84090 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 91, 121, 125, and 135 

[Docket No.: FAA–2023–2270; Notice No. 

24–04] 

RIN 2120–AL92 

25-Hour Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) 

Requirement, New Aircraft Production 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would 

increase the recording time of cockpit 

voice recorders from the mandated 2 

hours to a proposed 25-hour recording 

time for all future manufactured aircraft. 

This rulemaking would provide 

accident investigators, aircraft operators, 

and civil aviation authorities with 

substantially more cockpit voice 

recorder data to help find the probable 

causes of incidents and accidents, 

prevent future incidents and accidents, 

and make the FAA’s regulations more 

consistent with existing international 

requirements. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

February 2, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2023–2270 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov and follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at (202) 493–2251. 

Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 

public to better inform its rulemaking 

process. DOT posts these comments, 

without edit, including any personal 

information the commenter provides, to 

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 

www.dot.gov/privacy. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

www.regulations.gov/ at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charisse Green, AFS–340, Aircraft 

Maintenance Division, Office of Safety 

Standards, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence Ave. 

SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone 

(202) 267–1675; email Charisse.green@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in title 49 of the 

United States Code. Subtitle I, section 

106 describes the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the FAA’s authority. 

This rulemaking is issued under the 

authority described in subtitle VII, part 

A, subpart III, section 44701. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations providing 

minimum standards for other practices, 

methods, and procedures necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

since flight data recorders are the only 

means available to account for aircraft 

movement and flight crew actions 

critical to finding the probable cause of 

incidents or accidents, including data 

that could prevent future incidents or 

accidents. 

I. Executive Summary 

A. Overview of Proposed Rule 

This rulemaking effort proposes to 

amend the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) 

regulations to increase the recording 

duration of CVRs. Currently, CVRs are 

required to retain the last two hours of 

recorded information. Once this 2-hour 

limit is reached, a CVR overwrites the 

oldest data to maintain a rolling 2-hour 

recording. This proposal would increase 

the minimum duration of CVR 

recordings to 25 hours. The proposed 

change would affect all newly 

manufactured aircraft operating under 

title 14 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) parts 91, 121, 125, 

and 135, one year after the effective date 

of the final rule. 

B. Statement of the Problem 

The current 2-hour recording duration 

requirement does not meet the NTSB’s 

needs for investigations and subsequent 

safety recommendations. Since the 

NTSB issued Safety Recommendation 

A–18–030, it has investigated numerous 

accidents and incidents where CVR data 

relevant to the accident or incident has 

been overwritten because the relevant 

recording occurred earlier than the 

available two hours of recording. 

C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits 

Benefits of the proposed rule are 

expected to stem from a reduction in 

accident risk and time savings. 

Specifically, the additional audio of 

longer duration CVRs would provide 

authorities with more information on 

events and procedures undertaken in 

the flight deck in investigated incidents. 

This increased data may lead to new or 

more fully informed FAA 

recommendations or policy changes that 

could further enhance safety and reduce 

the risk that an incident becomes an 

accident. In addition, updated CVR 

models have also revamped the CVR 

interface tools, resulting in time-saving 

benefits. The simplified and more 

intuitive tools allow personnel to be 

trained quicker on operation, retrieve 

audio data faster, and perform 

additional diagnostic services to shorten 

downtime. The FAA currently lacks 

data to predict the exact reduction in 

accident risk and labor hours and 

requests comments on the expected 

value of these benefits. 

The FAA has assessed projected 

compliance costs using the incremental 

cost of equipping a 25-hour capable 

CVR over a comparable 2-hour unit to 

all applicable newly produced aircraft. 

Market research indicates that the 

difference between these units is 

minimal, ranging from near parity to an 

upper bound of approximately $4,500. 

Using that upper bound, the total cost 

over 20 years is estimated to be $102.42 

million at 7 percent present value, with 

annualized costs of $9.67 million. As 

operational procedures are expected to 

be similar between the older 2-hour and 

newer 25-hour capable models, the FAA 

anticipates no other notable costs. The 

FAA invites comments on the cost 

estimates and assumptions. 

II. Background 

A. CVRs: National Transportation 

Safety Board (NTSB) Recommendations 

and FAA Responses 

The FAA previously has engaged in 

rulemaking to address past NTSB 

recommendations concerning CVRs. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 84091 

1NTSB. Safety Recommendation A–96–171, 

December 11, 1996. 

2 Id. 

3 Id. 

4NTSB. Safety Recommendation A–02–24, 

August 29, 2002. 

5NTSB. Safety Recommendation Report A–18–04 

at 3, October 2, 2018. 

6 73 FR 12541 (2008). 

7 Id. 

8The FAA. Readout from the FAA Aviation 

Safety Summit Breakout Panels. March 15, 2023. 

Accessed from www.faa.gov/newsroom/readout-faaaviation-safety-summit-breakout-panels. 

9 ‘‘Amendment of requirements for flight 

recorders and underwater locating devices,’’ Notice 

of Proposed Amendment 2013–26, European Union 

Aviation Safety Agency, December 20, 2013. 

10Commission Regulation 2015/2338, 2015 O.J. 

Amending Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as regards 

requirements for flight recorders, underwater 

locating devices and aircraft tracking systems. 

11 Id. 

12NTSB. Aviation Safety Recommendation 

Report. ASR–18–04 at 2. October 2, 2018. 

13 Id. 

14 Id. 

In December 1996, the NTSB issued 

Safety Recommendation A–96–171 as a 

result of its investigation of an accident 

in January 1996.1 In this accident, an 

aircraft touched down hard in the 

approach light area short of a runway at 

the Nashville International Airport, 

resulting in minor injuries to passengers 

and crew and substantial damage to the 

aircraft’s tail section, nose gear, and 

engines. During the investigation, the 

NTSB was hampered by the fact that the 

30-minute closed-loop CVR tape did not 

include recordings of the initial 

approach to the runway, the hard 

landing event, or the go-around because 

that information had been recorded over 

and permanently lost after the airplane 

safely stopped on the ground.2 As a 

result, the NTSB recommended that the 

recording limitation for newly 

manufactured CVRs meet a minimum 

recording duration of two hours.3 The 

FAA adopted this recommendation in 

2008. 

In August 2002, the NTSB issued a 

safety recommendation letter to the 

FAA, identifying delays or failures by 

the operator to deactivate CVRs after 

reportable events as a major factor in the 

systemic problem of retaining data, as 

information was overwritten in the 

remainder of a flight with an incident or 

accident.4 The NTSB recommended that 

the FAA require the CVR be deactivated 

immediately upon completion of flight 

after a reportable incident or accident 

has occurred. In response, the FAA 

issued Notice 8400.48, ‘‘Cockpit Voice 

Recorder Deactivation After a 

Reportable Event,’’ on April 25, 2003. 

This notice advised air carriers to add 

a checklist item to deactivate the CVR, 

manually or automatically, immediately 

upon completion of a flight with a 

reportable accident or incident. On 

October 6, 2003, the NTSB considered 

Notice 8400.48 to have met the intent of 

Safety Recommendation A–02–24 for 

aircraft operating under parts 121 and 

135 requirements, but not part 91 

requirements as the notice did not 

address part 91 operators.5

On March 7, 2008, the FAA amended 

the CVR regulations in accordance with 

NTSB Safety Recommendation A–96– 

171.6 The final rule, ‘‘Revisions to 

Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital 

Flight Data Recorder Regulations,’’ 

increased the duration of certain CVR 

recordings, increased the data recording 

rate for certain digital flight data 

recorder (DFDR) parameters, physically 

separated DFDRs and CVRs, improved 

power supply to both CVRs and DFDRs, 

and required certain datalink 

communications received on an aircraft 

to be recorded if datalink 

communication equipment was 

installed.7

On October 10, 2018, the NTSB 

published an Aviation Safety 

Recommendation Report titled 

‘‘Extended Duration Cockpit Voice 

Recorders.’’ Within this safety report, 

Safety Recommendation A–18–030 

recommended that the FAA require all 

newly manufactured aircraft that must 

have a CVR to be fitted with and operate 

a CVR capable of recording the last 25 

hours of audio. This recommendation 

stemmed from an aircraft incident that 

occurred in July 2017 at San Francisco 

International Airport, in which the 

flight crew of an Airbus A320 was 

cleared to land on a set runway but 

instead lined up with a parallel taxiway. 

After descending to an altitude of 100 

feet above ground level (AGL), the 

aircraft overflew an airplane on the 

taxiway. The incident aircraft 

subsequently overflew a second airplane 

on the taxiway before starting to climb. 

During the investigation of the 

incident, the NTSB found it difficult to 

gather relevant information as the CVR 

data was overwritten before Air Canada 

officials learned of the severity of the 

event. The report stated that had the 

NTSB been able to obtain the 

overwritten data, investigators would 

have been able to assess the timing and 

content of the flight crew’s 

conversations during final approach, 

conversations during and after the goaround, and the flight crew’s crew 

resource management (CRM), workload, 

and fatigue based on verbalizations or 

flight deck sounds. In this instance, the 

NTSB identified several serious safety 

issues; however, this investigation 

lacked direct evidence of the flight 

crew’s decision making, coordination, 

and perception of its environment. 

B. FAA Aviation Safety Summit of 2023 

On March 15, 2023, the FAA 

convened an aviation safety summit, 

where approximately 200 safety leaders 

from the aviation industry met to 

discuss safety improvements in 

response to several recent near-miss 

incidents and runway incursions.8 The 

summit focused on ways to enhance 

flight safety for commercial operations, 

the air traffic system, airport and ground 

operations, and general aviation 

operations. 

As a result of discussions at the 

summit, the FAA committed to initiate 

rulemaking that would require CVRs to 

capture 25 hours of information for 

newly manufactured aircraft. 

C. ICAO and EASA Adoption of a 25- 

Hour Cockpit Voice Recorder 

Requirement 

In 2013, the European Union Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) proposed an 

amendment that would have required 

large commercial aircraft manufactured 

after January 1, 2019, to carry a CVR 

capable of recording the last 15 hours of 

aircraft operation.9 In 2015, after 

considering the comments received on 

the proposed amendment and after 

technical review, EASA extended the 

recording duration requirement to 25 

hours.10 The 25-hour mandate took 

effect on January 1, 2021. The regulation 

requires any aircraft with a maximum 

takeoff weight of 27,000 kg (60,000 

pounds) or more, manufactured after 

January 1, 2021, to be equipped with a 

CVR with at least a 25-hour recording 

capability.11

In 2016, the International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) also 

adopted a new standard calling for the 

installation of CVRs capable of 

recording the last 25 hours of aircraft 

operation on all aircraft manufactured 

after January 1, 2021, with a maximum 

certificated takeoff mass of over 27,000 

kg and engaged in commercial 

transport.12 In adopting this standard, 

ICAO emphasized the value of CVR 

recordings in analyzing human factors 

and other sounds.13 ICAO noted that 

extending the recording duration of 

CVRs was necessary to cover the longest 

flight duration, including pre- and 

postflight activities, delays, and the time 

required to secure the recordings.14

Since September 2013, the CVR 

technical standard in European 

Organization for Civil Aviation 

Equipment (EUROCAE) ED–112A, 

‘‘Minimum Operational Performance 

Specification for Crash Protected 

Airborne Recorder Systems,’’ used by all 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
84092 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

15All manufacturers, regardless of US-based or 

foreign, are required to use this standard in order 

to meet the carriage requirements in §§ 91.609, 

121.359, 125.227, and 135.151, which reference 

TSO–C123, which in turn specifies ED–112A. 

16 GlobalSpec. ‘‘EUROCAE ED 112.’’ Accessible at 

standards.globalspec.com/std/1629860/EUROCAE

%20ED%20112. 

17NTSB. (March 15, 2023). Transcript of NTSB 

Chair’s Remarks at the FAA Safety Summit. 

www.ntsb.gov/Advocacy/Activities/Pages/ 

Homendy-20230315.aspx. 

18NTSB. (2023) ‘‘Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVR) 

and Flight Data Recorders (FDR).’’ www.ntsb.gov/ 

news/Pages/cvr_fdr.aspx. 

manufacturers,15 already provides 

design standards for a 25-hour CVR.16

III. Discussion of the Proposal 

Since the FAA updated the CVR 

regulations in 2008, the NTSB has 

reported issues with accessing relevant 

CVR data with existing 2-hour recording 

duration. Numerous aircraft incidents 

have occurred in which relevant CVR 

data was overwritten and thereby made 

unavailable because of the time it took 

to retrieve the CVR. The lack of relevant 

CVR data hampers NTSB investigations 

and its ability to provide appropriate 

safety recommendations that can help 

prevent future accidents and 

incidents.17

In response to Safety 

Recommendation A–18–030, the FAA 

proposes to amend all CVR operational 

regulations related to CVR recording 

time by expanding the recording 

duration from two hours to 25 hours for 

aircraft manufactured one year after the 

date of publication of the final rule. 

The NTSB’s Safety Recommendation 

also included the recommendation to 

retrofit the current fleet. While 

retrofitting the current fleet would more 

expeditiously increase the number of 

aircraft fitted with the newer 25-hour 

CVR units and, thereby, the projected 

benefits to safety, the costs would be 

significant. Specifically, retrofitting the 

current fleet would increase by twothirds the number of aircraft required to 

install 25-hour CVRs (estimated 29,561 

aircraft in the current fleet added to the 

estimated 43,470 aircraft being built in 

the next 20 years). Further, the cost to 

retrofit existing aircraft with 25-hour 

CVRs would be several times higher 

than the cost to equip future-built 

aircraft with a 25-hour CVR instead of 

a 2-hour model. Assuming no 

replacement, applying a $25,000 CVR 

unit cost spread across the estimated 

29,651 current fleet would result in 

roughly $741.28 million (undiscounted) 

in equipment cost compared to the 

$195.62 million (undiscounted) in 

incremental upgrade costs from the 

proposed rule. Retrofitting current 

aircraft would also incur additional 

costs, such as aircraft downtime and 

labor hours required to replace the CVR 

unit, which would further increase the 

total cost. Therefore, in an effort to 

provide the increased benefit of making 

more substantive data available to 

accident investigators while 

maintaining the lowest economic 

impact on operators, this proposed rule 

would apply to newly manufactured 

aircraft only. For more information, 

please see the regulatory impact 

analysis in the docket. 

The proposed change would affect the 

following regulations: 

• Section 91.609(i)(2); 

• Section 121.359(i)(2); 

• Section 121.359(j)(2); 

• Section 125.227(g)(2); 

• Section 125.227(h)(2); 

• Section 135.151(g)(1)(iii); and 

• Section 135.151(g)(2)(iii). 

Certificate holders operating under 

part 129 requirements would be affected 

because, in accordance with § 129.24, 

their CVRs are required to record as if 

the aircraft were operated under parts 

121, 125, or 135. 

A. Cockpit Voice Recorder Capabilities 

and Investigative Use 

Aircraft operating under parts 91, 121, 

125, and 135 are required to be 

equipped with a CVR that records radio 

transmissions and sounds in the flight 

deck to aid subsequent investigation 

should an accident or incident occur. 

The recorder’s flight deck area 

microphone is usually located on the 

overhead instrument panel between the 

two pilots. 

CVRs preserve the recent history of 

sounds in the flight deck and provide 

unique information such as engine 

noise, stall warnings, landing gear 

extension and retraction, and other 

clicks and pops. These sounds may help 

an investigator to determine parameters 

such as engine rpm, system failures, 

speed, and the time at which certain 

events occur. The CVR also records 

communications with Air Traffic 

Control, automated radio weather 

briefings, conversations between the 

pilots and ground or cabin crew, flight 

crew verbalizations of intentions and 

coordination, as well as the pilots’ 

awareness of the aircraft and flight deck 

information.18 Access to this 

information allows investigators to more 

thoroughly investigate accident and 

incident factors. Incident factors include 

the flight crew’s procedural compliance, 

distraction, decision-making, workload, 

fatigue, and situational awareness. 

A CVR starts recording when an 

aircraft is powered up and will continue 

to record until the aircraft is powered 

down or the CVR is deactivated. Once 

a CVR reaches the end of its recording 

limit, it will overwrite existing data 

with a new recording. 

CVRs typically deactivate due to two 

forms of power loss. The first occurs 

when the CVR is deactivated after a 

major or catastrophic event causing a 

loss of electrical power. When this event 

occurs, the CVR preserves relevant 

audio recorded in the two hours prior to 

the accident. The second form occurs 

during less severe incidents, such as 

when the flight crew manually 

deactivates the CVR immediately upon 

landing in order to prevent the relevant 

audio from being overwritten. 

After an accident or incident, the CVR 

data is transferred to an NTSB lab for 

retrieval. The NTSB will eventually 

receive a readout from the CVR 

software. 

Since CVRs were implemented in 

1966, recording capabilities have 

significantly increased from the original 

30 minutes. The latest designs employ 

more easily expandable solid-state 

memory and use fault tolerant digital 

recording technique with an 

incorporated battery so that recording 

can continue until the end of flight, 

even when the aircraft’s electrical 

system fails. 

The technical limit for recording time 

has expanded such that 25 hours is now 

well within CVR capability. In addition, 

because both EASA and ICAO have 

adopted a 25-hour CVR recording 

duration minimum for aircraft 

manufactured after January 1, 2021, 

multiple manufacturers already produce 

CVRs capable of recording for 25 hours. 

B. National Transportation Safety Board 

Since 2008, the NTSB has expressed 

concerns regarding the availability of 

CVR information, the length of CVR 

recording time, and how to prevent 

relevant information from being 

overwritten after an incident or 

accident. The current 2-hour recording 

requirement has not fully resolved the 

issue of overwritten data, which 

continues to negatively impact NTSB 

investigations. 

There are two common causes for 

CVR data to be overwritten. First, there 

may be a delay between a safety event 

and the flight crew recognizing that 

event to be a serious incident or 

accident, resulting in the relevant CVR 

data being overwritten as the CVR 

continued to record throughout the 

delay. Second, the recording of a safety 

event may be overwritten during the 

course of the flight itself (e.g., where 

flight duration exceeds the 2-hour CVR 

recording duration). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 84093 

19 ICAO defines block time to include the moment 

an aircraft is pushed back from the gate to the 

moment it comes to a final stop at a gate or parking 

stand after landing. 

20NTSB. Aviation Safety Recommendation 

Report. ASR–18–04 at 5. October 2, 2018. 

21 Id. NTSB Report, citing ‘‘Minimum Operational 

Performance Specification for Crash Protected 

Airborne Recorder Systems,’’ ED–112A, European 

Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment. 

22 Id. at 4. 

23 Id. 

24NTSB. Aviation Investigation Preliminary 

Report No. DCA23LA149. Feb. 4, 2023. 

25Advisory Circular 20–186, Paragraph 3.2.4. July 

22, 2016. www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/ 

Advisory_Circular/AC_20-186.pdf. 

The NTSB reported that, in 2017, 

approximately 56 percent of U.S. block 

times 19 consisted of long and medium 

flights with durations longer than two 

hours, including some international 

flights lasting over 12 hours.20 When 

ICAO adopted the standard for the 

installation of 25-hour CVRs in 2016, it 

noted that extended duration of CVRs is 

necessary to cover the longest duration 

of flights, including pre- and postflight 

activities, delays, and the time required 

to secure the recordings.21

Since the 2-hour standard came into 

effect in 2008, numerous accidents and 

incidents have occurred where the CVR 

data was overwritten and, had it been 

available, would have positively 

contributed to NTSB investigations. 

Notable incidents include the following: 

TABLE 1—SAFETY EVENTS FOR WHICH PERTINENT CVR DATA WERE OVERWRITTEN

[Up to 2018] 

Date Event type NTSB No. Location Event description 

6/21/2018 ....... Incident .......... OPS18IA015 .. Chicago, IL ................. Runway excursion. 

4/18/2018 ....... Accident ......... DCA18LA163 Atlanta, GA ................ Engine fire. 

7/07/2017 ....... Incident .......... DCA17IA148 .. San Francisco, CA ..... Taxiway line-up and overflight of 4 air carrier airplanes by an Airbus 

A320 (46-hour notification delay). 

5/09/2014 ....... Accident ......... CEN14LA239 Columbus, OH ........... Ground engine fire. 

9/12/2013 ....... Incident .......... CEN13IA563 .. Austin, TX .................. Loss of pitch control during takeoff (4-day notification delay). 

7/31/2012 ....... Incident .......... CEN12IA502 .. Denver, CO ................ Bird strike. 

12/1/2011 ....... Accident ......... WPR12LA053 Oakland, CA .............. Enroute turbulence. 

6/21/2011 ....... Incident .......... ENG11IA035 .. Atlanta, GA ................ Engine fire. 

2/09/2011 ....... Incident .......... ENG11IA016 .. Minneapolis, MN ........ Tailpipe fire following push back. 

11/23/2010 ..... Accident ......... WPR11LA058 Salt Lake City, UT ..... On ground collision with tow tractor. 

6/28/2010 ....... Accident ......... CEN10LA363 Pioneer, LA ................ En route turbulence. 

12/31/2009 ..... Incident .......... DCA10IA015 .. Charlotte, NC ............. Wing tip strike during landing. 

6/29/2007 ....... Incident .......... LAX07IA198 ... Los Angeles, CA ........ Blown tires on takeoff. 

3/21/2006 ....... Incident .......... DEN06IA051 .. Denver, CO ................ Tail strike on landing. 

10/16/2003 ..... Accident ......... MIA04LA004 .. Tampa, FL ................. Taxiway excursion. 

6/03/2002 ....... Accident ......... DCA02MA039 Subic Bay, Philippines Abrupt maneuver due to ground proximity warning system alert and 

elevator damage. 

6/02/2002 ....... Accident ......... DCA02MA042 Subic Bay, Philippines Flight control malfunction during approach. 

In addition to the incidents noted by 

the NTSB, CVR data overwrites have 

hampered several other investigations. 

For example, on October 21, 2009, an 

incident occurred on a 4-hour flight 

where the flight crew did not 

communicate with air traffic control for 

about 1 hour and 17 minutes, during 

which time the airplane overflew its 

intended location at a cruise altitude of 

27,000 ft.22 The flight crew later 

reported that ‘‘cockpit distractions’’ led 

to the event. The airplane’s CVR had a 

30-minute recording duration; upon 

review, the NTSB discovered that all 

pertinent information had been 

overwritten by the remaining two hours 

and 11 minutes of the 4-hour flight.23

Even if the airplane had been equipped 

with a CVR recording for two hours, the 

information still would have been 

overwritten. Having lost this CVR data 

to overwriting, the NTSB was unable to 

determine the nature of the flight crew’s 

distraction, the events that led to the 

distraction, why the distraction lasted 

for as long as it did, and what mitigating 

procedures or actions could have 

prevented that distraction. 

More recently, on January 13, 2023, a 

runway incursion incident occurred at 

John F. Kennedy (JFK) Airport in New 

York, New York. The incursion 

involved a taxiing Boeing 777–200 and 

a Boeing 737–900ER cleared for takeoff. 

The Boeing 777–200 accessed a taxiway 

without Air Traffic Control (ATC) 

clearance, crossing the runway that the 

Boeing 737–900ER was utilizing for 

takeoff. ATC was notified of the 

potential conflict, cancelled the Boeing 

737–900ER’s takeoff clearance, and the 

flight crew aborted the flight. Because 

the incident did not result in any 

damage or injuries, the two flights 

eventually took off to their respective 

destinations. During its investigation, 

the NTSB discovered the CVR data for 

both flights had been overwritten. 

On February 4, 2023, a runway 

incursion occurred at Austin Bergstrom 

International Airport (AUS) when a 

Boeing 767F freighter attempted to land 

on a runway from which a Boeing 737– 

700 was also cleared to depart.24 Due to 

poor weather conditions, the Boeing 

767F crew did not see the conflict until 

late in the approach, and the two planes 

came close to colliding; specifically, the 

Boeing 767F needed to overfly the 

Boeing 737–700 to avoid a collision. 

There were no injuries reported to the 

128 passengers and crew onboard the 

Boeing 737–700 or to the 3 crew 

members onboard the Boeing 767F. 

During its investigation, the NTSB 

discovered the CVR data for both flights 

had been overwritten. 

The FAA had sought to prevent such 

recording issues by creating the 

retention requirements found in 

§§ 91.609(g), 121.343(i), and 135.152(e), 

where an operator must remove the 

recording media following an accident 

or incident and keep the recorded data 

for at least 60 days, or longer if 

necessary. The FAA also provided 

guidance in Advisory Circular 20–186, 

‘‘Airworthiness and Operational 

Approval of Cockpit Voice Recorder 

Systems,’’ 25 which recommended the 

operator to address CVR recording 

retention after an accident or incident in 

its maintenance and operational 

programs, such as inclusion in a flight 

crew checklist, or in the company 

standard operating procedures or 

emergency procedures. However, since 

recording issues continue to occur, the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
84094 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

26Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder and 

Digital Flight Data Recorder Regulations. 73 FR 

12541, 12544 (March 7, 2008). 

27 DOT. Treatment of the Value of Preventing 

Fatalities and Injuries in Preparing Economic 

Analyses. Office of the Secretary of Transportation. 

2022. 

FAA agrees with the NTSB that an 

extension to the CVR recording duration 

requirement to 25 hours is warranted. 

C. Privacy Concerns 

The FAA acknowledges that pilotfocused organizations may have 

concerns regarding how the NTSB or the 

FAA would use the CVR data collected 

for investigative purposes. 

This issue previously arose when the 

FAA increased the CVR recording 

duration from 30 minutes to 2 hours. At 

that time, the FAA determined that the 

investigative need and benefit of this 

information outweighed these privacy 

concerns.26 The FAA maintains this 

stance. The proposed increase to a 25- 

hour CVR recording duration would 

further improve current investigative 

capabilities. It would also provide 

investigating bodies, such as the NTSB, 

with more complete context 

surrounding the accidents and incidents 

under investigation and support their 

safety analyses. 

Importantly, this proposed increase is 

designed to provide more context for 

any flight deck activity that might be 

pertinent to an investigation. 

Specifically, this increase expands the 

possible range of data available to 

investigators. This proposal does not 

alter or modify the existing processes for 

requesting or use of this data. Sections 

91.609(g), 121.359(h), 121.227(f), and 

135.151(c) specify that the information 

obtained from the CVR recording is to 

be used for investigation purposes and 

that the FAA will not use the CVR 

record in any civil penalty or certificate 

action. This proposal does not modify 

these regulations. 

D. International Requirements 

ICAO and EASA both require the 

carriage of CVRs with 25-hour recording 

duration on airplanes with a maximum 

certificated takeoff mass of more than 

27,000 kg. These are aircraft that have 

the capability to fly transatlantic or 

international flights, i.e., long-haul 

flights that can last ten or more hours. 

In contrast, the FAA requirement would 

apply to all newly manufactured aircraft 

required to carry a CVR, based on 

existing operating rules. This distinction 

reflects differences between the FAA 

and ICAO/EASA regulatory schemes: 

the FAA’s existing regulatory scheme 

differentiates aircraft by operation type, 

not by weight. This rulemaking would 

not change that regulatory scheme. 

With both EASA and ICAO amending 

their CVR rules to require 25 hours of 

audio recording time, this proposed 

change also presents an opportunity to 

ensure U.S. regulations are consistent in 

intent with international authorities. 

This should lead to a reduction of risk 

for some operators who would 

otherwise face conflicting requirements 

and the cumbersome task of ascertaining 

guidance for the appropriate authorities 

in an attempt to satisfy differing 

regulations. Historically, the FAA has 

implemented CVR regulations by 

operation unlike ICAO and EASA, 

which put forth their standards and 

regulations by aircraft weight. As a 

result, the FAA’s proposal would 

encompass more aircraft than 

international requirements would 

because newly manufactured aircraft 

with less than a maximum takeoff 

weight of 27,000 kg would be affected. 

E. Conclusion and Compliance 

The FAA concurs with the NTSB’s 

recommendation and believes that 

extending CVR recording duration to 25 

hours would increase aviation safety by 

providing investigative bodies with 

more thorough context and background 

surrounding accidents and incidents. 

This proposal would also make FAA 

regulations more consistent with ICAO 

recommendations and EASA 

requirements. 

Given that the technology already 

exists to implement this proposal, the 

FAA proposes a compliance deadline 

for newly manufactured aircraft of one 

year after the effective date of the final 

regulation. Any aircraft with a newly 

issued airworthiness certificate dated on 

or after that compliance date would be 

required to be equipped with a CVR 

with 25-hour recording duration. 

In addition, the FAA will update the 

version of the technical standard order 

(TSO) referenced in the regulatory text 

from TSO–C123a to the latest version, 

TSO–C123c, for newly manufactured 

aircraft. 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Federal agencies consider impacts of 

regulatory actions under a variety of 

Executive orders and other 

requirements. First, Executive Order 

12866 and Executive Order 13563, as 

amended by Executive Order 14094 

(‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review’’), 

direct that each Federal agency shall 

propose or adopt a regulation only upon 

a reasoned determination that the 

benefits of the intended regulation 

justify the costs. Second, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) 

requires agencies to analyze the 

economic impact of regulatory changes 

on small entities. Third, the Trade 

Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96–39) 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

that may result in the expenditure by 

State, local, and tribal governments, in 

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more (adjusted annually 

for inflation) in any one year. The 

current threshold after adjustment for 

inflation is $177 million using the most 

current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for 

the Gross Domestic Product. The FAA 

has provided a detailed Regulatory 

Impact Analysis (RIA) in the docket for 

this rulemaking. This portion of the 

preamble summarizes the FAA’s 

analysis of the economic impacts of this 

proposed rule. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this proposed rule: 

will result in benefits that justify costs; 

is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866; will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities; will not create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States; and will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments, or on the private 

sector. 

A. Summary of the Regulatory Impact 

Analysis 

Benefits for the proposed rule were 

assessed qualitatively as the FAA 

currently lacks data to make projections 

on the benefit totals. The primary 

expected benefit is changes in safety 

from a potential reduction in accident 

risk. The expanded available audio from 

this proposed rule would provide 

authorities with more information on 

events and procedures undertaken in 

the flight deck in investigated incidents. 

This increased data may lead to new 

FAA recommendations or policy 

changes that could further enhance 

safety and reduce the risk that a future 

incident becomes an accident. The 

reduction in the risk of one fatality 

generates benefits equal to the value of 

statistical life (VSL), approximately 

$12.5 million in 2022 according to the 

Department of Transportation (DOT).27

Given the annualized costs of $9.67 

million from this proposed rule, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 84095 

28Small Business Administration (SBA) Size 

Standards, effective March 17, 2023, can be found 

at www.sba.gov/document/support-table-sizestandards. 

reducing the risk of a single fatality in 

any year due to effective safety 

measures resulting from the ability to 

gather additional CVR data would 

generate benefits greater than the 

expected costs. 

Additionally, there are some potential 

time-saving benefits associated with the 

updated CVR model deployment. In 

updating their CVR models, 

manufacturers also have revamped the 

CVR interface tools. These simplified 

and more intuitive tools allow 

personnel to be trained quicker on 

operation, retrieve audio data faster, and 

perform additional diagnostic services 

to shorten downtime. The FAA does not 

currently have enough data to predict 

the value of these benefits and invites 

public comments on the expected totals. 

The FAA assessed the costs for the 

proposed rule as the incremental cost 

increase of equipping a 25-hour capable 

CVR instead of a comparable 2-hour 

unit to all applicable new aircraft being 

produced. The total aircraft that will be 

built and equipped with the 25-hour 

CVR includes projected new aircraft 

needed to handle future demand 

increases as well as estimated 

replacements for the current fleet. 

Market research indicates the cost 

increase between comparable 2 and 25- 

hour CVRs to be minimal, ranging from 

near parity to an upper bound of 

approximately $4,500. Using that upper 

bound as the incremental cost to equip 

all applicable projected new aircraft 

with a 25-hour capable CVR, the 

estimated highest total cost over 20 

years, at seven percent present value, is 

$102.42 million with an annualized cost 

of $9.67 million (table 2). At three 

percent present value, the total cost is 

$144.77 million with an annualized cost 

of $9.73 million. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF COSTS OVER 20 YEARS

[Millions of 2021$] 

14 CFR operational part 

7% Present value 3% Present value 

Annualized 

costs Total costs Annualized costs Total costs 

Part 91 1 ........................................................................................................... $3.55 $37.57 $3.56 $52.98 

Part 121 ........................................................................................................... 3.18 33.66 3.19 47.41 

Part 125 ........................................................................................................... 0.16 1.65 0.16 2.32 

Part 135 ........................................................................................................... 2.79 29.55 2.83 42.06 

Total 2 ........................................................................................................ 9.67 102.42 9.73 144.77

1 Consists of Part 91 turbine powered and Part 91K aircraft. 

2Total reflects combined costs of each CFR part. 

Note: Columns may not sum to total due to rounding. 

The FAA does not anticipate other 

costs besides the incremental costs of 

forward fitting 25-hour capable CVRs to 

comply with the proposed rule. Based 

on the technical standards for CVRs, 

market research indicates that 25-hour 

models tend to match the older 2-hour 

variants in a manner that allows them 

to be swapped without much difficulty. 

This compatibility implies that other 

operational procedures and costs should 

be similar and not result in notable 

change. The FAA invites comments on 

the expected costs for this proposed 

rule. 

Please see the RIA available in the 

docket for more details. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

of 1980, Public Law 96–354, 94 Stat. 

1164 (5 U.S.C. 601–612), as amended by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. 

L. 104–121, 110 Stat. 857, Mar. 29, 

1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act 

of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–240, 124 Stat. 2504 

Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal 

agencies to consider the effects of the 

regulatory action on small business and 

other small entities and to minimize any 

significant economic impact. The term 

‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 

businesses and not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The proposed rule affects CVR 

manufacturers by requiring the 

development and certification of 25- 

hour capable models. A major change to 

the CVR components, such as in this 

case, would require a manufacturer to 

go through the development and 

certification of a new model, which 

could involve extra cost and time. 

However, due to EASA and ICAO 

standards for 25-hour capability taking 

effect in 2021, market research shows 

that manufacturers already have 

developed 25-hour compliant variants 

that meet FAA TSO–C123 compliance. 

Therefore, the proposed regulation is 

not expected to result in new or 

significant impacts on CVR 

manufacturers. The FAA invites 

comments on the expected effects of the 

proposed rule on CVR manufacturers. 

As described in the RIA, the FAA 

identified six U.S. manufacturers that 

would be affected by the proposed rule. 

Based on the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) 2023 size 

standard for Other Aircraft Part and 

Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing 

(NAICS 336413),28 and on publicly 

available data on employment for these 

entities, all six identified manufacturers 

are large businesses that exceed the 

1,250-employee size maximum for a 

small business. Therefore, the FAA 

certifies that the proposed rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

because the proposed rule does not 

impact any small entity. The FAA 

welcomes comments on the number of 

U.S. CVR manufacturers and this 

certification. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
84096 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

29 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000). 

30The FAA. (Jan. 28, 2004). FAA Order No. 

1210.20. www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/ 

1210.pdf. 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this proposed rule 

and determined that it promotes the 

safety of the American public and does 

not exclude imports that meet the 

recording length requirement. As a 

result, the FAA does not consider this 

proposed rule as creating an 

unnecessary obstacle to foreign 

commerce. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) requires 

agencies to prepare a written assessment 

of the costs, benefits, and other effects 

of proposed or final rules that include 

a Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 

one year. The current threshold after 

adjustment for inflation is $177 million 

using the most current (2022) Implicit 

Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic 

Product. 

The FAA determined that the 

proposed rule will not result in the 

expenditure of $177 million or more by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or the private sector, in any 

one year. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. 

According to the 1995 amendments to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 

1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not 

collect or sponsor the collection of 

information, nor may it impose an 

information collection requirement 

unless it displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) control number. 

This action contains the following 

proposed amendments to the existing 

information collection requirements 

previously approved under OMB 

Control Number 2120–0700. As required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has 

submitted these proposed information 

collection amendments to OMB for its 

review. 

Summary: This notice proposes to 

amend parts 91, 121, 125, and 135 

requirements so aircraft manufactured 

on or after [ONE YEAR THE EFFECTIVE 

DATE OF THE FINAL RULE] that are 

required to be installed with a cockpit 

voice recorder would be required to 

have a recording limit of 25 hours, 

expanded from the current requirement 

of 2 hours. 

Use: Such a record would provide 

additional information to accident and 

incident investigators to determine 

flight crew’s procedural compliance, 

distraction, decision-making, workload, 

fatigue, and situational awareness. The 

expansion to 25 hours would address 

the issue in which data is overwritten 

because the relevant recording occurred 

earlier than the available two hours of 

recording. 

Respondents (including number of): 

The respondents all would be certificate 

holders operating the above-referenced 

U.S.-registered aircraft under parts 91, 

121, 125, 129, and 135. Certificate 

holders operating under part 129 

requirements would be affected because, 

in accordance with § 129.24, a cockpit 

voice recorder would be required to 

record as if the aircraft were operated 

under parts 121, 125, or 135. 

Frequency: The 25 hours of recorded 

data would be overwritten on a 

continuing basis and would only be 

accessed following an accident or 

incident. 

Annual Burden Estimate: This 

proposed requirement would not change 

the current information collection 

activity; therefore, it does not contain a 

measurable hour burden. 

The FAA is soliciting comments to— 

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed 

information requirement is necessary for 

the proper performance of the functions 

of the FAA, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the FAA’s 

estimate of the burden; 

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(4) Minimize the burden of collecting 

information on those who are to 

respond, including by using appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Individuals and organizations may 

send comments on the information 

collection requirement to the address 

listed in the ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this preamble by February 

2, 2024. Comments also should be 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk 

Officer for FAA, New Executive Office 

Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street 

NW, Washington, DC 20053. 

F. International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified the following 

differences with these proposed 

regulations. The proposed rule would 

harmonize with ICAO regarding the 

required length of the CVR recordings at 

25 hours. However, the U.S. does not 

regulate carriage requirements of CVRs 

based on the aircraft gross weight, as do 

the ICAO and EASA, and the proposed 

rule change would not change this. If 

this proposal is adopted, the FAA 

intends to amend its currently filed 

difference on this topic with ICAO. 

G. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from the preparation of an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary 

circumstances. The FAA has 

determined this proposed rulemaking 

action qualifies for the categorical 

exclusion identified in paragraph 5–6.6f 

for regulations and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, 

Federalism. The FAA has determined 

that this proposed action would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, or the relationship between the 

Federal Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government and, therefore, 

would not have federalism implications. 

B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Consistent with Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments,29 and 

FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian 

and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation 

Policy and Procedures,30 the FAA 

ensures that Federally Recognized 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 84097 

Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity 

to provide meaningful and timely input 

regarding proposed Federal actions that 

have the potential to affect uniquely or 

significantly their respective Tribes. At 

this point, the FAA has not identified 

any unique or significant effects, 

environmental or otherwise, on tribes 

resulting from this proposed rule. 

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this proposed rule 

under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning 

Regulations that Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

(May 18, 2001). The FAA has 

determined that it would not be a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

Executive order and would not be likely 

to have a significant adverse effect on 

the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation 

Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation, 

promotes international regulatory 

cooperation to meet shared challenges 

involving health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this proposed action under the policies 

and agency responsibilities of E.O. 

13609 and has determined that this 

proposed action would have no effect 

on international regulatory cooperation. 

VI. Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. The FAA also invites comments 

relating to the economic, environmental, 

energy, or federalism impacts that might 

result from adopting the proposals in 

this document. The most helpful 

comments reference a specific portion of 

the proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should submit only one 

time if comments are filed 

electronically, or commenters should 

send only one copy of written 

comments if comments are filed in 

writing. 

The FAA will file in the docket all 

comments it receives, as well as a report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerning 

this proposed rulemaking. Before acting 

on this proposal, the FAA will consider 

all comments it receives on or before the 

closing date for comments. The FAA 

will consider comments filed after the 

comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. The FAA may change 

this proposal in light of the comments 

it receives. 

B. Confidential Business Information 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) is commercial or financial 

information that is both customarily and 

actually treated as private by its owner. 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt 

from public disclosure. If your 

comments responsive to this NPRM 

contain commercial or financial 

information that is customarily treated 

as private, that you actually treat as 

private, and that is relevant or 

responsive to this NPRM, it is important 

that you clearly designate the submitted 

comments as CBI. Please mark each 

page of your submission containing CBI 

as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such 

marked submissions as confidential 

under the FOIA, and they will not be 

placed in the public docket of this 

NPRM. Submissions containing CBI 

should be sent to the person in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 

this document. Any commentary that 

the FAA receives that is not specifically 

designated as CBI will be placed in the 

public docket for this rulemaking. 

C. Electronic Access and Filing 

A copy of this NPRM, all comments 

received, any final rule, and all 

background material may be viewed 

online at www.regulations.gov using the 

docket number listed above. A copy of 

this proposed rule will be placed in the 

docket. Electronic retrieval help and 

guidelines are available on the website. 

It is available 24 hours each day, 365 

days each year. An electronic copy of 

this document may also be downloaded 

from the Office of the Federal Register’s 

website at www.federalregister.gov and 

the Government Publishing Office’s 

website at www.govinfo.gov. A copy 

may also be found at the FAA’s 

Regulations and Policies website at 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request to the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Office of 

Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or 

by calling (202) 267–9677. Commenters 

must identify the docket or notice 

number of this rulemaking. 

All documents the FAA considered in 

developing this proposed rule, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed in 

the electronic docket for this 

rulemaking. 

D. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires the FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document may contact its local 

FAA official or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the internet, visit 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 91 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 

Charter flights, Safety, Transportation. 

14 CFR Part 125 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 

40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 

44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 

44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 

46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 47528– 

47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114–190, 130 Stat. 615 

(49 U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of 

the Convention on International Civil 

Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11). 

■ 2. Amend § 91.609 by revising 

paragraph (i)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 91.609 Flight data recorders and cockpit 

voice recorders. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) Retains at least— 

(i) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
84098 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

OF THE FINAL RULE,] the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision. 

* * * * * 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 

40113, 40119, 41706, 42301 preceding note 

added by Pub. L. 112–95, sec. 412, 126 Stat. 

89, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709– 

44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44729, 

44732; 46105; Pub. L. 111–216, 124 Stat. 

2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112–95, 

126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 note); Pub. L. 

115–254, 132 Stat. 3186 (49 U.S.C. 44701 

note). 

■ 4. Amend § 121.359 by revising 

paragraphs (i)(2) and (j)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.359 Cockpit voice recorders. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) Retains at least— 

(i) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision; and 

* * * * * 

(j) * * * 

(2) Retains at least— 

(i) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision; and 

* * * * * 

PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND 

OPERATIONS: AIRCRAFT HAVING A 

SEATING CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE 

PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM 

PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 6,000 

POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES 

GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD 

SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 125 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 

44701–44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 

44716–44717, 44722. 

■ 6. Amend § 125.227 by revising 

paragraphs (g)(2) and (h)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 125.227 Cockpit voice recorders. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(2) Retains at least— 

(i) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision; and 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(2) Retains at least— 

(i) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision; and 

* * * * * 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 

RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON 

BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 7. The authority citation for part 135 

continue to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 

41706, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711– 

44713, 44715–44717, 44722, 44730, 45101– 

45105; Pub. L. 112–95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 

44730). 

■ 8. Amend § 135.151 by revising 

paragraphs (g)(1)(iii) and (g)(2)(iii) to 

read as follows: 

§ 135.151 Cockpit voice recorders. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) Retains at least— 

(A) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(B) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) Retains at least— 

(A) The last 2 hours of recorded 

information using a recorder that meets 

the standards of TSO–C123a, or later 

revision; or 

(B) If manufactured on or after [ONE 

YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours 

of recorded information using a recorder 

that meets the standards of TSO–C123c, 

or later revision. 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a) in Washington, 

DC. 

Lawrence Fields, 

Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–26144 Filed 12–1–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–118492–23] 

RIN 1545–BQ99 

Section 30D Excluded Entities 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

proposed regulations that would 

provide guidance regarding the 

excluded entity provisions with respect 

to the clean vehicle credit as amended 

by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. 

The proposed regulations would also 

provide clarity on definitions with 

respect to new clean vehicles eligible for 

the clean vehicle credit. The proposed 

regulations would affect qualified 

manufacturers of new clean vehicles 

and taxpayers who purchase and place 

in service new clean vehicles. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

and requests for a public hearing must 

be received by January 18, 2024. 

Requests for a public hearing must be 

submitted as prescribed in the 

‘‘Comments and Requests for a Public 

Hearing’’ section. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters are strongly 

encouraged to submit public comments 

electronically via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and 

REG–118492–23) by following the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Requests for a public hearing 

must be submitted as prescribed in the 

‘‘Comments and Requests for a Public 

Hearing’’ section. Once submitted to the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal, comments 

cannot be edited or withdrawn. The 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1