U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal	Aviation	Administration

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



## Regulatory	Impact	Analysis, Notice	of	Proposed	Rulemaking	Regulatory	Evaluation **Revisions to Operational Requirements for the Use of Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) and to Pilot Compartment View Requirements for**  **Vision Systems** (14 CFR Parts 1, 23, 25, 27, 29, 61, 91, 121, 125, and 135) RIN 2120–AJ94 OFFI CE OF AVIAT ION POLICY AND PLANS ECONOMIC ANALYSIS DIVISION (APO - 300)1 

### Regulatory	Evaluation **for	the	Proposed	Rule	of	Enhanced	Flight	Vision	Systems	(EFVS) Summary:**  The FAA is proposing to permit operators to use an Enhanced Flight Vision Sy stem (EFVS) in lieu of natural vision to continue descending from 100 feet height above touchdown zone elevation to the runway and land on certain straight - in instrument approach procedures under instrument flight rules (IFR) . This proposal would also permit certain operators using EFVS - equipped aircraft to dispatch, release, or takeoff under IFR, and to initiate and continue an approach when the destination airport weather is below authorized visibility minimums for the runway of intended landing. Under this proposal, pilot training , recent flight experience , and proficiency would be required for operators who use EFVS in lieu of natural vision to descend below decision altitude, decision height, or minimum descent altitude. EFVS - equipped aircraft conducting operations to touchdown and rollout would be required to meet additional airworthiness requirements. This proposal would also revise pilot compartment view certification requirements for vision systems using a transparent display surface located in the pilot’s outside view . This proposal would take advantage of advanced vision capabilities thereb y achieving the NextGen goals of increasing access, efficiency , and throughput at many airports when low visibility is the limiting factor. Additionally , it would enable EFVS operations in reduced visibilities on a greater number of approach procedure ty pes while maintaining an equivalent level of safety . The total estimated costs of this proposed rule over 10 years are approximately $ 5.3 million nominal value and $ 4 . 5 millio n present value at a 7% discount rate , which equals about $0.5 million annualized cost in current dollar value . Since the decision to conduct EFVS2

operations addressed b y this proposal is voluntary , the FAA believes that operators who choose to conduct EFV S operations w ould demonstrate that the benefits of the proposal exceed the costs. Conversel y, for operators who choose not to conduct EFVS operations addressed b y this proposal, the proposed rule would not impose costs . Therefore, the FAA believes that b enefits of the proposed rule exceed costs because it would improv e cost - effectiveness of EFVS operations , save fuel and passenger time resulting from weather- induced delays and diversions , and provide manufacturers with an increase d level of certainty by e stablishing specific airworthiness standards and eliminating the need for the issuance of special conditions. **The Need for the Regulatory Action** Current Federal Aviation Regulations have some critical restrictions on EFVS operations . The enhanced flight visibility provided by

an EFVS can only

be used for operational benefit under § 91.175(l) in that portion of the visual segment that extends from decision altitude/decision height (DA/DH) or minimum de s cent altitude (MDA) down to 100 feet above the tou chdown zone elevation. The regulations impose additional restrictions on EFVS operations conducted under parts 121, 125, or 135 . An aircraft used to conduct an EFVS operation under those parts cannot be dispatched, released, or permitted to take off under IFR when the weather at the destination airport is forecasted or reported to be below authorized visibility minimums at the estimated time of arrival. Additionally, the pilot of an aircraft operating under these parts may not begin an approach or continue an approach past the final approach fix (or where a final approach fix is not used, begin the final approach segment of an instrument approach procedure) when the weather at the destination airport is reported to be below authorized visibility minimums.3

These regulatory

restrictions prevent EFVS from being used for maximum operational benefit s , which could be achieved by revising the current regulations to permit EFVS to be used to touchdown and rollout . Inaddition, current regulatory limitations rel ated to dispatch, flight release, take - off

s , initiating, and continuing an approach also prevent EFVS from being used for maximum operational benefit. If the FAA chooses not to take this regulatory action, persons conducting EFVS operation s would have to face an efficiency gap between maximum operational benefit with EFVS capabilities and restricted EFVS operations under current regulations. Delaying the proposed rule or no t chang ing the current regulations would continue to widen the efficiency gap . The FAA believes that EFVS capabilities could be better leveraged by this proposal to increase access, efficiency , and throughput at many airports when low visibility is a factor. In addition , the FAA believes that there would be a clear benefit of amending the operating rules for Category I I and III operations to permit EFVS to be used during the conduct of those operations . The FAA also believes that the propos ed training, recent flight experience , and proficiency requirements for EFVS operations would be the most cost effective way t o provide an appropriate level of safety for the conduct of EFVS operations . Finally , the current regulations contained in part 23, 25, 27, and 29, which address pilot compartment view requirements, do not contain airworthiness standards for vision systems. As a result, the FAA has been issuing special conditions under § 21.16 to provide airworthiness standards which could enable the installation of vision systems that would me et a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations. With over twelve ye ars of experience, the process of developing special conditions for vision sy stems has become routine. The FAA believes , therefore, that it would be in the public interest to revise pilot compartment view rules to esta blish airwor

thiness standards for vision s ys tems with a transparent display surface located4

in the pilot’s outside view . This action would provide industry with known certification requirements and eliminate the time and cost resulting from the process of issuing special conditions for both the FAA and applicants. The decision to conduct EFVS operations is voluntary . Operators would choose to voluntarily comp ly with the proposed rule because it would allow increase d access to airports under poor visibility . Thus it would stimulate the demand for EFVS equipped aircraf t, improve cost - effectiveness of EFVS op erations and sav e money on fuel and passenger time. Therefore the FAA believes that the proposed rule would add more ben e fi ts than costs to manufac turers and operators by permitting a greater range of operations. **Background** On January

9, 2004, the Federal Register published a final rule, Enhanced Flight Vision Sy stems , (69 FR 1620) . The rule permit s an EFVS to be used in lieu of natural vision to descend be lo w DA/DH or MDA down to 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation . The FAA proposes to establish regulations to expan d certain conditions under which EFVS operations are currentl y restricted and eliminate the need for special conditions. The proposed amendments are shown in Table 1 1 , in which we identify provisions that might have an economic impact on manufacturers, operators, and consumers. S ec tion A and Section B identify propose d changes in regulatory language , which do not apply to the cost and benefit anal ys is . The provisions proposed in Section C through Section F would have economic benefits, or both cost s and benefits related to training, equipment requirement s and certification. The FAA believes that there would be qualitative benefits ass ociated with provisions proposed in Section D and Sections G through Section J , which will be discussed in the benefit anal ys is . 1 The sections in Table 1 cor respond to Sections III - A through III - L of the proposal.5

Section s K through M do not apply to the cost and benefit anal ys is . We estimate benefits and costs in the following sections compared to the baseline of common practice and current FAA regulations. Table 1. Economic Impact Assessment Section III of the Preamble – Discussion of the Proposal Cost Benefit A. Revise the definition for EFVS and add a definition for EFVS operati on (§ 1.1) N/A N/A B. Consolidate all EFVS requirements in a new section ( § 91.176 ) N/A N/A C. Establish equipment, operating, and visual reference requirements for EFVS operations to touchdown and rollout (§ 91.176(a)) Possible equipment and certificati on cost. R isk mitigation and qualitative benefits D. Revisions to current requirements for EFVS operations to 100 feet (§ 91.176(b)) No ne , because of current practice Qualitative b enefit to part 91, 121, 125, 135 and 129

E. Establish training requiremen ts for EFVS operations (§ 61.31) In cremental training cost for pilots under parts 61, 121, 125, 135, and subpart K of part 91. Flight schools costs are estimated but not counted as these costs are included in pilot training costs. Risk mitigation and qual itative benefits F. Establish new recent flight experience and proficiency requirements for EFVS operations (§ 61.57) No ne , because of current practice Risk mitigation and qualitative benefits G. Permit EFVS - equipped aircraft to be dispatched, released , or to initiate a flight when the reported or forecast visibility at the destination airport is below authorized minimums (§§ 121.613, 121.615, 125.361, 125.363, 135.219) N o ne Qualitative b enefit t o part 121, 125 and 135 H. Permit operators of EFVS - equippe d aircraft to initiate or continue an approach when the destination airport visibility is below authorized minimums (§§ 121.651, 125.325, 125.381, 135.225) N o ne Qualitative b enefit to part 121, 125 and 135 I. Revise Category II and III general operating rules to permit the use of an EFVS (§ 91.189) N o ne Qualitative b ene fit to part 916

J. Revise pilot compartment view rules to establish airworthiness standards for vision systems with transparent displays (§§ 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, and 29.773) None for e xisting EFVS Qualitative Benefit to m anufacturers K . Related Amendments (§§ 91.175, 91.189, and 91.905) N/A N/A L . Conforming Amendments (§§ 91.175 and 91.189) N/A N/A M . I mplementation N/A N/A **Parties Potentially Affected by this Rulemaking**

 Original e quipment m anufacturers (OEMs) producing enhanced flight vision sy stem s (EFVS) or other vision systems with a transparent display surface located in the pilot’s outside view , in accordance with parts 23, 25, 27, or 29

 Persons installing EFVS or other vision sy stems with a transparent display surface located in the pilot’s outside view

 Persons conducting EFV S operations under part s 91, 121, 125, 129, or part 135

 Persons conducting EFVS training **Principal Assumptions and Sources of Information**

 A 10 - year period for this anal ys is is used because this perio d captures all cost impacts

 Discount rate is 7 percent (Office of Management & Budget, Circular A - 4, “Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit - Cost Analy sis of Federal Programs,” October 29, 1992, p. 8, www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html )

 An average of 4 pilots assigned to each EFVS - equipped aircraft

 OEMs and two operators provided the number of EFVS - equipped aircraft7  Operators of s om e aircraft equipped with older EFVS units would not seek certification for EFVS to touchdown and rollout

 The estimation of the incremental training cost per person is approximately $750 based on data collected from training centers .  Certification costs of incremental EFVS capabilities to touchdown and rollout are approximately

$1 million as an aggregate estimation

 A ircraft operation s over the next 10 years will grow about a 3.7 % per year based on the FAA 2012 forecast (Table 28, FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2012 - 2032) 2

. **Benefits of This Rule** This proposed rule comprises revisions to operational requirements for the use of enhanced flight vision s ystems and revisions to pilot compartment view requirements for vision s ys tems using a transparent display surface located in the pilot’s outside view . Since the decision to conduct EFVS operations is voluntary , the FAA expects those who choose to engage in those operations would do so only if the expected benefit exceeds the cost to them . Revisions to operational requirements for the use of EFVS would enable expanded EFVS operations , which would increase access, efficiency and through - put in low visibility conditions, and minimize potential for missed approaches and delayed take - offs. In addition, EFVS perm its low visibility

operations on a greater number of approach procedure types. Changes in the U . S . aviation infrastructure 3 , for example, the transition from incandescent to light - emitting diode ( LE D ) approach lights, could potentially impact the near ter

m benefits for persons using existing 2 The FAA forecast for active general aviation (GA) turbojets is 3.7% for the period of 2011 - 2021. 3 FAA airport infrastructure decisions are independent from this analysis.8

EFVS equipment , but may not impact future benefits of EFVS equipment designed to be interoperable with LEDs . The se expected benefits cannot be quantified because both the infrastructure and EFVS capabilities are evolv ing . B enefits of this proposed rule would be realized by averting costs related to interrupted flight operations due to low visibility resulting in los t passenger time and extra fuel consumption. Since aircraft currentl y cannot use EFVS to touchdown and rollout , we do not have sufficient historical data to quantify these benefits. We invite comments from existing EFVS operators about their expected benefits. We request comments to include airplane, type of operation, number of potential EFVS touchdowns, and extra costs of missed touchdowns and delayed take - offs. Revisions to pilot compartment view requirements for vision sy stems using a transparent display surface located in the pilot’s outside view would codify the current practice of issuing special condition s for each vision system by providing industry

with known requirements for the certification of these s ys tems under part 23, 25, 27, and 29. Because the proposed changes would streamline the certification process for these vision sy stems , the FAA would save the time and expense associated with developing, drafting, and publishing the special conditions in the Federal Register and responding to public comments. Since the FAA operates under a fiscal budget and issues annually a limited number of sp ecial conditions for vision sy stem s , the time and resource savings would most likely be applied to other certification activities . This proposed rule would eliminate the time required for special conditions to be issued for these projects . The full extent of these benefits is not known and therefore has not been quantified in this analysis . We specificall y request comments on the benefits of this proposal.9

**Costs of This Rule** Here, we estimate the incremental differences in costs , resulting from the propo sed changes in training , equipment and certification requirements . Data were obtained from EFVS manufacturers , training center s , and two operator s . In the following discussions, we assess the training costs , the equipment costs and certification costs separately in detail. The methodology and the sources of the data used in the cost estimation are explained as the cost analysis proceeds . **Training Requirement Cost** Additional training would be required for persons to conduct EFVS operations under part s 91 , 121, 125, and 135 . We calculate d the incremental training cost related to added training sessions for pilots covering EFVS operation s f rom 100 feet to touchdown and rollout . E xisting EFVS operation s training curriculums already contain instructional techniques and flight instruction for IFR flight . The proposed rule would only require training centers to make minor changes . Training centers would have to adjust curriculum and train instructors . The FAA expects any

related training center costs would b e passed on to pilots and are included in our estimate of costs related to training pilots in the following analysis. We requested and received data from p art 142 training centers. The training schools provided estimated cost s of EFVS training , which ran ged from $2,000 to $7,700 per pilot . In common practice, the price of a new EFVS - equipped aircraft includes a training package, covering a range of 3 to 4 hours of EFVS ground training and a range of 2 to 4 hours of simulator training. Since EFVS trainin g cost cannot be separated from the price , w e estimat e that the incremental training cost per pilot resulting from this rule is approximately $750 based10

on data collected from training centers and two operators . W e invite comment s on the incremental training cost from training centers and operators . Based on data collected from OEMs and two operator s , there are approximately 982 EFVS - equipped aircraft in service. W e assume for the purpose of this analysis that all persons conducting EFVS operations would be trained to conduct EFVS operations to touchdown and rollout . The FAA believes the proposal would accelerate the growth of EFVS operations. We e stimat e that the growth in U.S. EFVS operations would reflect an annual growth rate for aircraft of 3 .7 % in the next 10 ye ar s based on the FAA 2012 GA turbojet operation forecast (Table 28, FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2012 - 2032). The FAA expects this estimate to be an upper bo und because some aircraft may not be modified for these operations. The training cost would not recur because pilots trained for EFVS operations would not be required to repeat the training as long as they maintain their currency

and proficiency

after the initial training. Maintenance of currency is an ongoing requirement. However, because EFVS currency can be met simultaneously with instrument currency , the additional cost of maintaining EFVS currency

should be minimal. The total training cost attributable to the proposed requirements equals the number of pilots conducting EFVS operations multipl ied by the incremental training cost per pilot , plus the estimated growth of EFVS operations . We estimate 3,928 pilots would need training initially to meet the requirements of this proposed rule . This is the result of multiplying the number of EFVS - equipped aircraft ( 982 ) by an average of 4 pilots for each aircraft . Thus, the initial training cost is approximately $ 3 . 1 million if the rule would be promulgated in two years . This initial training cost resulted from multiplying the incremental training cost per pilot ($750) by the number of persons conducting EFVS operations ( 3,9 28 ) , plus the growth based on the annual11

rate of 3.7 % . Using the above methodology , we computed the total training cost of this rule to be approximately $ 4.3 million nominal value in 10 - ye ar period and $ 3. 5 million present value at a 7% discount rate. The computation of training costs in nominal value and the present value are illustrated in Table 2 . The FAA seeks comments on the training cost estimation .

Table 2 . Nominal Training Cost and Present Value Estimation ($ Million) Year C umulative Cost at

3.7% Growth Rate In cremental Cost in 2012 Dollars Present Value (7%) 2012 2.9 - - 2013 3.0 - - 2014 3.1 3.1 2.72 2015 3.2 0.1 0.09 201 6 3.4 0.1 0.09 2017 3.5 0.1 0.09 2018 3.6 0.1 0.09 2019 3.7 0.1 0.08 2020 3.9 0.1 0.08 2021 4.0 0.1 0.08 2022 4.2 0.1 0.08 2023 4.3 0.2 0.07 Total - 4.3 3. 47 **Note: Details may not add up to total s due to rounding.**  **Equipment requirement cost** The proposed rule establishes equipment, operating, and visual reference requirements for EFVS operations to touchdown and rollout . P roposed § 91.176(a) would require a radio altimeter, flare prompt or flare guidance, and a repeater display to be installed on an aircraft used in EFVS operations to touchdown and rollout . Currentl y, aircraft are already equipped with one or two radio altimeters and flare prompt or flare guidance. Hence, there would be no addi tional costs resulting from this requirement . OEMs reported that a multi - function display installed on an EFVS - equipped aircraft can be used as a repeater display . The multi - function display in most cases come s standard with the capability of showing the EFVS image . Thus , this equipment12

requirement would not result in additional costs. W e note EFVS installed prior to 2007 may require an upgrade. The operators of those aircraft m ight choose not to upgrade their EFVS capability to permit operations t o tou chdown and rollout . EFVS operators would choose not to upgrade when these cost s would exceed the expected benefits . Those who choose not to upgrade can continue to conduct EFVS operations to 100 feet. A n o - upgrade decision would not incur additional co st. Therefore, the regulatory costs of equipment requirements are negligible because there are no incremental costs required for EFVS - equipped operators. We ask for comments regarding this assessment. **Certification Cost** Revisions to operational requirements for the use of EFVS would incur certification cost s . These certification cost estimates are the incremental cost for certifying an exp anded EFVS capability

to touchdown and rollout . Some initial testing of EFVS to touchdown and rollout has already

occurred for in - production airplanes . After EFVS are certificated for aircraft that are currentl y in - production , manufacturers will consider certificating EFVS for aircraft that are out - of - production as a separate business decision. Similarity of equipment may

result in reduced certification cost not only for existing in - production airplanes, but also for other aircraft . The certification costs estimated herein are onl y those of current in - production airplanes and for the airplanes of a part 121 operator who expressed an interest in obtaining EFVS capability to touchdown and rollout . Additional certification costs , particularl y for out of production aircraft ( e . g . , for a supplemental ty pe certificate or amended ty pe certificate ), and for new aircraft , will only be incurred if there is sufficient demand and the expected revenue exceeds the costs. The FAA requested and received from an OEM the certification cost for a single in production airplane equipped with an EFVS that meets the provision of th e proposed rule . We13

took the OEM - provided certification cost for a single in - production airplane ty pe with multiple airplane models , which they estimate to be approximately $1 million. We ask for comments concerning this estimate and for costs that might be incurred to certificate new aircraft with EFVS sy stems that would be approved for EFVS operations to touchdown and rollout . Revisions to pilot compartment view requirements for vision systems using a transparent display surface locate d in the pilot’s outside view would not result in additional certification cost s compared to the current process of issuing special conditions for each vision system installation because the amendment would not require the FAA or an applicant to take additional actions to certificate these sy stems. **Total Cost Summary** The total incremental cost attributable to the proposed requirements equals nominal training cost ($ 4.3 million) plus the certification cost ($1 million) . The compliance cost of equipment requirements is neg ligible. The total incremental cost of the proposed rule is approximately

$ 5.3 million for the ten year period. The present value cost is approximately $ 4. 5 million using a seven percent discount rate. We estimate separatel y the regulatory cost of paper work, which is about $ 86,000 as described in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of the proposed rule. Table 3 presents the summary of the regulatory

costs in nominal dollar value and present value .14 Table 3 . Total Cost Summary Cost Component Nominal Cost

( $ Million) Present Value at 7%

($ Million) Training Cost $4.3 $3. 5 Certification Cost $1 $1 Total $5.3 $4. 5 Revisions to pilot compartment view requirements for vision sy stems using a transparent display surface locate d in the pilot’s outside v iew would not result in additional regulatory cost because the FAA would spend fewer resources than the status quo by not issuing special conditions for each vision system installation to meet current operational requirements . Therefore, the FAA ’s cost s are expected to decline by an in determinate amount as the number of vision systems that would require the issuance of special conditions in the future is unknown. The revisions would not increase costs to applicants seeking certification to meet current op erational requirements because the proposed rule would not impose requirements that differ from currently

issued special conditions . There may , however, be additional cost s associated with the certification of EFVS to meet the proposed new operational requirements . **Benefit/Cost Summary** The total estimated cost of this proposed rule over 10 years is approximately $ 5.3 million nominal value or $ 4. 5 million present value at a 7% discount rate . The annualized cost of this proposed rule in current dollar value is a half million dollars . These estimated compliance costs would be incurred b y those operators who want improved EFVS capabilities. OEMs are already15

proceeding with efforts to expand EFVS capabilities, which indicate the benefit s of conducting e xpanded EFVS operations would likely exceed the costs. Operators have also expressed an interest in obtaining EFVS capabilities to conduct operations to touchdown and rollout . The revisions to pilot compartment view requirements for vision systems with a transparent display surface locate d in the pilot’s outside view would not impose additional costs from those currently incurred using the special conditions process. The FAA believes the proposed rule would have benefits exceeding costs based on the likelihood that OEMs and operators would voluntarily incur the costs of the proposed rule in order to realize expected benefits . To quantify benefits, we request comments about expected benefits attributable to the proposed rule.