35488 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 120 / Monday, June 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

1The voluntary route originally was added to the 

Helicopter Route Chart for New York on May 8, 

2008. 

2See 77 FR 39918. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Chapter 05, Time Limits/Maintenance 

Checks—General, in RUAG Aerospace 

Services GmbH Dornier 228 Time Limits/

Maintenance Checks Manual (TLMCM), TM– 

TLMCM–090305–ALL, Revision 5, March 20, 

2011: 

(A) Page 5, in section 05–22–10, Zonal 

Inspection Program, dated May 1, 2006; 

(B) Page 5, in section 05–26–10, Low 

Utilization Zonal Inspection Program, dated 

May 1, 2006. 

(ii) Chapter 31, Indicating/Recording 

Systems, in RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH 

Dornier 228 Airplane Maintenance Manual, 

TM–AMM–228–00014–080184, Revision 3, 

October 30, 2012: 

(A) Pages 1 through 10, Overhead Panel 

5VE—Description, in subject 31–10–07, 

dated November 25, 2009; 

(B) Pages 201 through 208, Overhead Panel 

5VE—Maintenance Practices, in subject 31– 

10–07, dated November 25, 2009; 

(C) Pages 1 and 2, Overhead Panel 6VE— 

Description, in subject 31–10–08, dated 

November 25, 2009; 

(D) Pages 201 through 204, Overhead Panel 

6VE—Maintenance Practices, in subject 31– 

10–08, dated November 25, 2009. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact RUAG Aerospace Services 

GmbH, Dornier 228 Customer Support, P.O. 

Box 1253, 82231 Wessling, Germany; 

telephone: +49 (0) 8153–30 2220; fax: +49 (0) 

8153–30 4258; email: 

custsupport.dornier228@ruag.com; Internet: 

http://www.ruag.com/en/Aviation/Aviation_

Home. 

(4) You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(816) 329–4148. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 

13, 2014. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–14336 Filed 6–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 93 

[Docket No.: FAA–2010–0302; Amdt. No. 

93–98] 

RIN 2120–AK46 

The Extension of the Expiration Date of 

the New York North Shore Helicopter 

Route 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The action amends the 

expiration date of the final rule 

requiring pilots flying civil helicopters 

under Visual Flight Rules to use the 

New York North Shore Helicopter Route 

when operating along the north shore of 

Long Island, New York. The current rule 

expires on August 6, 2014. The FAA 

finds it necessary to extend this rule for 

an additional two years to preserve the 

current operating environment in order 

to determine whether the mandatory use 

of this route should be made permanent. 

The FAA will conduct notice and 

comment rulemaking on the permanent 

use of this route. A limited extension of 

the current rule provides needed time to 

conduct the appropriate analysis to 

assess the rule’s impact and proper 

rulemaking procedures. 

DATES: This final rule is effective August 

6, 2014, through August 6, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact David Maddox, Airspace 

Regulation and ATC Procedures Group, 

AJV–113, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone 202–267- 8783; email 

david.maddox@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

action, contact Lorelei Peter, 

International Law, Legislation and 

Regulations Division, AGC–200, Office 

of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone 202–267–3073; email 

Lorelei.Peter@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 agency’s authority. 

The FAA has broad authority and 

responsibility to regulate the operation 

of aircraft, the use of the navigable 

airspace and to establish safety 

standards for and regulate the 

certification of airmen, aircraft, and air 

carriers. (49 U.S.C. 40104 et seq., 

40103(b)). The FAA’s authority for this 

rule is contained in 49 U.S.C. 40103 and 

44715. Under section 40103, the 

Administrator of the FAA has authority 

to ‘‘prescribe air traffic regulations on 

the flight of aircraft (including 

regulations on safe altitudes) for * * * 

(B) protecting individuals and property 

on the ground. (49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(2)). 

In addition, section 44715(a), provides 

that to ‘‘relieve and protect the public 

health and welfare from aircraft noise,’’ 

the Administrator of the FAA, ‘‘as he 

deems necessary, shall prescribe * * * 

(ii) regulations to control and abate 

aircraft noise * * *.’’ 

I. Background 

In response to concerns from local 

residents regarding noise from 

helicopters operating over Long Island, 

the FAA adopted the New York North 

Shore Helicopter Route final rule (77 FR 

39911). The rule is based on a voluntary 

Visual Flight Rule (VFR) route that was 

developed by the FAA working with the 

Eastern Region Helicopter Council. The 

rule requires civil helicopter pilots 

operating under VFR, whose route of 

flight takes them over the north shore of 

Long Island between the VPLYD 

waypoint and Orient point, to use the 

North Shore Helicopter Route, as 

published in the New York Helicopter 

Chart.1 The rule permits pilots to 

deviate from the route and altitude 

requirements when necessary for safety, 

weather conditions, or transitioning to 

or from a destination or point of 

landing. The rule was promulgated to 

maximize use of the route as published 

in order to secure and improve upon 

decreased levels of noise that had been 

voluntarily achieved. 

The current rule terminates on August 

6, 2014. The FAA limited the duration 

of the rule because at the time of 

promulgation the FAA did not know the 

current rate of compliance with the 

voluntary route or the circumstances 

surrounding an operator’s decision to 

not use the route. The FAA concluded 

that ‘‘There is no reason to retain this 

rule if the FAA determines that it is not 

actually improving the noise situation 

along the north shore of Long Island.’’ 2

Accordingly, the agency decided that 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 120 / Monday, June 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 35489 

3 Id. 

the rule would sunset in two years if it 

was determined that there is no 

meaningful improvement in the effects 

of helicopter noise on quality of life or 

that the rule was otherwise unjustified. 

Specifically, the FAA stated ‘‘Should 

there be such an improvement, the FAA 

may, after appropriate notice and 

opportunity for comment, decide to 

make the rule permanent. Likewise, 

should the FAA determine that 

reasonable modification could be made 

to the route to better address noise 

concerns (and any other relevant 

concerns), we may choose to modify the 

rule after notice and comment.’’ 3

II. The Final Rule 

This action extends the requirement 

for pilots of civil helicopters to use the 

North Shore Helicopter Route when 

transiting along the north shore of Long 

Island for an additional two years, while 

the FAA considers whether to make the 

mandatory use of the route permanent. 

The current rule requiring use of the 

route expires on August 6, 2014. Public 

input to this consideration is critical 

and additional time is needed to 

conduct the rulemaking process. 

However, the FAA does not want to 

disrupt the operating environment and 

cause any confusion on using the route 

during this interim period. Therefore, 

the FAA finds that a two year extension 

of the current rule is warranted to 

maintain the current operating 

environment and permit the agency to 

engage in rulemaking to determine 

future action on this route. The FAA 

expects to issue a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on the permanent use of 

this route in the immediate future. The 

FAA finds that under Title 5 of the 

United States Code section 553(b) good 

cause exists that notice and public 

comment are impracticable and contrary 

to the public interest. 

III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 

Executive Order 13563 direct that each 

Federal agency shall propose or adopt a 

regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its 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. In 

developing U.S. standards, the Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. 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 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it to be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this extension. The reasoning for this 

determination follows. 

Since this rule only extends the 

current requirements for pilots of civil 

helicopters to use the North Shore 

Helicopter Route when transiting along 

the north shore of Long Island for an 

additional two years, the expected 

outcome will be a minimal impact and 

a regulatory evaluation was not 

prepared. 

The FAA has therefore determined 

that this extension is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration. The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

This final rule will maintain the 

current operating environment for two 

years, therefore the FAA maintains that 

it will only have a minimal impact on 

any small entity affected by this 

rulemaking action. 

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 

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 final rule and 

determined that it would have only a 

domestic impact and therefore no effect 

on international trade. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
35490 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 120 / Monday, June 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of $151 

million in lieu of $100 million. This 

final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

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. The 

FAA has determined that there is no 

new requirement for information 

collection associated with this final 

rule. 

F. International Compatibility and 

Cooperation 

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 determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these regulations. 

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 action under the policies and 

agency responsibilities of Executive 

Order 13609, and has determined that 

this action would have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

G. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental 

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ 

paragraph 312f. This action is not 

expected to cause any potentially 

significant environmental impacts, and 

no extraordinary circumstances exist 

that warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment. 

IV. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency determined that this action will 

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, 

does not have Federalism implications. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The 

agency has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order and it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

V. Additional Information 

A. Availability of Rulemaking 

Documents 

An electronic copy of rulemaking 

documents may be obtained from the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

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) 267–9680. Commenters 

must identify the docket or amendment 

number of this rulemaking. 

All documents the FAA considered in 

developing this rulemaking action, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed from 

the Internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced in item 

(1) above. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93 

Air traffic control, Airspace, 

Navigation (air). 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends chapter I. 

PART 93—SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC 

RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 93 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 

40109, 40113, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44715, 

44719, 46301. 

■ 2. Amend § 93.101 to read as follows: 

§ 93.101 Applicability. 

This subpart prescribes a special air 

traffic rule for civil helicopters 

operating VFR along the North Shore, 

Long Island, New York, between August 

6, 2012 and August 6, 2016. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in 

Washington, DC, on June 2, 2014. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–14457 Filed 6–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 32 

[Docket No.: OJP (BJA) 1646] 

RIN 1121–AA80 

Public Safety Officers’ Benefits 

Program 

AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs, 

Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Justice Programs 

(OJP) of the U.S. Department of Justice 

is amending its regulation defining 

‘‘Spouse’’ for purposes of implementing 

the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits 

(PSOB) Act, associated statutes, and 

Program. Prior to the Supreme Court 

invalidating section 3 of the Defense of 

Marriage Act (DOMA) DOMA prevented 

OJP from recognizing same-sex 

surviving spouses for the purposes of 

awarding PSOB Act benefits. As 

amended, the final regulation recognizes 

as a spouse, for purposes of the PSOB 

program, a person who lawfully enters 

into a marriage in one jurisdiction, even 

when living in another jurisdiction, and 

without regard to the law of the other 

jurisdiction. 

DATES: Effective July 23, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hope Janke, Bureau of Justice 

Assistance (BJA), OJP, at (202) 514– 

6278, or toll-free at 1 (888) 744–6153. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In a document published in the 

Federal Register on March 5, 2014 (79 

FR 12434), OJP proposed to amend its 

regulation at 28 CFR 32.3, defining 

spouse for purposes of the PSOB Act 

and program. The comment period 

ended on April 4, 2014. OJP received 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES