This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

34935 

Vol. 78, No. 112 

Tuesday, June 11, 2013 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 1, 23, 25, 27, 29, 61, 91, 

121, 125, and 135 

[Docket No.: FAA–2013–0485; Notice No. 

1209] 

RIN 2120–AJ94 

Revisions to Operational 

Requirements for the Use of Enhanced 

Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) and to 

Pilot Compartment View Requirements 

for Vision Systems 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing to 

permit operators to use an Enhanced 

Flight Vision System (EFVS) in lieu of 

natural vision to continue descending 

from 100 feet above the 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 EFVSequipped 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. EFVSequipped 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. The proposal 

would take advantage of advanced 

vision capabilities thereby 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 types while 

maintaining an equivalent level of 

safety. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

September 9, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2013–0485 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://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 USC 

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 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or 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: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Terry King, Flight 

Technologies and Procedures Division, 

AFS–400, Flight Standards Service, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

385–4586; email Terry.King@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

proposed rule contact Paul G. Greer, 

Office of the Chief Counsel, Regulations 

Division, AGC–200, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3073; email 

Paul.G.Greer@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the 

‘‘Additional Information’’ section for 

information on how to comment on this 

proposal and how the FAA will handle 

comments received. The ‘‘Additional 

Information’’ section also contains 

related information about the docket 

and the handling of proprietary or 

confidential business information. In 

addition, there is information on 

obtaining copies of related rulemaking 

documents. 

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. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 49 

U.S.C. 40103, which vests the 

Administrator with broad authority to 

prescribe regulations to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace, and 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), 

which requires the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations and minimum 

standards for other practices, methods, 

and procedures necessary for safety in 

air commerce and national security. 

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Frequently Used In This Document 

AEG Aircraft Evaluation Group 

ASR Airport surveillance radar 

CAA Civil aviation authority 

DA Decision altitude 

DH Decision height 

EASA European Aviation Safety Agency 

EFVS Enhanced Flight Vision System 

FAF Final approach fix 

FSB Flight Standardization Board 

FPARC Flight path angle reference cue 

FPV Flight path vector 

HUD Head up display 

IAP Instrument approach procedure 

ILS Instrument landing system 

IFR Instrument flight rules 

IR Infrared 

LOA Letter of authorization 

LODA Letter of deviation authority 

MASPS Minimum aviation system 

performance standards 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34936 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

MDA Minimum descent altitude 

MSpec Management specification 

NextGen Next Generation Air 

Transportation System 

NOTAM Notice to airmen 

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board 

OEM Original equipment manufacturer 

OpSpec Operation specification 

PAR Precision approach radar 

PIC Pilot in Command 

RVR Runway visual range 

VFR Visual flight rules 

Table of Contents 

I. Overview of Proposed Rule 

II. Background 

A. History 

B. Statement of the Problem 

C. Related Actions 

III. Discussion of the Proposal 

A. Revise the definition for EFVS and add 

a definition for EFVS operation (§ 1.1) 

B. Consolidate EFVS requirements in part 

91 in a new section (§ 91.176) 

C. Establish equipment, operating, and 

visual reference requirements for EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout 

(§ 91.176(a)) 

D. Revise current requirements for EFVS 

operations to 100 feet (§ 91.176(b)) 

E. Establish training requirements for 

persons conducting EFVS operations 

(§ 61.31) 

F. Establish new recent flight experience 

and proficiency requirements for persons 

conducting EFVS operations (§ 61.57) 

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) 

H. Permit operators of EFVS-equipped 

aircraft to initiate or continue an 

approach when the destination airport 

visibility is below authorized minimums 

(§§ 121.651, 125.325, 125.381, 135.225) 

I. Revise Category II and III general 

operating rules to permit the use of an 

EFVS (§ 91.189) 

J. Revise pilot compartment view rules to 

establish airworthiness standards for 

vision systems with transparent displays 

located in the pilot’s outside view 

(§§ 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, and 29.773) 

K. Related Amendments (§§ 91.175, 91.189, 

and 91.905) 

L. Conforming Amendments (§§ 91.175 and 

91.189) 

M. Implementation 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

C. International Trade Impact Assessment 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

F. International Compatibility 

G. Environmental Analysis 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

VI. Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

VII. The Proposed Amendment 

I. Overview of Proposed Rule 

Regulations pertaining to EFVS can be 

found in Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) 1.1, 91.175(l) and 

(m), 121.651(c) and (d), 125.381(c), and 

135.225(c). Section 91.175(l) authorizes 

the use of EFVS to determine that the 

enhanced flight visibility is at least the 

minimum prescribed for the approach 

being flown, and to identify the visual 

references that must be observed in 

order to descend below decision 

altitude/decision height (DA/DH) or 

minimum descent altitude (MDA) to 100 

feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation. Natural vision must be used 

below 100 feet. Sections 121.651(c), 

125.325, 125.381(c), and 135.225(c) 

place additional limitations on air 

carriers and commercial operators using 

EFVS. 

Under current regulations, an EFVS 

can be used in lieu of natural vision to 

descend below DA/DH or MDA down to 

100 feet above touchdown zone 

elevation on certain instrument 

approach procedures, provided specific 

regulatory conditions are met. When the 

destination airport weather is forecast or 

reported to be below authorized 

minimums at the estimated time of 

arrival, persons conducting operations 

under parts 121, 125, and 135 have 

certain dispatch, flight release, and IFR 

takeoff limitations as well as limitations 

related to initiating an approach, 

continuing an approach beyond the 

final approach fix (FAF), or beginning 

the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach procedure. The 

FAA proposes to revise the regulations 

to specify additional conditions under 

which an aircraft equipped with EFVS 

can be dispatched, released, or 

permitted to take off. It would also 

specify the conditions under which an 

operator of an EFVS-equipped aircraft 

may begin an approach when the 

weather is reported to be below 

authorized minimums. Additionally, it 

would permit an EFVS to be used to 

continue descent below 100 feet above 

the touchdown zone elevation when the 

required visual references can be 

observed using the EFVS. 

Currently, part 61 does not contain 

any training or recent flight experience 

requirements to conduct EFVS 

operations. To ensure that an 

appropriate level of safety is maintained 

for all EFVS operations, the FAA 

proposes to amend part 61 to require 

initial training as well as new recent 

flight experience and proficiency 

requirements for persons conducting 

EFVS operations. 

Current regulations also specify that 

no pilot operating an aircraft on a 

Category II or Category III approach that 

requires the use of a DA/DH may 

continue the approach below the 

authorized decision height using an 

EFVS in lieu of natural vision. The FAA 

also proposes to amend the regulations 

to permit an EFVS to be used during 

Category II and Category III approaches. 

Additionally, the FAA uses special 

conditions issued under § 21.16 to 

approve vision systems in type 

certificated aircraft. The FAA proposes 

to eliminate the need to issue special 

conditions for these systems by revising 

the pilot compartment view certification 

requirements in the airworthiness 

standards found in parts 23, 25, 27, and 

29. 

Following is a detailed overview of 

the proposed amendments: 

• Section 1.1 would be amended to 

better define the components of an 

EFVS and to define the term ‘‘EFVS 

operation.’’ 

• Sections 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, 

and 29.773 would be amended to 

establish certification requirements for 

vision systems with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view. 

• Section 61.31 would be amended to 

require training for EFVS operations. 

• Section 61.57 would be amended to 

require recent flight experience or a 

proficiency check for a person 

conducting an EFVS operation or acting 

as pilot in command (PIC) during an 

EFVS operation. 

• Sections 91.175 (l) and (m), which 

contain the existing EFVS regulations, 

would be redesignated as proposed 

§ 91.176. The FAA proposes to place all 

EFVS regulations contained in part 91, 

except those pertaining to Category II 

and III operations, in a single new 

section for organizational and regulatory 

clarity. 

• Section 91.189 would be amended 

to permit an EFVS to be used to identify 

the visual references required to 

continue an approach below the 

authorized decision height during 

Category II and Category III approaches. 

• Section 91.905 would be amended 

to add § 91.176 to the list of rules 

subject to waiver. 

• Sections 121.613 and 121.615 

would be amended to expand the 

conditions under which an EFVS can be 

used to dispatch or flight release an 

aircraft when the visibility is forecast or 

reported to be below authorized 

minimums for a destination airport. 

• Section 121.651 would be amended 

to permit the pilot of an EFVS-equipped 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34937 

aircraft to continue an approach past the 

FAF or to begin the final approach 

segment of an instrument approach 

procedure when the weather is reported 

to be below authorized visibility 

minimums. Section 121.651 would also 

be amended to permit EFVS-equipped 

part 121 operators to conduct EFVS 

operations in accordance with proposed 

§ 91.176 and their operations 

specifications issued for EFVS 

operations. 

• Sections 125.361 and 125.363 

would be amended to permit flight 

release for EFVS-equipped aircraft when 

weather reports or forecasts indicate 

that arrival weather conditions at the 

destination airport will be below 

authorized minimums. 

• Sections 125.325 and 125.381 

would be amended to permit the pilot 

of an EFVS-equipped aircraft to execute 

an instrument approach procedure 

when the weather is reported to be 

below authorized visibility minimums. 

Section 125.381 would also be amended 

to permit EFVS-equipped part 125 

operators to conduct EFVS operations in 

accordance with proposed § 91.176 and 

their operations specifications. 

• Section 135.219 would be amended 

to permit flights to be initiated for 

EFVS-equipped aircraft when weather 

reports or forecasts indicate that arrival 

weather conditions at the destination 

airport will be below authorized 

minimums. 

• Section 135.225 would be amended 

to permit the pilot of an EFVS-equipped 

aircraft to initiate an instrument 

approach procedure when the reported 

visibility is below the authorized 

visibility minimums for the approach. 

Section 135.225 would also be amended 

to permit EFVS-equipped part 135 

operators to conduct EFVS operations in 

accordance with proposed § 91.176 and 

their operations specifications issued for 

EFVS operations. 

• Additional amendments would be 

made to conform to the proposed 

regulatory changes. 

Each of these proposed amendments 

is discussed in detail in the sections that 

follow. The FAA has attempted to use 

regulatory language that is performancebased and not limited to a specific 

sensor technology. The FAA believes 

this action would accommodate future 

growth in real-time sensor technologies 

used in most enhanced vision systems. 

The proposal would maximize the 

benefits of rapidly evolving instrument 

approach procedures and advanced 

flight deck technology to increase access 

and capacity during low visibility 

operations. The proposal is consistent 

with the agency’s Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen) goals 

and operational improvements. An 

operator’s decision to equip with EFVS 

is voluntary; however, the operator 

would be required to conduct EFVS 

operations in accordance with this 

proposal. 

EFVS-equipped aircraft conducting 

operations to touchdown and rollout 

would be required to meet additional 

airworthiness requirements. Only 

enhanced flight vision systems that 

utilize a real-time image of the external 

scene topography would be addressed 

by the operational requirements 

proposed in this notice. Synthetic vision 

systems, which use a computergenerated image of the external scene 

topography from the perspective of the 

flight deck derived from aircraft 

attitude, a high precision navigation 

solution, and a database of terrain, 

obstacles and relevant cultural features, 

would not be addressed by the operating 

requirements set forth in this proposal. 

Synthetic vision systems with a 

transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view, however, 

would be subject to the airworthiness 

standards in proposed §§ 23.773, 

25.773, 27.773, and 29.773 as 

applicable. 

This proposal also does not address 

EFVS use for takeoff. Section 91.175(f) 

prescribes civil airport takeoff 

minimums which are applicable to 

persons conducting operations under 

parts 121, 125, 129, or 135. This section 

makes provision for the Administrator 

to authorize takeoff minimums other 

than the minimums prescribed in 

§ 91.175(f). Therefore, no regulatory 

amendments are proposed to enable 

EFVS to be used for takeoff because 

these operations can be authorized 

through existing processes. 

II. Background 

A. History 

An EFVS uses a head-up display 

(HUD) to provide flight information, 

navigation guidance, and a real-time 

image of the external scene to the pilot 

on one display. The real-time image of 

the outside scene is produced by 

imaging sensors, which may be based on 

forward looking infrared, millimeter 

wave radiometry, millimeter wave 

radar, low level light intensification, or 

other imaging technologies. In certain 

reduced visibility conditions, an EFVS 

can enable a pilot to see the approach 

lights, visual references associated with 

the runway environment, and other 

objects or features that might not be 

visible without the use of an EFVS. 

Combining the flight information, 

navigation guidance, and sensor 

imagery on a HUD allows the pilot to 

remain head up and to continue looking 

forward along the flight path throughout 

the entire approach, landing, and 

rollout. 

The requirements for operating below 

DA/DH or MDA under IFR on 

instrument approaches are contained in 

§ 91.175. Over the years, these 

requirements have been modified to 

enable aircraft operations during 

reduced visibility conditions while 

maintaining a high level of safety. For 

many years, descent below DA/DH or 

MDA could only be accomplished using 

natural vision. On January 9, 2004, a 

final rule, Enhanced Flight Vision 

Systems, was published in the Federal 

Register (69 FR 1620) to permit an EFVS 

to be used in lieu of natural vision to 

continue descent below DA/DH or MDA 

down to 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of 

intended landing. At and below 100 

feet, however, the lights or markings of 

the threshold or the lights or markings 

of the touchdown zone had to be 

distinctly visible and identifiable to the 

pilot using natural vision. A pilot could 

not continue descent below 100 feet by 

relying solely on the EFVS sensor 

imagery. 

The 2004 final rule permitted an 

EFVS to be used in this way under IFR 

only on straight-in instrument approach 

procedures other than Category II or III, 

subject to certain conditions and 

limitations. The FAA asserted in the 

final rule that permitting EFVS to be 

used in this way could allow for 

operational benefits, reduced costs, and 

increased safety. Using a HUD assists a 

pilot in flying a more precise flight path. 

The FAA asserted that an EFVS, which 

includes a real-time sensor image on a 

HUD, might also improve the level of 

safety by improving position awareness, 

providing visual cues to maintain a 

stabilized approach, and reducing 

missed approaches. An EFVS could also 

enable a pilot to detect an obstruction 

on the runway, such as an aircraft or 

vehicle, earlier in the approach, and 

detect runway incursions in reduced 

visibility conditions. Even in situations 

where the pilot has sufficient flight 

visibility at the DA/DH or MDA to see 

the required visual references using 

natural vision, an EFVS could be used 

to achieve better situation awareness 

than might be possible without it— 

especially in marginal visibility 

conditions. 

The 2004 final rule also established 

equipment requirements for EFVS 

operations. Enhanced flight vision 

systems used to conduct operations 

under the provisions of §§ 91.175(l) and 

(m), 121.651(c) and (d), 125.381(c), and 

135.225(c) using U.S.-registered aircraft 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34938 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

are required to have an FAA type design 

approval (e.g., type certificate, amended 

type certificate, or supplemental type 

certificate). Requiring a type design 

approval ensures that the EFVS 

equipment is appropriate to support the 

EFVS operations to be conducted. These 

approvals are currently achieved 

through the issuance of special 

conditions. Foreign-registered aircraft 

used to conduct EFVS operations in the 

U.S. that do not have an FAA type 

design approval must be equipped with 

an operable EFVS that otherwise meets 

the requirements of the U.S. regulations. 

Additional information regarding 

compliance with EFVS operating 

requirements can be found in Advisory 

Circular (AC) 90–106, Enhanced Flight 

Vision Systems. Additional information 

about compliance with the 

airworthiness or equipment 

requirements for EFVS can be found in 

AC 20–167, Airworthiness Approval of 

Enhanced Vision System, Synthetic 

Vision System, Combined Vision 

System, and Enhanced Flight Vision 

System Equipment. 

B. Statement of the Problem 

The FAA believes EFVS capabilities 

could be better leveraged by making 

provisions for current and future 

performance-based enhanced vision 

capabilities that would increase access, 

efficiency, and throughput at many 

airports when low visibility is a factor. 

The 2004 final rule permitted enhanced 

flight visibility (determined using EFVS) 

to be used in lieu of flight visibility 

(determined by natural vision) to 

descend below DA/DH or MDA down to 

100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation of the runway of intended 

landing. The rule, however, did not 

address dispatching a flight under part 

121, releasing a flight under part 125, or 

taking off under part 135. An aircraft 

operated under those parts cannot be 

dispatched, released, or permitted to 

take off under IFR when the weather at 

the destination airport is forecast or 

reported to be below authorized 

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 FAF (or where a FAF 

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 minimums. These 

restrictions prevent EFVS from being 

used for maximum operational benefit 

by persons conducting operations under 

parts 121, 125, or 135. This proposal 

would provide relief from these 

restrictions for operators of EFVSequipped aircraft. 

Under current regulations, 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 of an 

approach that extends from DA/DH or 

MDA down to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation. While this 

provision has provided operators with 

significant benefits, additional 

capability could be achieved by 

permitting EFVS to be used to 

touchdown and rollout. This would 

increase access and throughput over 

existing EFVS operations by removing 

the requirement to transition to natural 

vision at 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation. 

There are currently no training, recent 

flight experience, or proficiency 

requirements in part 61 for persons 

conducting EFVS operations. Since the 

2004 final rule was enacted, the number 

of persons conducting EFVS operations 

has significantly expanded. The FAA 

believes the proposal would further 

increase the number of operators 

conducting EFVS operations. 

Additionally, it would permit those 

operations to be conducted in low 

visibility conditions to touchdown and 

rollout. The FAA therefore proposes to 

establish training, recent flight 

experience, and proficiency 

requirements for EFVS operations to 

provide an appropriate level of safety 

for the conduct of those operations. 

The FAA also believes that an EFVS 

can provide operational and safety 

benefits during Category II and Category 

III operations, especially as more 

advanced imaging sensor capabilities 

are developed which function more 

effectively in lower visibility 

conditions. The proposal would 

therefore amend the operating rules for 

Category II and III operations to permit 

EFVS to be used in lieu of natural vision 

during the conduct of those operations. 

Finally, there are no airworthiness 

standards that specifically address the 

certification of vision systems, to 

include EFVS. Accordingly, the FAA 

has certificated vision systems using 

special conditions which can impose 

significant delays on the certification 

process. The proposal would therefore 

also amend parts 23, 25, 27, and 29 to 

establish certification requirements for 

vision systems with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view thereby eliminating the 

need for the issuance of special 

conditions. 

C. Related Actions 

The FAA is revising AC 90–106, 

Enhanced Flight Vision Systems, and 

AC 20–167, Airworthiness Approval of 

Enhanced Vision System, Synthetic 

Vision System, Combined Vision 

System, and Enhanced Flight Vision 

System Equipment, to include the 

provisions proposed in this NPRM. A 

Notice of Availability will be published 

in the Federal Register when these draft 

ACs have been completed, and copies of 

these draft ACs will be placed in the 

docket for public comment at that time. 

III. Discussion of the Proposal 

A. Revise the Definition for EFVS and 

add a Definition for EFVS Operation 

(§ 1.1) 

The FAA proposes to amend the 

definition of EFVS in § 1.1 to more 

precisely describe an EFVS. The 

proposed amendment specifies that an 

EFVS is an installed aircraft system and 

revises the current definition to include 

language that describes the elements 

and features of an EFVS currently found 

in § 91.175(m). The current definition of 

EFVS would be revised to include the 

phrase ‘‘the EFVS includes the display 

element, sensors, computers and power 

supplies, indications, and controls.’’ 

This phrase is currently found in 

§ 91.175(m)(3). The FAA also proposes 

to change the phrase ‘‘installed airborne 

system’’ to ‘‘installed aircraft system’’ 

because some EFVS operations may be 

conducted on the surface as well as in 

an airborne context. 

The proposed definition for EFVS 

would state: ‘‘Enhanced flight vision 

system (EFVS) means an installed 

aircraft system which uses an electronic 

means to provide a display of the 

forward external scene topography (the 

applicable natural or manmade features 

of a place or region especially in a way 

to show their relative positions and 

elevation) through the use of imaging 

sensors, such as forward-looking 

infrared, millimeter wave radiometry, 

millimeter wave radar, or low-light level 

image intensification. The EFVS sensor 

imagery and required aircraft flight 

information and flight symbology is 

displayed on a head-up display, or an 

equivalent display, so that the imagery 

and symbology is clearly visible to the 

pilot flying in his or her normal position 

with the line of vision looking forward 

along the flight path. An EFVS includes 

the display element, sensors, computers 

and power supplies, indications, and 

controls.’’ 

The FAA also proposes to add a 

definition to § 1.1 for EFVS operation. 

An EFVS operation would be defined as 

‘‘an operation in which an EFVS is 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34939 

required to be used to perform an 

approach or landing, determine 

enhanced flight visibility (as defined in 

current § 1.1), identify required visual 

references, or conduct the rollout.’’ This 

definition establishes the conditions 

under which an EFVS would be 

required to conduct specific operations. 

The FAA notes that while an EFVS can 

provide situation awareness in any 

phase of flight, such use would not 

constitute an EFVS operation unless an 

EFVS is required in lieu of natural 

vision to perform any visual task 

associated with approach, landing, and 

rollout. 

B. Consolidate EFVS Requirements in 

Part 91 in a New Section (§ 91.176) 

The FAA proposes to create new 

§ 91.176 which would contain the 

regulations for enhanced flight vision 

systems. The FAA believes that the 

extent of current and proposed EFVS 

provisions requires a new section for 

organizational and regulatory clarity. 

The existing regulations for EFVS to 100 

feet that are located in current 

§§ 91.175(l) and (m) would be moved to 

proposed § 91.176 and restructured. 

Proposed §§ 91.176(a) and (b) would 

each be organized into three main 

areas—equipment requirements, 

operating requirements, and visibility 

and visual reference requirements. 

Section 91.176(a) would contain the 

new regulations for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout, and § 91.176(b) 

would contain the existing regulations 

for EFVS operations that are conducted 

to 100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation. 

C. Establish Equipment, Operating, and 

Visual Reference Requirements for 

EFVS Operations To Touchdown and 

Rollout (§ 91.176(a)) 

Under the current EFVS rule, an EFVS 

can be used to descend below DA/DH or 

MDA on any instrument approach 

procedure, other than Category II or III, 

that is straight-in and that uses 

published straight-in minima. The 

existing regulations permit an EFVS to 

be used to identify the visual references 

required by § 91.175(l)(3) and to 

determine that the enhanced flight 

visibility provided by the EFVS is not 

less than the visibility prescribed in the 

instrument approach procedure (IAP) 

being flown. Both of these requirements 

have to be met before descending below 

DA/DH or MDA down to 100 feet above 

the touchdown zone elevation. 

Additionally, the regulations require 

that the aircraft be continuously in a 

position from which a descent to a 

landing on the intended runway can be 

made at a normal rate of descent using 

normal maneuvers, and, for operations 

conducted under parts 121 or 135, the 

descent rate will allow touchdown to 

occur within the touchdown zone of the 

runway of intended landing. 

At 100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation and below, the current 

regulations require that the flight 

visibility must be sufficient for the 

lights or markings of the threshold or 

the lights or markings of the touchdown 

zone to be distinctly visible and 

identifiable to the pilot without reliance 

on the EFVS in order to continue to a 

landing. In other words, descent below 

100 feet has to be accomplished using 

natural vision—a pilot cannot continue 

descending below 100 feet by relying 

solely on the EFVS sensor imagery 

under the current rule. 

The FAA proposes to permit 

enhanced vision provided by an EFVS 

to be used in lieu of natural vision to 

descend below 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation. The FAA 

believes the current visual references 

that need to be seen using natural vision 

to descend below 100 feet should serve 

as the basis for establishing the visual 

references necessary to be seen with 

enhanced vision to descend below 100 

feet when conducting EFVS operations 

to touchdown and rollout. Those visual 

references consist of lights or markings 

of the threshold or lights or markings of 

the touchdown zone. Additionally, the 

FAA proposes to add the runway 

threshold and the runway touchdown 

zone landing surface as references a 

pilot could use to descend below 100 

feet. The FAA believes these additions 

are necessary to include other visual 

references that could be displayed by 

the EFVS and used by the pilot to safely 

land the aircraft. 

Additionally, in § 91.176(a) the FAA 

would require that the aircraft be 

continuously in a position from which 

a descent to a landing on the intended 

runway could be made at a normal rate 

of descent using normal maneuvers. 

This proposed requirement is identical 

to the current requirement that exists for 

EFVS operations to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation. The 

proposal would also require that for all 

operators, the descent rate would allow 

touchdown to occur within the 

touchdown zone of the runway of 

intended landing. Currently only 

persons conducting operations under 

parts 121 or 135 are required to 

touchdown within the touchdown zone. 

For EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout, the FAA considers it prudent to 

require touchdown to occur within the 

touchdown zone for all operators in 

order to minimize any potential for a 

runway overrun in low visibility 

conditions. 

The FAA proposes to permit an EFVS 

operation to be conducted below the 

authorized DA/DH to touchdown and 

rollout using a straight-in precision 

instrument approach procedure or an 

approach with approved vertical 

guidance. In order to ensure obstacle 

clearance and stabilized approach to 

touchdown, the approach must have 

published straight-in minima, a 

published vertical path, and a published 

DA or DH. Accordingly, EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout 

would not be permitted on nonprecision 

approaches. 

In proposed § 91.176(a)(2)(i), the FAA 

would require each required pilot flight 

crewmember to have adequate 

knowledge of, and familiarity with, the 

aircraft, the EFVS, and the procedures to 

be used. Additionally, in proposed 

§ 91.176(a)(2)(ii), the FAA would 

require that the aircraft be equipped 

with, and the pilot flying would be 

required to use, an operable EFVS that 

meets the equipment requirements 

specified in proposed § 91.176(a)(1). 

When a minimum flightcrew of more 

than one pilot is required, proposed 

§ 91.176(a)(2)(iii) would require the 

pilot monitoring to use a display that 

provides him or her with EFVS sensor 

imagery. 

Part 61 does not currently contain 

training, recent flight experience, and 

proficiency requirements for EFVS 

operations. Under the proposal, 

however, each required pilot flight 

crewmember would be required to meet 

the applicable training, recent flight 

experience, and proficiency 

requirements proposed in §§ 61.31(l) 

and 61.57(h) and (i). Persons conducting 

operations under parts 121, 125, or 135 

would continue to be required to meet 

the current training, testing, and 

qualification provisions of those parts. 

The new proposals for part 61 are 

discussed in more detail in Sections III– 

E and III–F of this proposal. For foreign 

persons, each required pilot flight 

crewmember would have to meet the 

applicable requirements of the civil 

aviation authority of the State of the 

operator. 

For operational approval to conduct 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout, the FAA proposes to require 

persons conducting operations under 

parts 121, 125, 129, or 135 to conduct 

those operations in accordance with 

OpSpecs authorizing the use of EFVS. 

Persons conducting operations under a 

part 125 Letter of Deviation Authority 

(LODA) would conduct those operations 

in accordance with a letter of 

authorization (LOA) for EFVS 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34940 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

operations to touchdown and rollout. 

Part 91, subpart K, operators would be 

required to conduct these operations in 

accordance with their MSpecs 

authorizing the use of EFVS. Persons 

conducting operations under part 91 

(other than those conducted under 

subpart K) would be required to conduct 

them in accordance with their LOA for 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. Section L contains a discussion 

on how the FAA plans to manage EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout 

through OpSpecs, MSpecs, and LOAs. 

Under the current EFVS rule, an EFVS 

installed on a U.S.-registered aircraft 

conducting EFVS operations to 100 feet 

must be installed on that aircraft in 

accordance with an FAA type design 

approval (a type certificate, amended 

type certificate, or supplemental type 

certificate). An EFVS that is currently 

certified to conduct EFVS operations to 

100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation, however, may not meet the 

airworthiness standards necessary to 

support EFVS operations to touchdown 

and rollout. Therefore, the FAA 

proposes a similar certification process 

for an EFVS installed on an aircraft used 

in EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout and would require an FAA type 

design approval for these systems. 

The FAA recognizes that a foreignregistered aircraft may not have an FAAtype design approval. Therefore, the 

proposal would also permit use of an 

EFVS in those aircraft that may not have 

an FAA-type design approval provided 

those aircraft are equipped with an 

operable EFVS that otherwise meets the 

requirements of the U.S. regulations. 

Current § 91.175(m) states that an 

EFVS presents sensor imagery and 

aircraft symbology on a head-up display 

(HUD) or an equivalent display, so that 

they are clearly visible to the pilot flying 

in his or her normal position and line 

of vision looking forward along the 

flight path. A head-down display does 

not meet the regulatory requirement that 

the EFVS sensor imagery and aircraft 

flight symbology be presented so a pilot 

can see it while seated in his or her 

normal position and line of vision 

looking forward along the flight path. A 

head-down display, therefore, would 

not be considered an equivalent display. 

Current § 91.175(m) also states that an 

EFVS includes imaging sensors, 

computers and power supplies, 

indications, and controls. It must also 

display the following aircraft flight 

information and flight symbology: 

airspeed, vertical speed, aircraft 

attitude, heading, altitude, command 

guidance as appropriate for the 

approach to be flown, path deviation 

indications, flight path vector, and flight 

path angle reference cue. The displayed 

EFVS imagery, attitude symbology, 

flight path vector, flight path angle 

reference cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to the imagery and external 

scene topography must be aligned with 

and scaled to the external view; 

therefore, they must be conformal. The 

flight path angle reference cue must also 

be displayed with the pitch scale, and 

the pilot must be able to select the 

appropriate descent angle for the 

approach. The EFVS sensor imagery and 

aircraft flight symbology must be 

displayed such that they do not obscure 

the pilot’s outside view or field of view 

through the cockpit window. Finally, 

the display characteristics and 

dynamics must be suitable for manual 

control of the aircraft. 

The FAA proposes to apply all of the 

equipment requirements of the current 

EFVS regulations found in § 91.175(m) 

to EFVS operations conducted to 

touchdown and rollout. The FAA would 

also require the EFVS to display height 

above ground level such as that 

provided by a radio altimeter or another 

device capable of providing equivalent 

performance. While EFVS-specific 

callouts are usually based upon 

barometric altitude, the FAA believes 

that the supplementary information 

provided by a radio altimeter would 

provide pilots with additional altitude 

information and assist those pilots with 

performing the flare and landing during 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. The FAA believes this 

requirement is necessary to support 

altitude awareness during EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout. 

The FAA also proposes to require a 

flare prompt or flare guidance, as 

appropriate, for achieving acceptable 

touchdown performance. Each applicant 

for type design approval would be 

required to demonstrate acceptable 

touchdown performance for their 

particular EFVS implementation using 

either flare prompt or flare guidance. 

The FAA believes this requirement is 

necessary to provide the pilot with 

additional information to conduct the 

flare maneuver during conditions of low 

visibility typically encountered during 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. 

When a minimum flightcrew of more 

than one pilot is required, the FAA 

proposes to require that the aircraft be 

equipped with a display that provides 

the pilot monitoring with EFVS sensor 

imagery. Under the FAA’s proposal, this 

display must be located within the 

maximum primary field of view of the 

pilot monitoring and any symbology 

displayed must not adversely obscure 

the sensor imagery of the runway 

environment. The proposal also makes 

provision for dual EFVS installations, 

head mounted displays, and other head 

up presentations the FAA might find 

acceptable. While many EFVS-equipped 

aircraft provide a display of the sensor 

imagery to the pilot monitoring, U.S. 

regulations do not require that such a 

display be provided to the pilot 

monitoring for EFVS operations to 100 

feet. For these operations, the FAA 

considers it sufficient to conduct the 

operation using EFVS-specific 

procedures and callouts to support crew 

coordination and common situation 

awareness. At 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation, both pilots 

are relying on natural vision to identify 

the required visual references. During 

EFVS operations where the pilot flying 

relies on EFVS from DA/DH through 

touchdown and rollout, it cannot be 

assumed that the monitoring pilot sees 

anything of the outside environment 

using natural vision. Therefore, the FAA 

proposes to require that the aircraft be 

equipped with a display that provides 

the pilot monitoring with EFVS sensor 

imagery. This display would support 

the monitoring pilot’s view of the 

outside environment and provide 

common situation awareness. The pilot 

monitoring would carry out his or her 

normal approach monitoring tasks and 

be required to use the display to 

monitor and assess the safe conduct of 

the approach, landing, and rollout. This 

would confirm that the required visual 

references are acquired, verify visual 

acquisition of and alignment with the 

runway of intended landing, and assist 

in determining that the runway is clear 

of aircraft, vehicles, or other 

obstructions. 

For certain future EFVS operations, 

proposed § 91.176(a)(1)(ii) specifies that 

the Administrator may require the 

display of the EFVS sensor imagery, 

required aircraft flight information, and 

flight symbology to be provided to the 

pilot monitoring on a head-up display 

or other equivalent display appropriate 

to the operation being conducted. This 

provision is being made to provide the 

FAA with a means to respond to future 

advancements in sensor or display 

technology. 

D. Revise Current Requirements for 

EFVS Operations to 100 feet 

(§ 91.176(b)) 

As stated in Section III–B, the FAA 

proposes to move the current 

requirements for EFVS operations to 100 

feet from § 91.175(l) and (m) to 

proposed § 91.176(b) and restructure 

them to accommodate the regulatory 

changes set forth in this proposal. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34941 

The FAA proposes to permit EFVS to 

be used in the conduct of Category II 

and Category III operations. 

Accordingly, the exclusionary language 

‘‘other than Category II or Category III’’ 

would be deleted from the current 

provisions of § 91.175(l) that are now 

found in proposed § 91.176(b). This 

change is discussed in more detail in 

Section III–I. 

Proposed § 91.176(b)(3)(iii) would be 

structured to conform to the original 

intent of current § 91.175(l)(4) and 

include provisions for additional visual 

reference requirements similar to those 

proposed for inclusion in 

§ 91.176(a)(3)(iii) and discussed in 

Section III–C. It would clarify that the 

requirement for the pilot to determine 

enhanced flight visibility is only 

applicable to that portion of the 

approach from the authorized DA/DH or 

MDA to 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation. At and below 100 feet, 

flight visibility (using natural vision) 

would be required to be sufficient for 

the runway threshold, the lights or 

markings of the threshold, the runway 

touchdown zone landing surface, or the 

lights or markings of the touchdown 

zone to be distinctly visible and 

identifiable to the pilot without reliance 

on the EFVS. 

The reference to ‘‘standard instrument 

approach procedure’’ currently found in 

§ 91.175(l)(2) would be revised to 

‘‘instrument approach procedure’’ when 

the provisions contained in that 

paragraph are included in proposed 

§ 91.176(b)(3)(i). A corresponding 

provision would also be included in 

proposed § 91.176(a)(3)(i). These 

changes were made in recognition of the 

fact that persons conducting EFVS 

operations may use either standard or 

special instrument approach 

procedures. 

Currently, there are no training, recent 

flight experience, or proficiency 

requirements in part 61 for persons 

conducting EFVS operations. The FAA 

believes it is necessary to establish 

training, recent flight experience, and 

proficiency requirements to ensure that 

pilots possess the skills necessary to 

operate EFVS equipment, that they are 

trained and tested to a standard, and 

that the training they receive supports 

the EFVS operation to be conducted. 

The FAA’s proposal to add these 

requirements to part 61 are discussed in 

Sections III–E and III–F. Proposed 

training, recent flight experience, and 

proficiency requirements would apply 

to EFVS operations conducted to 

touchdown and rollout and to EFVS 

operations conducted to 100 feet above 

the touchdown zone elevation. 

Accordingly, the FAA proposes to 

include language in proposed 

§ 91.176(b)(2)(v)(A) which would 

require each required pilot flight 

crewmember to meet the new training, 

recent flight experience, and proficiency 

requirements that would be added to 

part 61. Additionally, the FAA proposes 

to add rule language to proposed 

§ 91.176(b)(2)(i) to require that each 

required pilot flight crewmember have 

adequate knowledge of, and familiarity 

with, the aircraft, the EFVS, and the 

procedures to be used. 

Under current § 91.175(l), a part 119 

or part 125 certificate holder cannot 

conduct an EFVS operation unless their 

OpSpecs authorize the use of EFVS. The 

same requirement applies to persons 

conducting operations under part 129. 

The proposed amendment would state 

that for persons conducting operations 

under part 91, subpart K, the operation 

would be required to be conducted in 

accordance with MSpecs authorizing 

the use of EFVS. For persons conducting 

operations under parts 121, 129, or 135 

of this chapter, the operation would be 

required to be conducted in accordance 

with OpSpecs authorizing the use of 

EFVS. For persons conducting 

operations under part 125 of this 

chapter, the operation would be 

required to be conducted in accordance 

with OpSpecs authorizing the use of 

EFVS, or in the case of a part 125 LODA 

holder, an LOA for the use of EFVS. 

While the FAA proposes to require an 

LOA for part 91 operators (other than 

part 91, subpart K) to conduct EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout, no 

LOA is currently required or proposed 

for EFVS operations conducted to 100 

feet. 

Currently, most foreign civil aviation 

authorities (CAAs) require an 

authorization to conduct EFVS 

operations. As a result, a foreign CAA 

may require a U.S. operator who wishes 

to conduct EFVS operations in their 

country to submit their FAA EFVS 

authorization as a condition for the 

foreign CAA’s approval. The FAA 

strongly recommends that operators 

contact the CAA of each foreign country 

in which they plan to conduct EFVS 

operations to determine the 

requirements for approval and for 

conducting EFVS operations since those 

requirements may be different from 

those of the United States. 

As previously discussed in Section 

III–A, the FAA proposes to move the 

statement ‘‘The EFVS includes the 

display element, sensors, computers and 

power supplies, indications, and 

controls.’’ currently contained in 

§ 91.175(m)(3) to the proposed revised 

definition of EFVS in § 1.1. The FAA 

also proposes not to include in the 

proposal the sentence ‘‘It may receive 

inputs from an airborne navigation 

system or flight guidance system,’’ 

which is currently contained in 

§ 91.175(m)(3). While this statement 

provides contextual information, it is 

not a stated requirement, and would be 

more appropriately addressed in 

advisory or guidance material. The FAA 

proposes to remove the phrase ‘‘on 

approaches without vertical guidance;’’ 

contained in § 91.175(m)(2)(ii) because 

the flight path angle reference cue is 

useful on all approaches. 

Additionally, the FAA would include 

language in proposed § 91.176(b)(1)(iii), 

which would clarify that a foreign 

registered aircraft need not have an 

FAA-type design approval provided the 

aircraft is equipped with an EFVS that 

meets all other applicable FAA 

requirements. 

E. Establish Training Requirements for 

Persons Conducting EFVS Operations 

(§ 61.31) 

Currently, part 61, which sets forth 

training requirements applicable to all 

pilots, flight instructors and ground 

instructors, does not contain specific 

training requirements for persons 

conducting EFVS operations. However, 

§ 91.175(l) requires that any pilot 

conducting an EFVS operation under 

parts 121, 125, and 135 be qualified to 

use an EFVS in accordance with the 

applicable training, testing, and 

qualification provisions of those parts. 

Additionally, a pilot conducting EFVS 

operations must conduct those 

operations in accordance with OpSpecs 

issued to the certificate holder which 

authorize the use of EFVS. OpSpecs 

authorizing the use of EFVS specify 

training, testing, and qualification 

requirements applicable to the use of 

EFVS. Furthermore, persons conducting 

EFVS operations under part 91, subpart 

K must conduct those operations in 

accordance with MSpecs, which set 

forth specific training, testing, and 

qualification requirements applicable to 

the use of EFVS. 

Although specific EFVS training 

requirements do not currently exist in 

part 61, both the FAA and EFVS 

manufacturers have recognized that 

pilots conducting EFVS operations need 

to be appropriately trained. FAA 

Aircraft Evaluation Group (AEG) Flight 

Standardization Boards (FSBs) have 

conducted operational suitability 

evaluations of EFVS equipment 

installed on certain airplanes, which 

have resulted in FSB reports that 

document the training, checking, and 

currency tasks that should be 

accomplished to safely operate this 

equipment. Certain aircraft 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34942 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

manufacturers have also encouraged 

flight crewmembers to receive training 

in the use of EFVS prior to conducting 

EFVS operations. These 

recommendations can be found in the 

airplane flight manuals for these 

manufacturers’ aircraft. Additionally, 

recent recommendations by the National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and 

legislative action by Congress highlight 

a concern with and commitment to 

safety, pilot training, standards, and 

performance. 

Non-commercial operators of EFVSequipped aircraft have also recognized 

the need for specialized ground and 

flight training in the use of EFVS. These 

operators generally obtain EFVS training 

for their pilots at part 142 training 

centers prior to conducting EFVS 

operations. This practice clearly 

demonstrates the importance these 

operators place on training in order to 

safely conduct EFVS operations. 

EFVS operations are often conducted 

in visibility conditions similar to those 

under which Special Authorization 

Category I, Category II, Special 

Authorization Category II, and Category 

III operations are conducted. These 

operations are conducted to lower than 

standard minima and require special 

aircrew training. 

Expanding the operational conditions 

and benefits for operators who use EFVS 

technology would increase the number 

and mix of aircraft and operators 

conducting low visibility operations at 

airports throughout the national 

airspace system. Establishing training 

requirements for the conduct of EFVS 

operations would ensure that pilots 

meet minimum requirements to operate 

EFVS equipment, that they are trained 

and tested to a standard, and that an 

appropriate level of public safety is 

maintained. This approach is consistent 

with that taken for other technologybased vision enhancements such as 

night vision goggles, for which the FAA 

established training requirements in 

2009 (74 FR 42500; August 21, 2009). 

The FAA proposes, therefore, to 

codify current EFVS training practices 

by amending § 61.31 to require ground 

training for any person manipulating the 

controls of an aircraft or acting as pilot 

in command of an aircraft during an 

EFVS operation. This requirement 

would apply to EFVS operations 

conducted to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation under 

existing EFVS regulatory provisions and 

to EFVS operations conducted to 

touchdown and rollout under this 

proposal. In addition, the FAA would 

require any person who serves as a 

required pilot flight crewmember during 

an EFVS operation conducted to 

touchdown and rollout under proposed 

§ 91.176(a) to obtain ground training. 

The ground training would be required 

to be received from an authorized 

instructor under a training program 

approved by the Administrator. 

Additionally, a logbook or other 

endorsement would be required to be 

obtained from an authorized instructor 

who would certify that the person 

satisfactorily completed the ground 

training. 

A person who serves as a required 

pilot flight crewmember during an EFVS 

operation that is conducted to 100 feet 

under the existing EFVS rule, but who 

does not manipulate the controls or 

serve as pilot in command of that 

aircraft, would not be required to 

receive EFVS ground training. These 

pilots are not required to receive EFVS 

ground training under current 

regulatory provisions. The FAA believes 

that the EFVS-specific call outs and 

crew coordination items performed by 

the pilot monitoring who would not also 

be acting as pilot in command (PIC) 

during an EFVS operation to 100 feet are 

so similar in nature to duties he or she 

normally performs on an instrument 

approach procedure that the completion 

of a formal EFVS ground training 

program for these pilots should not be 

required. The FAA further believes that 

these pilots can obtain the knowledge 

necessary to satisfactorily accomplish 

these additional tasks through computer 

based training, self study, other nonregulatory means, or through 

compliance with other regulations. 

Section 61.55, for example, contains 

provisions requiring a person serving as 

second-in-command to be familiar with 

the operational procedures applicable to 

an aircraft’s powerplant, equipment and 

systems, its performance specifications 

and limitations, its normal, abnormal, 

and emergency procedures, and its 

flight manual, placards and markings. 

Additionally, that pilot must comply 

with the training provisions of the part 

under which the operation is 

conducted, such as part 121, which 

requires ground and flight training 

appropriate to the particular assignment 

of the pilot flight crewmember. 

Under this proposal, the ground 

training would, at a minimum, consist 

of the following subjects: 

• Applicable portions of this Chapter 

I of Title 14 that relate to EFVS flight 

operations and limitations, including 

Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) 

limitations; 

• EFVS display, controls, modes, 

features, symbology, annunciations, and 

associated systems and components; 

• EFVS sensor performance, sensor 

limitations, scene interpretation, visual 

anomalies, and other visual effects; 

• Preflight planning and operational 

considerations associated with using 

EFVS during taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise, 

descent and landing phases of flight, 

including the use of EFVS for 

instrument approaches, operating below 

DA/DH or MDA, executing missed 

approaches, landing, rollout, and balked 

landings; 

• Weather associated with low 

visibility conditions and its effect on 

EFVS performance; 

• Normal, abnormal, emergency, and 

crew coordination procedures when 

using EFVS; and 

• Interpretation of approach and 

runway lighting systems and their 

display characteristics when using an 

EFVS. 

In considering those subjects that 

would be included in the proposed 

ground training, the FAA evaluated FSB 

recommendations and EFVS training 

material developed by part 142 training 

centers, EFVS manufacturers, and 

persons conducting operations under 

parts 121, 135, and subpart K of part 91. 

Additionally, the FAA reviewed EFVS 

training material used by the U.S. 

military and European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) training requirements 

for EFVS operations. 

The FAA also proposes to amend 

§ 61.31 to require flight training for any 

person manipulating the controls of an 

aircraft or acting as pilot in command of 

an aircraft during an EFVS operation. In 

order to ensure the continuation of 

current flight training practices, 

implement FSB flight training 

recommendations, and perpetuate the 

safe conduct of EFVS operations in an 

increasingly complex and rapidly 

evolving operational environment, the 

FAA believes that any person 

manipulating the controls of an aircraft 

or acting as pilot in command of an 

EFVS operation should receive EFVS 

flight training. This requirement would 

apply to pilots conducting EFVS 

operations to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation under the 

existing rule and also to pilots 

conducting EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout under this 

proposal. 

The FAA evaluated the same material 

it used to determine proposed ground 

training subjects and determined that 

EFVS flight training would, at a 

minimum, include the following tasks: 

• Preflight and inflight preparation of 

EFVS equipment for EFVS operations, 

including EFVS setup and use of 

display, controls, modes and associated 

systems, including adjustments for 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34943 

brightness and contrast under day and 

night conditions; 

• Proper piloting techniques 

associated with using EFVS during taxi, 

takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, landing, 

and rollout, to include missed 

approaches and balked landings; 

• Proper piloting techniques for the 

use of EFVS during instrument 

approaches, to include operations below 

DA/DH or MDA as applicable, under 

both day and night conditions; 

• Determining enhanced flight 

visibility; 

• Identifying required visual 

references appropriate to EFVS 

operations; 

• Transitioning from EFVS sensor 

imagery to natural vision acquisition of 

required visual references and the 

runway environment; 

• Using EFVS sensor imagery to 

touchdown and rollout, if EFVS 

operations as specified in § 91.176(a) are 

to be conducted; and 

• Normal, abnormal, emergency, and 

crew coordination procedures when 

using an EFVS. 

The flight training would have to be 

received from an authorized instructor 

under a training program approved by 

the Administrator. Additionally, a 

logbook or other endorsement would 

have to be obtained from an authorized 

instructor who finds the person 

proficient in the use of EFVS. To ensure 

that the authorized instructor providing 

the flight training is knowledgeable and 

proficient in the conduct of EFVS 

operations, that instructor would have 

to meet the training requirements for 

EFVS operations specified in proposed 

§ 61.31(l). 

Under this proposal, a training 

program approved by the Administrator 

could include EFVS training received 

through a part 141 pilot school, a part 

142 training center, or an FAA-approved 

training program other than that 

provided under parts 141 or 142. One 

example of an FAA-approved training 

program other than that provided under 

parts 141 or 142 could be a training 

program approved under part 121. 

Another example could be an approved 

EFVS training program conducted by a 

corporate flight department with 

experience in the conduct of EFVS 

operations. The FAA would require an 

EFVS training program to be approved 

to ensure that pilots receiving that 

training are trained and tested to a 

specific standard and that the training 

program content supports the EFVS 

operation to be conducted. 

Flight training for EFVS may be 

accomplished in the actual aircraft or in 

a simulator equipped with an EFVS. In 

accordance with FSB recommendations 

for EFVS training, the FAA has 

determined that flight simulators used 

to conduct this training would have to 

be either a level ‘C’ simulator with a 

daylight visual display, or a level ‘D’ 

simulator. Each simulator would have to 

be qualified for EFVS by the National 

Simulator Program. 

The FAA recognizes that an operator 

may opt to conduct less than the full 

range of EFVS operations due to 

equipment or operational limitations. 

For example, an operator’s aircraft may 

only be equipped to conduct EFVS 

operations to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation and its pilots 

are only trained to conduct those 

operations. That operator may later 

decide, however, to conduct EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout. 

The proposal would not require this 

operator’s pilots to complete the full 

training program applicable to EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout, 

but only that portion of the flight 

training program addressing the 

differences between the two operations. 

The proposal would require that this 

training be documented by an 

endorsement. In lieu of completing this 

differences training, a pilot could 

complete a pilot proficiency check on 

the additional EFVS operations 

administered by an FAA inspector, 

designated examiner, a check airman 

under parts 121, 125, or 135, or a 

program manager check pilot under part 

91, subpart K. 

Under this proposal, the ground 

training requirements of proposed 

§ 61.31(l)(1) and flight training 

requirements of proposed paragraph 

(l)(3) would not apply if a person has 

satisfactorily completed a pilot 

proficiency check on EFVS operations 

and received a logbook endorsement 

verifying that the check has been 

completed. The proficiency check, 

however, would be applicable to the 

specific type of EFVS operation to be 

conducted. For example, an EFVS 

proficiency check conducted for EFVS 

operations to 100 feet would not meet 

the requirement for a proficiency check 

for EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. Additionally, a proficiency 

check for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout may not meet all 

of the requirements for a proficiency 

check for EFVS operations to 100 feet 

because it may not include nonprecision approaches. The FAA 

recognizes, however, that a proficiency 

check for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout could be 

combined with a proficiency check for 

EFVS operations to 100 feet that 

addresses the conduct of non-precision 

approaches. 

The pilot proficiency check would be 

permitted to be conducted by an FAA 

inspector or designated examiner, a 

check airman under parts 121, 125, or 

135, or a program manager check pilot 

under part 91, subpart K. The pilot 

proficiency check could also be 

conducted by a person authorized by 

the U.S. Armed Forces to administer 

EFVS proficiency checks, provided the 

person receiving the check was a 

member of the U.S. Armed Forces at the 

time the check was administered. The 

proficiency check could also be 

conducted by an authorized instructor 

employed by a Federal, State, county, or 

municipal agency to administer an 

EFVS proficiency check, provided the 

person receiving the check was 

employed by that agency at the time the 

check was administered. 

Under proposed § 61.31(l)(7), the 

requirements of § 61.31(l)(1) and (l)(3) 

would not apply to a person who has 

satisfactorily completed an EFVS 

training program, proficiency check, or 

other course of instruction applicable to 

EFVS operations conducted under 

§ 91.176(b). The training program, 

proficiency check, or course of 

instruction would have to be acceptable 

to the FAA and could be completed 

prior to this proposal, but no later than 

24 months after the effective date of the 

final rule. The EFVS training program 

could be provided by a part 141 pilot 

school, a part 142 training center, or 

through another course of instruction 

the FAA would consider acceptable. 

Because current industry practice for 

training pilots to conduct EFVS 

operations typically includes both 

ground and flight training, the FAA 

believes that most pilots currently 

conducting EFVS operations have 

already completed EFVS ground and 

flight training at a part 141 pilot school, 

a part 142 training center, or through 

other ground and flight training 

acceptable to the Administrator for 

which they could show a logbook 

endorsement or training record. The 

FAA believes this provision would 

decrease the regulatory burden on pilots 

who have been safely conducting EFVS 

operations to 100 feet under current 

regulations. Additionally, the proposal 

would provide pilot schools and 

training centers with adequate time to 

develop training programs that meet the 

proposed training requirements. By 

including specific provisions in 

proposed § 61.31(l)(7) to permit the use 

of training programs, proficiency checks 

or other courses of instruction for a 2 

year period, the FAA would provide 

pilots currently conducting EFVS 

operations with a reasonable means of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34944 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

demonstrating compliance with the 

proposed ground and flight training 

requirements of § 61.31(l)(1) and (l)(3). 

Providing pilots with time and a flexible 

means to show compliance with the 

proposed training requirements for 

EFVS should ensure that existing EFVS 

operators can comply with the new 

provisions with little or no impact. 

F. Establish New Recent Flight 

Experience and Proficiency 

Requirements for Persons Conducting 

EFVS Operations (§ 61.57) 

Part 61 does not currently contain 

recent flight experience or proficiency 

requirements in order to conduct EFVS 

operations. The FAA believes it is 

necessary to establish recent flight 

experience and proficiency 

requirements to ensure that an 

appropriate level of skill is maintained 

to permit a pilot to conduct EFVS 

operations in low visibility conditions. 

The FAA proposes to amend § 61.57 to 

require recent flight experience or a 

proficiency check for a person 

conducting an EFVS operation or acting 

as pilot in command during an EFVS 

operation. This requirement would 

apply to both EFVS operations 

conducted to 100 feet under the current 

EFVS rule and to EFVS operations 

conducted to touchdown and rollout 

under this proposal. 

Although recent flight experience 

requirements are not currently specified 

in part 61 for the conduct of EFVS 

operations, the FAA believes that the 

proposal would lead to a significant 

increase in the scope and number of 

EFVS operations. EFVS operations are 

complex operations involving the use of 

a HUD with a sensor image that are 

typically conducted in low visibility 

conditions. The skills necessary to 

operate EFVS equipment under these 

conditions are perishable. In addition, 

the occurrence of these low visibility 

conditions is infrequent. Consequently, 

recent EFVS flight experience is 

necessary to prevent the loss of these 

skills and to ensure that EFVS 

operations are conducted safely. As 

EFVS equipment evolves to permit 

operations in lower visibility 

environments than are currently 

allowed, the need for pilots to maintain 

recent flight experience will become 

even more critical. 

This proposal would permit a person 

to manipulate the controls of an aircraft 

during an EFVS operation or act as pilot 

in command of an aircraft during an 

EFVS operation only if, within 6 

calendar months preceding the month of 

the flight, that person performs and logs 

six instrument approaches as the sole 

manipulator of the controls while using 

an EFVS. Unlike the instrument 

experience requirements specified in 

§ 61.57(c), these approaches need not be 

conducted in actual weather conditions 

or under simulated conditions using a 

view-limiting device. Since the EFVS 

can present a sensor image to the pilot 

in both IFR and VFR weather 

conditions, the FAA proposes to permit 

these approaches to be conducted under 

any weather conditions. One approach 

would be required to terminate in a full 

stop landing. For persons seeking to 

maintain currency to conduct EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout, 

the full stop landing would be required 

to be conducted using the EFVS. This 

requirement could be met in an aircraft 

or in a simulator equipped with an 

EFVS. If an EFVS-equipped simulator is 

used, it would have to be a level ‘‘C’’ 

simulator, with a daylight visual 

display, or a level ‘‘D’’ simulator that 

has been qualified for EFVS by the 

National Simulator Program. The 

purpose of requiring recent EFVS flight 

experience is to ensure that a pilot 

remains proficient in the use of all EFVS 

system components and operating 

procedures. 

Under the proposal, a person acting as 

pilot in command or a person who is 

manipulating the controls of an aircraft 

in an EFVS operation would either be 

required to meet the proposed EFVS 

recent flight experience requirements or 

pass an EFVS proficiency check. The 

proficiency check would consist of the 

training tasks listed in proposed 

§ 61.31(l) and would be required to be 

performed in the category of aircraft for 

which the person is seeking the EFVS 

privilege or in a flight simulator that is 

representative of that category of 

aircraft. The proficiency check could 

also be accomplished in a level ‘‘C’’ 

simulator, with a daylight visual 

display, or a level ‘‘D’’ simulator that 

has been qualified for EFVS by the 

National Simulator Program. Under this 

proposal, an EFVS proficiency check 

must be performed by— 

• An FAA Inspector or designated 

examiner who is qualified to perform 

EFVS operations in that same aircraft 

category; 

• A person who is authorized by the 

U.S. Armed Forces to perform EFVS 

proficiency checks, provided the person 

being administered the check is also a 

member of the U.S. Armed Forces; 

• A company check pilot who is 

authorized to perform EFVS proficiency 

checks under parts 121, 125, or 135, or 

subpart K of part 91 of this chapter, 

provided that both the check pilot and 

the pilot being tested are employees of 

that operator or fractional ownership 

program manager, as applicable; 

• An authorized instructor who meets 

the additional training requirements for 

EFVS operations specified in § 61.31(l) 

of this chapter, and if conducting a 

proficiency check in an aircraft, the 

recent flight experience specified in 

paragraphs (h) or (i) of this section; or 

• A person approved by the FAA to 

perform EFVS proficiency checks. 

The FAA notes that in accordance 

with the provisions of § 61.57(e)(2), the 

proposed recent flight experience 

requirements would not apply to a pilot 

in command who is employed by an air 

carrier certificated to conduct 

operations under parts 121 or 135. The 

pilot, however, must be engaged in a 

flight operation under parts 91, 121, or 

135 for that air carrier and in 

compliance with §§ 121.437 and 

121.439, or §§ 135.243 and 135.247, as 

appropriate. Additionally, proposed 

§ 91.176 would require each pilot flight 

crewmember to meet the applicable 

training, testing and qualification 

provisions of parts 121 or 135, as 

appropriate. The operation would also 

be required to be conducted in 

accordance with operations 

specifications authorizing the use of 

EFVS. 

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) 

Under current regulations, persons 

operating aircraft under part 121, 125, or 

135 must evaluate weather reports and 

forecasts for the destination airport and 

determine that weather conditions at the 

expected time of arrival will be at or 

above the minimums authorized for the 

instrument approaches to be flown. This 

requirement must be met in order to 

dispatch a flight under part 121, release 

a flight under part 125, or takeoff under 

part 135, regardless of whether or not 

the aircraft is equipped with an 

approved EFVS. This limitation 

precludes operators from fully 

leveraging EFVS capabilities that would 

increase access, efficiency, and 

throughput at destination airports when 

low visibility is a factor. 

The enhanced flight visibility 

provided by an EFVS enables 

instrument approach operations to be 

conducted safely in lower visibilities 

than would be possible using natural 

vision. To take full advantage of this 

capability and to provide improved 

operational reliability, the FAA 

proposes to amend the dispatch, flight 

release, and takeoff regulations found in 

§§ 121.613, 121.615, 125.361, 125.363, 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34945 

and 135.219 to permit operators of 

EFVS-equipped aircraft to dispatch, 

release, or takeoff when weather reports 

or forecasts indicate that weather 

conditions will be below the minimums 

authorized for the approaches to be 

flown at the destination airport. In 

addition, the FAA proposes to amend 

the regulations to permit aircraft 

equipped with EFVS to initiate an 

approach under IFR when weather 

reports or forecasts, or any combination 

thereof, indicate the weather conditions 

at the destination airport are below the 

authorized minimums for the approach 

to be flown. Authorizations would be 

based on demonstrated EFVS 

capabilities. This proposal is discussed 

in more detail in Section III–H. These 

changes would enable operators to take 

full advantage of the operational 

capabilities provided by EFVS to 

improve access to runways, increase 

service reliability, and reduce the costs 

associated with operational delays, 

without compromising safety. 

The FAA proposes to authorize 

operators of EFVS-equipped aircraft 

who plan to conduct EFVS operations at 

the destination airport to dispatch a 

flight under part 121, release a flight 

under part 125, or takeoff under part 

135 when weather conditions at the 

destination airport will be below the 

minimums for the approach to be flown 

at the estimated time of arrival. This 

authorization is granted through 

OpSpecs for EFVS operations, or for 

part 125 LODA holders, their LOA for 

EFVS operations. The authorization 

would also apply to EFVS operations 

conducted to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation under 

proposed § 91.176(b), as well as to EFVS 

operations conducted to touchdown and 

rollout under proposed § 91.176(a). As 

further discussed in Section III–M, the 

FAA expects to manage this 

authorization through an operator’s 

OpSpec or LOA for EFVS operations to 

ensure that an increase in the rate of 

missed approaches does not occur. 

Because EFVS performance can vary by 

sensor technology and design, 

meteorological conditions, and other 

factors, adjustments to the authorization 

could be made according to the 

performance demonstrated. Managing 

the authorization in this manner would 

permit the FAA to effectively respond to 

new technology developments and 

tailor an authorization to fit an 

operator’s particular EFVS capabilities. 

H. Permit operators of EFVS-Equipped 

Aircraft To Initiate or Continue an 

Approach When the Destination Airport 

Visibility Is Below Authorized 

Minimums (§§ 121.651, 125.325, 

125.381, 135.225) 

Under current § 121.651, no pilot may 

continue an approach past the FAF, or 

begin the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach procedure where a 

FAF is not used, when the latest 

weather report for that airport reports 

the visibility to be less than the 

visibility minimums prescribed for that 

procedure. There are two exceptions to 

this requirement. In the first exception, 

if a pilot has begun the final approach 

segment of an instrument approach 

procedure in accordance with 

§ 121.651(b), and after that receives a 

weather report indicating below 

minimum conditions, he or she may 

continue the approach to DA/DH or 

MDA. Upon reaching DA/DH or at 

MDA, and at any time before the missed 

approach point, the pilot may continue 

the approach below DA/DH or MDA if 

either the requirements for conducting 

EFVS operations to 100 feet under 

current § 91.175(l) are met, or the 

requirements for continuing the 

approach using natural vision under 

§ 121.651(c) are met. 

The second exception permits a pilot 

to begin the final approach segment of 

an instrument approach procedure, 

other than a Category II or Category III 

procedure, at an airport when the 

visibility is less than the visibility 

minimums prescribed for that procedure 

if that airport is served by an operative 

instrument landing system (ILS) and an 

operative precision approach radar 

(PAR), and both are used by the pilot. 

The pilot may continue the approach 

below the authorized DA/DH if the 

requirements of current § 91.175(l) are 

met, or if the requirements for 

continuing the approach using natural 

vision under § 121.651(d) are met. 

Under §§ 125.325 and 125.381, no 

pilot may execute an instrument 

approach procedure when the latest 

reported visibility is less than the 

landing minimums specified in the 

certificate holder’s OpSpecs. Under 

§ 135.225, no pilot may begin an 

instrument approach procedure to an 

airport when the latest weather report 

indicates that weather conditions are 

below the authorized IFR landing 

minimums for that airport. There are 

several exceptions to these requirements 

for persons conducting operations under 

parts 125 or 135. If a pilot conducting 

EFVS operations under part 125 has 

already initiated the instrument 

approach procedure, or if a pilot 

conducting EFVS operations in 

accordance with § 135.225(b) has begun 

the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach procedure, and 

subsequently receives another weather 

report that indicates conditions are 

below the minimum requirements, the 

pilot may continue the approach only if 

the requirements of current § 91.175(l) 

are met for EFVS operations conducted 

to 100 feet. If EFVS is not used, then the 

approach can only be continued if the 

later weather report is received during 

one of the following three phases: when 

the aircraft is on an ILS approach and 

has passed the FAF; the aircraft is on an 

airport surveillance radar (ASR) or PAR 

final approach and has been turned over 

to the final approach controller; or the 

aircraft is on a nonprecision final 

approach and the aircraft has passed the 

appropriate facility or FAF, or where a 

FAF is not specified, has completed the 

procedure turn and is established 

inbound toward the airport on the final 

approach course within the distance 

prescribed in the procedure. Upon 

reaching the authorized MDA or DH the 

pilot must find that the actual weather 

conditions are at or above the 

minimums prescribed for the procedure 

being used. 

The visibility requirements currently 

imposed for beginning or continuing an 

approach under parts 121, 125, and 135, 

prevent EFVS from being used to its full 

operational advantage. These 

restrictions significantly limit the utility 

of EFVS for these operators resulting in 

reduced access to airports in low 

visibility conditions. Currently, EFVS 

equipage is highest among part 91 

operators because they are not limited 

by restrictions on the weather 

conditions required to begin or continue 

an approach. 

Nine years of EFVS operational 

experience has shown that, under 

certain reduced visibility conditions, an 

EFVS can increase the likelihood that an 

approach and landing can be 

successfully completed. In cases where 

the visibility is marginal, such as during 

rapidly changing weather conditions, or 

when the reported visibility hovers at or 

near the minimum authorized, natural 

vision may be inadequate for a pilot to 

detect the required visual references 

necessary to complete the approach. 

EFVS provides a significant operational 

advantage under reduced visibility 

conditions, when natural vision is most 

compromised. Ground stops, holding 

delays, and diversions to an alternate 

airport could be reduced in these 

situations, especially if persons 

conducting operations under parts 121, 

125, and 135 are authorized to use an 

EFVS in weather conditions that would 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34946 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

normally preclude an approach from 

being initiated or continued. Since the 

proposal would authorize an EFVSequipped aircraft to be dispatched when 

the destination weather is reported or 

forecast to be below authorized 

minimums, the FAA believes that 

permitting that aircraft to initiate or 

continue an approach in those weather 

conditions would also be appropriate. 

Recognizing the operational benefits 

of EFVS, Federal Express Corporation 

(FedEx) petitioned for exemption from 

§ 121.651(b)(2) on March 21, 2008 

(Docket No. FAA–2008–0370) to the 

extent necessary to allow FedEx aircraft 

equipped with EFVS to continue an 

approach beyond the FAF, or to begin 

the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach procedure, if the 

latest weather report for that airport 

reports the visibility to be less than the 

visibility minimums prescribed for that 

procedure. On January 13, 2009, NetJets 

International, Inc. (NJI) petitioned for 

exemption from § 135.225(a)(2) (Docket 

No. FAA–2009–0047) to the extent 

necessary to allow NJI aircraft equipped 

with an EFVS to begin an instrument 

approach procedure to an airport when 

the latest weather report for that airport 

indicates that weather conditions are 

less than the authorized visibility 

minimums for that procedure. Both 

petitioners requested relief from the 

prohibition on beginning or continuing 

an approach when the reported 

visibility is below the authorized 

minimum visibility for the approach. 

Both petitioners asserted that granting 

their petitions would benefit the public 

while maintaining an equivalent level of 

safety to that provided under the current 

regulations. On December 24, 2009, the 

FAA issued Grant of Exemption No. 

9984 to FedEx, and on September 30, 

2010, the FAA issued Grant of 

Exemption No. 10147 to NJI. Both 

Grants of Exemption, however, were 

subject to specific conditions and 

limitations. 

To take full advantage of the 

operational capability of EFVS and to 

increase the likelihood that an approach 

would be successfully completed in low 

visibility conditions, the FAA proposes 

to amend §§ 121.651, 125.325, 125.381, 

and 135.225, to permit persons 

conducting operations under parts 121, 

125, or 135 to begin or to continue an 

approach when the reported visibility is 

below the authorized minimum 

visibility for the approach to be flown, 

provided the aircraft is equipped with, 

and the pilot uses, an EFVS in 

accordance with proposed § 91.176. The 

FAA proposes to authorize this 

operational capability for part 121, 125, 

and 135 operators through their OpSpec 

for EFVS operations, or for part 125 

LODA holders, their LOA for EFVS 

operations. This authorization would 

apply to EFVS operations conducted to 

100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation under proposed § 91.176(b), as 

well as to EFVS operations conducted to 

touchdown and rollout under proposed 

§ 91.176(a). Authorizations would be 

based on demonstrated EFVS 

capabilities. 

As an alternative to the proposal, the 

FAA considered authorizing a 1⁄3

visibility credit for EFVS-equipped 

operators as is currently permitted by 

EASA. Under EASA regulations, for 

example, if the authorized minimum 

visibility for an instrument approach 

procedure is 2400 feet runway visual 

range (RVR), a person operating an 

EFVS-equipped aircraft could reduce 

the minimum visibility required for an 

approach by 1⁄3 resulting in an adjusted 

required minimum visibility of 1600 

RVR for the approach. After careful 

consideration, the FAA determined that 

this alternative would be unnecessarily 

restrictive and would not provide the 

flexibility necessary to accommodate 

future advances in EFVS technology. 

As further discussed in Section III–M, 

the FAA expects to manage this 

authorization through an operator’s 

OpSpec or LOA for EFVS operations. 

For reasons identical to those discussed 

in Section III–G, this action would 

permit the FAA to effectively respond to 

new technology developments and 

tailor an authorization to fit an 

operator’s particular EFVS capabilities. 

I. Revise Category II and III General 

Operating Rules To Permit the Use of an 

EFVS (§ 91.189) 

The general operating rules for 

Category II and III operations are 

contained in § 91.189. Section 91.189, 

however, only pertains to part 91 

operators other than those conducting 

operations under part 91, subpart K (see 

§ 91.189(g)). The provisions of § 91.189 

do not apply to Category II or III 

operations conducted by certificate 

holders operating under parts 121, 125, 

129, or 135, or holders of MSpecs issued 

in accordance with part 91, subpart K. 

Under current regulations, no pilot 

operating an aircraft on a Category II or 

Category III approach that requires the 

use of a DA/DH can continue the 

approach below the authorized decision 

height unless at least one of the visual 

references listed in § 91.189(d)(2) is 

distinctly visible and identifiable. 

Under current regulations, the visual 

references must be seen using natural 

vision. The FAA proposes to amend 

§ 91.189(d) to permit an EFVS to be 

used in lieu of natural vision to identify 

the visual references required for 

descent below the authorized decision 

height on a Category II or III approach. 

A pilot conducting a Category II or III 

approach in accordance with § 91.189(d) 

would comply with either the 

provisions of that paragraph for 

identifying required visual references 

using natural vision or with the 

provisions of proposed § 91.176 for 

identifying required visual references 

using EFVS. 

The FAA proposes to amend 

§ 91.189(e) to permit a pilot operating an 

aircraft in a Category II or III approach 

to continue the approach below the 

authorized DA/DH provided that the 

conditions specified in proposed 

§ 91.176 are met. The proposed changes 

would permit required visual references 

to be identified using EFVS in lieu of 

natural vision. 

The FAA notes that all of the 

equipment requirements and airmen 

certification requirements for the 

conduct of Category II and Category III 

operations would continue to apply 

when an EFVS is also used during the 

conduct of those operations. The FAA 

also notes that an operator intending to 

use an EFVS to descend below DA/DH 

during the conduct of a Category II or 

Category III operation would be required 

to revise its Category II or Category III 

manual specified in § 91.191 to reflect 

the use of EFVS. A person seeking to 

conduct Category II or Category III 

operations where the use of EFVS is 

necessary to conduct those operations 

would have to be authorized by the 

Administrator. 

The FAA believes that the use of an 

EFVS could provide operational benefits 

during the conduct of Category II and 

Category III approaches, especially as 

advanced imaging sensor capabilities 

are developed to penetrate lower 

visibility conditions. Using EFVS in 

combination with Category II or III 

capabilities could improve situation and 

position awareness throughout the 

approach, landing, and rollout. It could 

also minimize the potential for missed 

approaches, reduce the cost associated 

with missed approaches and contribute 

to increased access, efficiency, and 

throughput when low visibility is a 

factor. 

J. Revise Pilot Compartment View Rules 

To Establish Airworthiness Standards 

for Vision Systems With Transparent 

Displays Located in the Pilot’s Outside 

View (§§ 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, and 

29.773) 

Sections 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, and 

29.773 specify the requirements and 

conditions under which the pilot 

compartment must provide an 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34947 

extensive, clear, and undistorted view to 

the pilot for safe operation of the aircraft 

within its operating limitations. 

Additionally, the regulations specify 

that the pilot compartment must be free 

of glare and reflection that could 

interfere with the normal duties of the 

minimum flightcrew. 

When these rules were originally 

issued, the FAA did not anticipate the 

development of vision systems with 

transparent displays that could 

significantly enhance, or even substitute 

for, a pilot’s natural vision. Vision 

systems are used to display an image of 

the external scene to the flightcrew. 

This proposal, however, would only 

address vision systems with a 

transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view, such as a headup-display, head-mounted display, or 

other equivalent display. Such ‘‘vision 

systems’’ include any enhanced vision 

system, EFVS, SVS, or combined vision 

system. 

For over a decade, the FAA has 

certified vision systems for transport 

category aircraft that have head-up 

displays. During this process, the FAA 

found that the existing airworthiness 

standards governing the pilot 

compartment view set forth in § 25.773 

were inadequate to address the novel or 

unusual design features of these 

systems. Therefore, the FAA issued 

special conditions under § 21.16 to 

provide airworthiness standards which 

could be used to enable the installation 

of vision systems that would meet a 

level of safety equivalent to that 

established in the regulations. Special 

conditions were issued to each 

applicant, because special conditions 

are only applicable to individual 

certification projects, and would be 

needed for new projects until the 

regulations are amended. 

The first issuance of special 

conditions for a vision system occurred 

in 2001 for the Gulfstream G–V. Since 

2005, special conditions for vision 

systems have been issued for the 

following aircraft: (1) Bombardier BD– 

700 Global Express; (2) Bombardier CL– 

600; (3) McDonnell Douglas MD–10– 

10F/30F; (4) Dassault Falcon 900EX and 

2000EX; (5) Boeing 737–700/–800/–900; 

(6) Boeing 757–200; (7) Boeing 777F; (8) 

Dassault Falcon 7X; and (9) Gulfstream 

G–VI. 

These special conditions were 

developed to ensure that the vision 

system could perform its intended 

functions with a level of safety 

equivalent to that established in the 

regulations. While the FAA issues 

special conditions to address novel or 

unusual design features in a particular 

aircraft, for consistency the FAA 

attempted to standardize these special 

conditions to the maximum extent 

possible. With over twelve years of 

experience, the process of developing 

special conditions for vision systems 

has become routine. Operational 

experience has shown that the 

certification requirements, set forth in 

the special conditions, have resulted in 

safe and effective vision system 

operations. 

The FAA recognizes, however, that 

the issuance of these special conditions 

adds significant time and expense to a 

certification project. These concerns 

have also been noted in the May 22, 

2012 Report from the Aviation 

Certification Process Review and Reform 

Aviation Rulemaking Committee to the 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

In that report, the committee 

recommended that the FAA address the 

continued use of special conditions in 

lieu of rulemaking by updating 

airworthiness standards in cases where 

special conditions have been used for a 

period of time and the design being 

evaluated is no longer new or novel. 

Accordingly, the FAA has determined it 

would be in the public interest to revise 

pilot compartment view rules to 

establish airworthiness standards for 

vision systems with transparent 

displays. This action would respond to 

the committee’s concerns, provide 

industry with known requirements for 

the certification of these systems, and 

eliminate the costs resulting from the 

process of issuing special conditions. 

Based on the experience gained by the 

FAA in developing special conditions, 

the FAA now believes that it is 

appropriate to establish airworthiness 

standards for vision systems with 

transparent displays located in the 

pilot’s outside view for airplanes and 

rotorcraft. Accordingly, the FAA 

proposes to amend §§ 23.773, 25.773, 

27.773, and 29.773 to include those 

general requirements that were 

previously contained in special 

conditions. In recognition of the rapid 

development of vision system 

technology, the proposed amendments 

are also written to permit the 

certification of a wide range of current 

and future vision systems and to 

address display methods other than a 

HUD, such as head-mounted displays or 

other types of head-up presentations. 

Although the proposed amendments 

differ slightly in structure to conform 

with the sections to which they have 

been added, the proposed requirements 

are essentially identical. The 

amendments would ensure that the 

system compensates for interference, 

provides an undistorted and conformal 

view of the external scene, provides a 

means to deactivate the display, and 

does not restrict the pilot from 

performing specific maneuvers. 

Each section would be amended to 

ensure that, while the vision system 

display is in operation, it must 

compensate for interference with the 

pilot’s outside view. The combination of 

what is visible in the display and what 

remains visible through and around it 

must enable the pilot using a vision 

system to perform those actions 

necessary for the operation of the 

aircraft as safely and effectively as 

would a pilot without a vision system. 

The FAA proposes that while the 

vision system is in operation, it must 

provide an undistorted view of the 

external scene. To ensure that the 

information provided by the vision 

system to the pilot is conformal to the 

external scene, the FAA would require 

that the imagery, attitude symbology, 

flight path vector, flight path angle 

reference cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to this imagery and external 

scene topography, be presented in a 

manner that is aligned with, and scaled 

to, the external scene. 

The vision system would be required 

to provide a means to allow the pilot 

using the display to immediately 

deactivate and reactivate the vision 

system imagery, on demand, without 

removing the pilot’s hands from the 

primary flight controls and thrust, or 

power, controls. The FAA believes that 

this proposed requirement is necessary 

in the unlikely event that the vision 

system does not provide a clear and 

undistorted image of the external scene 

or when the pilot does not wish to 

utilize the system’s full capabilities in 

time critical situations. 

When the vision system is not in 

operation, it must not restrict the pilot 

from performing those maneuvers 

necessary for the safe operation of the 

aircraft or detract from the ability of the 

pilot compartment to meet applicable 

airworthiness standards. This proposed 

requirement would ensure that when 

the vision system is not in operation the 

pilot would be able to operate the 

aircraft as safely and effectively as 

would a pilot without a vision system. 

The FAA notes that previously issued 

special conditions contained additional 

requirements that have not been set 

forth in this proposal. The FAA 

proposes that those previous 

requirements be specified in guidance 

material as a means of compliance with 

the proposed requirements set forth in 

§§ 23.773, 25.773, 27.773, and 29.773. 

This guidance would be contained in 

proposed AC 20–167A, Airworthiness 

Approval of Enhanced Vision System, 

Synthetic Vision System, Combined 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34948 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Vision System, and Enhanced Flight 

Vision System Equipment. Additionally, 

certification criteria for head-up 

displays is contained in AC 25–11A, 

Change 1, Electronic Flight Deck 

Displays. 

K. Related Amendments (§§ 91.175, 

91.189, and 91.905) 

The reference in current 

§ 91.175(c)(3)(vi) to the term ‘‘visual 

approach slope indicator’’ would be 

revised to ‘‘the visual glideslope 

indicator.’’ The FAA proposes to revise 

this term because the term ‘‘visual 

approach slope indicator’’ is excessively 

restrictive. The proposed revision 

would permit other devices, such as a 

precision approach path indicator 

(PAPI) and a pulsating visual approach 

slope indicator (PVASI), that provide 

visual glideslope information to be used 

as a required visual reference for 

operations below DA/DH or MDA 

during the conduct of an instrument 

approach procedure. 

In a previous rulemaking action, Area 

Navigation (RNAV) and Miscellaneous 

Amendments (72 FR 31678; Jun 7, 

2007), the FAA changed most of the 

references to ‘‘DH or MDA’’ in § 91.175 

to ‘‘DA/DH or MDA.’’ However, the 

references to ‘‘DH or MDA’’ in 

§ 91.175(l) were not changed. The FAA 

proposes to correct this inadvertent 

omission and amend proposed 

§ 91.176(b) accordingly. 

Currently § 91.175 is listed as one of 

the rules in § 91.905 that is subject to 

waiver. As the proposal moves the 

provisions applicable to EFVS 

operations to 100 feet currently 

contained in § 91.175(l) and (m) to 

proposed § 91.176, the FAA proposes to 

amend § 91.905 to include proposed 

§ 91.176 as a rule subject to waiver. 

Proposed § 91.176 would also contain 

regulatory provisions applicable to 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. As the FAA has already 

permitted EFVS operations to 100 feet to 

be subject to waiver, the FAA proposes 

that the provisions of the rule applicable 

to EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout also be subject to waiver. 

L. Conforming Amendments (§§ 91.175 

and 91.189) 

Certain conforming amendments 

consisting of revisions to regulatory 

citations and updates to terms need to 

be made as the result of this proposed 

rulemaking action and a previous 

rulemaking action. 

The introductory text of § 91.175(c) 

would be amended to change the 

reference to ‘‘paragraph (l) of this 

section’’ to ‘‘§ 91.176’’ since proposed 

§ 91.176 would contain the current and 

proposed rules for EFVS. 

The FAA proposes to amend 

§ 91.175(d)(1) to refer to proposed 

§ 91.176 because proposed § 91.176 

would contain rules for EFVS 

operations. The FAA also proposes to 

amend § 91.175(d)(1) to delete the 

reference to paragraph (l)(4) of that 

section and refer to paragraphs (a)(3)(iii) 

and (b)(3)(iii) of proposed § 91.176. 

These paragraphs would contain the 

visual references required for descent 

below 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout and EFVS 

operations to 100 feet, respectively. 

Paragraph (e)(1) of § 91.175 would be 

amended to revise the reference to 

paragraph (l) of that section to refer to 

proposed § 91.176 which would contain 

the rules for EFVS operations. 

M. Implementation 

The FAA proposes to limit initial 

implementation of EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout to visibilities of 

no lower than 1000 RVR because 

airworthiness and certification criteria 

have not been developed to support 

EFVS operations below 1000 RVR. All 

operators who wish to conduct EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout 

under this proposal would be required 

to obtain an OpSpec, MSpec, or LOA, as 

appropriate. 

Airworthiness and certification 

criteria to support EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout in visibilities as 

low as 1000 RVR were developed 

through FAA and industry participation 

on RTCA Special Committee 213 (SC– 

213). RTCA SC–213 was tasked with 

developing minimum aviation system 

performance standards (MASPS) for 

both EFVS operations to 100 feet and 

EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout. The special committee was also 

tasked with developing MASPS for 

synthetic vision systems (which are not 

the subject of the operational 

requirements of this rule) and combined 

vision systems. On December 16, 2008, 

RTCA published DO–315, which 

contained the MASPS for EFVS 

operations to 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation. The FAA 

subsequently incorporated these 

MASPS into AC 20–167, Airworthiness 

Approval of Enhanced Vision System, 

Synthetic Vision System, Combined 

Vision System, and Enhanced Flight 

Vision System Equipment. RTCA SC– 

213 then began work on MASPS for 

EFVS to touchdown operations. Because 

the airworthiness requirements to 

support EFVS operations in very low 

visibilities would be different than those 

conducted in a higher visibility range, 

SC–213 recommended parsing the 

MASPS for touchdown and rollout 

operations into two activities—MASPS 

for EFVS to touchdown and rollout 

down to 1000 RVR and MASPS for 

EFVS to touchdown and rollout down to 

300 RVR. RTCA published DO–315A on 

September 15, 2010, which contains the 

MASPS for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout down to 1000 

RVR. The FAA currently only plans to 

revise AC 20–167 to incorporate these 

MASPS for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout down to 1000 

RVR. RTCA SC–213, however, is 

currently working to develop MASPS 

for EFVS operations to touchdown and 

rollout in visibilities down to 300 RVR. 

Current enhanced flight vision 

systems use infrared-based (IR-based) 

sensors. While IR-based sensors provide 

the required enhanced flight visibility in 

certain visibility-limiting conditions, 

they currently do not provide the 

enhanced flight visibility required by 

the operating rules for EFVS to support 

operations in lower visibility ranges. 

Industry is developing other sensor 

technologies, such as millimeter wave 

radar, that are not limited in the same 

ways that IR-based sensors are limited. 

These efforts are still developmental, 

but show promise. Anticipating that 

industry’s sensor development efforts 

will produce sensors or sensor 

combinations that will provide adequate 

enhanced flight visibility to support 

operations at less than 1000 RVR, the 

FAA’s proposed rule language has been 

written in a performance-based manner. 

The FAA intends to manage these 

authorizations for EFVS to touchdown 

and rollout through OpSpecs, MSpecs, 

and LOAs. Managing authorizations in 

this manner would enable the FAA to 

structure an operator’s operational 

approval in a way that is performancebased—a way that links equipage and 

system performance to specific 

operational capabilities and 

authorizations. It would also permit the 

FAA to respond more rapidly to new 

technology. Rather than restricting the 

use of all vision technologies to a rigid 

and limiting set of visibility values, the 

FAA, for example, could permit new 

EFVS operations as vision technologies 

and appropriate equipment certification 

criteria are developed. The FAA 

believes that its actions would 

accommodate future growth in real-time 

sensor technologies without having to 

amend the regulations to address these 

future technological advancements. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34949 

1The FAA forecast for active general aviation 

(GA) turbojets is 3.7% for the period of 2011–2021. 

2FAA airport infrastructure decisions are 

independent from this analysis. 

IV. 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 (Public Law 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Public Law 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 proposed rule. 

We suggest that readers seeking greater 

details read the full regulatory 

evaluation, a copy of which we placed 

in the docket for this rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this proposed rule: 

(1) Has benefits that justify the costs; (2) 

is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866; (3) is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities; (5) would not create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States; and (6) 

would not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments, or other private sectors by 

exceeding the threshold identified 

above. These analyses are summarized 

below. 

Parties Potentially Affected by This 

Rulemaking 

• Original equipment manufacturers 

(OEMs) producing enhanced flight 

vision systems (EFVS) or other vision 

systems, in accordance with parts 23, 

25, 27, or 29 

• Persons installing EFVS or other 

vision systems with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view 

• Persons conducting EFVS operations 

under parts 91, 121, 125, 129, or part 

135 

• Persons conducting EFVS training 

Principal Assumptions and Sources of 

Information 

• A 10-year period for this analysis is 

used because this period captures all 

significant cost impacts 

• Discount rate is 7 percent (Office of 

Management & Budget, Circular A–4, 

‘‘Guidelines and Discount Rates for 

Benefit-Cost Analysis 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 aircraft 

• Operators of some 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 

in the aggregate 

• Aircraft operations over the next 10 

years will grow about 3.7% per year 

based on the FAA 2012 forecast 

(Table 28, FAA Aerospace Forecast 

Fiscal Years 2012–2032) 1

Benefits of This Rule 

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 to them exceeds the 

cost they incur. The proposed rule 

would enable expanded EFVS 

operations, which would increase 

access, efficiency and throughput in low 

visibility conditions, and minimize 

potential for missed approaches and 

delayed take-offs. In addition, EFVS 

permits low visibility operations on a 

greater number of approach procedure 

types. Changes in the U.S. aviation 

infrastructure,2, for example, the 

transition from incandescent to lightemitting diode (LED) approach lights, 

could potentially impact the near term 

benefits for persons using EFVS 

equipment but may not impact future 

benefits of EFVS equipment designed to 

be interoperable with LEDs. The impact 

on the benefits is unknown because 

both the infrastructure and EFVS 

capabilities are evolving. Benefits of this 

proposed rule would be realized by 

averting costs related to interrupted 

flight operations due to low visibility 

resulting in lost passenger time and 

extra fuel consumption. 

Since aircraft currently 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 airplanes 

affected, type of operation, number of 

approaches that would be completed as 

a result of adopting the provisions of the 

proposed rule, and extra costs of missed 

approaches and delayed departures and 

arrivals. 

Revisions to pilot compartment view 

requirements for vision systems with a 

transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view would codify 

the current practice of issuing special 

conditions for each of these vision 

systems by providing industry with 

known requirements for the certification 

of these systems under parts 23, 25, 27, 

and 29. Because the proposed changes 

would streamline the certification 

process for these vision systems by 

eliminating the need to issue special 

conditions, the FAA and applicants 

would save the time and expense 

associated with the issuance of these 

special conditions. The full extent of 

these benefits is not known and 

therefore has not been quantified in this 

analysis. 

Costs of This Rule 

The regulatory costs attributed to the 

proposed requirements are those above 

and beyond the current regulation and 

common practice. The FAA estimates 

compliance costs as the incremental 

differences in costs, resulting from the 

proposed changes in training, 

equipment and certification 

requirements. Data were obtained from 

EFVS original equipment 

manufacturers, training centers, and two 

operators. The total incremental cost 

attributable to the proposed 

requirements equals nominal training 

cost ($4.3 million) plus the initial 

certification cost ($1 million). The 

compliance cost of the proposed 

equipment requirements is negligible. 

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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34950 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

rate. The following table presents the 

summary of the regulatory costs in 2012 

dollars (nominal value) and present 

value (PV). 

Cost component 

Cost in 2012 dollars 

($ million) 

PV 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 systems with a 

transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view would not result 

in additional certification costs 

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 systems. The 

full extent of the costs for the 

certification of new vision systems with 

a transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view is not known 

and has not been quantified in the 

analysis. 

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 by those operators who want 

improved EFVS capabilities. OEMs are 

already proceeding with efforts to 

expand EFVS capabilities, which 

indicate the benefits of conducting 

expanded 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 located 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. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Public Law 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 FAA expects many small entities 

would benefit from this proposed rule. 

The purpose of the rule is to provide the 

safe operating requirements which 

would allow EFVS to extend operations 

from the current 100 feet above the 

touchdown zone elevation to landing. 

As these systems are largely installed in 

general aviation turbojets, we expect a 

substantial number of small entities to 

be affected. However, as the rule is 

voluntary, these small entities must 

choose to comply with this rule to 

obtain additional EFVS capabilities. 

Given the value of these turbojets, the 

value of EFVS and the value of the 

flights, the additional training cost 

would not result in a significant 

economic impact. Therefore, the FAA 

certifies that this proposed rule would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

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 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 the rule would not 

impose obstacles to foreign commerce, 

as foreign exporters do not have to 

change their current export products to 

the United States. 

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 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This proposed 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. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34951 

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 information collection 

requirements. As required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

these proposed information collection 

requirements to OMB for its review. 

The paperwork burden comprises 

documentation of requirements for 

training, recent flight experience, and 

proficiency under § 61.31. The 

following analyses were conducted 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501). If some operators 

eventually choose to conduct EFVS 

operations to touchdown and rollout, 

the provisions of proposed § 61.31(l) 

would result in a requirement to keep 

records of training, recent flight 

experience, and proficiency. It would 

not require mandatory reporting. We 

estimate the paperwork burden of these 

requirements to be $86,000. 

The total cost of the annualized 

paperwork burden is determined by 

multiplying the number of pilots per 

EFVS-equipped aircraft (four) by the 

number of EFVS aircraft (982) and then 

by the time of complying with the 

paperwork requirements for each pilot. 

The requirement of keeping flight 

crewmembers’ training documentation 

is covered under current Federal 

aviation regulations. Therefore, we 

would not repeat the cost estimate of 

recordkeeping due to current training 

requirement. Operators, however, are 

required to log their approaches using 

EFVS in 6 months in compliance with 

the recent flight experience and 

proficiency requirements of the 

proposed rule. The action of logging 

each approach in a semiannual 

frequency can be done manually or 

electronically. We estimated the time 

required to complete recordkeeping by 

flight crewmembers would be about 

0.10 hours semiannually or 0.20 hours 

annually. Assuming 3,928 pilots would 

be affected by the recordkeeping 

provisions of the rule, it would require 

about 786 hours of annual paperwork, 

and approximately $86,000 nominal 

cost at the maximum based on the 

average wage rate of $109 for flight 

crewmembers from the RITA–BTS Form 

41. 

Individuals and organizations may 

submit comments on the information 

collection requirement by September 9, 

2013, and should direct them to the 

address listed in the ADDRESSES section 

of this document. 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 Building, Room 10202, 725 

17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20053 

or via facsimile at (202) 395–6974. 

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 OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

number for this information collection 

will be published in the Federal 

Register, after the Office of Management 

and Budget approves it. 

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 determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

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 this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

See the ‘‘Regulatory Evaluation’’ 

discussion in the ‘‘Regulatory Notices 

and Analyses’’ section elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency has determined that this 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. 

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this proposed 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 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. 

VI. Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. The agency 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 send only one copy of written 

comments, or if comments are filed 

electronically, commenters should 

submit only one time. 

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 agency may 

change this proposal in light of the 

comments it receives. 

Proprietary or Confidential Business 

Information: Commenters should not 

file proprietary or confidential business 

information in the docket. Such 

information must be sent or delivered 

directly to the person identified in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this document, and marked as 

proprietary or confidential. If submitting 

information on a disk or CD ROM, mark 

the outside of the disk or CD ROM, and 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

proprietary or confidential. 

Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when the 

FAA is aware of proprietary information 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34952 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

filed with a comment, the agency does 

not place it in the docket. It is held in 

a separate file to which the public does 

not have access, and the FAA places a 

note in the docket that it has received 

it. If the FAA receives a request to 

examine or copy this information, it 

treats it as any other request under the 

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 

552). The FAA processes such a request 

under Department of Transportation 

procedures found in 49 CFR part 7. 

B. 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 notice 

number of this rulemaking. 

All documents the FAA considered in 

developing this proposed rule, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed from 

the Internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced in item 1 

above. 

VII. The Proposed Amendment 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 1 

Air transportation. 

14 CFR Part 23 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 27 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 29 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 61 

Aircraft, Airmen, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

14 CFR Part 91 

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Airports, Aviation safety, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety, Charter flights, Safety, 

Transportation. 

14 CFR Part 125 

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, 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 1—DEFINITIONS AND 

ABBREVIATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

■ 2. Amend § 1.1 by adding the 

definition of ‘‘EFVS operation’’ in 

alphabetical order, and revising the 

definition for ‘‘Enhanced flight vision 

system (EFVS)’’ to read as follows: 

§ 1.1 General definitions. 

* * * * * 

EFVS operation means an operation 

in which an EFVS is required to be used 

to perform an approach or landing, 

determine enhanced flight visibility, 

identify required visual references, or 

conduct the rollout. 

* * * * * 

Enhanced flight vision system (EFVS) 

means an installed aircraft system 

which uses an electronic means to 

provide a display of the forward 

external scene topography (the 

applicable natural or manmade features 

of a place or region especially in a way 

to show their relative positions and 

elevation) through the use of imaging 

sensors, such as forward-looking 

infrared, millimeter wave radiometry, 

millimeter wave radar, or low-light level 

image intensification. The EFVS sensor 

imagery and required aircraft flight 

information and flight symbology is 

displayed on a head-up display, or an 

equivalent display, so that the imagery 

and symbology is clearly visible to the 

pilot flying in his or her normal position 

with the line of vision looking forward 

along the flight path. An EFVS includes 

the display element, sensors, computers 

and power supplies, indications, and 

controls. 

* * * * * 

PART 23—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, 

ACROBATIC, AND COMMUTER 

CATEGORY AIRPLANES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 23 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44702, 44704. 

■ 4. Amend § 23.773 by adding 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 23.773 Pilot compartment view. 

* * * * * 

(c) A vision system with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view, such as a head-up-display, 

head-mounted display, or other 

equivalent display, must meet the 

following requirements: 

(1) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must compensate for 

interference with the pilot’s outside 

view such that the combination of what 

is visible in the display and what 

remains visible through and around it, 

enables the pilot to perform the 

maneuvers as specified in paragraph 

(a)(1) of this section and the pilot 

compartment to meet the provisions of 

paragraph (a)(2) of this section. 

(2) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must provide an 

undistorted view of the external scene. 

The vision system display must present 

the imagery, attitude symbology, flight 

path vector, flight path angle reference 

cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to this imagery and external 

scene topography, so that they are 

aligned with, and scaled to, the external 

scene. 

(3) The vision system must provide a 

means to allow the pilot using the 

display to immediately deactivate and 

reactivate the vision system imagery, on 

demand, without removing the pilot’s 

hands from the primary flight controls 

(yoke or equivalent) or thrust controls. 

(4) When the vision system is not in 

operation it must not restrict the pilot 

from performing the maneuvers as 

specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section and the pilot compartment from 

meeting the provisions of paragraph 

(a)(2) of this section. 

PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: TRANSPORT 

CATEGORY AIRPLANES 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 25 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, and 44704. 

■ 6. Amend § 25.773 by adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34953 

§ 25.773 Pilot compartment view. 

* * * * * 

(e) Vision systems with transparent 

displays. A vision system with a 

transparent display surface located in 

the pilot’s outside view, such as a headup-display, head-mounted display, or 

other equivalent display, must meet the 

following requirements: 

(1) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must compensate for 

interference with the pilot’s outside 

view such that the combination of what 

is visible in the display and what 

remains visible through and around it, 

enables the pilot to perform the 

maneuvers and normal duties as 

specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(2) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must provide an 

undistorted view of the external scene. 

The vision system display must present 

the imagery, attitude symbology, flight 

path vector, flight path angle reference 

cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to this imagery and external 

scene topography, so that they are 

aligned with, and scaled to, the external 

scene. 

(3) The vision system must provide a 

means to allow the pilot using the 

display to immediately deactivate and 

reactivate the vision system imagery, on 

demand, without removing the pilot’s 

hands from the primary flight controls 

(yoke or equivalent) or thrust controls. 

(4) When the vision system is not in 

operation it must not restrict the pilot 

from performing the maneuvers as 

specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section and the pilot compartment from 

meeting the provisions of paragraph 

(a)(2) of this section. 

PART 27—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY 

ROTORCRAFT 

■ 7. The authority citation for part 27 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44702, 44704. 

■ 8. Amend § 27.773 by adding 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 27.773 Pilot compartment view. 

* * * * * 

(c) A vision system with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view, such as a head-up-display, 

head-mounted display, or other 

equivalent display, must meet the 

following requirements: 

(1) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must compensate for 

interference with the pilot’s outside 

view such that the combination of what 

is visible in the display and what 

remains visible through and around it, 

provides for the same level of safe 

operation as specified in paragraphs 

(a)(1) and (b) of this section. 

(2) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must provide an 

undistorted view of the external scene. 

The vision system display must present 

the imagery, attitude symbology, flight 

path vector, flight path angle reference 

cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to this imagery and external 

scene topography, so that they are 

aligned with, and scaled to, the external 

scene. 

(3) The vision system must provide a 

means to allow the pilot using the 

display to immediately deactivate and 

reactivate the vision system imagery, on 

demand, without removing the pilot’s 

hands from the primary flight and 

power controls (cyclic and collective or 

equivalent). 

(4) When the vision system is not in 

operation it must permit the same level 

of safe operation as specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) of this section. 

PART 29—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: TRANSPORT 

CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT 

■ 9. The authority citation for part 29 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44702, 44704. 

■ 10. Amend § 29.773 by adding 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 29.773 Pilot compartment view. 

* * * * * 

(c) A vision system with a transparent 

display surface located in the pilot’s 

outside view, such as a head-up-display, 

head-mounted display, or other 

equivalent display, must meet the 

following requirements: 

(1) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must compensate for 

interference with the pilot’s outside 

view such that the combination of what 

is visible in the display and what 

remains visible through and around it, 

provides for the same level of safe 

operation as specified in paragraph (a) 

of this section. 

(2) While the vision system display is 

in operation, it must provide an 

undistorted view of the external scene. 

The vision system display must present 

the imagery, attitude symbology, flight 

path vector, flight path angle reference 

cue, and other cues which are 

referenced to this imagery and external 

scene topography, so that they are 

aligned with, and scaled to, the external 

scene. 

(3) The vision system must provide a 

means to allow the pilot using the 

display to immediately deactivate and 

reactivate the vision system imagery, on 

demand, without removing the pilot’s 

hands from the primary flight and 

power controls (cyclic and collective or 

equivalent). 

(4) When the vision system is not in 

operation it must permit the same level 

of safe operation as specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section. 

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, 

FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND 

INSTRUCTORS 

■ 11. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 

■ 12. Amend § 61.31 by redesignating 

paragraph (l) as paragraph (m) and 

adding a new paragraph (l) to read as 

follows: 

§ 61.31 Type rating requirements, 

additional training, and authorization 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(l) Additional training required for 

EFVS operations. (1) Except as provided 

under paragraph (l)(7) of this section, no 

person may manipulate the controls of 

an aircraft or act as pilot in command 

of an aircraft during an EFVS operation 

as specified in § 91.176(a) or (b) of this 

chapter, or serve as a required pilot 

flight crewmember during an EFVS 

operation as specified in § 91.176(a) of 

this chapter, unless that person— 

(i) Receives and logs ground training 

from an authorized instructor under a 

training program approved by the 

Administrator; and 

(ii) Obtains a logbook or other 

endorsement from an authorized 

instructor who certifies the person 

completed the ground training. 

(2) The ground training specified in 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section must 

include the following subjects: 

(i) Applicable portions of this chapter 

that relate to EFVS flight operations and 

limitations, including AFM limitations; 

(ii) EFVS display, controls, modes, 

features, symbology, annunciations, and 

associated systems and components; 

(iii) EFVS sensor performance, sensor 

limitations, scene interpretation, visual 

anomalies, and other visual effects; 

(iv) Preflight planning and operational 

considerations associated with using 

EFVS during taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise, 

descent and landing phases of flight, 

including the use of EFVS for 

instrument approaches, operating below 

DA/DH or MDA, executing missed 

approaches, landing, rollout, and balked 

landings; 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34954 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

(v) Weather associated with low 

visibility conditions and its effect on 

EFVS performance; 

(vi) Normal, abnormal, emergency, 

and crew coordination procedures when 

using EFVS; and 

(vii) Interpretation of approach and 

runway lighting systems and their 

display characteristics when using an 

EFVS. 

(3) Except as provided under 

paragraph (l)(7) of this section, no 

person may manipulate the controls of 

an aircraft or act as pilot in command 

of an aircraft during an EFVS operation 

as specified in § 91.176(a) or (b) of this 

chapter unless that person— 

(i) Receives and logs flight training 

from an authorized instructor who 

meets the requirements in this 

paragraph (l) under a training program 

approved by the Administrator; and 

(ii) Obtains a logbook or other 

endorsement from an authorized 

instructor who found the person 

proficient in the use of EFVS for the 

EFVS operations to be conducted. 

(4) The flight training specified in 

paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section must 

include the following tasks— 

(i) Preflight and inflight preparation of 

EFVS equipment for EFVS operations, 

including EFVS setup and use of 

display, controls, modes and associated 

systems, including adjustments for 

brightness and contrast under day and 

night conditions; 

(ii) Proper piloting techniques 

associated with using EFVS during taxi, 

takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, landing, 

and rollout, to include missed 

approaches and balked landings; 

(iii) Proper piloting techniques for the 

use of EFVS during instrument 

approaches, to include operations below 

DA/DH or MDA as applicable, under 

both day and night conditions; 

(iv) Determining enhanced flight 

visibility; 

(v) Identifying required visual 

references appropriate to EFVS 

operations; 

(vi) Transitioning from EFVS sensor 

imagery to natural vision acquisition of 

required visual references and the 

runway environment; 

(vii) Using EFVS sensor imagery to 

touchdown and rollout, if EFVS 

operations as specified in § 91.176(a) of 

this chapter are to be conducted; and 

(viii) Normal, abnormal, emergency, 

and crew coordination procedures when 

using an EFVS. 

(5) A flight simulator equipped with 

an EFVS may be used to meet the flight 

training requirements specified in 

paragraph (l)(3) of this section. The 

flight simulator must be a level ‘C’ 

simulator with a daylight visual display, 

or a level ‘D’ simulator. Each simulator 

must be qualified for EFVS by the 

National Simulator Program. 

(6) A person qualified to conduct 

EFVS operations under § 91.176(a) or (b) 

of this chapter who seeks to conduct 

additional EFVS operations for which 

that person has not received training 

must receive— 

(i) The flight training and 

endorsement specified in paragraph 

(l)(3) of this section appropriate to the 

additional EFVS operations to be 

conducted; or 

(ii) A pilot proficiency check on the 

additional EFVS operations 

administered by an FAA inspector, 

designated examiner, a check airman 

under parts 121, 125, 135, or a program 

manager check pilot under part 91 

subpart K of this chapter. 

(7) The requirements under 

paragraphs (l)(1) and (3) of this section 

do not apply if a person has 

satisfactorily completed— 

(i) A pilot proficiency check on EFVS 

operations as specified in § 91.176(a) or 

(b) of this chapter, as applicable, 

conducted by: 

(A) An FAA Inspector or designated 

examiner; 

(B) A person authorized by the U.S. 

Armed Forces to administer an EFVS 

proficiency check provided the person 

receiving the check was a member of the 

U.S. Armed Forces at the time the check 

was administered; 

(C) An authorized instructor 

employed by a Federal, State, county, or 

municipal agency to administer an 

EFVS proficiency check provided the 

person receiving the check was 

employed by that agency at the time the 

check was administered; or 

(D) A check airman under parts 121, 

125, 135, or a program manager check 

pilot under part 91 subpart K of this 

chapter; or 

(ii) A training program, proficiency 

check, or other course of instruction 

applicable to EFVS operations 

conducted under § 91.176(b) of this 

chapter that is acceptable to the 

Administrator before [DATE TWO 

YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 

OF THE FINAL RULE]. 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Amend § 61.57 by adding 

paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows: 

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in 

command. 

* * * * * 

(h) EFVS operating experience. (1) A 

person may manipulate the controls of 

an aircraft during an EFVS operation or 

act as pilot in command of an aircraft 

during an EFVS operation only if, 

within 6 calendar months preceding the 

month of the flight, that person 

performs and logs six instrument 

approaches under any weather 

conditions as the sole manipulator of 

the controls using an EFVS. One 

approach must terminate in a full stop 

landing. For persons authorized to 

exercise the privileges of § 91.176(a), the 

full stop landing must be conducted 

using the EFVS. 

(2) A flight simulator equipped with 

an EFVS may be used to meet the EFVS 

operating experience requirements 

specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this 

section. The flight simulator must be a 

level ‘C’ simulator with a daylight visual 

display, or a level ‘D’ simulator. Each 

simulator must be qualified by the 

National Simulator Program for EFVS. 

(i) EFVS proficiency check. A person 

who does not meet the EFVS experience 

requirements of this paragraph (h) must 

pass an EFVS proficiency check to act 

as pilot in command in an EFVS 

operation or to manipulate the controls 

of an aircraft during an EFVS operation. 

The proficiency check must be 

performed in the category of aircraft for 

which the person is seeking the EFVS 

privilege or in a flight simulator that is 

representative of that category of 

aircraft. The flight simulator must be a 

level ‘C’ simulator with a daylight visual 

display, or a level ‘D’ simulator. Each 

simulator must be qualified by the 

National Simulator Program for EFVS. 

The check must consist of the tasks 

listed in § 61.31(l), and the check must 

be performed by: 

(1) An FAA Inspector or designated 

examiner who is qualified to perform 

EFVS operations in that same aircraft 

category; 

(2) A person who is authorized by the 

U.S. Armed Forces to perform EFVS 

proficiency checks, provided the person 

being administered the check is also a 

member of the U.S. Armed Forces; 

(3) A company check pilot who is 

authorized to perform EFVS proficiency 

checks under parts 121, 125, or 135, or 

subpart K of part 91 of this chapter, 

provided that both the check pilot and 

the pilot being tested are employees of 

that operator or fractional ownership 

program manager, as applicable; 

(4) An authorized instructor who 

meets the additional training 

requirements for EFVS operations 

specified in § 61.31(l) of this chapter, 

and if conducting a proficiency check in 

an aircraft, meets the recent flight 

experience specified in paragraph (h) of 

this section or this paragraph (i); or 

(5) A person approved by the FAA to 

perform EFVS proficiency checks. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34955 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 14. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 

40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 

44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 

44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506– 

46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles 

12 and 29 of the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180). 

■ 15. Amend § 91.175 by revising 

paragraphs (c) introductory text, 

(c)(3)(vi), (d)(1), and (e)(1), and 

removing paragraphs (l) and (m). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 91.175 Takeoff and landing under IFR. 

* * * * * 

(c) Operation below DA/DH or MDA. 

Except as provided in § 91.176 of this 

chapter, where a DA/DH or MDA is 

applicable, no pilot may operate an 

aircraft, except a military aircraft of the 

United States, below the authorized 

MDA or continue an approach below 

the authorized DA/DH unless— 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(vi) The visual glideslope indicator. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) For operations conducted under 

§ 91.176 of this chapter, the 

requirements of paragraphs (a)(3)(iii) or 

(b)(3)(iii), as applicable, of that section 

are not met; or 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Whenever operating an aircraft 

pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section 

or § 91.176 of this chapter, the 

requirements of that paragraph are not 

met at either of the following times: 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Add § 91.176 to read as follows: 

§ 91.176 Operation below DA/DH or MDA 

using an enhanced flight vision system 

(EFVS) under IFR. 

(a) EFVS operations to touchdown 

and rollout. No person may conduct an 

EFVS operation in an aircraft, except a 

military aircraft of the United States, at 

any airport below the authorized DA/ 

DH to touchdown and rollout using a 

straight-in, precision instrument 

approach procedure or an approach 

procedure with approved vertical 

guidance unless the following 

requirements are met: 

(1) Equipment. (i) The aircraft is 

equipped with an operable EFVS that 

has either an FAA type design approval 

certified for EFVS operations to 

touchdown and rollout, or for a foreignregistered aircraft that does not have an 

FAA-type design approval, an EFVS that 

otherwise meets the requirements of this 

chapter for those operations. The EFVS 

must: 

(A) Have an electronic means to 

provide a display of the forward 

external scene topography (the 

applicable natural or manmade features 

of a place or region especially in a way 

to show their relative positions and 

elevation) through the use of imaging 

sensors, such as forward-looking 

infrared, millimeter wave radiometry, 

millimeter wave radar, or low-light level 

image intensification. 

(B) Present EFVS sensor imagery and 

aircraft flight symbology on a head-up 

display, or an equivalent display, so that 

the imagery and symbology is clearly 

visible to the pilot flying in his or her 

normal position with the line of vision 

looking forward along the flight path. 

Aircraft flight symbology must consist 

of at least airspeed, vertical speed, 

aircraft attitude, heading, altitude, 

height above ground level such as that 

provided by a radio altimeter or other 

device capable of providing equivalent 

performance, command guidance, as 

appropriate, for the approach to be 

flown, path deviation indications, flight 

path vector, and flight path angle 

reference cue. Additionally, the EFVS 

must display flare prompt or flare 

guidance, as appropriate, for achieving 

acceptable touchdown performance. 

(C) Present the displayed EFVS sensor 

imagery, attitude symbology, flight path 

vector, and flight path angle reference 

cue, and other cues, which are 

referenced to the EFVS sensor imagery 

and external scene topography, so that 

they are aligned with, and scaled to, the 

external view. 

(D) Display the flight path angle 

reference cue with a pitch scale that is 

selectable by the pilot to the desired 

descent angle for the approach and 

suitable for monitoring the vertical 

flight path of the aircraft. 

(E) Display the EFVS sensor imagery 

and aircraft flight symbology such that 

they do not adversely obscure the pilot’s 

outside view or field of view through 

the cockpit window. 

(F) Have display characteristics, 

dynamics, and cues that are suitable for 

manual control of the aircraft to 

touchdown in the touchdown zone of 

the runway of intended landing and 

during rollout. 

(ii) When a minimum flightcrew of 

more than one pilot is required, the 

aircraft must be equipped with a display 

that provides the pilot monitoring with 

EFVS sensor imagery. The display must 

be located within the maximum primary 

field of view of the pilot monitoring and 

any symbology displayed must not 

adversely obscure the sensor imagery of 

the runway environment. Based upon 

the EFVS operation to be performed, the 

Administrator may require the display 

of the EFVS sensor imagery and aircraft 

flight symbology to be provided to the 

pilot monitoring on a head-up display, 

or other equivalent display appropriate 

to the operation to be conducted. 

(2) Operations. (i) Each required pilot 

flight crewmember has adequate 

knowledge of, and familiarity with, the 

aircraft, the EFVS, and the procedures to 

be used. 

(ii) The aircraft is equipped with, and 

the pilot flying uses, an operable EFVS 

that meets the equipment requirements 

specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section. 

(iii) When a minimum flightcrew of 

more than one pilot is required, the 

pilot monitoring must use the display 

specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this 

section to monitor and assess the safe 

conduct of the approach, landing, and 

rollout. 

(iv) The aircraft is continuously in a 

position from which a descent to a 

landing on the intended runway can be 

made at a normal rate of descent using 

normal maneuvers. 

(v) The descent rate will allow 

touchdown to occur within the 

touchdown zone of the runway of 

intended landing. 

(vi) Each required pilot flight 

crewmember meets— 

(A) The applicable training, recent 

flight experience, and proficiency 

requirements of part 61 of this chapter, 

and for a part 119 or 125 certificate 

holder, the applicable training, testing 

and qualification provisions of parts 

121, 125, and 135 of this chapter; or 

(B) For a foreign person, the 

requirements of the civil aviation 

authority of the State of the operator. 

(vii) For a person conducting 

operations under part 91, other than 

those conducted under subpart K, the 

operation is conducted in accordance 

with a Letter of Authorization 

authorizing the use of EFVS. 

(viii) For a person conducting 

operations under part 91, subpart K, the 

operation is conducted in accordance 

with Management Specifications 

authorizing the use of EFVS. 

(ix) For a person conducting 

operations under part 121, 129, or 135 

of this chapter, the operation is 

conducted in accordance with 

operations specifications authorizing 

the use of EFVS. 

(x) For a person conducting 

operations under part 125 of this 

chapter, the operation is conducted in 

accordance with operations 

specifications authorizing the use of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34956 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

EFVS or the operator holds a Letter of 

Authorization for the use of EFVS. 

(3) Visibility and Visual Reference 

Requirements. No pilot operating under 

this section or §§ 121.651, 125.381, and 

135.225 of this chapter may operate an 

aircraft at any airport below the 

authorized DA/DH and land unless: 

(i) The pilot determines that the 

enhanced flight visibility observed by 

use of a certified EFVS is not less than 

the visibility prescribed in the 

instrument approach procedure being 

used. 

(ii) From the authorized DA/DH to 

100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation of the runway of intended 

landing, the approach light system (if 

installed) or both the runway threshold 

and the touchdown zone are distinctly 

visible and identifiable to the pilot 

using an EFVS. 

(A) The runway threshold must be 

identified using at least one of the 

following visual references— 

(1) The beginning of the runway 

landing surface; 

(2) The threshold lights; or 

(3) The runway end identifier lights. 

(B) The touchdown zone must be 

identified using at least one of the 

following visual references— 

(1) The runway touchdown zone 

landing surface; 

(2) The touchdown zone lights; 

(3) The touchdown zone markings; or 

(4) The runway lights. 

(iii) At 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of 

intended landing and below that 

altitude, one of the following visual 

references are distinctly visible and 

identifiable to the pilot using an EFVS— 

(A) The runway threshold; 

(B) The lights or markings of the 

threshold; 

(C) The runway touchdown zone 

landing surface; or 

(D) The lights or markings of the 

touchdown zone. 

(b) EFVS operations to 100 feet above 

the touchdown zone elevation. No 

person may conduct an EFVS operation 

in an aircraft, except a military aircraft 

of the United States, at any airport 

below the authorized DA/DH or MDA to 

100 feet above the touchdown zone 

elevation using a straight-in, instrument 

approach procedure unless the 

following requirements are met: 

(1) Equipment. The aircraft is 

equipped with an operable EFVS that— 

(i) Meets the requirements of 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section; 

(ii) Has an FAA-type design approval 

for EFVS operations to 100 feet above 

touchdown zone elevation and meets 

the requirements of paragraph (a)(1)(i) of 

this section but need not present flare 

prompt, flare guidance, or height above 

ground level; or 

(iii) For a foreign-registered aircraft 

that does not have an FAA-type design 

approval, an EFVS that otherwise meets 

the requirements of this chapter for 

those operations. 

(2) Operations. (i) Each required pilot 

flight crewmember has adequate 

knowledge of, and familiarity with, the 

aircraft, the EFVS, and the procedures to 

be used. 

(ii) The aircraft is equipped with, and 

the pilot flying uses, an operable EFVS 

that meets the equipment requirements 

specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this 

section. 

(iii) The aircraft is continuously in a 

position from which a descent to a 

landing on the intended runway can be 

made at a normal rate of descent using 

normal maneuvers. 

(iv) For operations conducted under 

part 121 or part 135 of this chapter, the 

descent rate will allow touchdown to 

occur within the touchdown zone of the 

runway of intended landing. 

(v) Each required pilot flight 

crewmember meets— 

(A) The applicable training, recent 

flight experience and proficiency 

requirements of part 61 of this chapter, 

and for a part 119 or 125 certificate 

holder, the applicable training, testing, 

and qualification provisions of parts 

121, 125, and 135 of this chapter; or 

(B) For a foreign person, the 

requirements of the civil aviation 

authority of the State of the operator. 

(vi) For a person conducting 

operations under part 91, subpart K, the 

operation is conducted in accordance 

with Management Specifications 

authorizing the use of EFVS. 

(vii) For a person conducting 

operations under part 121, 129, or 135 

of this chapter, the operation is 

conducted in accordance with 

operations specifications authorizing 

the use of EFVS. 

(viii) For a person conducting 

operations under part 125 of this 

chapter, the operation is conducted in 

accordance with operations 

specifications authorizing the use of 

EFVS or a Letter of Authorization for the 

use of EFVS. 

(3) Visibility and Visual Reference 

Requirements. No pilot operating under 

this section or §§ 121.651, 125.381, and 

135.225 of this chapter may operate an 

aircraft at any airport below the 

authorized MDA or continue an 

approach below the authorized DA/DH 

and land unless: 

(i) From the authorized MDA or DA/ 

DH to 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of 

intended landing, the pilot determines 

that the enhanced flight visibility 

observed by use of a certified enhanced 

flight vision system is not less than the 

visibility prescribed in the instrument 

approach procedure being used. 

(ii) From the authorized MDA or DA/ 

DH to 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of 

intended landing, the approach light 

system (if installed) or both the runway 

threshold and the touchdown zone are 

distinctly visible and identifiable to the 

pilot using an EFVS. 

(A) The runway threshold must be 

identified using at least one of the 

following visual references— 

(1) The beginning of the runway 

landing surface; 

(2) The threshold lights; or 

(3) The runway end identifier lights. 

(B) The touchdown zone must be 

identified using at least one of the 

following visual references— 

(1) The runway touchdown zone 

landing surface; 

(2) The touchdown zone lights; 

(3) The touchdown zone markings; or 

(4) The runway lights. 

(iii) At 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of 

intended landing and below that 

altitude, the flight visibility must be 

sufficient for one of the following visual 

references to be distinctly visible and 

identifiable to the pilot without reliance 

on the EFVS to continue to a landing— 

(A) The runway threshold; 

(B) The lights or markings of the 

threshold; 

(C) The runway touchdown zone 

landing surface; or 

(D) The lights or markings of the 

touchdown zone. 

■ 17. Amend § 91.189 by revising 

paragraphs (d) introductory text and (e) 

to read as follows: 

§ 91.189 Category II and III operations: 

General operating rules. 

* * * * * 

(d) Except as provided in § 91.176 of 

this part or unless otherwise authorized 

by the Administrator, no pilot operating 

an aircraft in a Category II or Category 

III approach that provides and requires 

the use of a DA/DH may continue the 

approach below the authorized decision 

height unless the following conditions 

are met: 

* * * * * 

(e) Except as provided in § 91.176 of 

this part or unless otherwise authorized 

by the Administrator, each pilot 

operating an aircraft shall immediately 

execute an appropriate missed approach 

whenever, prior to touchdown, the 

requirements of paragraph (d) of this 

section are not met. 

* * * * * 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34957 

■ 18. Amend § 91.905 by adding an 

entry for § 91.176 in numerical order to 

read as follows: 

§ 91.905 List of rules subject to waivers. 

* * * * * 

91.176 Operation below DA/DH or 

MDA using an enhanced flight vision 

system (EFVS) under IFR. 

* * * * * 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 19. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709– 

44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 46105. 

■ 20. Revise § 121.613 to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.613 Dispatch or flight release under 

IFR or over-the-top. 

No person may dispatch or release an 

aircraft for operations under IFR or overthe-top, unless appropriate weather 

reports or forecasts, or any combination 

thereof, indicate that the weather 

conditions will be at or above the 

authorized minimums at the estimated 

time of arrival at the airport or airports 

to which dispatched or released 

except— 

(a) As provided in § 121.615; or 

(b) In accordance with the certificate 

holder’s operations specifications for 

EFVS operations. 

■ 21. Amend § 121.615 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 121.615 Dispatch or flight release over 

water: Flag and supplemental operations. 

(a) Except as provided in the 

certificate holder’s operations 

specifications for EFVS operations, no 

person may dispatch or release an 

aircraft for a flight that involves 

extended overwater operation, unless 

appropriate weather reports or forecasts, 

or any combination thereof, indicate 

that the weather conditions will be at or 

above the authorized minimums at the 

estimated time of arrival at any airport 

to which dispatched or released, or to 

any required alternate airport. 

* * * * * 

■ 22. Amend § 121.651 by revising 

paragraphs (b) introductory text, (c) 

introductory text, (d) introductory text, 

redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f) as 

paragraphs (f) and (g), and adding new 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 121.651: Takeoff and landing weather 

minimums: IFR: All certificate holders. 

* * * * * 

(b) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(d) and (e) of this section, no pilot may 

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— 

* * * * * 

(c) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e) of this section, a pilot who has begun 

the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach procedure in 

accordance with paragraph (b) of this 

section and, after that, receives a later 

weather report indicating belowminimum conditions, may continue the 

approach to DA/DH or MDA. Upon 

reaching DA/DH or at MDA, and at any 

time before the missed approach point, 

the pilot may continue the approach 

below DA/DH or MDA if the following 

requirements are met— 

* * * * * 

(d) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e) of this section, a pilot may begin the 

final approach segment of an instrument 

approach procedure, other than a 

Category II or Category III procedure at 

an airport when the visibility is less 

than the visibility minimums prescribed 

for that procedure if the airport is served 

by an operative ILS and an operative 

PAR, and both are used by the pilot. 

However, no pilot may continue an 

approach below the authorized DA/DH 

unless the following requirements are 

met: 

* * * * * 

(e) A pilot may begin the final 

approach segment of an instrument 

approach procedure, or continue that 

approach procedure, at an airport when 

the visibility is reported to be less than 

the visibility minimums prescribed for 

that procedure if the aircraft is equipped 

with, and a pilot uses, an operable EFVS 

in accordance with § 91.176 of this 

chapter and the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications for EFVS 

operations. 

* * * * * 

PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND 

OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES 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 

■ 23. The authority citation for part 125 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 44716– 

44717, 44722. 

■ 24. Revise § 125.325 to read as 

follows: 

§ 125.325 Instrument approach procedures 

and IFR landing minimums. 

Except as specified in § 91.176 of this 

chapter, no person may make an 

instrument approach at an airport 

except in accordance with IFR weather 

minimums and unless the type of 

instrument approach procedure to be 

used is listed in the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications. 

■ 25. Revise § 125.361 to read as 

follows: 

§ 125.361 Flight release under IFR or overthe-top. 

No person may release an airplane for 

operations under IFR or over-the-top, 

unless appropriate weather reports or 

forecasts, or any combination thereof, 

indicate that the weather conditions 

will be at or above the authorized 

minimums at the estimated time of 

arrival at the airport or airports to which 

released except— 

(a) As provided in § 125.363; or 

(b) In accordance with the certificate 

holder’s operations specifications for 

EFVS operations. 

■ 26. Amend § 125.363 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 125.363 Flight release over water. 

(a) Except as provided in the 

certificate holder’s operations 

specifications for EFVS operations, no 

person may release an airplane for a 

flight that involves extended overwater 

operation, unless appropriate weather 

reports or forecasts, or any combination 

thereof, indicate that the weather 

conditions will be at or above the 

authorized minimums at the estimated 

time of arrival at any airport to which 

released, or to any required alternate 

airport. 

* * * * * 

■ 27. Amend § 125.381 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2), (b), and (c) 

introductory text, and adding paragraph 

(d) to read as follows: 

§ 125.381 Takeoff and landing weather 

minimums: IFR. 

(a) * * * 

(2) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(c) and (d) of this section, land an 

airplane under IFR. 

(b) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(c) and (d) of this section, no pilot may 

execute an instrument approach 

procedure if the latest reported visibility 

is less than the landing minimums 

specified in the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications. 

(c) Except as provided in paragraph 

(d) of this section, a pilot who initiates 

an instrument approach procedure 

based on a weather report that indicates 

that the specified visibility minimums 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
34958 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

exist and subsequently receives another 

weather report that indicates that 

conditions are below the minimum 

requirements, may continue the 

approach if the following conditions are 

met— 

* * * * * 

(d) A pilot may execute an instrument 

approach procedure, or continue the 

approach, at an airport when the 

visibility is reported to be less than the 

visibility minimums prescribed for that 

procedure if the aircraft is equipped 

with, and a pilot uses, an operable EFVS 

in accordance with § 91.176 of this 

chapter, and the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications for EFVS 

operations. 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 

RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON 

BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 28. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 40113, 

44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–44713, 

44715–44717, 44722, 45101–45105. 

■ 29. Revise § 135.219 to read as 

follows; 

§ 135.219 IFR: Destination airport weather 

minimums. 

Except as provided in the certificate 

holder’s operations specifications for 

EFVS operations, no person may take off 

an aircraft under IFR or begin an IFR or 

over-the-top operation unless the latest 

weather reports or forecasts, or any 

combination of them, indicate that 

weather conditions at the estimated 

time of arrival at the next airport of 

intended landing will be at or above 

authorized IFR landing minimums. 

■ 30. Amend § 135.225 by: 

a. Revising paragraphs (a) 

introductory text and (c) introductory 

text; 

b. Amending paragraph (d) 

introductory text by removing the word 

‘‘If’’ and adding in its place the words 

‘‘Except as provided in paragraph (j) of 

this section, if’’; and 

c. Adding paragraph (j). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 135.225 IFR: Takeoff, approach and 

landing minimums. 

(a) Except to the extent permitted by 

paragraphs (b) and (j) of this section, no 

pilot may begin an instrument approach 

procedure to an airport unless— 

* * * * * 

(c) Except as provided in paragraph (j) 

of this section, a pilot who has begun 

the final approach segment of an 

instrument approach to an airport under 

paragraph (b) of this section, and 

receives a later weather report 

indicating that conditions have 

worsened to below the minimum 

requirements, may continue the 

approach if the following conditions, 

are met— 

* * * * * 

(j) A pilot may begin an instrument 

approach procedure, or continue the 

approach, at an airport when the 

visibility is reported to be less than the 

visibility minimums prescribed for that 

procedure if the aircraft is equipped 

with, and a pilot uses, an operable EFVS 

in accordance with § 91.176 of this 

chapter, and the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications for EFVS 

operations. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 40103 and 44701(a)(5) in Washington, 

DC, on May 30, 2013. 

Margaret Gilligan, 

Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety, 

AVS–1. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13454 Filed 6–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0500; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–SW–45–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell), Model 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This document proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for the Bell Model 412, 

412CF, and 412EP helicopters. The AD 

currently requires reidentifying each 

affected part-numbered main rotor yoke 

(yoke) on its data plate, reducing the 

retirement life of the reidentified yoke, 

and revising the Airworthiness 

Limitations section of the maintenance 

manual or the Instructions for 

Continued Airworthiness (ICAs) 

accordingly. Since we issued the AD, 

we have discovered that the affected 

yokes do not have a data plate, making 

compliance with the part-marking 

requirements of the existing AD 

impossible. This proposed AD would 

retain the current requirements with the 

exception of the P/N marking location. 

The actions specified in this AD are 

intended to prevent fatigue cracking of 

a yoke, failure of the yoke, and 

subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Operations Office between 9 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bell 

Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, 

Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone (817) 

280–3391; fax (817) 280–6466; or at 

http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. 

You may review service information at 

the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham 

Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 

76137. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Kohner, ASW–170, Aviation 

Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Rotorcraft Certification Office, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137, telephone (817) 222–5170, fax 

(817) 222–5783, email 7-avs-asw170@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to participate in this 

rulemaking by submitting written 

comments, data, or views. We also 

invite comments relating to the 

economic, environmental, energy, or 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS