Document ID: FAA-2013-0259-1197
Agency: faa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; New Task
Posted Date: 2016-04-27T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24930-24932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09781]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee--New Task

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of a new task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee 
(ARAC) a new task to provide recommendations regarding bird strike 
protection rulemaking, policy, and guidance for normal category 
rotorcraft and to provide recommendations to enhance the existing bird 
strike protection standards for transport category rotorcraft. The FAA 
amended its regulations to incorporate bird strike protection rules for 
transport category rotorcraft in 1996. Data shows an increase in the 
bird population and weight has resulted in an increase in bird strikes 
with both normal category rotorcraft and transport category rotorcraft. 
The increase in bird strikes has led to more frequent bird penetration 
into the cockpit and cabin areas, elevating the risk of potential 
serious injuries or fatalities to occupants. Direct bird impact to the 
pilot has led to partial or complete pilot incapacitation in numerous 
cases, increasing the risk of fatalities.
    This notice informs the public of the new ARAC activity and 
solicits membership for the Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary B. Roach, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177, 
Gary.B.Roach@faa.gov, phone number 817-222-5110, facsimile number 817-
222-5961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

ARAC Acceptance of Task

    As a result of the March 23, 2016, ARAC meeting, the FAA assigned 
and ARAC accepted this task establishing the Rotorcraft Bird Strike 
Working Group. The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will serve as 
staff to the ARAC and provide advice and recommendations on the 
assigned task. The ARAC will review and accept the recommendation 
report and will submit it to the FAA.

Background

    The FAA established the ARAC to provide information, advice, and 
recommendations on aviation-related

[[Page 24931]]

issues that could result in rulemaking, to the FAA Administrator, 
through the Associate Administrator of Aviation Safety.
    In 1996, a bird strike protection rule (14 CFR 29.631) was adopted 
requiring that transport category rotorcraft be designed to ensure 
continued safe flight and landing (for Category A) or safe landing (for 
Category B) following an impact with a 2.2-pound bird. At that time, 
bird strike protection was not adopted for normal category rotorcraft. 
As of 2015, normal category rotorcraft comprise over 90% of rotorcraft 
operating in the U.S. The data from the FAA's Wildlife Strike Database 
indicates about 75% of reported bird strikes from 1990-2013 were with 
normal category rotorcraft. These percentages suggest that the absence 
of bird strike protective requirements for normal category rotorcraft 
results in increased risk for the majority of U.S. rotorcraft.
    Further analysis of rotorcraft data from the FAA's Wildlife Strike 
Database indicates a 68% increase in bird strikes since 2009 and more 
than a 700% increase since the early 2000s. In raw numbers, the 
percentages translate from around 25 reports of rotorcraft bird strikes 
per year in the early 2000s, to 121 strikes in 2009, to 204 strikes in 
2013. Using rotorcraft flight hours to perform a rate-based analysis, 
reported bird strikes increased 49% in the five year period from 2010 
to 2014 (3.99 per 100,000 flight hours to 5.95 per 100,000 flight 
hours). Better event reporting accounts for some of this increase, but 
the rapid escalation goes beyond reporting improvements alone. One 
conjecture is the increase may be caused by the growing population of 
birds in general, a growing population of larger birds, quieter 
aircraft, and an increase in the number of rotorcraft operations.
    In addition to the increased frequency of bird strikes, the FAA has 
observed increased strikes to the rotorcraft windscreen area with a 
force of impact that has directly endangered occupants and elevated the 
risk to safe rotorcraft operations. Bird penetration into the cockpit 
and cabin areas has become increasingly common, elevating the 
probability of potential serious injuries or fatalities to occupants. 
Moreover, direct bird impact to the pilot has led to partial or 
complete pilot incapacitation in numerous cases, often causing an 
increased risk for loss of control of the rotorcraft and fatalities. 
The typical scenario is that the bird strikes and shatters a portion of 
the front windscreen. The bird's remains, as well as damaged portions 
of the rotorcraft (such as the windscreen), either hit the pilot in the 
head, neck, or upper torso, or proceed through the cockpit to strike 
the passengers or crew.
    These recent observations reinforce previous findings from the 
study, Bird Strikes to Civil Helicopters in the United States, 1990-
2005 (2006), by Cleary, Dolbeer, and Wright, based on 15 years of data 
from the FAA's National Wildlife Database. The study concluded that: 
(1) Helicopters were significantly more likely to be damaged by bird 
strikes than airplanes, (2) windshields on helicopters were more 
frequently struck and damaged than windshields on airplanes, and (3) 
helicopter bird strikes were more likely to lead to injuries to crew or 
passengers than airplane bird strikes. The NTSB referenced these same 
findings in its accident report of a 2009 fatal rotorcraft accident in 
Morgan City, LA, where a bird strike was determined to be the probable 
cause of the accident (NTSB Aircraft Accident Report No. CEN09MA117).
    Some bird strike events where the bird penetrates the cockpit and 
cabin have received less attention either because the damage was 
limited to the windscreen or because the injury to the crew and 
passengers was minor. However, a superficial examination of the 
rotorcraft damage and occupant injury levels is misleading. The FAA has 
found that most of these cases had less to do with the sufficiency of 
aircraft design and equipage, and more to do with the crew's personal 
protective gear--such as helmets--that mitigated the potential event 
severity. Other cases of low severity are the result of fortuitous 
circumstance. One specific example occurred during a March 2015 police 
operation in Dallas, Texas, where a bird penetrated the cockpit and 
struck the pilot, who was not wearing a helmet. The pilot was 
incapacitated by the impact and--under ordinary circumstances--the 
event would likely have led to a fatal outcome from loss of rotorcraft 
control. However, the left seat occupant happened to be a rated 
helicopter pilot, something that was not typical for the police 
operation being conducted. The left seat occupant then assumed control 
of the rotorcraft and landed without incident. The result was an event 
with a low-severity outcome, but the underlying lesson from the 
relatively benign consequence cannot be dismissed.
    While the absence of any bird strike requirements for normal 
category rotorcraft must be addressed, data shows that bird strikes 
with transport category rotorcraft are a growing concern, especially 
encounters with larger birds. Transport category rotorcraft are more 
likely to spend extended time in the en route phase of flight and fly 
at higher altitudes. While the higher altitude would appear to reduce 
the probability of encountering bird strike, data shows an increased 
altitude does not mitigate the severity of damage when a bird strike 
occurs. A United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) study found 
that, of the 32 damaging strikes that occurred to U.S. rotorcraft in 
2014, 72% of those occurred more than 500 feet above ground level. The 
study opined that the more severe damage was likely attributable to the 
higher speed of the rotorcraft during the en route phase of flight. The 
increased exposure of transport category rotorcraft in this environment 
suggests the existing 2.2-pound bird strike requirement may not be 
adequate.
    Whether normal category or transport category, the unique operating 
profile of a helicopter leads to a different exposure to bird strike 
risk than does fixed-wing aircraft. The study, Wildlife strikes to 
civil helicopters in the U.S., 1990-2011 (2013) by Washburn, Cisar, and 
Default, discusses some of the differences. It concluded that, unlike 
with fixed-wing aircraft, helicopter bird strikes occur with greatest 
frequency during the en route phase of flight and in the off-airfield 
environment. It credits bird strikes that occur in the off-airfield 
environment as accounting for the majority of bird strike-related human 
injuries and fatalities for helicopters. Since helicopters operate at 
much lower altitudes than fixed-wing aircraft, the exposure to the risk 
of a bird strike is not limited to the departure and arrival phases of 
flight, but instead remains for the duration of the flight profile.

The Task

    The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will provide advice and 
recommendations to the ARAC on bird strike protection rulemaking, 
policy, and guidance for parts 27 and 29. The Rotorcraft Bird Strike 
Working Group is tasked to:
    1. For normal category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make 
written recommendations on how to incorporate bird strike protection 
requirements into the part 27 airworthiness standards for newly type 
certificated rotorcraft.
    2. For normal category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make 
written recommendations on how the bird strike protection requirements 
in Task 1 should be made effective via Sec.  27.2 for newly 
manufactured rotorcraft.
    3. For transport category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make 
written recommendations on how to enhance

[[Page 24932]]

the Sec.  29.631 bird strike protection airworthiness standard in light 
of increases in bird weight and increased exposure to bird strikes for 
newly type certificated rotorcraft.
    4. For transport category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make 
written recommendations on how the bird strike protection requirements 
in Task 3 should be made effective via Sec.  29.2 for newly 
manufactured rotorcraft.
    5. For normal and transport category rotorcraft, specifically 
advise and make written recommendations on incorporating rotorcraft 
bird strike protection improvements and standards into the existing 
rotorcraft fleet.
    6. For Tasks 1 through 5, consider existing non-traditional bird 
strike protection technology, including the use of aircraft flight 
manual limitations (such as requiring airspeed limitations at lower 
altitudes), when making the recommendations. These considerations must 
include: An evaluation of the effectiveness of such technology, 
assumptions used as part of that evaluation, validation of those 
assumptions, and any procedures to be used for operation with the 
technology or with the aircraft limitations.
    7. Based on the recommendations in Tasks 1 through 6, specifically 
advise and make written recommendations for the associated policy and 
guidance.
    8. Based on the Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group 
recommendations, perform the following:
    a. Estimate what the regulated parties would do differently as a 
result of the proposed recommendation and how much it would cost.
    b. Estimate the safety improvements of future bird encounters from 
the proposed recommendations.
    c. Estimate any other benefits (e.g., reduced administrative 
burden) or costs that would result from implementation of the 
recommendations.
    9. Develop a report containing recommendations on the findings and 
results of the tasks explained above. The report should document:
    a. Both majority and dissenting positions on the findings and the 
rationale for each position.
    b. Any disagreements, including the rationale for each position and 
the reasons for the disagreement.
    10. The working group may be reinstated to assist the ARAC in 
responding to the FAA's questions or concerns after the recommendation 
report has been submitted.

Schedule

    The recommendation report should be submitted to the FAA for review 
and acceptance no later than 18 months after publication of this notice 
in the Federal Register.

Working Group Activity

    The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group must comply with the 
procedures adopted by the ARAC as follows:
    1. Conduct a review and analysis of the assigned tasks and any 
other related materials or documents.
    2. Draft and submit a work plan for completion of the task, 
including the rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration by 
the ARAC.
    3. Provide a status report at each ARAC meeting.
    4. Draft and submit the recommendation report based on review and 
analysis of the assigned tasks.
    5. Present the recommendation report at the ARAC meeting.

Participation in the Working Group

    The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will be comprised of 
technical experts having an interest in the assigned task. A working 
group member need not be a member representative of the ARAC. The FAA 
would like a wide range of members (normal category rotorcraft 
manufacturers, transport category rotorcraft manufacturers, and 
rotorcraft operators from various segments of the industry such as oil 
and gas exploration, emergency medical services, and air tour 
operators) to ensure all aspects of the tasks are considered in 
development of the recommendations. The provisions of the August 13, 
2014, Office of Management and Budget guidance, ``Revised Guidance on 
Appointment of Lobbyists to Federal Advisory Committees, Boards, and 
Commissions'' (79 FR 47482), continues the ban on registered lobbyists 
participating on Agency Boards and Commissions if participating in 
their ``individual capacity.'' The revised guidance now allows 
registered lobbyists to participate on Agency Boards and Commissions in 
a ``representative capacity'' for the ``express purpose of providing a 
committee with the views of a nongovernmental entity, a recognizable 
group of persons or nongovernmental entities (an industry, sector, 
labor unions, or environmental groups, etc.) or state or local 
government.'' (For further information, see Lobbying Disclosure Act of 
1995 as amended, 2 U.S.C. 1603, 1604, and 1605.)
    If you wish to become a member of the Rotorcraft Bird Strike 
Working Group, write the person listed under the caption FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT expressing that desire. Describe your interest in 
the task and state the expertise you would bring to the working group. 
The FAA must receive all requests by May 27, 2016. The ARAC and the FAA 
will review the requests and advise you whether or not your request is 
approved.
    If you are chosen for membership in the working group, you must 
actively participate in the working group, attend all meetings, and 
provide written comments when requested. You must devote the resources 
necessary to support the working group in meeting any assigned 
deadlines. You must keep your management and those you may represent 
advised of working group activities and decisions to ensure the 
proposed technical solutions do not conflict with the position of those 
you represent. Once the working group has begun deliberations, members 
will not be added or substituted without the approval of the ARAC 
Chair, the FAA, including the Designated Federal Officer, and the 
Working Group Chair.
    The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of 
the ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the 
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.
    The ARAC meetings are open to the public. However, meetings of the 
Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group are not open to the public, except 
to the extent individuals with an interest and expertise are selected 
to participate. The FAA will make no public announcement of working 
group meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 19, 2016.
Lirio Liu,
Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2016-09781 Filed 4-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P