Document ID: FAA-2010-0302-0001
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: The New York North Shore Helicopter Route
Posted Date: 2010-05-26T04:00Z

[Federal Register: May 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 101)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 29471-29474]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26my10-15]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 93

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0302; Notice No. 10-08]
RIN 2120-AJ75

 
The New York North Shore Helicopter Route

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This proposed action would require helicopter operators to use 
the New York North Shore Route when operating in that area of Long 
Island, New York. The North Shore Route was added to the New York 
Helicopter Route

[[Page 29472]]

Chart in 2008 and the use of that route is currently voluntary. New 
York public officials have continued to receive complaints regarding 
the adverse impact of helicopter noise on their communities. The 
intended effect of this proposal is to maximize utilization of the 
existing route flown by helicopter traffic along the north shore of 
Long Island and reduce the noise impact on nearby communities.

DATES: Send your comments on or before June 25, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-
0302 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, 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.

For more information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you 
provide. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can 
find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any of 
our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment 
(or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you 
may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to 
http://www.regulations.gov at any time and 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 proposed rule contact Ellen Crum, Airspace and Rules Group, AJR-
33, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8783. For legal questions 
concerning this proposed rule contact Lorelei Peter, AGC-220, Office of 
Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone 202-267-3073.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Later in this preamble under the Additional Information section, we 
discuss how you can comment on this proposal and how we will handle 
your comments. Included in this discussion is related information about 
the docket, privacy, and the handling of proprietary or confidential 
business information. We also discuss how you can get a copy of related 
rulemaking documents.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA has broad authority and responsibility to regulate the 
operation of aircraft and the use of the navigable airspace and to 
establish safety standards for and regulate the certification of 
airmen, aircraft, and air carriers. (49 U.S.C. 40104 et seq., Sec.  
40103(b). The FAA's authority for this proposed rule is contained in 49 
U.S.C. 40103 and 44715. Under Sec.  40103, the Administrator of the FAA 
has authority to ``prescribe air traffic regulations on the flight of 
aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for * * * (B) 
protecting individuals and property on the ground. (49 U.S.C. 
40103(b)(2)). In addition, Sec.  44715(a), provides that to ``relieve 
and protect the public health and welfare from aircraft noise,'' the 
Administrator of the FAA, ``as he deems necessary, shall prescribe * * 
* (ii) regulations to control and abate aircraft noise * * *''

Background

    In response to numerous complaints regarding helicopter noise 
received by New York public officials, including Senator Schumer and 
former Senator Clinton, the FAA began working with stakeholders and 
industry groups to address the issue. Senator Charles Schumer and 
Representative Tim Bishop conducted a meeting in October 2007 with the 
FAA, local helicopter operators and the airport proprietors to 
specifically address the noise complaints stemming from the north shore 
of Long Island. As a result of this meeting, a visual flight rules 
(VFR) helicopter route, the North Shore route, was designed for 
helicopters to use when transiting the area in order to lessen the 
noise impact on populated areas by remaining offshore and over the 
water. As this route was developed for VFR flight, use of it is 
voluntary. The route was published on the Helicopter Route Chart for 
New York, effective May 8, 2008.
    The Helicopter Route Chart program was established by the FAA to 
enhance helicopter access into, egress from, and operation within high 
density traffic areas by depicting discrete and/or common use 
helicopter routes. Guidance and procedures for this program are 
contained in FAA Order 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration, 
Chapter 11. The use of these routes is voluntary, unless air traffic 
control assigns the charted routes to pilots for purposes of addressing 
traffic density or safety.
    New York elected officials have advised the FAA the noise 
complaints continue in this area notwithstanding the North Shore route. 
The local FAA Flight Standards Division has also received the same 
complaints.
    The New York Long Island airspace, like many other areas in the 
U.S., presents competing interests. The geographic area is not vast but 
supports a highly congested populated area that is surrounded by 
traffic operating into and out of LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy 
International Airport, Republic Airport and a multitude of both public 
and private heliports.
    This proposed action would require civil helicopters along Long 
Island, New York's northern shoreline to follow the published New York 
North Shore Route between the fixed waypoint VPLYD and Orient Point. 
The FAA is aware that several conditions may exist for which helicopter 
operators would need to deviate from the route. Therefore, provisions 
are included that take into consideration the wide variety of 
helicopters, their associated performance and mission profiles, the 
dynamic weather environment along the route, and the pilot's 
responsibility to maintain safe operations at all times.

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. We have determined that there 
is no new information collection requirement associated with this 
proposed rule.

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

[[Page 29473]]

maximum extent practicable. The FAA has determined that there are no 
ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that correspond to these 
proposed regulations.

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, 
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency 
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires 
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small 
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits 
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to 
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. 
standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. 
standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 
104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of 
the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies 
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations. 
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule 
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement 
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a 
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 
Such a determination has been made for this proposed rule. The 
reasoning for this determination follows:
    This proposed action is not expected to result in additional costs 
on the affected helicopters because those operators that cannot comply 
with the route as published due to operational limitations, performance 
factors, weather conditions or safety considerations are allowed to 
deviate from the provisions of Subpart H.
    FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required 
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain 
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given 
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide range of small entities, 
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions. Agencies must perform a review to determine 
whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in 
the RFA. However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected 
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the 
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required. The certification must include a statement providing the 
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.
    This proposed rule would impact several small entities. For 
aircraft operators these include all firms with less than 1,500 
employees. There are 5 small entities in the New York market for part 
135 sightseeing helicopter tours. However, the rule does not require 
the purchase of additional equipment and allows pilots to deviate from 
the proposed provisions if necessary, due to operational limitations of 
the helicopter, performance factors, weather conditions or safety 
considerations. Therefore the rule imposes only minimal operating cost.
    Therefore, the FAA certifies that this proposed rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.

International Trade Impact Analysis

    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 any 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 standards have a 
legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety and do 
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. As the 
proposed rule would have only a domestic impact, the Trade Agreement 
Act does not apply.

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.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this 
action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national 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.

Environmental Analysis

    Under regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality, 
federal agencies are required to establish procedures that, among other 
things, identify agency actions that are categorically excluded from 
the requirement for an environmental assessment or environmental impact 
statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 because 
they do not have a significant effect on the human environment. See 40 
CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), 1508.4. The required agency procedures must also

[[Page 29474]]

``provide for extraordinary circumstances in which a normally excluded 
action may have a significant environmental effect.'' 40 CFR 1508.4. 
For FAA actions, these ``categorical exclusions'' and ``extraordinary 
circumstances'' are listed in Chapter 3 of FAA Order 1050.1E, 
``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures.''
    The FAA has determined that this proposed rulemaking action 
qualifies for the categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 312f of 
FAA Order 1050.1E. That categorical exclusion applies to 
``[r]egulations, standards, and exemptions (excluding those which if 
implemented may cause a significant impact on the human environment).'' 
The existing New York North Shore Route is a visual flight rules (VFR) 
route, use of which is voluntary. Additionally, the route is located 
entirely over water and away from noise-sensitive locations. Therefore, 
implementation of this proposed rule is not expected to result in 
significant adverse impacts to the human environment. Moreover, 
implementation of the proposed rule would not involve any of the 
extraordinary circumstances listed in Section 304 of FAA Order 1050.1E.

Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use

    The FAA has analyzed this NPRM under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it is not 
a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order because it is 
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, 
and it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

Additional Information

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this 
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also 
invite 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, please send only one copy of written comments, or 
if you are filing comments electronically, please submit your comments 
only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a 
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel 
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we 
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for 
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has 
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. 
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Proprietary or Confidential Business Information

    Do not file in the docket information that you consider to be 
proprietary or confidential business information. Send or deliver this 
information directly to the person identified in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. You must mark the 
information that you consider proprietary or confidential. If you send 
the information on a disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or 
CD-ROM and also identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
    Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are aware of proprietary information 
filed with a comment, we do not place it in the docket. We hold it in a 
separate file to which the public does not have access, and we place a 
note in the docket that we have received it. If we receive a request to 
examine or copy this information, we treat it as any other request 
under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We process such a 
request under the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using 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.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    You can also get a copy 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. Make 
sure to identify the docket or notice number of this rulemaking.
    You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing this 
proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from 
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in 
paragraph (1).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93

    Air traffic control, Airspace, Navigation (air).

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 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES

    1. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502, 
44514, 44701, 44719, 46301.
    2. Amend part 93 by adding subpart H to read as follows:

Subpart H--Mandatory Use of the New York North Shore Helicopter 
Route

Sec.  93.101  Applicability.

Sec.  93.103  Helicopter operations.

Subpart H--Mandatory Use of the New York North Shore Helicopter 
Route

Sec.  93.101  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribes a special air traffic rule for civil 
helicopters operating VFR along the North Shore, Long Island, New York.

Sec.  93.103  Helicopter operations.

    (a) Unless otherwise authorized, each person piloting a helicopter 
along Long Island, New York's northern shoreline between the VPLYD 
waypoint and Orient Point, shall utilize the North Shore Helicopter 
route, as published.
    (b) Pilots may deviate from the requirements of paragraph (a) when 
required for safety, weather conditions or transitioning to or from a 
destination or point of landing.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 17, 2010.
Edie Parish,
Acting Director, Systems Operations, Airspace and Aeronautical 
Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2010-12606 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P