Document ID: FAA-2020-0772-0001
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Extension of the Requirement for Helicopters To Use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route
Posted Date: 2020-08-07T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 153 (Friday, August 7, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47895-47899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17334]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 93

[Docket Nos.: FAA-2020-0772 and FAA-2018-0954; Amdt. No. 93-103]
RIN 2120-AL65

Extension of the Requirement for Helicopters To Use the New York 
North Shore Helicopter Route

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the expiration date of the final rule 
requiring pilots operating civil helicopters under Visual Flight Rules 
to use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route when operating along 
that area of Long Island, New York. The current rule expires on August 
6, 2020. The FAA finds it necessary to extend the rule for an 
additional two years.

DATES: Effective August 5, 2020 through August 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking 
documents and other information related to this final rule, see ``How 
to Obtain Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning 
this action, contact Sheri Edgett-Baron, Airspace Rules and 
Regulations, Air Traffic Organization, AJV-P2; Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; 
telephone (202) 267-8783; email 9-NATL-NY-NorthShore@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 47896]]

Good Cause for Immediate Effectiveness

    Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.) 
generally requires that the publication or service of a substantive 
rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its effective date. 
Section 553(d)(3) provides an exception to this general requirement 
when the agency finds good cause to waive the delay in the effective 
date. The current rule expires on August 6, 2020, and this extension of 
the rule maintains the status quo. To prevent confusion among pilots 
using the route and avoid disruption of the current operating 
environment from a temporary lapse of the requirement for helicopters 
to use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route, the FAA finds that 
good cause exists to make this rule immediately effective.

Authority

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes 
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
    The FAA's authority for this rule is contained in 49 U.S.C. 40103 
and 44715. Under section 40103(b)(2), the FAA Administrator has 
authority to prescribe air traffic regulations on the flight of 
aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for, among other 
purposes, navigating aircraft and protecting individuals and property 
on the ground. In addition, section 44715(a) provides that, to relieve 
and protect the public health and welfare from aircraft noise, the FAA 
Administrator has authority to prescribe regulations to control and 
abate aircraft noise.

I. Background

    In 2012, in response to concerns from local residents regarding 
noise from helicopters operating over Long Island, the FAA issued the 
New York North Shore Helicopter Route final rule (77 FR 39911, July 6, 
2012). The Rule required civil helicopter pilots operating Visual 
Flight Rules (VFR), whose route of flight takes them over the north 
shore of Long Island between the Visual Point Lloyd Harbor (VPLYD) 
waypoint and Orient Point (VPOLT), to use the North Shore Helicopter 
Route, as published in the New York Helicopter Chart (the Chart). The 
Rule was promulgated to maximize use of the route, as published per the 
Chart, to secure and improve upon decreased levels of noise that had 
been voluntarily achieved. The Rule permits pilots to deviate from the 
route and altitude requirements when necessary for safety, weather 
conditions, or transitioning to or from a destination or point of 
landing. The Rule is based on a voluntary VFR route that the FAA 
developed, working with the Eastern Region Helicopter Council. The 
voluntary route originally was added to the Chart on May 8, 2008.
    The Rule has been extended twice without substantive change. It is 
currently in effect through August 6, 2020.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Extension of the Expiration Date of the New York North 
Shore Helicopter Route, 79 FR 35488 (June 23, 2014); Extension of 
the Requirement for Helicopters to Use the New York North Shore 
Helicopter Route, 81 FR 48323 (June 25, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018

    Section 182 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-
254, October 5, 2018) directed the FAA to hold a public hearing to 
solicit feedback on the Rule from impacted communities and to provide 
notice of, and an opportunity for, at least 60 days of public comment 
regarding the Rule.
    On November 2, 2018, the FAA opened the 60-day comment period and 
announced three public meetings in the Federal Register.\2\ The FAA 
subsequently announced a fourth public meeting on December 12, 2018.\3\ 
The meetings were held on Long Island in locations along the North 
Shore Route and in Queens where helicopters turn east to pick up the 
route. The meetings and comment period were also announced on social 
media and through a press release, and local elected officials were 
informed. The meetings were held using a workshop format where subject 
matter experts from the FAA are available to speak with members of the 
public to answer their questions. The public also had the ability to 
provide comments at the meetings. Comments provided at these meetings 
were added to the public comment docket.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Request for Comments on Requirement for Helicopters To Use 
the New York North Shore Helicopter Route, 83 FR 55133 (Nov. 2, 
2018), and Notification of Public Meetings on Requirement for 
Helicopters To Use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route, 83 FR 
55134 (Nov. 2, 2018).
    \3\ Notification of Replacement Public Meeting on Requirement 
for Helicopters To Use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route, 83 
FR 63817 (Dec. 12, 2018).
    \4\ FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0954.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the meetings and the comment period was to assist 
the FAA in assessing and understanding the impacts of the Rule and any 
potential implications of modifying it. To help the public focus on the 
issues, FAA invited responses to the following four questions, which 
were stated in the FAA's November 2, 2018 Federal Register notice:
    1. Did implementation of the Rule result in more or less helicopter 
noise in your community compared to levels you experienced prior to 
implementation of the Rule?
    2. How and when do helicopter operators deviate from the Rule?
    3. Are there alternative or supplemental routes that you believe 
will reduce the noise impacts without jeopardizing the safe operation 
of aircraft?
    4. Should the Rule be extended, modified, or allowed to expire in 
2020?
    At the close of the comment period on January 2, 2019, the FAA had 
received a total of 417 comments, of which 396 were unique. Most of the 
comments the FAA received were from private citizens. The FAA also 
received comments from representatives of local governments and civic 
associations. The largest portion of the comments came from people and 
communities on the East End of Long Island.

III. Overview and Disposition of Comments

    The vast majority of commenters who addressed the first question 
complained about increased noise since the Rule's inception. A little 
more than half of the comments related the increased noise to the Rule. 
Without additional data and analysis, however, it is difficult to 
determine whether an increase in the level of activity or the Rule is 
the greatest contributing factor to the increase in noise complaints.
    Approximately half of the commenters responded to the question 
regarding helicopters deviating from the Rule. The comments demonstrate 
that people believe pilots regularly deviate from the North Shore 
Route, including altitude requirements. The comments indicate that 
people perceive that deviations are commonplace.
    Part of this belief may be a general misunderstanding of what the 
Rule requires. The Rule permits deviations from the route for safety, 
weather conditions, or transitioning to or from a destination or point 
of landing. Additionally, commenters appear to believe mistakenly that 
the altitude requirements of the route apply even after helicopters 
depart the route to transition to their destination.
    The FAA received over 200 comments with respect to alternate or 
supplemental routes that may reduce noise. About half of these comments 
recommended a southern route over the Atlantic Ocean. These commenters 
believed that a southern route would minimize flight over land. Other

[[Page 47897]]

commenters believed that the route should require helicopters to 
navigate around Orient Point or Plum Island; that is, that the route 
should eliminate deviations to transition to or from a destination or 
point of landing. Still other commenters suggested that helicopters 
should be required to use both an all-water north shore route and a 
south shore route. Some of these commenters suggested that the north 
shore route be used in one direction and the south shore route be used 
in the other direction.
    While most commenters expressed a desire for FAA to modify the 
route, there is no consensus as to how the route should be modified. 
The FAA finds that more engagement with stakeholders is necessary 
before a new or modified route acceptable to all stakeholders could be 
created and incorporated into the regulations, should the FAA determine 
that any further regulation is necessary. FAA also notes that East 
Hampton Airport will no longer be subject to grant obligations in 
September 2021,\5\ and the Town of East Hampton, which is the operator 
of East Hampton Airport, has indicated that when its grant obligations 
expire, it may close the airport or convert it to a private use 
airport.\6\ As a private use airport, East Hampton may be able to 
impose limits on operations (e.g., limits on the number of operations 
per day or limits on the time of day that aircraft may operate) that 
public use airports \7\ cannot impose without complying with the 
Aircraft Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (49 U.S.C. 47521 et seq.).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Grant obligations are assurances that an airport provides in 
exchange for receiving federal grants to improve the airport. Among 
the grant assurances are prohibitions on restricting access to the 
airport based on noise and the obligation to keep the airport open 
until the grant obligations expire.
    \6\ A private use airport is a publicly owned or privately owned 
airport not open to the public. Airport Compliance Manual, FAA Order 
5190.6B, Appendix A, at 324 (2009).
    \7\ A public use airport is an airport used or intended to be 
used for public purposes. 49 U.S.C. 47102(20)-(21).
    \8\ See also implementing regulations at 14 CFR part 161.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Eastern Region Helicopter Council, which 
represents the majority of commercial helicopter operators providing 
service to the East End of Long Island, agreed to fly an all-water 
route around Orient Point for the 2020 summer season.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See https://www.27east.com/southampton-press/helicopter-firms-agree-to-fly-new-noise-abatement-routes-into-east-hampton-airport-1686302/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before considering any modification to the route, FAA would want to 
consider how flying an all-water route impacts residents and operators, 
particularly with respect to safety. Furthermore, before considering 
modifying the route or creating a southern route, FAA would need a 
better understanding of the likelihood that East Hampton Airport will 
close or be converted to a private use airport. It would not be 
efficient or effective to design a new route based on current 
conditions when those conditions may no longer exist by the time a new 
route and rulemaking are complete.
    Finally, FAA asked commenters whether the Rule should be extended, 
modified, or allowed to expire in August 2020. Virtually all of the 
comments FAA received in response to this question suggested that the 
Rule should either expire or be modified. Many of the comments mirrored 
the comments regarding alternate or supplemental routes. Some of the 
comments suggested modifications unrelated to the route and thus are 
outside of the scope of this rulemaking. With respect to the comments 
that suggested modifying the Rule, as discussed above, the lack of 
consensus and the changing circumstances argue against a modification 
of the Rule at this time.
    Other commenters suggested that FAA should impose higher minimum 
altitudes. While higher minimum altitudes could result in less noise in 
certain areas, it could also spread noise over larger areas. Requiring 
helicopters to maintain higher altitudes until in close proximity to an 
airport would require pilots to make specialized steep approaches at 
much lower airspeeds than most operations require. These landings could 
take three to four times longer than a standard approach and landing, 
causing a corresponding increase in noise levels and duration.
    Still others comments suggested that Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) 
routes should be required. IFR routes would not necessarily change the 
location of aircraft and could have the impact of concentrating 
aircraft on the IFR route. Finally, some commenters suggested that the 
ability to deviate from the Rule be eliminated, even for weather and 
safety. FAA finds that modifying the Rule to eliminate deviations for 
weather and safety would create unsafe and potentially hazardous 
conditions.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule

    This final rule extends for an additional two years the requirement 
for pilots of civil helicopters to use the North Shore Helicopter Route 
when transiting along the north shore of Long Island. The FAA 
considered the comments received, and expects that two years will 
provide a sufficient time to assess route modifications identified by 
commenters and whether a new or modified route should be created and 
incorporated into regulation. Additionally, this period of time will 
allow the FAA to evaluate the effects of the all-water route around 
Orient Point resulting from the voluntary agreement by the Eastern 
Region Helicopter Council, and the effects of any changes implemented 
by East Hampton Airport once it ceases to be a grant obligated airport 
in 2021. Extending the requirement to use the North Shore Helicopter 
Route during this period will continue to foster maximum use of the 
North Shore Helicopter Route and avoid disruption of the current 
operating environment. Therefore, the FAA finds that a two-year 
extension of the current rule is warranted.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several analyses. 
First, Executive Orders 12866 and 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. In 
addition, DOT rulemaking procedures in 49 CFR part 5 instruct DOT 
agencies to issue a regulation upon a reasoned determination that 
benefits exceed costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 
(Pub. L. 96-354), as codified at 5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires 
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small 
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as 
codified in 19 U.S.C. Chapter 13, prohibits agencies from setting 
standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade Agreements 
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), as codified in 2 
U.S.C. Chapter 25, 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). The FAA also analyzes this regulation under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act. This portion of the preamble

[[Page 47898]]

summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this final 
rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined this rule is 
not a significant regulatory action, as defined in section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866 and under DOT rulemaking procedures. As notice 
and comment under 5 U.S.C. 553 are not required for this final rule, 
the regulatory flexibility analyses described in 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 
regarding impacts on small entities are not required. This rule will 
not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United 
States. This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, 
or tribal governments, or on the private sector, by exceeding the 
threshold identified previously.
    This final rule amends the expiration date of the final rule 
requiring pilots operating civil helicopters under Visual Flight Rules 
to use the New York North Shore Helicopter Route when operating along 
that area of Long Island, New York. As previously discussed, the FAA 
finds it necessary to extend the Rule for an additional two years to 
preserve the current operating environment while allowing sufficient 
time for the FAA to assess route modifications identified by commenters 
and whether a new or modified route could be created and would be 
appropriate for incorporation into regulation.
    The FAA determined the 2012 final rule would impose minimal costs 
because many of the existing operators were already complying with the 
final rule requirements. In addition, the FAA based the 2012 final rule 
on a voluntary route developed by the FAA working with the Eastern 
Region Helicopter Council--the FAA added the voluntary route to the New 
York Helicopter Chart on May 8, 2008. The 2012 final rule also permits 
deviations from the route for safety, weather conditions, or 
transitioning to or from a destination or point of landing. The FAA 
extended the 2012 final rule in 2014 and 2016 without any substantive 
change. As this final rule further extends the 2012 final rule 
requirements without change, the FAA expects it will not impose 
additional costs.
    Therefore, the FAA has determined that this final 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.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, in 5 U.S.C. 605(b), provides that a 
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required if the head of an 
agency certifies that a rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The agency head must 
also include a statement providing the factual basis for this 
certification.
    The FAA Administrator certifies that this final rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, for the following reasons. With this final rule, the 
regulatory provisions already in place will be extended two years to 
provide the FAA with time to assess route modifications identified by 
commenters and whether a new or modified route could be created and 
incorporated into regulation. The final regulatory flexibility analysis 
for the 2012 final rule determined that it had a minimal cost impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. This final rule extends those 
requirements. Thus, the FAA expects a minimal economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) 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 this Act, the establishment of standards is not 
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the 
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic 
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a 
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also 
requires consideration of international standards and, where 
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has 
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that 
the Rule will preserve the current operating environment and is not 
considered an unnecessary obstacle to foreign commerce.

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 $155 million in lieu of $100 
million.
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires 
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information 
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that 
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with 
this final rule.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that correspond to this regulation.
    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet 
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, 
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent 
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has 
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of 
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this action would have 
no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and 
Procedures,'' identifies FAA actions that, in the absence of 
extraordinary circumstances, are categorically excluded from requiring 
an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement 
(EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act. This rule qualifies 
for the categorical exclusion in paragraph 5-6.6.f of that Order, which 
includes ``[r]egulations . . . excluding those that if implemented may 
cause a significant impact on the human environment.'' There are no 
extraordinary circumstances that warrant preparation of an EA or EIS.

IV. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal 
Actions

    The FAA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 12114, 
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions (44 FR 1957, 
January 4,

[[Page 47899]]

1979), and DOT Order 5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order 12114 
requires the FAA to be informed of environmental considerations and 
take those considerations into account when making decisions on major 
Federal actions that could have environmental impacts anywhere beyond 
the borders of the United States. The FAA has determined that this 
action is exempt pursuant to Section 2-5(a)(i) of Executive Order 12114 
because it does not have the potential for a significant effect on the 
environment outside the United States.
    In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: 
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8-6(c), the FAA has prepared a 
memorandum for the record stating the reason(s) for this determination 
and has placed it in the docket for this rulemaking.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined 
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the 
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have federalism 
implications.

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet 
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, 
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent 
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has 
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of 
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this action would have 
no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

E. Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because 
this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

VI. How To Obtain Additional Information

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by 
using the internet --
    1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov/);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Access the Government Printing Office's web page at https://www.govinfo.gov/.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by 
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information 
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its 
jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this document may 
contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble. 
To find out more about SBREFA, visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93

    Air traffic control, Airspace, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends chapter I of Title 14 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES

0
1. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 
44502, 44514, 44701, 44715, 44719, 46301.

0
2. Revise Subpart H to read as follows:
Subpart H--Mandatory Use of the New York North Shore Helicopter Route
Sec.
93.101 Applicability.
93.103 Helicopter operations.

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, 
between August 5, 2020, and August 5, 2022.

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 and altitude, as published.
    (b) Pilots may deviate from the route and altitude requirements of 
paragraph (a) of this section when necessary for safety, weather 
conditions or transitioning to or from a destination or point of 
landing.

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), 
and 44703 in Washington, DC, on August 4, 2020.
Steve Dickson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-17334 Filed 8-5-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P