Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/01/11/2012-356/authorization-to-use-lower-than-standard-takeoff-approach-and-landing-minimums-at-military-and
Timestamp: 2017-09-24 09:05:09
Document Index: 225039063

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', 'art 60', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', 'art 121', 'art 91', '§\u2009121', '§\u200991', '§\u200991', '§\u200991', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', 'art 91', 'art 121', '§\u2009135', 'art 135', 'art 135', '§\u2009135', '§\u2009135']

Federal Register :: Authorization To Use Lower Than Standard Takeoff, Approach and Landing Minimums at Military and Foreign Airports
Effective: February 27, 2012.
1629-1632 (4 pages)
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2012-356 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2012-356
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before February 10, 2012.
Commenting on this Direct Final Rule. You may send comments identified by docket number FAA-2012-0007 using any of the following methods:
Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://www.Regulations.gov.
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 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. This amendment to the regulation is within the scope of that authority because it prescribes an accepted method for ensuring the safe operation of aircraft at foreign and military airports when weather conditions are below standard minimums.
The FAA is adopting this final rule without prior notice and prior public comment as a direct final rule with comments. The FAA does not believe prior notice and prior public comment is necessary in this rule change because it is relieving to all concerned parties. In addition, the FAA recently published a Petition for Exemption from § 135.225(f) for public comment (76 FR 22445) and received only three comments, all in favor of the petition.
The Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) provide that to the maximum extent possible, operating administrations of the DOT should provide an opportunity for public comment on regulations issued without prior notice (44 FR 1134). Accordingly, 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 this final rule.
Unless a written adverse or negative comment or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received within the comment period, the regulation will become effective on the date specified above. After the close of the comment period, the FAA will publish a document in the Federal Register indicating that no adverse or negative comments were received and confirming the date on which the final rule will become effective. If the FAA does receive an adverse or negative comment within the comment period, or written notice of intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct final rule will be published in the Federal Register, and a notice of proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment period.
The airport weather minimums that eventually evolved into § 135.225 started development prior to 1957 in Civil Air Regulation part 60, Air Traffic Rules. Section 60.46, “Instrument Approach Procedures,” required the weather to be at least visual flight rules (VFR). The 1 mile and 1/2 mile visibility requirements that now appear in § 135.225 first appeared in the regulations in the early 1960s. As aircraft, flight crewmember and avionics capabilities evolved, it became possible to safely conduct lower than standard takeoffs, approaches and landings.
Qualified part 135 operators are allowed to conduct lower than standard IFR operations at domestic airports under § 135.225(g), 135.225(h) and 135.225(i)(3) when authorized to do so through the issuance of Operations Specification C079 (OpSpec C079). However, § 135.225(f) limits a part 135 operator to the standard visibility of 1 mile for takeoffs and 1/2 mile for approaches when conducting the same type of operations at military airports or outside the United States. There is no provision under § 135.225(f) to allow lower than standard IFR operations through operations specifications.
While many part 135 operators fly turbojet airplanes worldwide, we realize that not all part 135 operators have met the requirements necessary to conduct lower than standard IFR operations authorized by OpSpec C079. Therefore, we are amending § 135.225(f) to allow for lower than standard IFR operations at military and foreign airports only for those part 135 operators authorized through OpSpec C079. This action will align § 135.225(f) with § 135.225(g), 135.225(h) and 135.225(i)(3), which permit operators to conduct certain lower than standard IFR operations when authorized to do so through the issuance of operations specifications.
By amending § 135.225(f), the final rule would also align part 135 regulations with similar provisions found in part 121 and part 91. For example, § 121.651(f), uses the alternative language, “Unless otherwise authorized in the certificate holder's operations specifications * * *” to allow for the use of lower weather minimums than those prescribed by the appropriate foreign airport authority.
Similarly, § 91.175 allows for lower than standard takeoff, approach, and landing at foreign and military airports by specific authorization. Section § 91.175(a), which concerns approaches, and § 91.175(f)(1), which concerns takeoffs, include the language: “Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA”. Section 91.175(g) specifically concerns military airports and uses the language, “Unless otherwise prescribed by the Administrator.”
Based on the fact that an increasing number of consumers are relying on part 135 operators for their travel and shipping needs and that OpSpec C079 provides an equivalent level of safety, the FAA determined that it is in the public interest to grant exemptions from § 135.225(f) to certificate holders who operate at military and foreign airports when those certificate holders have requested the exemption and otherwise meet all other regulatory requirements. To date, 22 grants of exemption from § 135.225(f) have been issued with thirteen of them granted in 2011.
As new aircraft replace the current fleet, more part 135 operators have the capability to perform at lower than standard takeoff, approach, and landing minimums. Therefore we have determined that it is unfair to continue to require the industry to bear the costs of the exemption process when an operations specification already exists that will allow the operations to be conducted safely.
To allow the use of OpsSpec C079 for these operations, the FAA will incorporate a minor rule language change in § 135.225(f) to add the phrase “unless authorized by the certificate holder's operations specifications” immediately before the words “no pilot may * * *.”
The FAA will then make changes to OpSpec C079 as appropriate to include authorized international airports with the listing of domestic airports. The language currently in § 135.225(f) referencing military and foreign airports will otherwise remain unchanged since not all part 135 operators will choose to apply for, nor be able to demonstrate the requirements necessary for the issuance of OpSpec C079. Part 91 and part 121 regulations do not exclude the opportunity for a certificate holder to receive authorization to operate at lower than standard takeoff, approach, and landing minimums at military or foreign airports; therefore, they do not need to be changed.
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 direct final rule.
The reasoning for this determination follows. 14 CFR 135.225(f), IFR Takeoff, approach and landing minimums, provides guidance to pilots making an IFR takeoff or approach and landing at a military or foreign airport. Under § 135.225(f), a part 135 operator may not conduct takeoffs, approaches and landings lower than the standard visibility of 1 mile for takeoffs and 1/2 mile for approaches. This direct final rule improves the efficiency of the current regulation by relieving operators of the burden of having to file repeated exemption requests to conduct operations that FAA has previously approved for their or other certificate holders' operations.
Part 135 operators are authorized through Operations Specification C079 to conduct lower than standard IFR operations at U.S. domestic airports. Allowing these same operators to conduct similar operations at military and foreign airports would be cost beneficial. The net effect would be to eliminate the time, resources and documents required to apply for and process exemptions. As a result, the expected outcome will be a minimal impact with positive net benefits, and a full regulatory evaluation was not prepared.
As noted above, the proposed changes to § 135.225(f) are cost relieving because this direct final rule removes the burden of having to file exemptions for landings and takeoffs under low visibility. Therefore, as FAA Administrator, I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this direct final rule and determined that it will have only a domestic impact and therefore creates no obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.
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 direct final rule. Rather, the time and cost of preparing, filing and waiting for a decision for an exemption request to perform the operations is eliminated by the direct final rule.
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 reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and has identified no differences with these regulations. The direct final rule does not make changes to those portions of the regulations that require operators to follow international regulations where applicable.
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined that this action, since it is directed at airport operations conducted at airports outside the United States or at military airports, 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.
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. Rather, since this rule is relieving, and increases potential takeoff and landing options to the operator, the FAA believes that this rule may result in a net energy savings.
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.fdsys.gov.
2. Amend § 135.225 by revising paragraph (f) introductory text to read as follows:
[FR Doc. 2012-356 Filed 1-10-12; 8:45 am]