[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 249 (Thursday, December 29, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-32108]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 29, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part VII





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Aviation Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



14 CFR 121, 129, and 135




Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, TCAS I; Final Rule
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 121, 129, and 135

[Docket No. 27663; Amdt No. 121-247, 129-24, 135-54]
RIN: 2120-AF24

 
Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, TCAS I

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document revises the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) 
to extend the compliance date from February 9, 1995, to December 31, 
1995, for installing an approved traffic alert and collision avoidance 
system (TCAS I). This amendment is necessary due to delays in TCAS I 
equipment development and testing, the complexity of equipment use and 
installation, and the requirement to complete complex supplemental type 
certification programs.

DATES: This document is effective December 29, 1994. The final 
compliance date is December 31, 1995. Comments on the revision of 
section 121.356(b) must be received on or before February 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments on the revision of section 
121.356(b) in duplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of 
the Chief Counsel, Attn: Rules Docket (AGC-204), Room 916, 800 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. Comments may be 
examined in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal Holidays, between 
8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary E. Davis, Project Development 
Branch, AFS-240, Air Transportation Division, Office of Flight 
Standards, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Telephone (202) 267-8096.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In a petition for exemption dated October 13, 1992, the Regional 
Airline Association (RAA) petitioned on behalf of its affected member 
airlines and other similarly situated airlines for a temporary 
exemption from the February 9, 1995, deadline to install an approved 
TCAS I system (Docket No. 27008). The exemption was requested for 
operators of turbine-powered airplanes with 10 to 30 passenger seats. 
The FAA denied the petition on May 27, 1993. The FAA stated in its 
denial that the general relief requested by the RAA is more 
appropriately handled by rulemaking rather than exemption. This action 
is the subsequent rulemaking response to the RAA petition for 
exemption. The RAA's petition also sought a temporary exemption from 
the April 20, 1994, deadline to install an approved Ground Proximity 
Warning System (GPWS), which the FAA has denied and is not an issue in 
this rulemaking.
    In its October 13 petition, the RAA stated that extension of the 
compliance date was needed because of delays in the development and 
operational testing of prototype TCAS I equipment. The RAA stated that 
when Amendment No. 135-30 established the TCAS I requirements on 
January 6, 1989, the FAA acknowledged that no TCAS I design had been 
approved, and no manufacturer had build a TCAS I unit. The FAA 
considered these points in establishing a compliance date for 
installation and operation of TCAS I at 6 years from the effective date 
of the amendment.
    RAA further stated that it was informed early in 1990 by ARINC 
Research Corporation (ARINC), the FAA's TCAS I program contractor, that 
equipment would be available for a Limited Installation Program (LIP) 
testing by April 1991, and that the test would be completed in 
approximately 1 year. RAA stated that ARINC advised it that the 
development program for prototype TCAS I equipment was still not 
complete, and that the LIP for the operational evaluation was not 
expected to begin for at least several months.
    RAA stated in its petition that because of this the TCAS I 
development and operational evaluation program was more than 18 months 
behind its original planned schedule, no TCAS I equipment had yet 
received a technical standards order (TSO) approval, and to the RAA's 
knowledge, only one manufacturer was currently accepting orders for 
TCAS I deliveries. Air carriers are naturally reluctant to place orders 
for this equipment before a TSO is issued and before the LIP has 
confirmed the validity of the equipment design.
    RAA asserted that an extension of time was required to permit the 
evaluation and procurement of TCAS I equipment, to develop and obtain 
approval of supplemental type certificates (STC) for each affected 
airplane model, and to schedule equipment installations with minimum 
disruptions to scheduled service.
    RAA points out that simultaneously with the adoption of Amendment 
No. 135-30, Amendment No. 121-201 was also adopted which required 
development and installation of TCAS II on airplanes operating under 
part 121. This amendment required that all affected airplanes be 
equipped with TCAS II by December 30, 1991. After receiving numerous 
objections from operators and other sources, the FAA reconsidered this 
requirement and revised the installation dates; Amendment No. 121-217 
established a phased installation schedule and delayed the full 
compliance TCAS II installation date to December 30, 1993.
    RAA submitted that the arguments that supported the extension of 
time for TCAS II support a similar extension and phased installation 
schedule for TCAS I installations. In fact, the TCAS I LIP was just 
completed in June, 1994, and there remained, at the time of their 
petition, a lack of any approved equipment installations because of the 
lengthy STC approval process. Thus, the RAA expected that operators 
would not be able to complete equipment selections and installations on 
all airplanes by February 9, 1995.
    RAA's petition for exemption also stated that FAA should rejustify 
the need for a TCAS I rule. The RAA based its rationale on the fact 
that the rule has a significantly higher-than-estimated cost to the 
airline industry. RAA and its member carriers continue to support 
realistic and achievable improvements in safety where the benefits 
clearly justify the costs. It believes that the cost of safety-related 
equipment must be compared to the potential benefits and the capability 
of the industry to afford it; therefore, the FAA should consider 
alternative approaches.
    Aircraft seating 10 to 30 passengers and operating under part 121, 
129, or 135 must be equipped with TCAS I by February 9, 1995, in 
accordance with the regulation issued January 5, 1989 (54 FR 940). RAA 
believed that the FAA should consider implementing a phased compliance 
schedule as was done for part 121 carriers that were required to 
install TCAS II (14 CFR 121.356), rather than adhere to the deadlines 
in affected regulations.
    The air carriers represented by RAA believe that extending the 
compliance schedule for TCAS I would not adversely affect safety 
because it would allow affected airlines to devote limited economic 
resources to the orderly completion of TCAS I installations, along with 
other air-worthiness and safety-related requirements. They believe the 
general public will benefit by allowing for a more efficient allocation 
of an operator's resources, and by reducing the number of disruptions 
of scheduled service due to excessive unscheduled removal of aircraft 
from service for equipment installation.

Consideration of Comments

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking, in the Federal 
Register on March 31, 1994, (59 FR 15308), proposing an extension of 
the compliance date to March 31, 1997, to require that all affected 
aircraft be equipped with TCAS I and seeking comments on the use of a 
phased compliance schedule similar to the schedule that currently 
exists for TCAS II. The FAA also invited public comment on any issue 
discussed in the notice, and fully considered each commenter's position 
before making any final decision on extending the TCAS I compliance 
date.
    Ten comments were received from individual operators, aircraft 
leasing companies, equipment manufacturers, and trade associations. 
Eight support the petition; two oppose it in its entirety, generally 
citing TCAS as cost prohibitive. Of the eight supporting the petition, 
five recommended that there be no phase in of the compliance schedule; 
three recommended some form of a phase in.
    Equipment manufacturers that commented on this rule favored a 
phased compliance schedule because it would spread sales over a 2 year 
period. This would provide an orderly manufacturing process, thereby 
reducing product shortages as the final compliance date nears. 
Commenters that were not in favor of a phased compliance schedule felt 
that an arbitrary schedule sometimes places an undue burden on 
operators to remove equipment from revenue service early in order to 
meet the arbitrary date, when in fact, final installation may be 
scheduled a few months later during the normal maintenance cycle.
    The FAA does not agree with commenters who want to rescind the 
rule. Analysis and experience indicate that the safety benefits from 
this rule more than justify its costs. In addition, the FAA considers 
those comments to be beyond the scope of the proposal.

Discussion of the Amendment

    The FAA has considered all the facts and circumstances presented by 
the RAA and commenters and extends the compliance date until December 
31, 1995, for the installation of TCAS I in parts 121, 129, and 135.
    The RAA has presented certain problems involved in obtaining and 
installing TCAS I for part 135 operators. The FAA agrees that 
circumstances may not warrant requiring the affected operators to 
install TCAS I before February 9, 1995. A TSO has recently been issued. 
The first aircraft received a supplemental type certificate (STC) for a 
TCAS I installation in late July 1993, and the TCAS I LIP was completed 
in June, 1994.
    The delays in equipment development and testing that were reviewed 
in the Notice, the complexity of the equipment use and installation, 
and the requirement to complete complex supplemental type certification 
programs remain as issues today just as they were when the RAA petition 
was received. The passage of time has not completely abated these 
concerns.
    The FAA estimates that there are at least 25 different makes and 
models of airplanes that operate under part 135 and are required to 
have TCAS I installed. Many of these aircraft have been designed and 
manufactured overseas, thus complicating the issue of availability of 
design data for supplemental type certification, which is required of 
each different make/model installation. The FAA, however, believes that 
the compliance date of December 31, 1995, can be met by the majority of 
affected air carriers. Because the basic requirement for TCAS has been 
part of the regulations since 1989, the FAA believes that air carriers 
have been making and implementing plans to install the TCAS system, 
i.e., identifying requirements, identifying sources of equipment, 
budgeting, projecting affected maintenance schedules, etc., even though 
the initial testing phase of the equipment was behind schedule.

Deviation Procedures

    The FAA recognizes that, in rare cases and despite the exercise of 
best efforts, there may be justification for some additional extension 
to the mandated compliance date. Accordingly, the FAA has provided a 
means to request and receive a deviation of up to 6 months from the 
carrier's local Principal Avionics Inspector (PAI) with the concurrence 
of the Director, Flight Standards Service (AFS-1). Air carriers must 
plan appropriate petition lead times to gain these approvals, with a 
minimum of 60 days required from receipt of request to final approval. 
Deviations will only be granted in extraordinary and unforeseen 
circumstances, beyond the control of the air carrier. Even in such 
circumstances, a deviation will not be granted unless specific criteria 
are met: The carrier must show that a good faith effort has been 
expended to meet the compliance date of December 31, 1995. In addition, 
the carrier must document that it cannot meet certain milestones such 
as TCAS equipment delivery, STC approval, installation schedules, and 
that the aircraft could not be removed from service without a 
significant adverse impact on the flying public.
    Based on the above factors, and those discussed elsewhere in this 
document and in the Notice, the FAA is extending the compliance date to 
December 31, 1995. The FAA finds that this extension is in the public 
interest, in that it represents an appropriate balance between 
enhancement of safety and reasonable feasibility of compliance. Since 
parts 121 and 129 contain a similar rule for operators of aircraft with 
30 seats or less, the FAA is extending the compliance date for those 
operators as well. However, the FAA does not find it appropriate to 
grant as much relief as originally proposed because, as recognized by 
the FAA, the TCAS system is an important piece of equipment, which 
provides a significant enhancement of the safety of air travel. 
Therefore, the compliance schedule has been adjusted from the original 
Notice.
    Because TCAS is an important part of the overall safety system, the 
FAA wants certificate holders to comply with this TCAS rule as soon as 
possible. In an effort to facilitate this, the FAA will advise the 
traveling public of air carriers that have complied with this rule 
significantly earlier than the required compliance date.
    The TCAS rule, which was originally adopted in 1989, envisioned 
covering all aircraft with 10 or more passenger seats. The preamble to 
the original rule indicated the FAA's intent to require TCAS I for the 
10 to 30 passenger seat aircraft, which are primarily operated under 
part 135. However, the notice inadvertently did not propose a similar 
provision for these aircraft for part 121, to cover those infrequent 
circumstances in which these aircraft are operated under that part. The 
original final rule, however, did insert a provision in part 121 
covering combination cargo/passenger airplanes with 10-30 passenger 
seats. This final rule will revise that part 121 TCAS I provision in 
section 121.356(b) to cover all 10-30 passenger-seat airplanes. The FAA 
views this change as posing no additional burden to the industry 
because these aircraft are usually operated under part 135. Carriers 
who operate both these aircraft and larger aircraft sometimes seek FAA 
authorization to operate all aircraft under part 121 to simplify 
functions such as crewmember training. These operators do not seek to 
follow part 121 rules to avoid the installation of TCAS.
    The FAA considers further comment on this provision to be 
unnecessary, and is adopting this revision in this final rule. However, 
in accordance with DOT policy, interested persons are invited to submit 
comments on the revision of section 121.356(b) as they may desire. 
Correspondence should identify the docket number and be submitted in 
duplicate to the address provided above. All communications received on 
or before the close of the comment period will be considered by the 
Administrator, and this amendment may be changed in the light of 
comments received. All comments will be available for public review, 
both before and after the closing date for comments, in the rules 
docket.

Regulatory Analyses

    Executive Order 12866 established the requirement that, within the 
extent permitted by law, a Federal regulatory action may be undertaken 
only if the potential benefits to society for the regulation outweigh 
the potential costs to society. In response to this requirement, and in 
accordance with Department of Transportation policies and procedures, 
the FAA has estimated the anticipated benefits and costs of this 
rulemaking action. The FAA has determined that this rule is not a 
``significant rulemaking action,'' as defined by Executive Order 12866 
(Regulatory Planning and Review).
    The rule will extend the compliance date to install an approved 
traffic alert and collision avoidance systems (TCAS I) from February 9, 
1995, to December 31, 1995. This rule will apply to turbine-powered 
aircraft with 10 to 30 seats operated under parts 121, 135 and 129. 
This extension of the compliance deadline is necessary because of 
delays in the development and operational testing of prototype TCAS I 
equipment, the complexity of the equipment use and installation, and 
the requirement to complete complex supplemental type certification 
programs.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by 
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily burdened 
by government regulations. The RFA requires agencies to review rules 
that may have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.''
    Under FAA Order 2100.14A, the criterion for a ``substantial 
number'' is a number that is not less than 11 and that is more than one 
third of the small entities subject to the rules. For operators of 
aircraft for hire, a small operator is one that owns, but not 
necessarily operates, nine or fewer aircraft. This proposal would 
mainly affect part 135 scheduled operators, although some unscheduled 
operators could be affected as well. The FAA's criterion for a 
``significant impact'' is $116,300 or more per year for a scheduled 
operator and $4,600 or more for an unscheduled operator.
    This rule to extend the compliance date for installing TCAS I 
equipment will not have any economic impact on small operators. 
Therefore, the FAA has determined that the final rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small operators.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess the 
effects of regulatory changes on international trade. The impact of the 
rule change on international trade should be limited by the 
regionalized nature of the routes that are typically flown by aircraft 
with 10 to 30 seats. In addition, the fact that this rule will have the 
same economic impact on both the domestic (part 135) and foreign 
operators (part 129) of this size range of aircraft will limit its 
impact on competitive relationships between these two classes of 
operators. Based on this information, the FAA concludes that the rule 
change will have a negligible impact on international trade.

Federalism Implications

    This amendment does not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in accordance with Executive 
Order 12612, it is determined that this rule change does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no requirements for information collection associated 
with this rule that requires approval from the Office of Management and 
Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511).

Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, this regulation is not 
significant under Executive Order 12866. In addition, it is certified 
that this amendment does not have a significant economic impact, 
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under 
the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. However, this amendment 
is considered significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Charter flights, Safety.

14 CFR Part 129

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airplanes, Air taxis, Air transportation, 
Aviation safety, Charter flights, Safety, Transportation.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends parts 121, 129, and 135 of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations (14 CFR part 121, 14 CFR part 129, and 14 CFR part 135) as 
follows:

PART 121--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND 
SUPPLEMENTAL AIR CARRIERS AND COMMERCIAL OPERATORS OF LARGE 
AIRCRAFT

    1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1355, 1356, 1357, 1401, 1421-1430, 
1472, 1485, and 1502; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (Revised Pub. L. 97-449, 
January 12, 1983).

    2. Section 121.356 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 121.356  Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System.

    (b) * * *
    (b) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, after 
December 31, 1995, no person may operate a passenger or combination 
cargo/passenger seat configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of 10 to 
30 seats unless it is equipped with an approved traffic alert and 
collision avoidance system. If a TCAS II system is installed, it must 
be capable of coordinating with TCAS units that meet TSO C-119.
* * * * *

PART 129--OPERATIONS: FOREIGN AIR CARRIERS AND FOREIGN OPERATORS OF 
U.S. REGISTERED AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON CARRIAGE

    3. The authority citation for part 129 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1346, 1354(a), 1356, 1357, 1421, 1502, 
and 1511; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (revised Pub. L. 97-449, January 12, 
1983).

    4. Section 129.18 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 129.18  Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, after 
December 31, 1995, no foreign air carrier may operate in the United 
States a turbine powered airplane that has a passenger seat 
configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of 10 to 30 seats unless it is 
equipped with an approved traffic alert and collision avoidance system. 
If a TCAS II system is installed, it must be capable of coordinating 
with TCAS units that meet TSO C-119.

 PART 135--AIR TAXI OPERATORS AND COMMERCIAL OPERATORS

    5. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1355(a), 1421 through 1431, and 
1502; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (revised Pub. L. 97-449, January 12, 1983).

    6. Section 135.180 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 135.180  Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System.

    (a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, after 
December 31, 1995, no person may operate a turbine powered airplane 
that has a passenger seat configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of 
10 to 30 seats unless it is equipped with an approved traffic alert and 
collision avoidance system. If a TCAS II system is installed, it must 
be capable of coordinating with TCAS units that meet TSO C-119.
* * * * *
    Issued in Washington, D.C., on December 23, 1994.
David R. Hinson,
Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-32108 Filed 12-23-94; 2:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M