[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8862-8865]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4824]



[[Page 8861]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part IV





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Aviation Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



14 CFR Parts 91, et al.



Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of Grand Canyon National Park; 
Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 38 / Wednesday, February 26, 1997 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 8862]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 91, 93, 121, and 135

[Docket No. 28537; Amendment Nos. 91-253, 93-73, 121-262, 135-66]
RIN 2120-AF93


Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of Grand Canyon National 
Park

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: On December 31, 1996, the FAA published a final rule that 
codifies the provisions of Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 
No. 50-2, Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of Grand Canyon National 
Park (GCNP); modifies the dimensions of the GCNP Special Flight Rules 
Area; establishes new and modifies existing flight-free zones; 
establishes new and modifies existing flight corridors; establishes 
reporting requirements for commercial sightseeing companies operating 
in the Special Flight Rules Area; prohibits commercial sightseeing 
operations during certain time periods; and limits the number of 
aircraft that can be used for commercial sightseeing operations in the 
GCNP Special Flight Rules Area. This action delays the effective date 
for 14 CFR Sections 93.301, 93.305, and 93.307 of the final rule and 
reinstates portions of and amends the expiration date of SFAR No. 50-2. 
This action does not affect or delay the implementation of the curfew, 
aircraft restrictions, reporting requirements or the other portions of 
the rule.

Dates: Effective date: The effective date of May 1, 1997, for 14 CFR 
Sections 93.301, 93.305, and 93.307, is delayed until 0901 UTC January 
31, 1998. SFAR No. 560-2 is reinstated and amended effective 0901 UTC 
May 1, 1997. SFAR No. 50-2, Sections 2, 3, 6, 6, 7 and 8 are removed 
effective 0901 UTC May 1, 1997.
    Comments must be received on or before March 24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed, in triplicate to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules 
Docket (AGC-200), Docket No. 28537, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591. Comments may be sent electronically to the Rules 
Docket by using the following Internet address 
[email protected]. Comments must be marked Docket No. 28537. 
Comments may be examined in the Rules Docket in Room 915G on weekdays 
between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except on Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Neil Saunders, Airspace and Rules 
Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591; Telephone: (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments on the Rule

    Although this action is a final rule, and was not preceded by 
notice and public procedure, comments are invited on the rule. This 
rule will become effective on the date specified in the DATES section. 
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and 
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in evaluating the 
effects of the rule, and in determining whether additional rulemaking 
is required.

History

    On December 31, 1996, the FAA published three concurrent actions (a 
final rule, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM], and a Notice of 
Availability of Proposed Commercial Air Tour Routes) in the Federal 
Register (62 FR 69301) as part of an overall strategy to reduce further 
the impact of aircraft noise on the park environment and to assist the 
National Park Service (NPS) in achieving its statutory mandate imposed 
by Public Law 100-91. The final rule amends part 93 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations and adds a new subpart to codify the provisions of 
SFAR No. 50-2, modifies the dimensions of the GCNP Special Flight Rules 
Area; establishes new and modifies existing flight-free zones; 
reestablishes new and modifies existing flight corridors; and 
establishes reporting requirements for commercial sightseeing companies 
operating in the Special Flight Rules Area. In addition, to provide 
further protection for park resources, the final rule prohibits 
commercial sightseeing operations in the Zuni and Dragon corridors 
during certain time periods, and places a temporary limit on the number 
of aircraft that can be used for commercial sightseeing operations in 
the GCNP Special Flight Rules Area. These provisions become effective 
on May 1, 1997.
    An NPRM, Notice No. 96-15, proposing to establish noise limitations 
for certain aircraft operating in the vicinity of GCNP was also 
published with a comment period that closes on March 31, 1997.
    Finally, a Notice of Availability of proposed Commercial Air Tour 
Routes for the GCNP was published with a 30-day comment period that 
closed on January 31, 1997. This Notice requested comment on the 
proposed new or modified existing air tour routes, which complement the 
final rule affecting the Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of GCNP.

Petitions

    By petition dated January 15, 1997, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots 
Association requested that the FAA reconsider the rule because of its 
perceived negative impact on the general aviation community and the 
fact that general aviation traffic does not contribute to the issues 
addressed by the final rule.
    On January 30, 1997, the Clark County Department of Aviation, et 
al., filed a petition seeking reconsideration and/or a stay of 
effectiveness of the implementation of the Toroweap/Shinumo Flight-Free 
Zone that will bar the use of the current ``Blue 1'' commercial air 
tour route until the FAA has taken adequate steps to assure the 
availability of an adequate alternative for Las Vegas based air tour 
operators.
    On January 31, 1997, the Grand Canyon Air Tour Coalition 
(Coalition) requested a stay of the effective date arguing that the 
necessary pilot training and certification could not be reasonably and 
safely completed prior to the May 1, 1997, effective date. The petition 
also alleged that discontinuing and limiting existing tour routes as of 
May 1, 1997, would disrupt the travel plans of a substantial portion of 
GCNP visitors, and air tour operators would be forced to dishonor 
contractual obligations based on material printed prior to August 1996. 
(This administrative action is separate from but interrelated to a 
Petition for Review filed by the Coalition in the Court of Appeals for 
the District of Columbia Circuit, Grand Canyon Air Tour Coalition v. 
FAA, (Case No. 97-1003)).
    On February 18, 1997, the Grand Canyon Trust, et. al., (Trust) 
filed a request with the FAA opposing the Coalition's request for stay 
of the final rule and urged the FAA to deny the Coalition's request. 
The Trust argued that the Coalition has not presented valid grounds to 
support its stay request.
    Even though the specific Petitions filed with the FAA focus on 
different aspects of the operating environment within the Park, the 
underlying concepts of the three Petitions are similar in nature. All 
three administrative Petitions are concerned

[[Page 8863]]

with the air tour route structure or its implementation.
    In support of the requests for a stay of the effective date, the 
Petitions have alleged several economic and safety concerns. The 
economic concerns are inextricably tied with the implementation of the 
new routes in the Park. As will be discussed below, if the 
implementation of the new routes is delayed, the economic concerns are, 
at a minimum, also delayed. In essence, the safety concerns stem from 
the Petitioners' position that there is not enough time to train and 
certify all operators and pilots for operations on the new Grand Canyon 
routes that are scheduled to be in place on May 1, 1997, and that this 
would create an inherently unsafe situation in the Grand Canyon. The 
FAA strongly disagrees with this assertion that implementing the new 
routes effective May 1, 1997, would be unsafe. Even though the FAA is 
committed to achieving the substantial restoration of natural quiet in 
the Park as soon as possible, safety is, and always will be, paramount. 
To that end, the FAA has been preparing to take dramatic steps to 
alleviate any potential problems that could adversely affect the safety 
in the Park on May 1, 1997, by arranging for additional inspectors to 
be available for the operators to complete the training on the new 
routes prior to the May 1, 1997, effective date. The FAA would never 
permit an unsafe situation to take place at the Grand Canyon.
    While the FAA has been diligently working toward a May 1, 1997, 
implementation date for the entire rule, the Agency has also been 
reviewing comments concerning proposed routes and working toward the 
establishment of these routes. During the process of establishing the 
new routes in response to the final rule, the FAA has met with aviation 
users, Park users, and Native Americans. Several new and innovative 
ideas were offered by those groups. Many of these creative ideas 
suggest alternatives to both the existing environment at the Park and 
the proposed environment that could significantly improve the operating 
situation in both the environmental and operational arenas. These new 
suggestions have not yet been adequately explored, but are deserving of 
further investigation and analysis. Additional time would afford the 
FAA and the Department of the Interior (DOI) an opportunity to review 
these new ideas. In addition, the FAA is committed to a continued 
working relationship with the affected Native American tribal units, 
and the FAA intends to complete consultation with the affected Native 
American tribes concerning these new route suggestions pursuant to 
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Although the FAA 
is fully prepared to implement the new route structure on May 1, 1997, 
as originally proposed, it would be extremely difficult to accommodate 
the new proposals now being discussed by that date.
    The FAA has consulted with the DOI concerning the new suggestions 
received by the FAA and the need for further consultation. The DOI 
reexamined the situation at the Park and concluded that the 
implementation of the curfew as required by the final rule on May 1, 
1997, will, on its own, be a significant step to achieving the 
substantial restoration of natural quiet in the Park. The subsequent 
implementation of the new air tour route structure, together with the 
proposal of quiet technology, will form the basis for the next step 
towards the substantial restoration of natural quiet. The DOI and the 
FAA have determined that additional time would be beneficial to permit 
the further exploration of these new ideas submitted by the affected 
and interested parties, and that a delay in the effective date of the 
implementation of the new routes in the Park is warranted. Therefore, 
to permit continued discussions on, and possible changes to, the 
proposed new routes and to permit further consultation with the Native 
American tribes, the FAA has determined to delay the effective date of 
the expansion of the flight-free zones and minimum altitudes as stated 
in 14 CFR Sections 93.301, 93.305 and 93.307 to January 31, 1998. The 
effective date of May 1, 1997, for all the other aspects of the rule, 
i.e., the curfew, aircraft limitations, and reporting requirements, 
will remain unchanged.
    Since the FAA is delaying certain portions of the final rule, as 
stated above, SFAR 50-2 must be reinstated, and certain portions of the 
SFAR be extended. The continuation of the SFAR is vital to maintain the 
existing environmental and safety benefits. Specifically, the FAA finds 
it necessary to amend Section 9 of the reinstated SFAR 50-2 to extend 
the provisions of Sections 1, 4, and 5, (i.e., the Special Flight Rules 
Area, the flight-free zones and the minimum flight altitudes) until 
January 31, 1998. The termination of SFAR 50-2 Sections 1, 4, and 5 
will coincide with the delayed effective date of 14 CFR Sections 
93.301, 93.305, and 93.307.
    On May 1, 1997, the provisions of the final rule that are 
unaffected by the pending route structure will go into effect. These 
provisions consist of the curfew, aircraft limitations, and reporting 
requirements, and are continued in 14 CFR Sections 93.303, 93.309, 
93.311, 93.313, 93.315, 93.316, and 93.317. To avoid redundancy and 
confusion the FAA also finds it necessary to remove certain sections of 
SFAR 50-2 effective May 1, 1997. Sections 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 will be 
removed on May 1, 1997 to coincide with the implementation of the above 
referenced sections of the final rule contained in part 93.

Further Consultation and Review

    As mentioned above, during the comment period on the new routes, 
the FAA received many insightful and cogent comments on the proposed 
route structure. Consultation with the Native American representatives 
also produced several useful and valid alternate operational schemes. 
Many of these ideas received from the comments and through the 
consultations are innovative and may prove to be quite beneficial for 
both the safety and the environmental arenas. A good example of this 
concerns the direction of air tour traffic in the eastern side of the 
Park, e.g. in the Dragon Corridor. The FAA's preliminary view that 
traffic should operate in a clockwise direction is being revisited, 
based on comments from the air tour operators as well as from NPS. With 
new considerations given by the operators, the existing direction of 
traffic operations, ie., counterclockwise, may be the more safe and 
environmentally sound decision.
    The FAA has determined that the responses to the proposed routes 
should be further analyzed prior to implementation of airspace changes. 
Therefore, in light of the comments and additional information 
received, the FAA will reexamine the proposed route structure in 
relation to the operating environment in the Park. The FAA expects to 
revisit the proposed route structure and incorporate several of the 
above mentioned ideas. Involvement of the interested and affected 
parties will be crucial in this process.

Notice and Comment

    As is explained below, this final rule is being issued without 
prior notice and comment because of the time constraints. The FAA spent 
the month of January and most of February receiving and reviewing 
comments on the proposed routes and consulting with the various 
affected parties. Had the FAA not received the valuable information on 
the route structure that it did, the FAA would have been able to 
transmit the data on the proposed routes to the proper charting 
authorities

[[Page 8864]]

(the National Ocean Service [NOS]), and an aeronautical chart would 
have been available by at least April 1, 1997, that would have been 
used by the operators for training and navigational purposes. To have 
the appropriate chart produced by April 1, the FAA would have had to 
forward the charting data to NOS by February 21, 1997. However, once 
the FAA started to receive the relevant information from the 
commenters, the Agency had to make a determination as to whether to 
proceed with the proposed routes so as to have the routes and the 
complete Grand Canyon final rule effective and implemented on May 1, or 
whether to take additional time to analyze the comments and possibly 
develop a better and more comprehensive route structure that would not 
go into effect until after the busy summer tourist season.
    Further, officials of the Park and NPS had suggested alterations 
and refinements in the route structure that have the potential to 
produce noise reduction benefits. They have requested the opportunity 
to explore these new options with the FAA. Both the FAA and the DOI 
believe that all these suggested changes could produce a significantly 
better rule for both the Park users and the aviation operators. 
Additional time is needed, however, to review, analyze, and implement 
these route changes, which, again, would preclude a May 1, 1997, 
effective date.
    To permit what the FAA and the DOI believe will culminate in a 
better overall route structure, the FAA has decided not to send the 
originally proposed routes to NOS for charting, but to analyze the new 
ideas with the expectation of creating better routes. Due to the 
specific and strict requirements of NOS for the charting preparation 
time, any further alteration to the route structure, such as the ones 
suggested by DOI and interested parties, make it impossible to meet the 
charting date necessary for a May 1 effective date. A delay in the 
charting data to NOS would mean that NOS would not have been able to 
produce the charts by April 1 and, consequently, operators would not 
have been able to train their pilots by May 1. Essentially, therefore, 
any delay in sending the data to NOS results in an equivalent delay of 
the effective date. With the goal to produce the best routes possible, 
the FAA determined that it would be contrary to the public interest to 
implement the originally proposed routes when better alternatives might 
be available as a result of the comments received and the consultations 
with DOI and others.
    Moreover, past experience has demonstrated that the training of 
pilots on new routes during a peak tourist season could be unsafe. At 
the Park, the peak season extends approximately from May through 
October. To eliminate the potential for unsafe operations within the 
Park, the FAA further determined that the training should take place in 
the Park when the volume of air traffic traditionally decreases, i.e., 
after the summer tourist season. For that reason, the FAA is delaying 
the effective date of the new airspace and route structure until 
January 31, 1998, to give the operators sufficient time to train their 
pilots adequately and safely after the close of the busy summer season. 
Therefore, the FAA finds that there is sufficient justification under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b) to issue this rule without notice and an opportunity for 
comment. However, while there is not sufficient time to allow prior 
notice and comments concerning the FAA decision to delay the May 1 
effective date, we invite comments concerning any other aspect of this 
notice, including the new implementation date of January 31, 1998.

Economic Evaluation

    In promulgating the final rule for Special Flight Rules in the 
Vicinity of the GCNP, the FAA prepared a cost-benefit analysis of the 
rule. The delay in the implementation of 14 CFR Sections 93.301 and 
93.307 will not affect that assessment. The delay in the implementation 
of Section 93.305 will be cost-relieving.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, 
FAA completed a final regulatory flexibility analysis of the final 
rule. The delay in the implementation of 14 CFR Sections 93.301, 
93.305, and 93.307 will not have an effect on that analysis.

Federalism Implications

    The amendment set forth herein will not have substantial direct 
effects on the States, or the relationship between the national 
Government and the State, 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 
amendment does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 91

    Aircraft, Airmen, Air traffic control, Aviation safety, Noise 
control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 93

    Air traffic control, Airports, Navigation (Air), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 121

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Charter flights, Safety, 
Transportation.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

Adoption of Amendments

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends 14 
CFR parts 91, 93, 121, and 135 as follows:

PARTS 91, 121 AND 135 [AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 
44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 
46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531.

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

    Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-44702, 
44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903-44904, 
44912, 46105.

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

    Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709, 
44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722.

SFAR No. 50-2 [Reinstated]

    4. In parts 91, 121, and 135, Special Federal Aviation Regulation 
No. 50-2 is reinstated.
    5. In parts 91, 121, and 135, Special Federal Aviation Regulation 
No. 50-2, Section 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 are removed.
    6. In parts 91, 121, and 135, Special Federal Aviation Regulation 
No. 50-2, Section 9 is revised to read as follows:

SFAR 50-2--Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of the Grand Canyon 
National Park, AZ

* * * * *
    Section 9. Termination date. Sections 1. Applicability, Section 
4, Flight-free zones, and Section 5. Minimum flight altitudes, 
expire on 0901 UTC, January 31, 1998.

PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES AND AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERNS

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

    Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502, 
44514, 44701, 44719, 46301.

    The effective date of May 1, 1997, for new Secs. 93.301, 93.305, 
and 93.307 to be

[[Page 8865]]

added to 14 CFR Chapter I is delayed until 0901 UTC, January 31, 1998.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 1997.
Barry L. Valentine,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-4824 Filed 2-21-97; 3:49 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M