[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 58 (Friday, March 24, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16114-16116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-7341]



[[Page 16113]]

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

Part IX





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Part 91



Special Visual Flight Rules; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 16114]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FAA-2000-7110; Amdt; No. 91-262]
RIN 2120-AG94


Special Visual Flight Rules

AGENCY:  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:  Direct final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY:  This action amends the language regarding aircraft operating 
in accordance with Special Visual Flight Rules (SVFR). Specifically, 
this action will permit a general aviation pilot at a satellite airport 
where weather reporting is not available, to depart in meteorological 
conditions less than basic Visual Flight Rules (VFR) weather minimums 
provided that the pilot determines that he has the requisite flight 
visibility. The FAA is taking this action to reduce the number of 
unnecessary flight delays being faced by general aviation aircraft 
while providing an equivalent level of safety.

DATES:  Effective May 23, 2000.
    Comments must be received by April 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES:  Comments on this document should be mailed or delivered, in 
duplicate, to: United States Department of Transportation Dockets, 
Docket No. FAA-2000-7110, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room Plaza 401, 
Washington, DC 20590. Comments may be filed and examined in Room Plaza 
401 between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays, except Federal holidays. 
Comments also may be sent electronically to the Dockets Management 
System (DMS) at the following Internet address: http://dms.dot.gov/. 
Commenters who wish to file comments electronically should follow the 
instruction on the DMS web site.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Avis P. Person, Airspace and Rules 
Division (ATA-400), Air Traffic Airspace Management Program, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591; telephone number (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  

Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse 
or negative comments; therefore, the FAA is issuing it as a direct 
final rule. The amendment was recommended by the Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee (ARAC) with no dissenting opinions. In addition, the 
FAA believes that the amendment will be well received by the public.
    Unless a written adverse or negative comment or a written notice of 
intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received on this 
direct final rule within the comment period, the regulation will become 
effective on the date specified. 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 received, within the comment period, an adverse or 
negative comment, 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 (NPRM) may be 
published with a new comment period.

Comments Invited

    Although this action is in the form of a final rule and was not 
preceded by an NPRM, comments are invited on this document. Interested 
persons are invited to participate in this action by submitting such 
written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments relating 
to the environmental, energy, federalism, or economic impact that might 
result from adopting the proposals in this document also are invited. 
Substantive comments should be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments 
must identify the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted 
in duplicate to the Rules Docket address specified above.
    All comments received, as well as a report summarizing each 
substantive public comment contact with FAA personnel on this 
rulemaking, will be filed in the docket. The docket is available for 
public inspection before and after the comment closing date.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this document must include a pre-addressed, 
stamped postcard with those comments on which the following statement 
is made: ``Comments to Docket No. [FAA-2000-7110].'' The postcard will 
be date stamped and mailed to the commenter.

Availability of Final Rules

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded using a modem 
and suitable communications software from the FAA regulations section 
of the FedWorld electronic bulletin board service (telephone (703) 321-
3339), the Government Printing Office's electronic bulletin board 
service (telephone (202) 512-1661).
    Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/nprm/nprm.htm or the Government Printing Office's web page at 
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara for access to recently published 
rulemaking documents. This direct final rule also may be accessed on 
the DMS at the electronic address listed in the ADDRESSES section 
above.
    Any person may obtain a copy of this document by submitting 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. Communications must identify the amendment number of 
docket number of this final rule.
    Persons interested in being placed on the mailing list for future 
rulemaking documents should request from the above office a copy of 
Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution 
System, which describes the application procedure.

Small Entity Inquiries

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996, requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for 
information or advice about compliance with statues and regulations 
within its jurisdiction. Therefore, any small entity that has a 
question regarding this document may contact their local FAA official. 
Internet users can find additional information on SBREFA in the ``Quick 
Jump'' section of the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm and may send electronic inquiries to the following Internet 
address: [email protected].

Background

    The current language of Secs. 91.155 and 91.157 have causes 
confusion as to the application of VFR weather minimums in controlled 
airspace at satellite airports, and prompted numerous inquiries and 
requests for clarification. In particular, concerns have been raised as 
to whether the ceiling at a satellite airport can be determined by a 
pilot on the ground in takeoff position.
    On January 9, 1995, the FAA requested that the Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee on Air Traffic Issues (ARAC) review Secs. 91.155 and 
91.157 and recommend language that would be more easily understood by 
the aviation community. In response, the ARAC established a working 
group composed of representatives from the

[[Page 16115]]

Air Traffic Control Association, Inc. (ATCA), the Aircraft Owners and 
Pilots Association (AOPA), the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), 
the Helicopter Association International (HAI), and the National 
Business Aviation Association (NBAA) to review this matter. As a result 
of this review of Secs. 91.155 and 91.157, the working group concluded 
that misunderstandings occur when applying the visibility minimums on 
the ground for SVFR operations from a satellite airport. The ARAC 
recommended that the FAA resolve the problem by permitting part 91 
general aviation pilots in takeoff position to determine whether 
visibility minimums exist for SVFR departure at satellite airports when 
weather reporting is not available at the satellite airport.
    A satellite airport, is an airport that exists within the same 
airspace area as the primary airport that determines the airspace 
designation. SVFR operations are aircraft operating in accordance with 
clearances within controlled airspace in meteorological conditions less 
than the basic VFR weather minimums.
    Under current rules, an SVFR clearance must be requested and 
approved by the nearest air traffic control (ATC) facility to operate 
within a Class B, C, D, or E surface area when the weather does not 
meet VFR flight weather minimums. This clearance allows operations 
below 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) within the lateral boundaries of 
a controlled airspace surface area, with limited exceptions, provided 
the following conditions are satisfied: (1) the pilot receives a 
clearance from ATC; (2) the pilot remains clear of clouds; (3) SVFR 
operations are conducted only between sunrise and sunset; and (4) the 
ground visibility report indicates that at least 1 statute mile of 
visibility exists. If ground visibility is not reported, flight 
visibility must be determined to be at least 1 statute mile.
    Ground visibility is defined in 14 CFR section 1.1 as the 
``prevailing horizontal visibility near the Earth's surface as reported 
by the United States Weather Service or an accredited observer.'' 
Because ground visibility is considered an official report, pilots and 
air traffic controllers are more likely to rely on a ground visibility 
report than a flight visibility report which is reported by a pilot. 
But in the absence of a ground visibility report, Sec. 91.157(c)(2) 
currently allows a pilot departing under SVFR to rely on a flight 
visibility report, which may have been reported by a pilot in flight 
who is not required to be an official weather observer. Flight 
visibility is also defined in 14 CFR section 1.1 and must be determined 
by a pilot from the cockpit while an aircraft is airborne. The current 
rules do not permit flight visibility to be determined by a pilot on 
the ground.

Discussion of the Recommendation

    The ARAC working group recommended that the FAA permit those 
general aviation pilots operating in accordance with part 91 to 
determine whether visibility minimums exist for SVFR departure at 
satellite airports when weather reporting capabilities do not exist at 
the satellite airport. The working group rationale is that there is 
little difference between a pilot's ability to determine visibility in 
flight versus on the ground.
    The FAA has reviewed and accepted the ARAC recommendation. Thus, 
the FAA is amending Sec. 91.157 to allow pilots to determined if 
visibility minimums exist on the ground for SVFR departure provided the 
following conditions are satisfied: 1) the flight is conducted under 
part 91; and 2) the airport at which the aircraft is located is a 
satellite airport that does not have weather reporting capabilities. 
The pilot's visibility determination on the ground for SVFR departure 
is not an official ground visibility report since the pilot's report is 
not equivalent to that of an official weather observer. Consequently, 
the rule expands the term ``flight visibility'' as opposed to `ground 
visibility'' but limits that expansion to SVFR departure under 
Sec. 91.157.
    This action is intended to reduce unnecessary delays for part 91 
operations and clarify the appropriate means of determining visibility 
minimums for SVFR departure from satellite airports when that airport 
does not have weather reporting capabilities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3507(d), there are no requirements for information collection 
associated with this rule.

International Compatibility

    The FAA has reviewed corresponding International Civil Aviation 
Organization international standards and recommended practices and 
Joint Aviation Authorities regulations, where they exist, and has 
identified no differences in these proposed amendments and the foreign 
regulations.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    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 requires agencies to analyze the 
economic effect of regulatory changes on small businesses and other 
small entities. Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs 
agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on international 
trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
direct final rule: (1) will generate benefits that justify its costs 
and is not a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in the 
Executive Order; (2) is not significant as defined in the Department of 
Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (3) will not have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities; (4) 
will not constitute a barrier to international trade; and (5) will not 
contain any Federal intergovernmental or private sector mandates. These 
analyses are presented here in the preamble.
    This direct final rule allows pilots who are on the ground (in 
controlled air space at satellite airports) to determine whether 
visibility conditions meet or exceed the minimums necessary to allow 
flight departure under special visual flight rules (SVFR) when these 
satellite airports do not have weather reporting capabilities. 
Previously, if satellite airports were experiencing weather conditions 
that would have permitted takeoff under SVFR, but the weather at the 
primary airport was not favorable, the pilot was required to delay 
departure until either the weather conditions improved at the primary 
airport or the pilot received a flight visibility report indicating at 
least 1 statute mile of visibility. This direct final rule will clarify 
the language regarding departure under SVFR and reduce the number of 
unnecessary flight delays while providing an equivalent level of 
safety.
    The direct final rule is expected to impose no costs on the FAA or 
airspace users since no additional resources will be needed to 
implement this rule. In fact, the direct final rule may reduce the 
unnecessary number of flight delays, however, information is not 
available to calculate this number. The FAA contends that safety will 
not be adversely affected as a result of this rulemaking.
    In view of the fact that this direct final rule will result in 
potential cost-savings, while maintaining an equivalent level of 
safety, the FAA has determined that his direct final rule will be cost-
beneficial.

[[Page 16116]]

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 establishes ``as a principle 
of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 
the objective of the rule and of applicable statues, to fit regulatory 
and informational requirements to the scale of the business, 
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation.'' 
To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to solicit and 
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rational for 
their actions. The Act 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 proposed or 
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as 
described in the Act.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides that 
the head of the agency may so certify and an RFA is not required. The 
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for 
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    The FAA has conducted the required review of this direct final rule 
and has determined that it will impose no costs on the FAA or airspace 
users, and therefore, will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, pursuant to the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation 
Administration certifies that this direct final rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. However, 
the FAA solicits comments from the public regarding this determination 
of no significant impact.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The provisions of this rule will have little impact on trade for 
both U.S. firms doing business in foreign countries and foreign firms 
doing business in the United States.

Federalism Implications

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. It has determined that 
this action will 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. Therefore, the FAA has determined that this direct final 
rule does not have federalism implications.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
enacted as Public Law 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal 
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment 
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency 
rule that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more (when 
adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and 
tribal governments in the aggregate, or by the private sector. Section 
204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
(or their designees) of State, local, and tribal governments on a 
proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A significant 
intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any provision in a Federal 
agency regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, 
local, and tribal governments in the aggregate of $100 million 
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 203 of the 
Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements section 204(a), provides that, 
before establishing any regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall 
have developed a plan, which, among other things, mut provide for 
notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a 
meaningful and timely opportunity for these small governments to 
provide input in the development of regulatory proposals.
    This direct final rule does not contain any Federal 
intergovernmental or private sector mandate that exceeds $100 million a 
year.

Agency Findings

    The FAA has determined that this regulation is noncontroversial and 
unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons 
discussed in the preamble, I certify that this regulation (1) is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(F) of Executive Order 
12866 and, therefore, its not subject to review by the Office of 
Management and Budget; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 
Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 
11034, February 26, 1979; and (3) if promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial 
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

    Air Traffic Control, Aircraft, Airplanes, Airports, Airspace, 
Weather.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends part 91 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 
as follows:

PART 91--AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES

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

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


    2. Section 91.157(c)(2) is revised and paragraph (d) is added to 
read as follows:


Sec. 91.157  Special VFR weather minimums.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) If ground visibility is not reported, unless flight visibility 
is at least 1 statute mile. For the purposes of this paragraph, the 
term flight visibility includes the visibility from the cockpit of an 
aircraft in takeoff position if:
    (i) The flight is conducted under this part 91; and
    (ii) The airport at which the aircraft is located is a satellite 
airport that does not have weather reporting capabilities.
    (d) The determination of visibility by a pilot in accordance with 
paragraph (c)(2) of this section is not an official weather report or 
an official ground visibility report.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 21, 2000.
Jane F. Garvey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-7341 Filed 3-23-00; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M