[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23543-23557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11726]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 65, 91, 105, 119

[Docket No. FAA-1999-5483; Amendment No. 65-42, 91-268, 105-12 and 119-
4]
RIN 2120-AG52


Parachute Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends regulations that govern parachute operations. 
Amendments to these regulations reflect changes in the requirements 
applicable to radio communications, airspace classification, parachute 
packing, tandem parachute operations, and foreign parachutists. Through 
this rule, the FAA intends to enhance the safety of parachute operation 
in the National Airspace System (NAS).

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 9, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Crum, Airspace and Rules 
Division, ATA-400, Air Traffic Airspace Management Program, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591, telephone (202) 267-8783; or Randy Montgomery, Flight Standards 
Service Division, AFS-340, General Aviation and Commercial Branch, 
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-3155.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Final Rules

    You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by taking the 
following steps:
    (1) Go to the search function of the Department of Transportation's 
electronic Docket Management System (DMS) Web Page (http://dms.dot.gov/search).
    (2) On the search page type in the last four digits of the Docket 
number shown at the beginning of this final rule. Click on ``search.''
    (3) On the next page, which contains the Docket summary information 
for the Docket you selected, click on the final rule.
    You can also get an electronic copy using the Internet through 
FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/armhome.htm or the Federal 
Register's web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html.
    You can also get a copy 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. Make 
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this final 
rule.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    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 statutes and regulations 
within its jurisdiction. Therefore, any small entity that has a 
question regarding this document may contact their local FAA official, 
or the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can 
find out more about SBREFA on the Internet at our site, http://www.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm. For more information on SBREFA, e-mail us [email protected].

Background

    In 1991, the FAA initiated a review of part 105, which was 
originally published in 1962 to determine if the regulation continued 
to reflect current practices and equipment used in the industry. Among 
other information, the FAA studied reports received from the Aviation 
Safety Reporting System (ASRS), the National Transportation Safety 
Board (NTSB), Air Traffic Unsatisfactory Condition Reports (UCR), and 
recommendations from the Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee and 
the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). Upon 
completion of the review, the FAA determined that the regulation 
required revision to be consistent with the parachute equipment used 
today and current industry practices.
    An example of changes that have taken place in the parachute 
industry since the time part 105 was published is the development of 
dual-harness, dual parachute systems designed to carry more than one 
person at a time. In 1983 the FAA began receiving petitions for 
rulemaking and exemption, requesting changes to the rule allowing use 
of this equipment. During the 1990's, the FAA received petitions for 
rulemaking to allow foreign parachutists to jump in the United States 
without an exemption. Additionally, petitioners

[[Page 23544]]

requested removal of the requirement for static line assist devices 
when ram air parachutes were used.
    The following is a detailed discussion of these petitions and the 
FAA's rationale for making the regulatory changes in this final rule.

Petitions for Exemption and Rulemaking

Tandem Parachute Operations
    When part 105 was published in 1962, civilian parachute operations 
were limited to the use of a single-harness, dual-parachute pack. Since 
then, the parachute industry has developed dual harness systems that 
support two people under a single parachute. Because part 105 currently 
allows parachute operations with single-harness parachutes only, the 
use of parachute equipment capable of supporting two people has only 
been authorized by exemption. For purposes of the exemptions, the FAA 
and the parachuting industry have adopted the term ``tandem'' to 
describe those parachute operations that use a dual-harness, dual-
parachute system.
    The first exemption authorizing tandem parachute operations in the 
United States was granted to Strong Enterprises and Relative Workshop 
by the FAA in 1984. Since then more than 2.5 million experimental 
tandem parachute jumps have been conducted under exemption authority in 
the United States and abroad. Under the exemptions, various companies 
conducting tandem parachute operations were required to furnish the FAA 
with accident statistics on tandem operations, which provided the FAA 
with the means to evaluate the safety of tandem equipment compared to 
the safety of equipment and operations currently permitted under part 
105.
    In July 1997, the United States Parachute Association (USPA) 
submitted a petition for rulemaking requesting that the FAA permit 
tandem parachute operations. While considering the USPA petition, the 
FAA reviewed accident statistics from 1991 through 1996. Based on the 
information collected during the review, the FAA has determined that 
experimental tandem parachute operations conducted under an exemption 
from part 105 have demonstrated that tandem operations can be conducted 
safely.
    Many of the new regulations applicable to tandem parachute 
operations are based on terms and conditions previously contained in 
exemptions. Although an exemption will no longer be required to conduct 
a tandem parachute operation, the FAA has written the regulations to 
include terms similar to those previously contained in the exemptions. 
The FAA believes that the continued use of the practices and procedures 
proven to be safe under exemption will ensure continued safety in these 
operations. The specific terms and conditions adopted will be discussed 
under the comment section.
Static-Line Assist Devices
    The USPA submitted a petition in July 1997 requesting that the FAA 
omit the requirement for using a static-line when using direct-
deployed, ram-air parachutes. As a basis for its request, the USPA 
cited a series of tests it performed to determine if assist devices 
improved the reliability of the static line direct deployment of a ram-
air canopy. The tests showed that an assist device does not improve the 
deployment reliability when used with a static line. Moreover, there 
was no evidence of adverse effects when the device is removed. As a 
result of these tests, the FAA has concluded that safety would not be 
compromised by removing the static-line assist device requirements for 
ram-air parachutes.

Equipment and Packing Requirements for Foreign Parachutists

    The USPA submitted a third petition for rulemaking in July 1997 
requesting that the FAA allow foreign parachutists to make parachute 
jumps in the United States using their own equipment.
    The current regulations require that parachute equipment used in 
operations conducted within the United States meet the standards set 
forth under part 105. The practical impact of this requirement is that 
foreign parachutists could not use their own equipment, usually 
manufactured in another country, when participating in parachute 
operations in the United States. The FAA has issued exemptions to 
organizations sponsoring parachuting events attended by foreign 
parachutists. This long time practice has demonstrated that operations 
conducted under these exemptions have been conducted safely. 
Additionally, the FAA recognizes that foreign manufacturers of 
parachute equipment often meet U.S. standards.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    Based on the review, petitions received, and the collection of data 
regarding parachute operations, the FAA published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) (64 FR 18302), on April 13, 1999. The FAA proposed 
numerous changes, including: (1) Changes in response to the airspace 
reclassification rule, (2) changes to air traffic control communication 
requirements, (3) changes to reflect improved parachute design, and (4) 
changes in industry practices. The notice provided for a 90-day comment 
period that closed on July 12, 1999.
    In response to the NPRM, the FAA received 71 comments. Among the 
comments received were several comments that are outside the scope of 
the rule; therefore, those comments will not be addressed in this 
rulemaking. While the majority of comments submitted to the public 
docket were from parachutists, comments were also received from drop 
zone operators; pilots; the Illinois Department of Transportation; the 
U.S. Department of the Army; the United States Parachute Association 
(USPA); the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; Southwest 
Airlines Pilots' Association the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association 
(AOPA); and the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA).
    The following is a discussion of the substantive comments received 
in response to the NPRM. Sections that received no comments are not 
included in this discussion, and are incorporated in the final rule as 
proposed in the Notice.

Discussion of the Comments

Section 65.111  Certificate Required

    Proposal: The FAA proposed to revise paragraph (b) of current 
Sec. 65.111, Certificate required, which in part, requires that anyone 
who packs, maintains, or alters a main parachute of a dual parachute 
pack to have an appropriate current certificate issued under subpart F 
of part 65. This paragraph also allows non-certificated persons to pack 
a main parachute of a dual parachute pack that is to be used by that 
person for intentional jumping.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to allow persons to pack a main 
parachute under the supervision of a certificated parachute rigger or 
to allow a parachutist in command to pack a main parachute for tandem 
parachute operations. The FAA also proposed to add the word ``next'' to 
the provision that a person may pack a main parachute if that person 
intends to make the ``next'' parachute jump using that parachute.
    Comments: One commenter supports the proposed rule language. 
Several commenters, including Skydive Delmarva, Inc. do not agree with 
proposed Sec. 65.111. Skydive Delmarva, Inc. suggests adding a new 
paragraph which would allow persons authorized in writing by a 
certificated rigger to pack main parachutes without supervision. 
Further, Skydive Delmarva, Inc.

[[Page 23545]]

requests that the FAA authorize organizations, other than the FAA, to 
issue parachute rigger certificates.
    FAA response: Skydive Delmarva Inc.'s comment to allow a non-
certificated person to receive permission in writing from a 
certificated rigger to pack a main parachute was not addressed in the 
NPRM. As a consequence, the comment goes beyond the scope of this 
rulemaking. This comment will not, therefore, be addressed in the final 
rule.
    The FAA disagrees, for safety reasons, with Skydive Delmarva's 
request to allow persons authorized in writing by a certificated rigger 
to pack main parachutes without supervision. Further, in response to 
Skydive Delmarva's request to authorize organizations, other than the 
FAA, to issue parachute rigger certificates, the FAA recognizes and 
currently allows designated parachute rigger examiners (DPRE's), who 
are not FAA employees, to issue parachute rigger certificates. 
Therefore, Sec. 65.111 is adopted in the final rule as proposed.

Section 105.3  Definitions

    The FAA proposed to define the terms ``approved parachute,'' 
``automatic activation device,'' ``drop zone,'' ``fatal injury,'' 
``foreign parachutist,'' ``freefall,'' ``main parachute,'' ``object,'' 
``parachute drop,'' ``parachute jump,'' ``parachute operation,'' 
``parachutist,'' ``parachutist in command,'' ``passenger parachutist,'' 
``pilot chute,'' ``ram-air parachute,'' ``reserve parachute,'' 
``serious injury,'' ``single-harness, dual-parachute system,'' 
``supervision,'' ``tandem parachute operation,'' and ``tandem parachute 
system.''
    The following is a list of proposed definitions, on which the FAA 
received comments, and the FAA response to those comments. Definitions 
that were included in the proposal, but not commented on are included 
in the final rule as proposed. However, definitions for ``foreign 
parachutist,'' ``parachute drop,'' ``parachute operation,'' and 
``parachutist,'' have been changed for further clarification. The 
definitions for ``fatal injury'' and ``serious injury'' are deleted 
from the final rule.
Automatic Activation Device (AAD)
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define an ``automatic activation 
device'' as a self-contained mechanical device attached to a parachute, 
other than a static line, which automatically initiates parachute 
deployment at a preset altitude, time, percentage of terminal velocity, 
or combination thereof if that parachute has not been manually 
activated.
    Comments: Several commenters object to the proposed definition for 
the AAD. One of these commenters states that the definition should be 
deleted because AAD's ``are not approved, reviewed, or certificated,'' 
therefore, they should not be addressed in this rulemaking. Another 
commenter states that ``AAD'' should be defined as ``a self-contained 
mechanical or electro-mechanical device,'' because this definition 
accurately describes the type of equipment currently used in the 
parachute industry.
    FAA response: The FAA disagrees that the definition for AAD should 
be deleted, but it agrees that the term ``electro-mechanical device'' 
should be added to the definition.
    The FAA concluded that a definition for AAD should be included in 
this final rule because parachutists frequently use this equipment 
today. The fact that parachutists voluntarily rely on the AAD for their 
safety is a testimony to its value. The FAA's required use of an AAD on 
tandem parachute system reserve parachutes further attests to the added 
protection afforded by the use of this device.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter who recommended that the term 
``electro-mechanical device'' should be added to the definition of AAD. 
Upon receipt of this comment, the FAA reviewed the design and 
construction of AAD's. Three types of AADs exist; the first type is 
purely mechanical, or battery activated; the second type is a 
microprocessor, which has a mini computer; the third type of AAD, which 
is most frequently used today, combines the battery and computer 
processor to create an electro-mechanical AAD. Given that this AAD is 
the most frequently used, adding the phrase ``electro-mechanical'' to 
the definition provides the most accurate description of AAD's used 
today. Therefore, the FAA has added this phrase to the definition.
    The FAA also amends the proposed definition for the term ``AAD'' in 
two other respects. First, the definition states that the AAD is 
attached to the interior of the reserve parachute container, instead of 
the parachute itself. Second, the definition is corrected to state that 
the AAD initiates deployment of the reserve parachute, which is a more 
accurate description of the AAD's operation that what was originally 
proposed.
Direct Supervision
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define the term ``supervision'' as 
the act of a certificated rigger personally observing the packing of a 
parachute by a noncertificated person to the extent necessary to ensure 
that it is being done properly.
    Comments: Several commenters recommend revising the proposed 
definition of the term ``supervision'' to include that the certificated 
rigger is readily available in person for consultation. One commenter 
recommends that the definition be amended to state that a certificated 
rigger also ``. . . takes responsibility for that packing.''
    FAA response: The FAA agrees with the comment that a certificated 
rigger needs to be available during the packing process. The FAA has 
adopted a revised definition in the final rule to address this concern 
by changing ``supervision'' to ``direct supervision.'' Although the 
term ``direct supervision'' was not used in the NPRM, the FAA believes 
that adding the word ``direct'' clarifies the FAA's intent that a 
certificated rigger must be on the premises during the parachute 
packing process. The certificated rigger's presence ensures that he/she 
is readily available in person for consultation.
    In addition, the FAA agrees with the commenters that direct 
supervision includes taking responsibility for the packing. Therefore, 
the phrase ``and takes responsibility for that packing'' has been added 
to the term ``direct supervision'' in the final rule.
Fatal Injury
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define the term ``fatal injury'' as 
any parachuting injury that results in death within 30 days from the 
date of injury.
    FAA Response: Many comments were received on this proposed term 
because it is in conjunction with the proposed addition of Sec. 105.27, 
Accident reporting requirements. Since the FAA has eliminated proposed 
Sec. 105.27 in the final rule, this definition has been deleted.
Foreign Parachutist
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define this term as a parachutist who 
is neither a U.S. citizen nor a resident alien.
    FAA Response: While no comments were received on this definition, 
the FAA has amended the proposed definition to clarify that a foreign 
parachutist is a parachutist who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a 
resident alien and is participating in parachute operations within the 
United States using parachute equipment not manufactured in the United 
States.

[[Page 23546]]

Parachute Drop
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define this term as a parachute 
operation that involves the descent of an object to the surface from an 
aircraft in flight when a parachute is used or intended to be used 
during all or part of that descent.
    FAA Response: While no comments were received on this definition, 
the FAA amended the proposed definition to clarify that a parachute 
drop means the descent of an object from an aircraft in flight when a 
parachute is used or intended to be used during all or part of that 
descent.
Parachute Operation
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define this term as any activity that 
includes a parachute jump or a parachute drop. This activity involves, 
but is not limited to the following persons: Parachutist, tandem 
parachute operation, drop zone owner or operator, certificated 
parachute rigger, pilot, or appropriate FAA personnel.
    FAA Response: While no comments were received on the proposed 
definition for parachute operation, the FAA determined that it should 
be further clarified. Therefore, the FAA has amended the proposed 
definition to define a parachute operation as any activity associated 
with, or performed in support of a parachute jump or a parachute drop. 
A parachute operation can involve, but is not limited to, the following 
persons: Parachutist, a parachutist in command and passenger in tandem 
parachute operations, jump master, certificated parachute rigger, or 
pilot.
Parachutist
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define this term as a person who 
boards an aircraft with the intent to exit the aircraft while in flight 
using a single-harness, dual parachute system to descend to the 
surface.
    FAA Response: While no comments were received on this definition, 
the FAA has amended the proposed definition to clarify that a 
parachutist is a person who intends to exit an aircraft while in flight 
using a single-harness, dual parachute system to descend to the 
surface.
Parachutist in Command
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to add the term ``parachutist in 
command'' to address the instructor of a tandem parachute operation, 
which the FAA defined as the person responsible for the operation and 
safety of a tandem parachute operation before, during, and after a 
tandem parachute operation.
    Comments: Several commenters state that the term ``parachutist in 
command'' should be changed to ``tandem instructor,'' which would more 
accurately reflect that person's function as a teacher, not simply the 
person in charge of the tandem parachute operation.
    The USPA contents that the parachutist in the forward harness is 
more than a passenger because he or she could sabotage the safety of 
the operation by failing to follow proper procedures between exit and 
touch down.
    FAA response: The FAA has given the commenters' recommendations 
serious consideration but cannot agree that ``tandem instructor'' would 
accurately reflect the role and responsibility that this person holds. 
Although it is true that the parachutist in command provides 
instruction, the amount of time spent instructing is greatly outweighed 
by the responsibilities held by the person in this role. The bulk of 
the parachutist-in-command's duties are centered on the safety of the 
tandem parachute operation. Safety, in this case, only begins with the 
passenger's instruction in proper procedures. In fact, the parachutist-
in-command controls the safety of the operation from the moment the 
pair exit the aircraft to the time that touch down is safety 
accomplished.
    The FAA has also given further consideration to the USPA's concern 
that the passenger can sabotage the tandem parachute operation. The FAA 
agrees with the USPA regarding the potential for a passenger to 
inadvertently act in a manner that would sabotage the safety of the 
operation, but such an event is highly unlikely. However, if such event 
occurred, the parachutist-in-command would be required to bring the 
operation back under control. The FAA believes that the term 
``parachutist-in-command'' provides the broadest range of applicability 
and most accurately describes the responsibilities of the person who 
occupies the rear harness in a tandem parachute operation. Therefore, 
the term ``parachutist-in-command'' is adopted in the final rule.
Passenger Parachutist
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to add the term ``passenger 
parachutist'' and define it as a person who boards an aircraft, acting 
as other than the parachutist in command of a tandem parachute 
operation, with the intent of exiting the aircraft while in flight 
using the forward harness of a dual harness tandem parachute system.
    Comments: Several commenters suggest changing this term to 
``student tandem parachutist.'' One commenter suggests changing the 
term to ``tandem student.'' Another commenter suggests that the term 
should be changed because the term ``passenger'' is used when referring 
to aircraft operations and is not appropriate when referring to tandem 
parachute operations since the person is a ``student,'' not a 
``passenger.''
    FAA response: The FAA believes that the term ``passenger 
parachutist'' best describes the role of the person occupying the 
forward harness of a tandem parachute system. The term ``passenger 
parachutist'' is more inclusive than the terms ``student tandem 
parachutist'' or ``tandem student.'' Therefore, this term broadens the 
classification of persons participating in tandem parachute operations. 
In addition, this term clarifies that the parachutist-in-command would 
be solely responsible for regaining control of the parachute and the 
safety of the parachute operation, in the event of an emergency. It is 
highly unlikely that the parachutist in the forward would have the 
knowledge and experience to handle an emergency situation properly. For 
these reasons, the term ``passenger parachutist'' is most appropriate 
to describe the parachutist using the forward harness of a tandem 
parachute.
Serious Injury
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define the term ``serious injury'' as 
any injury that requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours, 
commencing within 7 days from the date the injury was received; results 
in a fracture of any bone (except simple fractures of fingers, toes, or 
the nose); causes severe hemorrhages, or nerve, muscle, or tendon 
damage; or involves any internal organ.
    FAA response: Many comments were received in response to this 
proposed term because of its relation to the proposed addition of 
Sec. 105.27, Accident reporting requirements. Since the FAA has 
eliminated proposed Sec. 105.27 in the final rule, this definition has 
been deleted.
Tandem Parachute Operation
    Proposal: The FAA proposed to define the term ``tandem parachute 
operation'' as a parachute operation in which more than one person 
simultaneously uses the same tandem parachute system while descending 
from an aircraft in flight.
    Comments: Several commenters suggest that this term be change to 
``tandem parachute jump,'' or that

[[Page 23547]]

``tandem parachute jump'' be used in addition to ``tandem parachute 
operation'' to more accurately describe the action taking place, and to 
be consistent with current terminology.
    FAA response: The FAA does not agree with these commenters. The 
proposed definition is intended to include more than just the actual 
jump, it also includes all aspects of the jump, from the time the jump 
aircraft departs until the last parachutist(s) descend to the surface. 
Therefore, the FAA adopts the definition as proposed.

Section 105.  General

    Proposal: In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to make the following 
editorial changes to current Sec. 105.13: (1) Replace the word ``make'' 
with the phrase ``to conduct,'' (2) replace the term ``parachute jump'' 
with the term ``parachute operation,'' (3) replace the word ``made'' 
with the word ``conducted,'' and (4) replace the word ``jump'' with the 
word ``operation.''
    Comments: Several comments were received on this proposal from the 
USPA, AOPA and others, requesting that the FAA incorporate language 
into the proposed Sec. 105.5, which would hold the parachutists, not 
pilots, responsible for creating hazards to air traffic. These comments 
state that pilots of jump aircraft should be relieved from full 
responsibility for a parachutist exiting their aircraft. The comments' 
justification for their position is that parachutes used in these types 
of operations can be steered, therefore, the parachutist can maneuver 
out of the designated drop zone, possibly creating a hazard to air 
traffic.
    FAA response: The proposed changes to this section were editorial 
in nature, not substantive. Comments that concern the responsibility of 
the pilot-in-command are beyond the scope of this rulemaking and 
therefore, are not addressed. This section is adopted as proposed.

Subpart B--Operating Rules

Section 105.13  Radio Equipment and Use Requirements

    Proposal: Currently, part 105 requires that the pilot of an 
aircraft used for conducting parachute operations establish radio 
communications with the nearest FAA air traffic control facility or FAA 
Flight Service Station at least 5 minutes before the jumping activity 
is to begin.
    The FAA proposed to amend this section to require that the jump 
aircraft establish radio communications with the air traffic control 
facility having jurisdiction over the affected airspace. A pilot of a 
jump aircraft will no longer be required to establish radio 
communications with Flight Service Stations for the purpose of 
receiving traffic information.
    The FAA also proposed amending this section to require pilots to 
notify ATC when the last parachutist or object leaves the aircraft. The 
current rule requires the pilot of the jump aircraft to notify ATC when 
the last parachutist reaches the ground.
    In addition, the notice proposed to amend the lost communication 
procedures applicable to parachute operations. Currently, if 
communications systems become inoperative in flight after receipt of a 
required ATC authorization, the jumping activity from that flight may 
be continued. The notice proposed that if the required radio 
communications system is or becomes inoperative during any parachute 
operation in or into controlled airspace, the parachute operation msut 
be aborted.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, AOPA, and the 
Southwest Airlines Pilot's Association recommended changes to this 
section. The USPA suggests adding the phrase, ``airspace of intended 
exit altitude(s)'' to paragraph (a)(1)(ii). The USPA requests this 
change because parachute operations can pass through the airspace of 
several ATC facilities and sectors, depending on the altitude of the 
aircraft. According to the USPA, the proposal did not clarify which ATC 
facility would be the appropriate facility to contact. The change 
requested by the USPA would clarify that the appropriate facility to 
contact would be the one that has jurisdiction over the airspace and 
the altitude where the aircraft is located when the parachutist exists 
the aircraft.
    Another commenter believes that the requirement to contact the ATC 
facility having jurisdiction over the airspace could be interpreted to 
require the pilot to maintain communications with two or more 
facilities during the jump operation. The commenter contends that if 
communications must be maintained with more than one ATC facility, a 
second radio would be required, imposing a financial burden of at least 
$1200 to $1500. This commenter believes that the current requirement is 
sufficient and should not be changed.
    The USPA objects to the FAA proposal to require the parachutists on 
the flight to share responsibility to establish radio communications 
and to receive information about air traffic activity. The commenter 
recommends that the pilot in command have sole responsibility for radio 
communications.
    Several commenters object to the proposed removal of the 
requirement to contact FAA Flight Service Stations (FSS). These 
commenters are concerned that Notices to Airman (NOTAM) regarding 
parachute operations, normally submitted to FSS's, will not be received 
or disseminated. The commenters believe that this creates a safety 
problem for non-radio equipped aircraft operating in airspace where 
parachute operations are being conducted.
    Several commenters object to the proposal that requires that 
parachute operations must be aborted if radio communications equipment 
becomes inoperative. Currently, parachute operations may continue if 
the radio failure occurs after receipt of the ATC authorization. The 
USPA contends that the parachute operation should continue after 
receipt of an ATC authorization, regardless of the operational status 
of the radio communications system. According to the USPA, safety would 
not be compromised because the ATC has identified the aircraft on radio 
and has been advised of the jump operation.
    FAA response: The FAA agrees with some of the comments received in 
response to the proposed changes.
    The FAA agrees with the USPA's comment to include the phrase 
``airspace of the first intended exit altitude'' in 
Sec. 105.13(a)(1)(ii). Since parachute operations can require the use 
of more than one altitude, the FAA agrees with USPA's comment. The FAA 
believes that further clarification is necessary by adding that radio 
communications should be established over the affected airspace of 
``the first'' intended exit altitude. Therefore, this clarifying 
language has been added to the phrase proposed by the USPA and is 
incorporated in the final rule. The adoption of this phrase clarifies 
which ATC facility to contact when parachute operations are being 
conducted.
    The FAA also agrees that the rule as proposed could be interpreted 
to mean that the aircraft must have more than one radio to meet the 
communications requirement. The FAA's intent was not to require the 
pilot to contact more than one ATC facility, nor is it the intent of 
the FAA to increase the pilot's workload during a jump activity. It is 
common practice for ATC facilities to coordinate information regarding 
parachute jump operations. Pilots, therefore, typically are not 
required to contact more than one facility. By inserting the phrase, 
``airspace of first intended exit altitude,'' in the rule language, the 
FAA believes that this confusion will be eliminated.

[[Page 23548]]

    The FAA concurs with the USPA that the pilot in command should be 
solely responsible for establishing and maintaining radio 
communications and information about air traffic activity. The proposal 
was intended to ensure that known air traffic information is 
communicated to both the pilot and the parachutist. However, the 
configuration of most aircraft avionics, make it impractical for both 
pilot and parachutist to share the responsibility for establishing 
radio communications. Traffic information can be relayed within the 
aircraft from the pilot to the parachutists. Therefore, the FAA has 
deleted the requirement, that the parachutists also be responsible for 
establishing radio communications, from the final rule.
    The FAA believes that commenters concerned about the FAA's failure 
to disseminate NOTAMs on parachute operations misunderstand the 
communications requirements. The current rule requires that pilots 
conducting parachute operations contact FSS's to receive information 
about know air traffic in the vicinity. This is solely a communication 
requirement; it does not address filing or disseminating NOTAM's. In 
addition, Sec. 91.103 requires all pilots to become familiar with all 
available information concerning the flight that includes NOTAM's. 
Since pilots who operate non-radio equipped aircraft are required to 
check NOTAM's prior to a flight, this change will not impact safety. 
This rule does not change the current industry practice that pilots 
contact FSS's to file NOTAM information.
    The FAA does not agree with the USPA recommendation to retain the 
current rule language that permits jump activities to continue if the 
aircraft loss its radio communications capability. The purpose of this 
proposal is to increase the safety of all aircraft in the vicinity of 
the parachute operation by ensuring that two-way radio communications 
have been established and maintained between the jump aircraft and the 
ATC facility that has jurisdction over the airspace. If, prior to 
receipt of an ATC authorization or during the parachute operation, the 
radio communications system becomes inoperative, traffic information or 
the status of the parachute operation cannot be exchanged, therefore, 
the parachute operation must be aborted. The proposed language is 
adopted in the final rule.

Section 105.15  Information Required and Notice of Cancellation or 
Postponement of a Parachute Operation

    Proposal: The current rule lists information that must be submitted 
to the FAA when an individual or an organization requests an 
authorization for a parachute jump. This information includes the radio 
frequencies, if any, available in the aircraft. The FAA proposed that 
when required to submit information regarding parachute operations, the 
radio frequencies appropriate to the facilities used during the 
parachute operation would be specified, rather than the radio 
frequencies avialable in the aircraft.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA recommend that the 
requirement to submit the radio frequencies appropriate to the ATC 
facility be replaced with the name of the ATC facility that has 
jurisdiction over the airspace where the jump will take place. The USPA 
contends that the pilot or fjum proponent may not know the radio 
frequencies that are used by ATC for the jump operation until 
coordination is completed with the proper ATC facility.
    One commenter disagrees with the proposed requirement that a 
request for authorization should include the registration number for 
the jump aircraft. The commenter adds that this requirement is 
acceptable when filing a NOTAM. However, when a request is submitted to 
conduct a demonstration several days in advance of the jump operation, 
the person(s) participating in the demonstration may not know which 
aircraft is going to be used.
    FAA response: The FAA agrees with the USPA's recommendation that 
the proponent of the parachute operation must submit the name of the 
ATC facility that has jurisdicaiton over the airspace where the jump 
will take place. In many cases, the pilot or jump proponent does not 
know which ATC radio frequencies are designated for the sector where 
the parachute operation will take place. By incorporating this change 
into the final rule, the pilot will know which ATC facility is the 
appropriate one to contact, and that facility may issue the appropriate 
frequency to the pilot.
    In addition, the FAA understands that there may be some 
circumstances where the registration number of the jump aircraft is not 
known until the day of the hump. If this is the case, multiple 
registration numbers may be submitted along with an explanation to the 
ATC facility. Knowing the registration number of the aircraft 
identifies to the controllers the aircraft that will be involved in the 
jump operation. Having the aircraft identification number makes the 
intentions of the pilot contained in the authorization available to the 
controller, and therefore, reduces radio frequency congestion. The rule 
language remains as proposed.
    The FAA has also added clarifying language to paragraph (a)(8), 
requiring persons requesting an authorization to conduct a parachute 
operation to provide the name of that air traffic control facility 
having jurisdiction of the airspace at the ``first intended'' exist 
altitude to be used in that parachute operation. The FAA believes this 
clarifying language is necessary to ensure that radio communication are 
established between the pilot of the hump aircraft and the appropriate 
air traffic control facility. Therefore, this phrase has been added to 
Sec. 105.15(a)(8) in the final rule.

Section 105.19  Parachute Operations Between Sunset and Sunrise

    Proposal: Proposed Sec. 105.19 would have added a requirement for 
parachutist(s) and objects descending from an aircraft to display a 
light which is visible for 3 statute miles in all directions.
    Comments: Several commenters, including the USPA and the Southwest 
Airlines Pilot's Association, object to the requirement to display a 
light that is visible ``in all directions.'' The commenters believe it 
would require that a parachutist or an object be equipped with more 
than one light.
    FAA response: The FAA has revisited this proposal and agrees with 
the commenters. Therefore, the FAA is rescinding the proposal and has 
deleted the phrase ``in all directions'' in the final rule. The common 
practice of mounting a light on the parachutist's helmet should make 
him or her visible to aircraft operating on the same horizontal plane. 
A helmet-mounted light may not be visible to aircraft flying at higher 
or lower altitudes than the parachutist, but the parachutist should not 
present a hazard to those aircraft. In addition, the requirement to 
have a light that is visible ``in all directions'' would require that a 
parachutist be equipped with two lights which would exceed the 
requirements for aircraft lights in part 91. Therefore, the phrase ``in 
all directions'' is not included in the final rule.

Section 105.21  Parachute Operations Over or Into a Congested Area or 
an Open Air Assembly of Persons

    Proposal: In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to remove the 4-day 
requirement to apply for a certificate of

[[Page 23549]]

authorization to make a parachute jump over or into congested areas or 
open air assemblies since that amount of time for processing 
certificates of authorization is no longer necessary.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, oppose deleting the 
4-day reporting requirement, because in the commenters' opinion, it may 
take the FAA longer than 4 days to process a certificate of 
authorization. All of the commenters request that the regulation be 
amended to require processing of applications for certificates of 
authorization within 5 business days after submission, instead of 
leaving the processing time unspecified.
    FAA response: The FAA does not agree with the commenters that 
removing the 4-day reporting requirement will increase the time it 
takes the FAA to process a certificate of authorization. The FAA and 
the parachute industry may use current technology (i.e., computers and 
fax capability) which makes it possible to process certificates of 
authorization in less than 4 days. Currently, the FAA uses this 
technology to issue certificates of authorization for other aviation 
events (i.e., air shows). Therefore, the FAA has determined that 
removing the 4-day reporting requirement will not cause additional 
processing delays and will actually expedite the process. The 
requirement is adopted in the final rule, as proposed.

Section 105.23  Parachute Operations Over or Onto Airports

    Proposal: Currently, unless prior approval has been given by 
aircraft management, part 105 prohibits parachute operations over or 
onto any airport that does not have a functioning control tower 
operated by the United States. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed amending 
the regulation to require pilots of aircraft conducting parachute 
operations to contact the air traffic control tower having jurisdiction 
over the area where parachute operations are taking place, regardless 
of who is responsible for tower operations.
    Comments: The commenters did not offer specific comments on the 
proposed change to this section. However, many commenters disagree with 
the current rule language which grants airport managers the authority 
to approve parachute operations over or onto the airports.
    FAA response: The FAA did not propose an amendment to change the 
longstanding policy authorizing airport managers to grant approval for 
parachute operations over or onto their airport. The comments are 
therefore, outside the scope of the NPRM, and have not been considered.

Section 105.25  Parachute Operations in Designated Airspace

    Proposal: The FAA proposed to prohibit parachute operations in 
restricted or prohibited areas unless authorized by the controlling 
agency of the area concerned. The FAA also proposed to prohibit 
parachute operations in Class A, B, C, or D airspace without an air 
traffic control authorization. Further, the FAA proposed to prohibit 
parachute operations within Class E or G airspace unless the air 
traffic control facility having jurisdiction over the affected airspace 
is notified of the parachute operation no earlier than 24 hours before 
or not later than 1 hour before the parachute operation begins.
    Comments: There were no substantive comments received on this 
section.
    FAA response: Although there were no comments received on this 
section, the FAA determined that in paragraph (c) of this section, 
``air traffic control'' should be replaced with ``the FAA'' to indicate 
that other FAA organizations, besides air traffic, may revoke the 
acceptance of the notification for any failure of the organization 
conducting the parachute operations to comply with FAA requirements. 
With the exception of this change, this section remains as proposed.

Section 105.27  Accident Reporting Requirements

    Proposal: Currently, there are no FAA requirements to report 
accidents involving parachutist. In the NPRM the FAA proposed a new 
section which would require the parachutist(s), the pilot of the 
aircraft, or the drop zone owner or operator to notify the FAA within 
48 hours of any parachute operation resulting in a serious or fatal 
injury to the parachutist.
    Comments: Numerous commenters, including USPA, AOPA, and Southwest 
Airlines Pilot's Association strongly oppose this proposed requirement, 
while one commenter supports it. Most of the commenter state that the 
pilot should not be responsible for reporting an accident because it 
would be very difficult for the pilot to know if a parachutist who 
jumped from his or her aircraft was injured from the fall. Several 
commenters state that only ``serious'' injuries, requiring a 
physician's attention, should be reported. In addition, several 
commenters also dispute the number of estimated parachute jumping 
accidents per year that was used as a basis for cost analysis and 
determining paperwork burden, versus the number of accidents that 
actually occur.
    FAA response: Based on the comments received, the FAA has revisited 
its original proposal to determine whether or not current FAA policy, 
as well as industry practices, provide adequate information pertaining 
to parachute operation incidents.
    The FAA believed that collection and review of information 
pertaining to parachute operation accidents could be used to assess the 
safety of parachute operations and assist in preventing future 
parachute accidents.
    However, to be effective, this data collection requires a system, 
or infrastructure, to collect, store and evaluate the information, 
which the FAA does not have the resources to support at this time. In 
addition, this requirement imposes a significant paperwork burden on 
individuals conducting or participating in parachute operations. After 
considering the lack of available FAA resources and the paperwork 
burden that would be necessary to meet this requirement, the FAA has 
concluded that the infrastructure for this type of data collection is 
currently unavailable, and that the paperwork burden would be 
excessive.
    Additionally, the FAA and the USPA have a close working 
relationship with regard to the safe conduct of parachute operations 
within the National Airspace System. When safety issues surface within 
either organization, an exchange of information is commonplace. We 
expect this relationship to continue, and believe that cooperation 
between the two organizations will provide the same, if not a better 
alternative than regulations at this time.
    Therefore, Sec. 105.27 and the definitions in Sec. 105.3 associated 
with this section (i.e., ``fatal injury'' and ``serious injury'') are 
not included in the final rule. Although this section is not adopted in 
the final rule, the FAA will continue to monitor the safety of 
parachute operations and the possible need for accident reporting 
requirements for possible consideration in a future rulemaking action.

Subpart C--Parachute Equipment and Packing

Section 105.43  Use of Single-Harness, Dual-Parachute Systems

    Proposal: Currently, the rule provides that only a certificated 
parachute rigger, or the person making the parachute jump with that 
parachute, may pack a main parachute. The FAA proposed that a non-
certificated person also may pack a main parachute under the direct

[[Page 23550]]

supervision of a certificated parachute rigger. The FAA also proposed 
that if installed, the automatic activation device (AAD) must be 
maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions for that AAD.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, believe that the 
responsibility for the safety of parachute equipment should rest with 
the certificated rigger and the parachute jumper, not the pilot of the 
aircraft used for the jump, as current stated in Sec. 105.43(a).
    In addition, the USPA states that the certificated rigger should be 
on the premises during parachute packing, and thus available for 
personal consultation.
    Several commenters support the current 120-day repack cycle 
requirement, which was also included in the proposal. Numerous 
commenters oppose the current 120-day repack cycle, and favor either a 
180-day or a 6-month repack cycle.
    Several commenters, including USPA, request the deletion of 
Sec. 105.43(b)(3), which requires that if AAD's are installed, they 
must be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. 
The USPA states that if this paragraph is retained in the final rule, 
there is no method of documentation available for a pilot to verify 
that the AAD is in compliance with the manufacturer's guidelines/
instructions, and thus, in compliance with the rule. In addition, other 
commenters note that this piece of equipment is supplemental and does 
not require FAA certification, therefore, it should not be included in 
the regulation.
    FAA response: The FAA agrees with the commenters who request that 
the certificated rigger should be held responsible for packing the 
parachute properly. However, this requirement is not new to the 
regulations. Certificated riggers have always been responsible for the 
proper rigging of a parachute, which is evident from the fact that the 
rigger is required to obtain a certificate. Section 65.129 of the 
regulations further requires that the certificated rigger ensure that 
parachutes are packed in accordance with the Administrator's and 
manufacturer's requirements. The FAA has adopted the revision of 
``supervision'' to ``direct supervision,'' and has included the phrase 
``takes responsibility for that packing'' in definition.
    The FAA cannot agree entirely with those commenters who believe 
that the pilot should not be held responsible for the safety of the 
parachute equipment. The FAA wants to retain this longstanding 
requirement in the final rule for more than one reason. First and 
foremost, the pilot is the final checkpoint for equipment that a 
parachutist encounters before jumping from the aircraft. The pilot 
merely verifies that the jumper's equipment is properly inspected, 
which is not a burdensome task. The FAA believes that the pilot should 
bear this burden because the pilot has responsibility for the safety of 
the parachutist(s) while they are aboard the aircraft and the FAA 
believes that this responsibility should include ensuring that the 
parachutist(s) are using proper equipment.
    The FAA agrees with the USPA's recommendation that a certificated 
rigger should be on the premises during parachute packing and available 
for personal consultation. The FAA also believes a certificated rigger 
should directly supervise the packing of the parachute. It is not 
sufficient, from a safety standpoint, to have a non-certificated person 
pack a parachute without a certificated rigger directly supervising the 
packing, and ensuring that it is done properly. Accordingly, 
Sec. 105.43(a) is adopted as proposed.
    With regard to the repack cycle, the 180-day and 6 month repack 
cycles were not part of the original proposal; therefore, they are 
outside the scope of this rulemaking. The requirement for a 120-day 
repack cycle is retained in the final rule.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenters' request to delete 
Sec. 105.43(b)(3), which requires that if AAD's are installed, they 
must be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. 
Although AAD's are not subject to approval under a TSO or airworthiness 
certification, the FAA believes this requirement is necessary for 
safety considerations, even though AAD's are an optional piece of 
equipment, except in tandem operations. Therefore, this requirement is 
retained in the final rule.
    The FAA also made a correction to the paragraph designation of this 
section. In the proposal, paragraph (b)(3) was incorrectly labeled; it 
has been correctly designated as paragraph (c) in the final rule.

Section 105.45  Use of Tandem Parachute Systems

    Proposal: This proposed section provided for tandem parachute 
operations, and incorporated the conditions and limitations, with some 
modification, set forth in the grants of exemption issued to 
experimental tandem parachute operators. These conditions and 
limitations include instructor experience requirements, briefings for 
passenger parachutists, equipment inspections, and packing 
requirements.
    In addition, the FAA proposed that a certificated parachute rigger 
supervise persons packing parachutes who are not certificated by the 
FAA, unless the person packing the parachute is a parachutist in 
command.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, recommend that 
manufacturer's directives for tandem parachute systems be made 
mandatory. The commenters also request that the number of freefall 
jumps to qualify as a tandem jump instructor be changed from 300 of 500 
freefall jumps with a ram air parachute to 500 freefall jumps, because 
currently, only ram air parachutes are used. According to the 
commenters, this change would reflect the recommendation by USPA and 
the manufacturers for tandem jump instructor qualifications.
    FAA response: The USPA's recommendation that the manufacturer's 
directives for tandem parachute systems should be mandatory is outside 
the scope of this rulemaking, and therefore, cannot be addressed at 
this time.
    The FAA has decided to eliminate the requirement that 300 of the 
500 freefall jumps must be made using a ram air parachute. The 
commenters correctly point out that round have long become obsolete. 
Today, almost all jumps are made with ram air parachutes. The FAA has 
changed this requirement to 500 jumps using a ram-air parachute in the 
final rule.

Section 105.47  Use of Static Lines

    Proposal: The current rule requires that no person may make a 
parachute jump using a static line unless an assist device is used to 
aid the pilot chute in performing its function, or if no pilot chute is 
used, to aid in the direct deployment of the main parachute canopy. The 
Notice proposed to remove the requirement that assist devices must be 
used with ram-air parachutes.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, submitted comments on 
this proposed section. The commenters ask that the term ``direct-
deployed'' be changed to ``direct-bag deployed'' and that the term 
``ram-air parachutes'' be replaced with the term ``ram-air canopies,'' 
because according to the commenters, these terms are used currently in 
the parachute industry.
    FAA response: The FAA does not agree with these commenters. The use 
of the terms ``ram-air canopies'' and ``ram-air parachutes'' are nearly 
synonymous in the parachute industry, as are the terms ``direct-bag 
deployed'' and ``direct

[[Page 23551]]

deployed.'' Therefore, these terms are adopted as proposed.

Section 105.49  Foreign Parachutists and Equipment

    Proposal: This new section will be added to address equipment and 
packing requirements for foreign parachutists. Only single-harness, 
dual-parachute systems which contain a non-technical standard order 
(TSO) reserve parachute or non-TSO'd harness and container would be 
allowed to be used in the United States by the owner or agent of that 
equipment. The parachute system used by the foreign parachutist must 
also meet the civil aviation authority requirements of the foreign 
parachutist's country, and must be packed by the foreign parachutist 
making the next parachute jump with that parachute, or a U.S. 
certificate parachute rigger.
    Comments: Several commenters, including the USPA, believe that this 
section needs clarification. For example, the commenters suggest that 
the FAA should clarify that when a foreign jumper brings a parachute 
system into the United States, the foreign parachute system should be 
subject to the U.S. repack cycle (120 days).
    FAA response: The FAA does not agree with the commenter's 
recommendations that the foreign parachute system should be subject to 
the U.S. repack cycle (120 days). The FAA has already determined that 
foreign parachute systems must meet the requirements of their country 
or its civil aviation authority. This section is incorporated into the 
final rule as proposed, with one exception. In the proposal, the two 
subparagraphs in paragraph (a)(4) were incorrectly labeled (a) and (b); 
they have been correctly designated as (i) and (ii), respectively, in 
the final rule.

Section 119.1  Applicability

    Proposal: Currently, Sec. 119.1(e)(6) provides an exception for 
nonstop flights conducted within a 25 statute mile radius of the 
airport of takeoff carrying persons for the purpose of intentional 
parachute jumps. The FAA proposed to amend this section to add the word 
``objects'' in addition to ``persons'' when a flight is conducted for 
intentional parachute operations.
    Comments: Several commenters, including USPA, submitted comments on 
this proposed section. Some commenters ask for the elimination of this 
section, as they claim it is unnecessary, given the nature of parachute 
operations today. Several other commenters, including USPA, suggest 
that the 25-statue mile limit be increased to a 100-statute mile limit 
of the departure airport.
    FAA response: The FAA does not agree with the commenters' requested 
changes. Since the request to increase the statute mile limit from 25 
to 100 statute miles from the airport of departure, is outside the 
scope of the Notice, it will not be considered in this action. 
Therefore, the language originally proposed in the Notice is retained 
in the final rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    At the NPRM stage of this final rule, the FAA proposed a 
requirement for accident reporting. Because this requirement involved 
the voluntary submission of information from the public on accidents 
involving parachute operations, the FAA prepared an estimate of the 
paperwork burden that would be required of the public and submitted it 
to OMB for approval. However, after reviewing the comments received 
from the public on the accident reporting proposal in the NPRM, the FAA 
has decided not to include this requirement in the final rule. 
Therefore, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3507(d)), the agency has determined that there are no longer 
information requirements associated with this final rule.

International Compatibility

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

Economic Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, 
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates 
Assessment

    Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several 
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs each Federal 
Agency to propose or adopt a regulation only if the agency makes a 
reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation 
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes 
on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531-
2533) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary 
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing 
U.S. standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider 
international standards. Where appropriate, agencies are directed to 
use those international standards as the basis of U.S. standards. And 
fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to 
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects 
of proposed or final rules. This requirement applies only to rules that 
include a Federal mandate on State, local, or tribal governments, or 
the private sector, likely to result in a total expenditure of $100 
million or more in any one year (adjusted for inflation).
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined this rule: (1) 
Has benefits which do justify its costs, is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' as defined in the Executive Order, and is not 
``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; 
(2) will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities; (3) will not impose restraints on international trade; and 
(4) does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal 
governments, or on the private sector. The FAA has placed these 
analyses in the docket and summarized them below.
    This final rule will amend the regulations that govern parachute 
operations. Amendments to the regulations reflect changes in the 
requirements applicable to radio communications, parachute packing, 
tandem parachute operations, and foreign parachutists. Through this 
rule, the FAA intends to enhance the safety of parachute operations in 
the National Airspace System (NAS).
    The benefits of the final rule are: (1) It should reduce the risk 
of a midair collision between aircraft and persons engaged in parachute 
operations, and reduce the risk of aircraft coming in close proximity 
to the parachutists in the vicinity of an airport or within controlled 
airspace; (2) it will revise some sections of the rule for better 
understanding; and (3) it will permit certain operations that currently 
are only allowed through exemptions granted by the FAA.
    The amendments to part 105 will impose negligible additional cost, 
if any, on parachutists, pilots of aircraft used in parachute 
operations, certificated parachute riggers, and drop zone operators. 
Major aspects of this rule such as the requirements for tandem 
parachute operations and for parachute jumps by foreign parachutists 
already are being met under exemptions granted by the FAA. Therefore, 
this rulemaking action will not impose additional business expenses on 
drop zone operators, parachute clubs, or foreign parachutists. Costs 
imposed on the FAA

[[Page 23552]]

are negligible, since the agency will not be required to provide 
additional oversight of parachute operations under the revision of 
parts 65, 91, 105, and 119.
    In view of the negligible additional cost of compliance to the 
final rule, compared with the improvements in operating procedures that 
enhance the safety of parachute operations, the FAA has determined that 
the final rule is cost-justified.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ``as a 
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, 
consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, 
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the 
business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to the 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale 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 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 a regulatory flexibility 
analysis is not required. The certification must include a statement 
providing the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning 
should be clear.
    The FAA conducted the required review of this final rule and 
determined that it will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The small entities affected by 
this final rule consist of parachutists, pilots of aircraft used in 
parachute operations, certificated riggers, and drop zone operators. 
The final rule will impose negligible additional cost, if any, on the 
entities. Major aspects of this rulemaking such as permitting tandem 
parachute operations will not impose additional business expenses for 
compliance on drop zone operators or parachute clubs because these 
entities currently adhere to the requirements of the rule through 
grants of exemptions issued by the FAA under part 105. Accordingly, 
pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FAA 
certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Statement

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from 
engaging in any standards or related activity that create unnecessary 
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate 
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary 
obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international 
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. 
standards. In addition, consistent with the Administrator's belief in 
the general superiority and desirability of free trade, it is the 
policy of the Administration to remove or diminish, to the extent 
feasible, barriers to international trade, including both barriers 
affecting the export of American goods and services to foreign 
countries and barriers affecting the import of foreign goods and 
services into the United States.
    The FAA has determined that the rule will promote parachuting by 
foreign parachutists in the United States. The final rule will permit 
foreign parachutists to jump in the United States using parachutes that 
are packed in their country of origin and thereby encourage foreign 
countries to grant permission for U.S. skydivers to jump in those 
countries using parachutes packed in the United States.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), enacted as Pub. 
L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, is intended, among other things, to curb 
the practice of imposing unfunded Federal mandates on State, local, and 
tribal governments.
    Title II of the Act 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 a $100 million or more 
expenditure (adjusted annually for inflation) 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.''
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do 
not apply.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final 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, or 
the relationship betwen the national Government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government. Therefore, the FAA has detemined that this final rule 
does not have federalism implications.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA actions that may be categorically 
excluded from preparation of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
environmental impact statement. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, 
appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this rulemaking action qualifies for a 
categorical exclusion.

Energy Impact

    The energy impact of the final rule has been assessed in accordance 
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Pub. L. 94-163, as 
amended (42 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. It has been determined 
that the final rule is not a major regulatory action under the 
provisions of the EPCA.

Distribution and Derivation Tables

    The following distribution table is provided to illustrates how the 
current regulation would relate to the revised part 105, and the 
derivation table identifies how the revised part 105 would relate to 
the current rule.

                           Distribution Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Old section                        New  section(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
105.1....................................  105.1
105.11...................................  105.1
105.13...................................  105.5
105.14...................................  105.13
105.15...................................  105.21
105.17...................................  105.23
105.19...................................  105.25
105.23...................................  105.25
105.25...................................  105.15
105.33...................................  105.19
105.35...................................  105.7
105.37...................................  105.9
105.41...................................  105.41
105.43...................................  105.43 and 105.47
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                            Derivation Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               New section                         Old section(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
105.1....................................  105.1 and 105.11

[[Page 23553]]

 
105.3....................................  New
105.5....................................  105.13
105.7....................................  105.35
105.9....................................  105.37
105.13...................................  105.14
105.15...................................  105.25
105.17...................................  105.29
105.19...................................  105.33
105.21...................................  105.15
105.23...................................  105.17
105.25...................................  105.19 and 105.23
105.41...................................  105.41
105.43...................................  105.43
105.45...................................  New
105.47...................................  105.43
------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 65

    Air traffic controllers, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Alcohol abuse, 
Drug abuse, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 91

    Afghanistan, Agriculture, Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 
Airports, Aviation safety, Canada, Cuba, Freight, Mexico, Noise 
control, Political candidates, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Yugoslavia.

14 CFR Part 105

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Recreation and recreation areas, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 119

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air carriers, Aircraft, 
Aviation safety, Charter flights, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends parts 65, 91, 105, and 119 of Title 14 Code of 
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 65--CERTIFICATION: AIRMEN OTHER THAN FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS

    1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-
44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.

    2. Section 65.111 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 65.111  Certificate required.

    (a) No person may pack, maintain, or alter any personnel-carrying 
parachute intended for emergency use in connection with civil aircraft 
of the United States (including the reserve parachute of a dual 
parachute system to be used for intentional parachute jumping) unless 
that person holds an appropriate current certificate and type rating 
issued under this subpart and complies with Secs. 65.127 through 
65.133.
    (b) No person may pack, maintain, or alter any main parachute of a 
dual-parachute system to be used for intentional parachute jumping in 
connection with civil aircraft of the United States unless that 
person--
    (1) Has an appropriate current certificate issued under this 
subpart;
    (2) Is under the supervision of a current certificated parachute 
rigger;
    (3) Is the person making the next parachute jump with that 
parachute in accordance with Sec. 105.43(a) of this chapter; or
    (4) Is the parachutist in command making the next parachute jump 
with that parachute in a tandem parachute operation conducted under 
Sec. 105.45(b)(1) of this chapter.
* * * * *

    3. Section 65.125 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and 
(b)(2) to read as follows:


Sec. 65.125  Certificates: Privileges.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Supervise other persons in packing any type of parachute for 
which that person is rated in accordance with Sec. 105.43(a) or 
Sec. 105.45(b)(1) of this chapter.
    (b) * * *
    (2) Supervise other persons in packing, maintaining, or altering 
any type of parachute for which the certificated parachute rigger is 
rated in accordance with Sec. 105.43(a) or Sec. 105.45(b)(1) of this 
chapter.
* * * * *

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 
articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation 
(61 stat. 1180).


    5. Section 91.307 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 91.307  Parachutes and parachuting.

* * * * *
    (b) Except in an emergency, no pilot in command may allow, and no 
person may conduct, a parachute operation from an aircraft within the 
United States except in accordance with part 105 of this chapter.
* * * * *

    6. Part 105 is revised to read as follows:

PART 105--PARACHUTE OPERATIONS

Subpart A--General
105.1  Applicability.
105.3  Definitions.
105.5  General.
105.7  use of alcohol and drugs.
105.9  Inspections.
Subpart B--Operating Rules
105.13  Federal RegisterRadio equipment and use requirements.
105.15  Information required and notice of cancellation or 
postponement of a parachute operation.
105.17  Flight visibility and clearance from cloud requirements.
105.19  Parachute operations between sunset and sunrise.
105.21  Parachute operations over or into a congested area or an 
open-air assembly of persons.
105.23  Parachute operations over or onto airports.
105.25  Parachute operations in designated airspace.
Subpart C--Parachute Equipment and Packing
105.41  Applicability.
105.43  Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.
105.45  Use of tandem parachute systems.
105.47  Use of static lines.
105.49  Foreign parachutists and equipment.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113-40114, 44701-44702, 44721.


Sec. 105.1  Applicability.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, 
this part prescribes rules governing parachute operations conducted in 
the United States.
    (b) This part does not apply to a parachute operation conducted--
    (1) In response to an in-flight emergency, or
    (2) To meet an emergency on the surface when it is conducted at the 
direction or with the approval of an agency of the United States, or of 
a State, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, or a possession of the 
United States, or an agency or political subdivision thereof.
    (c) Sections 105.5, 105.9, 105.13, 105.15, 105.17, 105.19 through 
105.23, 105.25(a)(1) and 105.27 of this part do not apply to a 
parachute operation

[[Page 23554]]

conducted by a member of an Armed Force--
    (1) Over or within a restricted area when that area is under the 
control of an Armed Force.
    (2) During military operations in uncontrolled airspace.


Sec. 105.3    Definitions.

    For the purposes of this part--
    Approved parachute means a parachute manufactured under a type 
certificate or a Technical Standard Order (C-23 series), or a 
personnel-carrying U.S. military parachute (other than a high altitude, 
high speed, or ejection type) identified by a Navy Air Facility, an 
Army Air Field, and Air Force-Navy drawing number, an Army Air Field 
order number, or any other military designation or specification 
number.
    Automatic Activation Device means a self-contained mechanical or 
electro-mechanical device that is attached to the interior of the 
reserve parachute container, which automatically initiates parachute 
deployment of the reserve parachute at a pre-set altitude, time, 
percentage of terminal velocity, or combination thereof.
    Direct Supervision means that a certificated rigger personally 
observes a non-certificated person packing a main parachute to the 
extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly, and takes 
responsibility for that packing.
    Drop Zone means any pre-determined area upon which parachutists or 
objects land after making an intentional parachute jump or drop. The 
center-point target of a drop zone is expressed in nautical miles from 
the nearest VOR facility when 30 nautical miles or less; or from the 
nearest airport, town, or city depicted on the appropriate Coast and 
Geodetic Survey World Aeronautical Chart or Sectional Aeronautical 
Chart, when the nearest VOR facility is more than 30 nautical miles 
from the drop zone.
    Foreign parachutist means a parachutist who is neither a U.S. 
citizen or a resident alien and is participating in parachute 
operations within the United States using parachute equipment not 
manufctured in the United States.
    Freefall means the portion of a parachute jump or drop between 
aircraft exit and parachute deployment in which the parachute is 
activated manually by the parachutist at the parachutist's discretion 
or automatically, or, in the case of an object, is activated 
automatically.
    Main parachute means a parachute worn as the primary parachute used 
or intended to be used in conjunction with a reserve parachute.
    Object means any item other than a person that descends to the 
surface from an aircraft in flight when a parachute is used or is 
intended to be used during all or part of the descent.
    Parachute drop means the descent of an object to the surface from 
an aircraft in flight when a parachute is used or intended to be used 
during all or part of that descent.
    Parachute jump means a parachute operation that involves the 
descent of one or more persons to the surface from an aircraft in 
flight when a aircraft is used or intended to be used during all or 
part of that descent.
    Parachute operation means the performance of all activity for the 
purpose of, or in support of, a parachute jump or a parachute drop. 
This parachute operation can involve, but is not limited to, the 
following persons: parachutist, parachutist in command and passenger in 
tandem parachute operations, drop zone or owner or operator, jump 
master, certificated parachute rigger, or pilot.
    Parachutist means a person who intends to exit an aircraft while in 
flight using a single-harness, dual parachute system to descend to the 
surface.
    Parachutist in command means the person responsible fro the 
operation and safety of a tandem parachute operation.
    Passenger parachutist means a person who boards an aircraft, acting 
as other than the parachutist in command of a tandem parachute 
operation, with the intent of existing the aircraft while in-flight 
using the forward harness of a dual harness tandem parachute system to 
descend to the surface.
    Pilot chute means a small parachute used to initiate and/or 
accelerate deployment of a main or reserve parachute.
    Ram-air parachute means a parachute with a canopy consisting of an 
upper and lower surface that is inflated by ram air entering through 
specially designed openings in the front of the canopy to form a 
gliding airfoil.
    Reserve parachute means an approved parachute worn for emergency 
use to be activated only upon failure of the main parachute or in any 
other emergency where use of the main parachute is impractical or use 
of the main parachute would increase risk.
    Single-harness, dual parachute system: means the combination of a 
main parachute, approved reserve parachute, and approved single person 
harness and dual-parachute container. This parachute system may have an 
operational automatic activation device installed.
    Tandem parachute operation: means a parachute operation in which 
more than one person simultaneously uses the same tandem parachute 
system while descending to the surface from an aircraft in flight.
    Tandem parachute system: means the combination of a main parachute, 
approved reserve parachute, and approved harness and dual parachute 
container, and a separate approved forward harness for a passenger 
parachutist. This parachute system must have an operational automatic 
activation device installed.


Sec. 105.5  General.

    No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from an aircraft, if that operation creates a hazard to air traffic or 
to persons or property on the surface.


Sec. 105.7  Use of alcohol and drugs.

    No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a person to conduct a parachute 
operation from that aircraft, if that person is or appears to be under 
the influence of--
    (a) Alcohol, or
    (b) Any drug that affects that person's faculties in any way 
contrary to safety.


Sec. 105.9  Inspections.

    The Administrator may inspect any parachute operation to which this 
part applies (including inspections at the site where the parachute 
operation is being conducted) to determine compliance with the 
regulations of this part.

Subpart B--Operating Rules


Sec. 105.13  Radio equipment and use requirements.

    (a) Except when otherwise authorized by air traffic control--
    (1) No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft, in or into controlled airspace unless, during that 
flight--
    (i) The aircraft is equipped with a functioning two-way radio 
communication system appropriate to the air traffic control facilities 
being used; and
    (ii) Radio communications have been established between the 
aircraft and the air traffic control facility having jurisdiction over 
the affected airspace of the first intended exit altitude at least 5 
minutes before the parachute operation begins. The pilot in command 
must establish radio communications to receive information regarding 
air traffic

[[Page 23555]]

activity in the vicinity of the parachute operation.
    (2) The pilot in command of an aircraft used for any parachute 
operation in or into controlled airspace must, during each flight--
    (i) Continuously monitor the appropriate frequency of the 
aircraft's radio communications system from the time radio 
communications are first established between the aircraft and air 
traffic control, until the pilot advises air traffic control that the 
parachute operation has ended for that flight.
    (ii) Advise air traffic control when the last parachutist or object 
leaves the aircraft.
    (b) Parachute operations must be aborted if, prior to receipt of a 
required air traffic control authorization, or during any parachute 
operation in or into controlled airspace, the required radio 
communications system is or becomes inoperative.


Sec. 105.15  Information required and notice of cancellation or 
postponement of a parachute operation.

    (a) Each person requesting an authorization under Secs. 105.21(b) 
and 105.25(a)(2) of this part and each person submitting a notification 
under Sec. 105.25(a)(3) of this part must provide the following 
information (on an individual or group basis):
    (1) The date and time the parachute operation will begin.
    (2) The radius of the drop zone around the target expressed in 
nautical miles.
    (3) The location of the center of the drop zone in relation to--
    (i) The nearest VOR facility in terms of the VOR radial on which it 
is located and its distance in nautical miles from the VOR facility 
when that facility is 30 nautical miles or less from the drop zone 
target; or
    (ii) the nearest airport, town, or city depicted on the appropriate 
Coast and Geodetic Survey World Aeronautical Chart or Sectional 
Aeronautical Chart, when the nearest VOR facility is more than 30 
nautical miles from the drop zone target.
    (4) Each altitude above mean sea level at which the aircraft will 
be operated when parachutists or objects exist the aircraft.
    (5) The duration of the intended parachute operation.
    (6) The name, address, and telephone number of the person who 
requests the authorization or gives notice of the parachute operation.
    (7) The registration number of the aircraft to be used.
    (8) The name of the air traffic control facility with jurisdiction 
of the airspace at the first intended exit altitude to be used for the 
parachute operation.
    (b) Each holder of a certificate of authorization issued under 
Secs. 105.21(b) and 105.25(b) of this part must present that 
certificate for inspection upon the request of the Administrator or any 
Federal, State, or local official.
    (c) Each person requesting an authorization under Secs. 105.21(b) 
and 105.25(a)(2) of this part and each person submitting a notice under 
Sec. 105.25(a)(3) of this part must promptly notify the air traffic 
control facility having jurisdiction over the affected airspace if the 
proposed or scheduled parachute operation is canceled or postponed.


Sec. 105.17  Flight visibility and clearance from cloud requirements.

    No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft--
    (a) Into or through a cloud, or
    (b) When the flight visibility or the distance from any cloud is 
less than that prescribed in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Flight visibility     Distance from
            Altitude                (statute miles)         clouds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,200 feet or less above the                       3  500 feet below,
 surface regardless of the MSL                         1,000 feet above,
 altitude.                                             2,000 feet
                                                       horizontal.
More than 1,200 feet above the                     3  500 feet below,
 surface but less than 10,000                          1,000 feet above,
 feet MSL.                                             2,000 feet
                                                       horizontal.
More than 1,200 feet above the                     5  1,000 feet below,
 surface and at or above 10,000                        1,000 feet above,
 feet MSL.                                             1 mile
                                                       horizontal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 105.19  Parachute operations between sunset and sunrise.

    (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a person to conduct a parachute 
operation from an aircraft between sunset and sunrise, unless the 
person or object descending from the aircraft displays a light that is 
visible for at least 3 statute miles.
    (b) The light required by paragraph (a) of this section must be 
displayed from the time that the person or object is under a properly 
functioning open parachute until that person or object reaches the 
surface.


Sec. 105.21  Parachute operations over or into a congested area or an 
open-air assembly of persons.

    (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft, over or into a congested area of a city, town, or 
settlement, or an open-air assembly of persons unless a certificate of 
authorization for that parachute operation has been issued under this 
section. However, a parachutist may drift over a congested area or an 
open-air assembly of persons with a fully deployed and properly 
functioning parachute if that parachutist is at a sufficient altitude 
to avoid creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface.
    (b) An application for a certificate of authorization issued under 
this section must--
    (1) Be made in the form and manner prescribed by the Administrator, 
and
    (2) Contain the information required in Sec. 105.15(a) of this 
part.
    (c) Each holder of, and each person named as a participant in a 
certificate of authorization issued under this section must comply with 
all requirements contained in the certificate of authorization.
    (d) Each holder of a certificate of authorization issued under this 
section must present that certificate for inspection upon the request 
of the Administrator, or any Federal, State, or local official.


Sec. 105.23  Parachute operations over or onto airports.

    No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft, over or onto any airport unless--
    (a) For airports with an operating control tower:
    (1) Prior approval has been obtained from the management of the 
airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport.

[[Page 23556]]

    (2) Approval has been obtained from the control tower to conduct 
parachute operations over or onto that airport.
    (3) Two-way radio communications are maintained between the pilot 
of the aircraft involved in the parachute operation and the control 
tower of the airport over or onto which the parachute operation is 
being conducted.
    (b) For airports without an operating control tower, prior approval 
has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct 
parachute operations over or on that airport.
    (c) A parachutist may drift over that airport with a fully deployed 
and properly functioning parachute if the parachutist is at least 2,000 
feet above that airport's traffic pattern, and avoids creating a hazard 
to air traffic or to persons and property on the ground.


Sec. 105.25  Parachute operations in designated airspace.

    (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft--
    (1) Over or within a restricted area or prohibited area unless the 
controlling agency of the area concerned has authorized that parachute 
operation;
    (2) Within or into a Class A, B, C, D airspace area without, or in 
violation of the requirements of, an air traffic control authorization 
issued under this section;
    (3) Except as provided in paragraph (c) and (d) of this section, 
within or into Class E or G airspace area unless the air traffic 
control facility having jurisdiction over the airspace at the first 
intended exit altitude is notified of the parachute operation no 
earlier than 24 hours before or no later than 1 hour before the 
parachute operation begins.
    (b) Each request for a parachute operation authorization or 
notification required under this section must be submitted to the air 
traffic control facility having jurisdiction over the airspace at the 
first intended exit altitude and must include the information 
prescribed by Sec. 105.15(a) of this part.
    (c) For the purposes of paragraph (a)(3) of this section, air 
traffic control facilities may accept a written notification from an 
organization that conducts parachute operations and lists the scheduled 
series of parachute operations to be conducted over a stated period of 
time not longer than 12 calendar months. The notification must contain 
the information prescribed by Sec. 105.15(a) of this part, identify the 
responsible persons associated with that parachute operation, and be 
submitted at least 15 days, but not more than 30 days, before the 
parachute operation begins. The FAA may revoke the acceptance of the 
notification for any failure of the organization conducting the 
parachute operations to comply with its requirements.
    (d) Paragraph (a)(3) of this section does not apply to a parachute 
operation conducted by a member of an Armed Force within a restricted 
area that extends upward from the surface when that area is under the 
control of an Armed Force.

Subpart C--Parachute Equipment and Packing


Sec. 105.41  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribed rules governing parachute equipment used in 
civil parachute operations.


Sec. 105.43  Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.

    No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, 
dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow 
any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a 
single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least 
one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved 
single person harness and container that are packed as follows:
    (a) The main parachute must have been packed within 120 days before 
the date of its use of a certificated parachute rigger, the person 
making the next jump with that parachute, or a non-certificated person 
under the direct supervision of a certification parachute rigger.
    (b) The reserve parachute must have been packed by a certificated 
parachute rigger--
    (1) Within 120 days before the date of its use, if its canopy, 
shroud, and harness are composed exclusively of nylon, rayon, or 
similar synthetic fiber or material that is substantially resistant to 
damage from mold, mildew, and other fungi, and other rotting agents 
propagated in a moist environment; or
    (2) Within 60 days before the date of its use, if it is composed of 
any amount of silk, pongee, or other natural fiber, or material not 
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (c) If installed, the automatic activation device must be 
maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions for that 
automatic activation device.


Sec. 105.45  Use of tandem parachute systems.

    (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem 
parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any 
person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a 
tandem parachute system, unless--
    (1) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is 
the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements:
    (i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must 
provide documentation that the parachutist--
    (ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using 
a ram-air parachute, and
    (iii) Holds a master parachute license issued by an organization 
recognized by the FAA, and
    (iv) Has successfully completed a tandem instructor course given by 
the manufacturer of the tandem parachute system used in the parachute 
operation or a course acceptable to the Administrator.
    (v) Has been certified by the appropriate parachute manufacturer or 
tandem course provider as being properly trained on the use of the 
specific tandem parachute system to be used.
    (2) The person acting as parachutist in command:
    (i) Has briefed the passenger parachutist before boarding the 
aircraft. The briefing must include the procedures to be used in case 
of an emergency with the aircraft or after exiting the aircraft, while 
preparing to exit and exiting the aircraft, freefall, operating the 
parachute after freefall, landing approach, and landing.
    (ii) Uses the harness position prescribed by the manufacturer of 
the tandem parachute equipment.
    (b) No person may make a parachute jump with a tandem parachute 
system unless--
    (1) The main parachute has been packed by a certificated parachute 
rigger, the parachutist in command making the next jump with that 
parachute, or a person under the direct supervision of a certificated 
parachute rigger.
    (2) The reserve parachute has been packed by a certificated 
parachute rigger in accordance with Sec. 105.43(b) of this part.
    (3) The tandem parachute system contains an operational automatic 
activation device for the reserve parachute, approved by the 
manufacturer of that tandem parachute system. The device must--
    (i) Have been maintained in accordance with manufacturer 
instructions, and
    (ii) Be armed during each tandem parachute operation.

[[Page 23557]]

    (4) The passenger parachutist is provided with a manual main 
parachute activation device and instructed on the use of that device, 
if required by the owner/operator.
    (5) The main parachute is equipped with a single-point release 
system.
    (6) The reserve parachute meets Technical Standard Order C23 
specifications.


Sec. 105.47  Use of static lines.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person 
may conduct a parachute operation using a static line attached to the 
aircraft and the main parachute unless an assist device, described and 
attached as follows, is used to aid the pilot chute in performing its 
function, or, if no pilot chute is used, to aid in the direct 
deployment of the main parachute canopy. The assist device must--
    (1) Be long enough to allow the main parachute container to open 
before a load is placed on the device.
    (2) Have a static load strength of--
    (i) At least 28 pounds but not more than 160 pounds if it is used 
to aid the pilot chute in performing its function; or
    (ii) At least 56 pounds but not more than 320 pounds if it is used 
to aid in the direct deployment of the main parachute canopy; and
    (3) Be attached as follows:
    (i) At one end, to the static line above the static-line pins or, 
if static-line pins are not used, above the static-line ties to the 
parachute cone.
    (ii) At the other end, to the pilot chute apex, bridle cord, or 
bridle loop, or, if no pilot chute is used, to the main parachute 
canopy.
    (b) No person may attach an assist device required by paragraph (a) 
of this section to any main parachute unless that person is a 
certificated parachute rigger or that person makes the next parachute 
jump with that parachute.
    (c) An assist device is not required for parachute operations using 
direct-deployed, ram-air parachutes.


Sec. 105.49  Foreign parachutists and equipment.

    (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in 
command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted 
from that aircraft with an unapproved foreign parachute system unless--
    (1) The parachute system is worn by a foreign parachutist who is 
the owner of that system.
    (2) The parachute system is of a single-harness dual parachute 
type.
    (3) The parachute system meets the civil aviation authority 
requirements of the foreign parachutist's country.
    (4) All foreign non-approved parachutes deployed by a foreign 
parachutist during a parachute operation conducted under this section 
shall be packed as follows--
    (i) The main parachute must be packed by the foreign parachutist 
making the next parachute jump with that parachute, a certificated 
parachute rigger, or any other person acceptable to the Administrator.
    (ii) The reserve parachute must be packed in accordance with the 
foreign parachutist's civil aviation authority requirements, by a 
certificated parachute rigger, or any other person acceptable to the 
Administrator.

PART 119--CERTIFICATION: AIR CARRIERS AND COMMERCIAL OPERATORS

    7. The authority citation for part 119 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 40102, 40103, 44105, 
44106, 44111, 44701-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 44904, 44906, 44912, 
44914, 44936, 44938, 46103, 46105.

    8. Section 119.1 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(6) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 119.1  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) Nonstop flights conducted within a 25-statute-mile radius of 
the airport of takeoff carrying persons or objects for the purpose of 
conducting intentional parachute operations.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 4, 2001.
Jane F. Garvey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-11726 Filed 5-8-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M