[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 237 (Monday, December 10, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63888-63895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30358]



[[Page 63887]]

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

Part V





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Part 91



Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2001 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 63888]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FAA-2000-8490; Amdt. No. 91-271]
RIN 2120-AH12


Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the list of airspace locations where 
Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) may be applied to include 
the New York Flight Information Region (FIR) portion of West Atlantic 
Route System (WATRS) airspace. RVSM is the reduction of vertical 
separation between aircraft at certain higher altitudes. RVSM is 
applied only between aircraft that meet stringent altimeter and auto-
pilot performance requirements. The introduction of RVSM in WATRS 
airspace will save operators fuel and time and will enhance airspace 
capacity. This rule also requires any aircraft that is equipped with 
Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System version II (TCAS II) and 
that is flying in RVSM airspace to incorporate a version of TCAS II 
that is compatible with RVSM operations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Maloy, Flight Technologies and 
Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, AFS-400, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591, telephone (860) 654-1006.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    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 notice. Click on ``search.''
    (3) On the next page, which contains the Docket summary information 
for the Docket you selected, click on the document number for the item 
you wish to view.
    You can also get an electronic copy using the Internet through the 
Office of Rulemaking's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/armhome.htm 
or the Federal Register 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 
rulemaking.

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.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm. For more information on SBREFA, e-mail 
us at [email protected].

Background

    This final rule is based on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 
No. 00-16 published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2000 (65 FR 
79283). That NPRM proposed to amend Appendix G of 14 CFR part 91, 
Operations within Airspace designated as Reduced Vertical Separation 
Minimum (RVSM) Airspace. RVSM is the reduction of vertical separation 
between aircraft from 2,000 feet to 1,000 feet at flight levels (FLs) 
between FL 290 (29,000 feet) and FL 410 (41,000 feet).

Statement of the Problem

    Air traffic in WATRS airspace has increased steadily in the past 
few years and is projected to continue to increase. Between 1997 and 
1999, the annual traffic count in the WATRS airspace increased from 
72,020 to 109,044 flights. This represents an increase of 51 percent. 
This is a result of a resurgence of activity after several years of 
economic downturn. The Office of International Operations for the FAA's 
New York Enroute Air Traffic Center estimates a similar increase over 
at least the next several years, assuming the economy stays healthy. A 
substantial portion of the increase is the Europe to Caribbean traffic 
that overflies the WATRS airspace.
    Unless efficiency is improved, the FAA may not be able to 
accommodate these greater numbers of aircraft without altitude 
restrictions that can result in traffic delays and fuel penalties. RVSM 
alleviates the limitation on air traffic management at high altitudes 
imposed by the conventional 2,000-foot vertical separation standard. 
Increasing the number of flight levels available in the WATRS airspace 
is projected to provide operator benefits similar to those achieved in 
the North Atlantic (NAT) and Pacific (PAC). Operators will save fuel 
and time by using optimum altitudes and tracks.
    In the WATRS airspace, the FAA plans to initially implement RVSM 
between FL 310 and FL 390 (inclusive). This is in line with the 
altitudes in the NAT.

Oversight for Implementation

    The New York Oceanic Capacity Enhancements Task Force (NYOCETF) 
(the Task Force), provides oversight for plans and policy related to:
    1. Changes to separation minima.
    2. Issues relating to traffic management.
    3. Airspace/ATS Routes.
    4. Standardization of ATC and Operator procedures.
    5. Contingency procedures.
    6. Communication issues.
    7. Status of oceanic ATC automation.
    The NYOCETF is the body that is developing WATRS RVSM 
implementation plans. The New York Air Route Traffic Control Center 
(ARTCC) Plans and Procedures Manager chairs the Task Force. The Task 
Force is using the policy and criteria developed in International Civil 
Aviation Organization (ICAO) forums to build the RVSM program for the 
WATRS airspace.

History of RVSM

    Rising traffic volume and fuel costs, which made flight at fuel-
efficient altitudes a priority for operators, sparked an interest in 
the early 1970s in implementing RVSM above FL 290. In April 1973, the 
Air Transport Association of America (ATA) petitioned the FAA for a 
rule change to reduce the vertical separation minimum to 1,000 feet for 
aircraft operating above FL 290. The petition was denied in 1977 in 
part because (1) aircraft altimeters had not been improved 
sufficiently, (2) improved maintenance and operational standards had 
not been developed, and (3) altitude correction was not available in 
all aircraft. In addition, the cost of modifying nonconforming aircraft 
was prohibitive. The FAA concluded that granting the ATA petition at 
that time would have adversely affected safety. Nevertheless, the FAA 
recognized the

[[Page 63889]]

potential benefits of RVSM under certain circumstances and continued to 
review technological developments, committing extensive resources to 
studying aircraft altitude-keeping performance and necessary criteria 
for safely reducing vertical separation above FL 290. Data showing that 
RVSM implementation is technically and economically feasible has been 
published in studies conducted cooperatively in international forums, 
as well as separately by the FAA.
    Because of the high standard of performance and equipment required 
for RVSM, the FAA advocated initial introduction of RVSM in oceanic 
airspace where special navigation performance standards were already 
required. Special navigation areas require high levels of long-range 
navigation precision due to the separation standard applied. RVSM 
implementation in such airspace requires an increased level of 
precision demanded of operators, aircraft, and vertical navigation 
systems.
    On March 27, 1997, RVSM was implemented in one such special 
navigation area of operation established in the ICAO NAT Region, the 
NAT Minimum Navigation Performance Specification (MNPS) airspace. In 
designated NAT MNPS airspace, tracks are spaced 60 nautical miles (NM) 
apart. Between FLS 310 and 390 (inclusive), aircraft are separated 
vertically by 1000 feet. All aircraft operating in this airspace must 
be appropriately equipped and capable of meeting required lateral 
navigation performance standards of 14 CFR 91.705 and the vertical 
navigation performance standards of 91.706. Operators must follow 
procedures that ensure that the navigation standards are met. Flight 
crews must also be trained on RVSM policy and procedures. Each 
operator, aircraft, and navigation system combination must receive and 
maintain authorization to operate in the NAT MNPS. The North Atlantic 
Systems Planning Group (NATSPG) Central Monitoring Agency (CMA) 
monitors NAT aircraft fleet performance to ensure that a safe operating 
environment is maintained.
    In addition, Pacific RVSM was implemented on February 24, 2000. The 
Asia/Pacific Approval Registry and Monitoring Agency performs the 
function of the CMA in the Pacific.

Current Aircraft Capabilities

    FAA data indicate that the altitude-keeping performance of most 
aircraft flying in oceanic airspace meet the standards for RVSM 
operations. The FAA and ICAO research to determine the feasibility of 
implementing RVSM included the following four efforts:
    1. FAA Vertical Studies Program. This program began in mid-1981, 
with the objectives of collecting and analyzing data on aircraft 
performance in maintaining assigned altitude, developing program 
requirements to reduce vertical separation, and providing technical and 
operational representation on the various working groups studying the 
issue outside the FAA.
    2. RTCA Special Committee (SC)-150. RTCA, Inc., (formerly Radio 
Technical Commission for Aeronautics). This committee is an industry 
organization in Washington, DC, that addresses aviation technical 
requirements and concepts, and procedures, recommended standards. When 
the FAA hosted a public meeting in early 1982 on vertical separation, 
it was recommended that RTCA be the forum for development of minimum 
system performance standards for RVSM. RTCA SC-150 was formed in March 
1982 to develop minimum system performance requirements, identify 
required improvements to aircraft equipment and changes to operational 
procedures, and assess the impact of the requirements on the aviation 
community. SC-150 served as the focal point for the study and 
development of RVSM criteria and programs in the United States from 
1982 to 1987, including analysis of the results of the FAA Vertical 
Studies Program.
    3. ICAO Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP). 
In 1987, the FAA concentrated its resources for the development of RVSM 
programs in the ICAO RGCSP. The U.S. delegation to the ICAO RGCSP used 
the material developed by SC-150 as the foundation for U.S. positions 
and plans on RVSM criteria and programs. The panel's major conclusions 
were:
     RVSM is technically feasible without imposing unreasonably 
demanding technical requirements on the equipment.
     RVSM provides significant benefits in terms of economy and 
en route airspace capacity.
     Implementation of RVSM on either a regional or global 
basis requires sound operational judgment supported by an assessment of 
system performance based on: aircraft altitude-keeping capability, 
operational considerations, system performance monitoring, and risk 
assessment.
    4. NATSPG and the NATSPG Vertical Separation Implementation Group 
(VSIG). The NATSPG Task Force was established in 1988 to identify the 
requirements to be met by the future NAT Region air traffic services 
system; to design the framework for the NAT airspace system concept; 
and to prepare a general plan for the phased introduction of the 
elements of the concept. The objective of this effort was to permit 
significant increases in airspace capacity and improvements in flight 
economy. At the meeting of the NATSPG in June 1991, all of the NAT air 
traffic service provider States, as well as the International Air 
Transport Association (IATA) and International Federation of Airline 
Pilots Association (IFALPA), endorsed the Future NAT Air Traffic 
Services System Concept Description developed by the NATSPG Task Force. 
With regard to the implementation of RVSM, the Concept Description 
concludes that priority must be given to implementation of this measure 
as it is believed to be achievable within the early part of the concept 
timeframe. The NATSPG's initial goal was to implement RVSM between 1996 
and 1997. To meet this goal, the NATSPG established the VSIG in June 
1991 to take the necessary actions to implement RVSM in the NAT. These 
actions included:
     Programs, and supporting documents, to approve aircraft 
and operators for conducting flight in the RVSM environment and to 
address all issues related to aircraft airworthiness, maintenance, and 
operations. The group has produced guidance material for aircraft and 
operator approval that ICAO has distributed to civil aviation 
authorities and NAT users. Also, ICAO has planned that the guidance 
material be incorporated in the approal process established by the 
States.
     Developing the system for monitoring aircraft altitude-
keeping performance. This system is used to observe aircraft 
performance in the vertical plane to determine that the approval 
process is uniformly effective and that the RVSM airspace system is 
safe.
     Evaluating and developing Air Traffic Control (ATC) 
procedures for RVSM, conducting simulation studies to assess the effect 
of RVSM on ATC, and developing documents to address ATC issues.
    The ICAO Limited NAT Regional Air Navigation Meeting held in 
Portugal in November 1992 endorsed the NATSPG RVSM implementation 
program. At that meeting, it was concluded that RVSM implementation 
should be pursued. The FAA concurred with the conclusions of the NATSPG 
on RVSM implementation.

[[Page 63890]]

Discussion of Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) 
II, Version 7.0 for RVSM Operations

    Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) is a general 
term for equipment that warns pilots of nearby aircraft and provides 
collision avoidance protection. It is designed to serve as a safety 
back-up to the air traffic control system.
    TCAS I warns pilots of the potential for collision by providing 
traffic advisories (TAs). These TAs show where another aircraft is 
relative to the TCAS-equipped aircraft. TAs generally include the 
range, altitude, and bearing of the intruding aircraft.
    TCAS II provides both TAs and recommended vertical escape 
maneuvers, known as resolution advisories (RAs) Resolution advisories 
provide pilots with information to change a flight path or prevent a 
maneuver that could cause insufficient separation between airplanes. 
TCAS II also coordinates RAs between two TCAS-equipped airplanes (i.e., 
each pilot would receive an RA that would not conflict with the other 
RA).
    The regulations require under 14 CFR sections 121.356, 125.224, and 
135.180, that certain aircraft must be operated with TCAS II, or an 
equivalent, and the appropriate class of Mode S transponder. Certain 
other aircraft may be operated with TCAS I or its equivalent. 
Airworthiness Directives issued to the avionics manufacturers in 1994 
require that those aircraft that are required to be TACS II equipped be 
equipped with TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced. Approximately 90% of the 
flights now conducted in RVSM airspace are equipped with TCAS II, 
version 6.04 Enhanced.
    This rule will require that aircraft operated in RVSM airspace and 
equipped with TCAS II, must be modified to incorporate collision 
avoidance system logic software Version 7.0, or a later version. 
Version 7.0 is necessary because only Version 7.0 and later versions 
incorporate revised alert thresholds for traffic alerts (TA) and 
resolution advisories (RA) for flight levels (FL) 300 through FL 420 
that are compatible with RVSM operations. The alert thresholds in 
Version 6.04 Enhanced are not totally compatible with RVSM operations. 
The logic for these alert thresholds does not consider the reduced 
separation in RVSM airspace and occasionally causes false alerts.
    This rule will not require aircraft in RVSM airspace to be equipped 
with TCAS II. Other rules regulate which aircraft are required to be 
equipped with TCAS II. The rule will, however, require any aircraft 
that is equipped with TCAS II to use Version 7.0 to be approved to fly 
in RVSM airspace.

Status of TCAS I

    TCAS I is compatible with RVSM operations and no modifications are 
necessary.

Background of TCAS II Operation in RVSM Airspace

    RVSM was implemented in North Atlantic (NAT) Minimum Navigation 
Specifications Airspace (NAT MNPSA) in March 1997. In preparation for 
RVSM implementation, the North Atlantic System Planning Group (NATSPG) 
Operations/Airworthiness (Ops/Air) group reviewed the effect that RVSM 
would have on the operation of TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced in NAT 
oceanic airspace. The group recognized that TCAS II, Version 6.04 
Enhanced was designed with a TA alert threshold of 1,200 feet for FL 
300 through FL 420 and would produce inappropriate TA's for aircraft 
that were separated in RVSM airspace by 1,000 feet vertically, 
especially in certain situations. For example, the group recognized 
that in situations where two aircraft were separated by 1,000 feet 
vertically and one nautical mile or less longitudinally, on the same 
track and proceeding in the same direction at approximately the same 
speed, TA's could be received in the cockpit repeatedly over an 
extended period of time. The group observed, however, that the traffic 
levels in oceanic airspace are low relative to continental operations 
and operations are relatively stable (i.e., aircraft generally climb or 
descend infrequently). For this reason, it concluded that TCAS II, 
Version 6.04 Enhanced was acceptable during the early stages of RVSM 
operations in oceanic airspace provided pilots were informed on the 
operating characteristics of TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced operations 
in RVSM airspace. To inform pilots of the potential problem with 
Version 6.04, the group developed and distributed a document to educate 
pilots on these characteristics. The document also recommended that 
pilots limit their vertical speed to 1,000 feet per minute when close 
to other aircraft to reduce the number of unnecessary alerts.
    RVSM has been implemented for over three years in North Atlantic 
airspace and since February 2000 in the Pacific oceanic Flight 
Information Regions. In that time, TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced has 
proven generally acceptable for RVSM operations in oceanic airspace. 
Multiple TA events have, however, been found to occur in situations 
where aircraft are on the same track, speed and direction with one 
nautical mile or less longitudinal spacing.

How Unnecessary TA's May Affect Safety

    TCAS provides an aural TA in the form of the announcement 
``Traffic, Traffic'' in the cockpit. The ``Traffic, Traffic'' 
announcement repeated over a period of time distracts the pilot from 
the execution of his or her duties and produces the potential to cause 
a pilot error. As an example, during the flight, pilots program 
navigation computers with a series of numbers representing positions on 
the route of flight. A distraction while programming the navigation 
computer can cause the pilot to make an error that results in the 
aircraft straying from its assigned route and posing a hazard to itself 
and other aircraft.

Increase in RVSM Operations

    As air traffic increases in areas where RVSM is currently 
implemented and as RVSM is implemented in new areas, there will be more 
aircraft conducting RVSM flights and increased exposure to distracting 
TA's. Air traffic in NAT and Pacific oceanic airspace where RVSM has 
already been implemented is projected to increase 4-6% each year. New 
RVSM implementations are planned in the near future in airspace over 
the Western and South Atlantic, the western Pacific, and the Caribbean. 
The number of RVSM flights will continue to increase and therefore, the 
probability of aircraft experiencing distracting multiple TA's will 
also increase.

TCAS II, Version 7.0 Compatibility With RVSM Operations

    To avoid the potential for an increase in distracting TA's that can 
lead to pilot errors, those aircraft that are used in RVSM operations 
that are equipped with TCAS II systems must be modified to incorporate 
a version of TCAS that is compatible with RVSM operations. TCAS II, 
Version 7.0 was designed to be compatible with RVSM operations and 
mitigates the occurrence of unnecessary TA's in RVSM operations. In 
TCAD, Version 7.0, the TA alert threshold between flight levels 300 and 
420 is reduced from 1,200 feet to 850 feet. This revision will 
eliminate unwarranted TA's between aircraft that are correctly 
separated by 1,000 feet vertically in RVSM airspace.

[[Page 63891]]

ICAO and Foreign Standards

    ICAO Annexes and civil aviation authorities in foreign countries 
have already established standards and requirements for specified 
aircraft to be equipped with TCAS II, Version 7.0. ACAS II is the ICAO 
term that describes aircraft collision avoidance systems and related 
equipment. To comply with ICAO ACAS II Standards, Version 7.0 must be 
incorporated in TCAS II. The aircraft covered and compliance dates for 
ACAS II (TCAS II, Version 7.0) are discussed in the paragraph below.

Part 91, Section 91.703 Requirements Applicable to U.S. Operations

    Various countries throughout the world have adopted the ICAO Annex 
6 requirements discussed below for ACAS II equipage in their airspace. 
In some major areas, countries and regions have adopted accelerated 
equipage compliance dates. Because 14 CFR 91.703 requires United States 
operators to comply with the regulations of the countries in which they 
are operating, the ACAS II equipage requirements of foreign countries 
have already required United States operators to plan to equip with 
Version 7.0.
    Section 91.703 is entitled ``Operations of civil aircraft of U.S. 
registry outside of the United States''. Paragraph 91.703(a)(2) states 
that each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside 
the United States shall ``when within a foreign country, comply with 
the regulations relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there 
in force''.

ICAO Annex 6 Standards for ACAS II Equipage.

    ICAO Annex 6 (Operation of Aircraft), part 1 (International 
Commercial Air Transport--Aeroplanes), paragraph 6.18 contains 
standards calling for TCAS II, Version 7.0 (ACAS II) equipage for 
specified aircraft by January 1, 2003. Specifically, it states that all 
turbine-engined aircraft with a maximum certified take-off mass (gross 
weight) that exceeds 15,000 kg (33,000 pounds) or authorized to carry 
more than 30 passengers shall be equipped with ACAS II by January 1, 
2003. Annex 6 also calls for all aircraft to be equipped with a 
pressure altitude reporting transponder that operates in accordance 
with the relevant provisions of ICAO Annex 10.

Asia/Pacific Regional Standards for ACAS II

    The ICAO Regional Supplements for the Middle East/Asia and the 
Pacific are published in the ICAO document entitled ``Regional 
Supplementary Procedures'' (ICAO Doc 7030). Those regional Supplements 
call for TCAS II, Version 7.0 equipage for the aircraft specified in 
Annex 6 by January 1, 2000. Since Version 7.0 was not widely available 
from avionics manufacturers, most aircraft were not able to meet that 
date. In response, the Asia/Pacific Air Navigation Planning and 
Implementation Regional Group (APAN/PIRG) has adopted a regional policy 
that calls for the specified aircraft to be equipped by January 1, 
2002.

North Atlantic Regional Standards for ACAS II

    The ICAO Doc 7030 Regional Supplement for the NAT Regional calls 
for TCAS II, Version 7.0 equipage for the aircraft specified in Annex 6 
by March 31, 2001. (The ICAO NAT Region encompasses most of WATRS 
airspace).

European Country Requirements for ACAS II

    The requirements for ACAS II equipage in European countries have 
been published in the European Regional Supplements contained in ICAO 
DOC 7030. European Supplement paragraph 16.1 (Carriage and operation of 
ACAS II) calls for the aircraft specified in Annex 6, Part 1 to be ACAS 
II equipped by January 1, 2000. In response to the lack of availability 
of Version 7.0, the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) member 
States have granted exemptions to allow aircraft to continue to operate 
until March 31, 2001 with TCAS, Version 6.04 Enhanced.

Requirements for TCAS II, Version 7.0 in Countries in the Pacific and 
Asian Regions

    The ICAO Bangkok office has conducted a survey of countries in Asia 
and the Pacific to determine those countries that have established or 
plan to establish requirements for ACAS II equipage in their airspace. 
To date, 28 countries have established or are developing requirements 
for operators to equip by the ICAO Annex 6 compliance date of January 
1, 2003 or sooner. This list includes: Australia, China, Japan, Korea, 
New Zealand and Singapore.

Effect of Linking TCAS, II, Version 7.0 Equipage to RVSM Operations

    The rule requires aircraft that are used in RVSM operations and 
equipped with TCAS II to be equipped with Version 7.0 because it is 
compatible with RVSM operations. Because other countries and ICAO 
Regions are already requiring ACAS II (Version 7.0), however, the 
economic and aircraft engineering impact directly related to this rule 
will be minimal.
    RVSM is currently applied only in certain major oceanic airspace 
outside the U.S.--the NAT and Pacific. As detailed above, requirements 
for TCAS II, Version 7.0 have already been established for operators 
and aircraft operating outside the US to destinations in Europe, Asia 
and the Pacific. Since operators will already be required to equip with 
TCAS II, Version 7.0 to operate in the airspace of most countries in 
the Pacific and European regions, the effect of requiring TCAS II, 
Version 7.0 for RVSM operations after March 31, 2002 will be minimal.

Compliance Date for Version 7.0

    This amendment requires operators to incorporate Version 7.0 
software into TCAS II equipped airplanes used in RVSM operations by 
March 31, 2002. The following are factors considered in this decision.
    First, there have not been adequate numbers of Version 7.0 units 
and upgrade kits available to operators. TCAS II, Version 7.0 
requirement for European airspace was delayed to March 31, 2001 for 
this reason. To allow time for adequate numbers of Version 7.0 units 
and upgrade kits to be made available following the European compliance 
date, the FAA is delaying its TCAS II Version 7.0 requirement for RVSM 
operations to March 31, 2002. This will allow 12 months after the 
initial demand for Version 7.0 to meet the European requirement.
    Second, incorporation of Version 7.0 in TCAS II unites is not a 
major aircraft engineering effort. Incorporation of Version 7.0 is a 
software change. Existing equipment is removed from the aircraft and 
the Version 7.0 modification is accomplished by an authorized service 
facility. Considering these factors, the FAA believes establishing a 
requirement for incorporation of Version 7.0 for operations after March 
31, 2002 will provide adequate time for aircraft not affected by the 
European requirements to comply.

Discussion of Comments

    The FAA received comments on the proposed rule from the following 6 
organizations:
    (1) The Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA).
    (2) Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA).
    (3) Cessna Aircraft Company.
    (4) General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA).
    (5) The Department of Defense (DOD).
    (6) The Coalition of Airlines Pilots Association (CAPA).

[[Page 63892]]

    1. ATCA Comments. ATCA states that it concurs with the proposed 
rule to implement RVSM in WATRS airspace and also concurs with the 
requirement that aircraft equipped with TCAS incorporate a version of 
TCAS that is compatible with RVSM operations. ATCA also states that the 
rule offers the prospect of greater availability of the most time and 
efficient tracks and routes as well as increased capacity in the North 
Atlantic Route System.

FAA Response

    ATCA comments support publication of the final rule. No FAA 
response required.
    2. AOPA Comments. AOPA states that procedures such as WATRS RVSM 
will likely have minimal short-term repercussions. AOPA is concerned 
that the introduction of exclusionary RVSM airspace brings the 
potential to improve service to participating users at the expense of 
non-RVSM operators. AOPA's greater concern is that RVSM procedures, and 
with them new equipment mandates and certification processes, will 
reduce access afforded to some operators if implemented domestically 
within the United States.

FAA Response

    This rule only affects WATRS airspace, not domestic airspace. The 
FAA will give careful consideration to AOPA's concern in any future 
rulemaking.
    3. Cessna Aircraft Company Comments. Cessna states that it will not 
have an adequate number of modification kits to be able to meet WATRS 
RVSM requirements by the compliance dates proposed in the NPRM.

FAA Response

    First, aircraft that are not RVSM compliant retain the option to 
operate above and/or below RVSM airspace. The option for unapproved 
aircraft to climb through RVSM flight levels to operate above RVSM 
airspace has been used successfully in both North Atlantic and Pacific 
operations, and it will be available to WATRS operators. Aircraft that 
are not RVSM compliant may also operate below WATRS RVSM airspace. 
Maximum leg lengths across WATRS RVSM airspace are approximately two 
hours. Fuel consumption at lower altitudes for two hours or less should 
not provide unacceptable operational limitations.
    Second, the FAA provided industry with over 3 years of notice of 
its intent to implement WATRS RVSM. The FAA announced its intention to 
implement RVSM in the New York FIR portion of WATRS airspace at the New 
York Oceanic Capacity Enhancement Task Force on August 28, 1998. The 
FAA believes it has given the aircraft manufacturers and operator 
community adequate time to prepare for WATRS RVSM implementation and 
has made extensive efforts to keep them informed on the progress of 
implementation plans. RVSM has been implemented for over four years in 
the North Atlantic and for a year and a half in the PAC. Operators and 
aircraft manufacturers have been well informed of the planned expansion 
of RVSM to other airspace.
    4. General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA). GAMA states 
that its member companies support the planned implementation of RVSM 
where airspace is congested. However, it is concerned that the proposed 
rule to implement RVSM in WATRS on November 1, 2001 may not allow 
enough time for the fleet to be properly equipped.

FAA Response

    The FAA responses to the Cessna comments also apply to the GAMA 
comments.
    Additionally, by November 1, 2001, a significant majority of 
flights are projected to be conducted by RVSM compliant aircraft. As of 
May 2001 (six months prior to the planned implementation date), 75 
percent of all flights operating at and above FL 290 in WATRS airspace 
had already been approved for RVSM operations. The FAA has observed a 
steady increase in the number of RVSM approved aircraft and projects 
that by November 1 RVSM compliant aircraft will conduct a significant 
majority of WATRS flights. In addition, business aviation aircraft 
conduct approximately 7.5 per cent of the flights in WATRS airspace. As 
of May, 51% of business jets operating above FL 290 in WATRS airspace 
had already been RVSM approved. The FAA anticipates that this 
percentage will continue to increase as implementation approaches. The 
FAA estimates that the percentage of WATRS flights projected to be 
conducted by unapproved business jets will be 3% or less.
    5. DOD Comments. DOD is concerned that it would have to separately 
notify each sector/center in the route of flight when an aircraft is 
not RVSM approved. DOD requests that the FAA adopt the following 
guidance: ``For operational purposes, it is the desire of the 
Department of Defense that filing of a routine flight plan will suffice 
for advance notification of non-RVSM equipped aircraft and request that 
the first oceanic center make all subsequent coordination.''

FAA Response

    The FAA accepts the DOD's recommendation. Specifically, filing a 
flight plan for non-RVSM equipped aircraft is adequate advance notice 
to ATC and no additional notice is required.
    6. CAPA Comments. CAPA does not object in principle to the concept 
of reducing vertical separation, as long as safety is not compromised. 
CAPA states, however, that reducing vertical separation minima without 
requiring TCAS for all aircraft will jeopardize safety.

FAA Response

    The FAA does not agree that reducing separation without requiring 
TCAS equipage will create a safety problem. The FAA does recognize, 
however, the significant enhancements to operational safety provided by 
TCAS. In its comments on this issue below, the FAA discusses the FAA 
and ICAO initiatives that should lead to increased TCAS equipage in 
oceanic operations. The FAA does not agree with the CAPA position for 
the following reasons:
    First, 1,000-foot vertical separation has been applied below flight 
level 290 since the early 1960's (over 40 years) without special 
aircraft equipage or performance requirements, including TCAS. ICAO 
Annex 2 (Rules of the Air), Appendix 3 (Table of Cruising Levels) 
provides for 1,000 ft vertical separation to be applied globally below 
FL 290.
    Second, standardized aircraft altitude-keeping performance and 
pilot/controller contingency procedures maintain safe RVSM operations. 
Section 91.706 and Appendix G require that for an aircraft to be 
approved for RVSM operations, the aircraft altimetry systems, automatic 
altitude-keeping devices and altitude alerters must meet stringent 
performance requirements.\1\ In addition, pilot and controller 
procedures in contingencies and emergencies were developed and revised 
prior to RVSM implementation. Pilot and controller actions in events 
such as aircraft system malfunctions, turbulence encounters and wake 
turbulence encounters have proven to be effective over the past four 
and one half years of RVSM operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Aircraft equipage and performance were developed in the ICAO 
Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP) and 
published in ICAO Document 9574 in 1992. Section 91.706 and Appendix 
G reflect the ICAO requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, RVSM has been applied successfully without a TCAS 
requirement since March 1997 in North Atlantic oceanic airspace and 
since

[[Page 63893]]

February 2000 in Pacific airspace. Over that period of time, 
approximately 1.7 million flights have been conducted in RVSM airspace 
and approximately 7.2 million hours of RVSM successful flight 
experience have been accumulated. NAT airspace has the highest traffic 
density of any oceanic airspace in the world. Between 900 to 1100 
flights are conducted each day in the RVSM airspace of the North 
Atlantic. The busiest route system in the Pacific is the North Pacific 
Route System (NOPAC) where approximately 175 flights are conducted each 
day and in the entire Pacific, approximately 440 flights operate per 
day.
    Fourth, monitoring of system safety has shown that the probability 
of collision in RVSM operations is extremely low when measured against 
the agreed Target Level of Safety (TLS). The ICAO recommended Target 
Level of Safety applied in the vertical dimension is five fatal 
accidents in one billion hours of flight time. Both NAT and Pac RVSM 
airspace have been assessed against this TLS. When considering the 
major components of Collision Risk Modeling (CRM), RVSM operations have 
been shown to meet the TLS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The major CRM components are: Traffic density, aircraft 
altitude-keeping performance and the frequency of large errors 
attributed to human and aircraft system errors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicability of CAPA Comments to TCAS Rulemaking

    The FAA believes that the CAPA comments relate more specifically to 
the benefits of TCAS as a safety net in general operations. We do not 
believe that the CAPA recommendation for TCAS equipage is relevant to 
the expansion of 1,000-foot vertical separation above FL 290. The FAA 
has reviewed incidents where TCAS could have or did contribute to the 
prevention of an accident. None of these incidents occurred in airspace 
where RVSM is applied and many of them occurred below FL 290.

Current Rule Projects Related to TCAS Equipage.

    There are efforts under way in the United States to revise the 
regulations related to TCAS equipage. Also, ICAO has published 
Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) that address TCAS eqipage. 
The status of these efforts is as follows:

Revision of Regulations Related to TCAS Eqipage.

    In response to an Independent Pilot Association (IPA) petition for 
rulemaking, the FAA is developing an NPRM. We believe that the CAPA 
comments are more applicable to this effort than to RVSM rulemaking.

ICAO Annex 6 (Operation of Aircraft).

    In November 1998, Annex 6 Part 1 (International Commercial 
Transport Airplanes) was amended to require TCAS equipage by January 1, 
2003 for aircraft in excess of 15,000 kg (33,000 pounds) takeoff weight 
or authorized to carry more than 30 passengers. By January 1, 2005, 
aircraft in excess of 5,700 kg (12,500 pounds) take off weight or 
authorized to carry more than 19 passengers will be required to be TCAS 
equipped. In addition, Annex 6 Part II (International General Aviation 
Airplanes) has been amended to require IGA aircraft eqipage with a 
pressure altitude reporting transponder by January 1, 2003. This 
amendment was made to enhance the effectiveness of TCAS operations.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The reporting and recording keeping requirements associated with 
this rule remain the same as under current rules and have previously 
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), 
and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0026. There are no new 
requirements for information collection associated with this amendment.

International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices (SARP) to the maximum extent practicable. The 
operator and aircraft approval process was developed jointly by the FAA 
and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) under the auspices of NATSPG. 
The FAA has determined that this amendment does not present any 
differences.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency 
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the 
economic effect of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, OMB 
directs agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on 
international trade. And fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment 
of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules 
that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by 
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by private 
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation).
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
rule: (1) Generates benefits that justify its costs and is not ``a 
significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Executive Order; (2) 
is not significant as defined in the Department of Transportation's 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (3) does not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities; and 94) does not 
constitute a barrier to international trade. These analyses, available 
in the docket, are summarized below.
    This rule amends 14 CFR 91, Appendix G, Section 8 (Airspace 
Designation) by adding the New York FIR portion of the WATRS airspace 
to the list of airspace where RVSM would be implemented. It also amends 
section 2 (Aircraft Approval) by adding a new paragraph that requires 
any aircraft that are equipped with TCAS II to use Version 7.0, which 
is RVSM compatible.
    This rule will provide operators the following benefits: (1) Permit 
more operations at fuel/time efficient tracks and altitudes, thereby 
providing fuel savings, (2) increase the number of available flight 
levels, and (3) enhance airspace capacity.
    In addition to operator fuel savings, many non-quantifiable or 
value-added benefits will result from the implementation of RVSM in 
WATRS. Input from air traffic managers, controllers, and operators has 
identified numerous additional benefits.
    These benefits include:
     Enhanced capacity.
     Reduced airspace complexity.
     Decreased operational errors in these regions.
     Reduction of user-requested off course climbs for, 
altitude changes.
     Improved flexibility for peak traffic demands.
     More options in deviating aircraft during periods of 
adverse weather.
    The operational benefits realized in the NAT and PAC regions are 
anticipated in WATRS as well.
    Specific benefits cited by aircraft operators are:
     Decreased flight delays.
     Improved access to desired flight levels.
     Reduced average flight times.
     Increased availability of step climbs.

[[Page 63894]]

     Increased likelihood of receiving a clearance for weather 
deviations.
     Seamless, transparent, and harmonious operations between 
the NAT and WATRS regions.
     Consistent procedural environment throughout the entire 
flight.
     Reduced impact of adverse weather by permitting aircraft 
deviations to other airways without any efficiency loss.
    Implementing RVSM in WATRS should increase user satisfaction. The 
benefits described in this section are compelling in number and 
operational impact. These benefits are alos significant in that both 
air traffic service providers and aircraft operators will enjoy them.
    Most of the costs of this rule will be incurred by those operators 
who choose to participate in WATRS RVSM and, therefore, must upgrade 
various equipment and altimetry systems to meet requirements. The 
quantifiable benefits of the rule result from fuel savings to 
participating operators who may operate at more fuel-efficient 
altitudes. Significant non-quantifiable benefits are also associated 
with the rule as previously discussed.
    The FAA assumed for the purpose of this analysis that all existing 
operators in the area would become WATRS RVSM participants. Based on 
that assumption, the agency's final quantified estimates of the costs 
and benefits are nearly equal. For the period 2001-2015, estimated 
undiscounted benefits in fuel savings are $34.2 million, while 
undiscounted costs are $26.2 million. Discounted benefits, however, are 
$18.4 million while discounted costs equal $23.4 million. Discounted 
benefits fall below discounted estimated costs because costs are 
incurred early in the 15-year analysis period and benefits are 
distributed more evenly throughout the period.
    Although the FAA's quantified estimates of costs and benefits are 
nearly equal, there are substantial non-quantifiable benefits. Each 
operator will be free, under this rule, to decide for itself if the 
benefits to that operator justify the costs to that operator. As stated 
previously, participating in WATRS RVSM is entirely voluntary. 
Operators who choose not to participate will still be able to fly above 
or beneath WATRS RVSM airspace.
    The FAA believes that many operators will decide that benefits 
justify costs and participate in WATRS RVSM. This belief is 
strengthened by the widespread acceptance of similar RVSM programs 
recently implemented in the North Atlantic and Pacific regions, and 
further reinforced by the fact that no comments on the NPRM opposed the 
rule on economic grounds.
    TCAS II Version 7.0 is mandated for any operator who uses TCAS II. 
There is no economic impact to operators upgrading to TCAS II Version 
7.0 due to their upgrading for other international requirements.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 establishes ``as a principle 
of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 
the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory 
and informational requirements to the scale of the business, 
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulations.'' 
To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to solicit and 
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rational for 
their actions. The Act covers a wide-range of small entities, including 
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or 
final rule will have significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, then 
the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as 
described in the Act.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides that 
the head of the agency may so certify and an RFA is not required. The 
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for 
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    Operators that met the Small Business Administration (SBA) small 
entity criteria were extracted from the 44-day traffic sample of ETMS 
data. These operators were cross-referenced with the Central Monitoring 
Agency (CMA) and the Asia Pacific Approvals and Monitoring Organization 
(APARMO) databases to determine if they operated any RVSM-approved 
aircraft. The small entity operators with RVSM-approved aircraft were 
not considered further in this impact determination.
    The list of potential small entity operators, taken from the 
traffic sample, was used to identify six operators currently reporting 
financial data to the FAA Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Revenue 
information for these small entities for year 1999 was obtained from 
the Air Carrier Financial Statistics Quarterly. The operators were then 
ranked with respect to their total operating revenue.
    The annualized cost of compliance is less than one-half of one 
percent of annual operating revenues for all but one small entity 
operator. The FAA does not consider one operator being significantly 
impacted by this rule to be a substantial number of small operators 
being significantly impacted. Moreover, the FAA does not mandate these 
costs. Only operators who choose to participate in the RVSM program and 
WATRS will incur costs. The FAA therefore certifies that this rule does 
not have a significant 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 activities that create unnecessary 
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate 
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary 
obstacles. The statue also requires consideration of international 
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. 
standards.
    In accordance with the above statute, the FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this rule and has determined that it will impose 
the same costs on domestic and international entities and thus has a 
neutral trade impact.

Federalism Implications

    The regulations proposed herein will not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in 
accordance with Executive order 12612, it is determined that this rule 
will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the 
preparation of a federalism assessment.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
codified as 2 U.S.C. 1501 1571, requires each Federal agency, to the 
extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment of the effects 
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may 
result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more 
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 204(a) of 
the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to develop an 
effective process to permit timely input by

[[Page 63895]]

elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal 
governments on a proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A 
``significant intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any 
provision in a Federal agency regulation that would impose an 
enforceable duty upon state, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in 
any one year. Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements 
section 204(a), provides that before establishing any regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, the agency shall have developed a plan that, among other 
things, provides for notice to potentially affected small governments, 
if any, and for a meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in 
the development of regulatory proposals.
    This rule does not contain a Federal intergovernmental and private 
sector mandate that exceeds $100 million a year, therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do 
not apply.

Environmental Analysis

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

Energy Impact

    The energy impact of the notice has been assessed in accordance 
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) and P. 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.

Immediate Adoption

    Expansion of RVSM into WATRS is part of an internationally 
coordinated plan to expand RVSM in the ICAO North Atlantic Region. 
Operators have already committed financial and engineering resources 
and obtained RVSM approval. Because of the efficiencies that RVSM will 
bring to operations in this area, good cause exists for making this 
rule effective on publication.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

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

The Amendment

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

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

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

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


    2. In Appendix G, amend section 2 by revising paragraph (g), and 
adding a new paragraph (h), and in section 8 add a new paragraph (c) to 
read as follows:

Appendix G to Part 91--Operations in Reduced Vertical Separation 
Minimum (RVSM) Airspace

* * * * *

Section 2. Aircraft Approval

* * * * *
    (g) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) 
Compatibility With RVSM Operations: All aircraft. After March 31, 
2002, unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, if you 
operate an aircraft that is equipped with TCAS II in RVSM airspace, 
it must be a TCAS II that meets TSO C-119b (Version 7.0), or a later 
version.
    (h) If the Administrator finds that the applicant's aircraft 
comply with this section, the Administrator notifies the applicant 
in writing.
* * * * *

Section 8. Airspace Designation

* * * * *
    (c) RVSM in the West Atlantic Route System (WATRS). RVSM may be 
applied in the New York FIR portion of the West Atlantic Route 
System (WATRS). The area is defined as beginning at a point 
38 deg.30' N/60 deg.00'W direct to 38 deg.30'N/69 deg.15' W direct 
to 38 deg.20' N/69 deg.57' W direct to 37 deg.31' N/71 deg.41' W 
direct to 37 deg.13' N/72 deg.40' W direct to 35 deg.05' N/
72 deg.40' W direct to 34 deg.54' N/72 deg.57' W direct to 
34 deg.29' N/73 deg.34' W direct to 34 deg.33' N/73 deg.41' W direct 
to 34 deg.19' N/74 deg.02' W direct to 34 deg.14' N/73 deg.57' W 
direct to 32 deg.12' N/76 deg.49' W direct to 32 deg.20' N/
77 deg.00' W direct to 28 deg.08' N/77 deg.00' W direct to 
27 deg.50' N/76 deg.32' W direct to 27 deg.50' N/74 deg.50' W direct 
to 25 deg.00' N/73 deg.21' W direct to 25 deg.00'05" N/69 deg.13'06" 
W direct to 25 deg.00' N/69 deg.07' W direct to 23 deg.30' N/
68 deg.40' W direct to 23 deg.30' N/60 deg.00' W to the point of 
beginning.

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 4, 2001.
Jane F. Garvey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-30358 Filed 12-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M