[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54320-54324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-21171]



[[Page 54319]]

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

Part VI





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135



Revisions to Digital Flight Data Recorder Requirements; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 21, 2002 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 54320]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135

[Docket No.: FAA-2002-11705; Amendment No. 121-292, 125-39 and 135-85]
RIN 2120-AH81


Revisions to Digital Flight Data Recorder Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the flight data recorder regulations by 
expanding the recording ranges for certain data parameters for all 
covered airplanes. This amendment is necessary because certain 
airplanes are unable to record certain flight parameters under the 
existing resolution criteria without undergoing unintended and 
expensive retrofit.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 20, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Davis, Flight Standards Service, 
Air Transportation Division, AFS-201A, Federal Aviation Administration, 
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
8166; facsimile (202) 267-5229, e-mail [email protected].

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 five 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 Government Printing Office'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 
rulemaking.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996 requires 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 [email protected].

Background

    The regulations adopted by the FAA in August of 1997 (62 FR 38362) 
substantially improved the requirements for flight data recorders and 
mandated that up to 88 parameters of flight data of recorded for 
diagnostic use in the event of an accident or serious incident. Most of 
the improvements in the recording capacity did not directly affect 
Airbus airplanes, however, because almost all of the additional 
parameters required by the FAA had been incorporated previously into 
Airbus product specifications. In the case of a few parameters, 
however, Airbus airplanes were unable to meet the parameter recording 
requirements adopted in the rule. In 1997, the FAA stated that it had 
tailored the rule to avoid major equipment redesign or retrofits. The 
new requirements were to be met in stages, with the first 34 parameters 
being required at the next heavy maintenance check after August 18, 
1999, but no later than August 20, 2001; followed by parameters 35 
through 57 for aircraft manufactured after August 18, 2000, upon 
delivery; and finally parameters 58 through 88 for aircraft 
manufactured after August 19, 2002, upon delivery.
    On August 24, 1999 (64 FR 46117), the FAA amended the digital 
flight data recorder (DFDR) resolution and sampling requirements for 
several parameters for Airbus airplanes. The amendments addressed only 
the first 34 parameters. Similarly, on August 24, 2000 (64 FR 51741), 
the FAA revised the DFDR regulations, making technical changes related 
to parameters 35 through 57 to accommodate Airbus airplanes.

Petition for Rulemaking

    By letter dated February 22, 2002, Airbus petitioned the FAA to 
further amend Appendix M to part 121 and Appendix E to part 125. The 
letter states that Airbus had completed its audit of compliance 
requirements for parameters 58 through 88, and identified three 
specific technical issues of compliance for which it sought relief. 
Specifically, Airbus seeks minor technical changes to the recording 
requirements for parameter 83 (cockpit trim control input position--
roll), parameter 84 (cockpit trim control input position--yaw), and 
parameter 88 (cockpit flight control input force--rudder). However, 
since its February letter, Airbus has withdrawn its request for changes 
to the requirements for parameter 88.
    Airbus notes that the FAA, in adopting the new DFDR recording 
resolution requirements, did not intend to require equipment redesign 
or retrofit, and that the requested specification changes would be 
consistent with that intent. Airbus airplanes have been recording these 
parameters for many years, and Airbus claims that there would be no 
safety or analytic benefit to replace sensors that are virtually 
compliant with the regulatory specifications. According to Airbus, the 
deviations to current resolution requirements they are seeking are 
small, and are consistent with the smallest increment employed in the 
parameters for actual measurement of the respective flight control 
surfaces.
    Specifically, Airbus seeks changes to the DFDR recording 
requirements for the following parameters as contained in Appendix M to 
part 121 and appendix E to part 125 of 14 CFR:
    Parameter 83, cockpit trim control input position--roll, is 
required to be resolved to 0.028 degrees (0.2% of operational range of 
7 degrees). On A310 and A300-600 series aircraft this is 
implemented with a resolution of 0.096 degrees. Airbus asserts that 
this resolution is nearly identical to the smallest increment used in 
deflection of the roll control surfaces for each model, which is 0.092 
degrees in the A310 aircraft and 0.091 degrees in the A300-600 
aircraft. Airbus states that achieving the additional resolution would 
provide no substantive benefit. Airbus requests that a footnote be 
added in Appendix M to part 121 and Appendix E to part 125, to reflect 
this deviation for the airplane models noted.
    Parameter 84, cockpit trim control input position--yaw, is required 
to be resolved to 0.08 degrees (0.2% of operational range of 
20 degrees). On A318/319/320/321 series aircraft, this is

[[Page 54321]]

implemented with a resolution of 0.088 degrees. Airbus asserts that 
this resolution surpasses the smallest increment used to deflect the 
yaw control surfaces for each model, which is 0.112 degrees for the 
A320 family. Airbus requests that a footnote be added in Appendix M to 
part 121 and Appendix E to part 125, to reflect this deviation for the 
airplane models noted.
    Airbus states that U.S. operators of the affected airplanes would 
incur substantial costs associated with being involved in the redesign 
and installation of new DFDR equipment to achieve precise compliance 
with the recording resolution requirements of the current regulations. 
In addition, if new aircraft were delivered with DFDR recording 
equipment that differs from that installed on existing aircraft, 
operators would have to maintain the equipment separately, increasing 
recordkeeping requirements and costs. Airbus states that these added 
costs would not be balanced by any increase in safety or investigative 
capability. Accordingly, Airbus concludes that it is in the public 
interest to make the requested regulatory modifications.

Discussion of Comments

    On April 22, 2002, the FAA published a notice of petition for 
rulemaking, with a request for comments, discussing this Airbus request 
(67 FR 19534). The comment period for that notice (Notice No. PE-2002-
28) closed on May 22, 2002. In response to that notice we received two 
generally favorable comments, one from the Air Transport Association 
(ATA) and another from the Boeing Airplane Company (Boeing). The ATA 
supports the Airbus petition, reaffirming that the 1997 rule was not 
intended to necessitate retrofit modifications. The ATA agrees with the 
petitioner's claim that the required changes to the production 
configurations and the resulting differences with the configurations 
for airplanes already in service would be neither cost effective nor 
beneficial in mishap investigations.
    Boeing concurs with the requested revisions to the parameter 83 and 
parameter 84 resolutions, stating that they are minor and would not 
significantly affect the ability of accident investigators to perform 
their investigation. However, Boeing questioned the need to revise the 
accuracy requirement for parameter 88, and is concerned that any 
changes to the rule might affect the method of compliance for which it 
had received approval. Since Airbus withdrew its request to amend the 
recording requirements of parameter 88, no change to that parameter is 
included in this amendment.

FAA's Response

    The FAA considered carefully all the comments received. Because no 
commenter opposed the requested changes to parameters 83 and 84, the 
FAA has determined that the changes would be in the public interest.
    Airbus requested that these amendments be codified as footnotes to 
the affected appendixes. After considerable discussion with technical 
representatives and accident investigators, however, the FAA has 
determined the requested changes can be made to the appendices and made 
available to all airplanes without compromising resources available to 
accident investigators. The incremental difference in the measurements 
obtained are considered insignificant. Further, the FAA notes that the 
same parameters and resolution requirements appear in Appendix F to 
part 135. Because the changes requested will apply to all airplanes 
subject to parts 121 and 125, the FAA finds that the same changes are 
appropriate for the part 135 requirements. Accordingly, in Part 121 
Appendix M, Part 125 Appendix E, and Part 135 Appendix F, resolution 
recording requirements for parameters 83 and 84 will be amended to read 
0.7% and 0.3% of full range, respectively.

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption

    Sections 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. Sections 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3)) authorize 
agencies to dispense with certain notice procedures for rules when they 
find ``good cause'' to do so. Under section 553(b)(3)(B), the 
requirements of notice and opportunity for comment do not apply when 
the agency, for good cause, finds that those procedures are 
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 
Section 553(d)(3) allows an agency, upon finding good cause, to make a 
rule effective immediately, thereby avoiding the 30-day delayed 
effective date requirement in section 553.
    The FAA finds that the requirements for notice and public comment 
to this amendment have been met because the FAA published for comment 
Airbus's original petition for rulemaking. Further, if the changes are 
delayed awaiting additional public notice and comment, regulated 
entities would be unable to comply with an August 20, 2002, compliance 
deadline. Therefore, the FAA finds that further notice and comment are 
unnecessary and that good cause exists for making these amendment 
effective on August 20, 2002.

Paperwork Reduction Act

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

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 to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that correspond to these regulations.

Economic Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, 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 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 impact of regulatory changes on small entities. 
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. section 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 also requires agencies to consider 
international standards and, where appropriate, use them as the basis 
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Public Law 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 the private 
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation.)
    Regulations with an expected minimal impact the above-specified 
analyses are not required. The Department of Transportation Order DOT 
2100.5 prescribes policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, 
and review of regulations. If it is determined that the expected impact 
is so minimal that the proposal does not warrant a full Evaluation, a 
statement to

[[Page 54322]]

that effect and the basis for it is included in the proposed 
regulation. The FAA has determined that there are no costs associated 
with this final rule. Instead, this rule change relieves operators of 
Airbus airplanes from a cost that would have been inadvertently imposed 
on them in the adoption of the 1997 regulations. This cost would have 
been imposed beginning on August 20, 2002. This change effectuates the 
original intent of the 1997 regulations.
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this rule (1) has 
benefits which justify its costs; (2) is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and is not 
``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; 
(3) will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities; (4) will have little effect on international trade; and (5) 
does not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal 
governments, or on the private sector.
    The purpose of this rule is to eliminate the necessity to 
incorporate unnecessary changes into an existing type of airplane that 
already meets the requirements of the rule except for minor variations 
in the resolution recording requirement. The FAA has determined that 
allowing the continued resolution-recording at a slightly different 
value will not impact safety or the collection of accident 
investigation data. This rule would result in cost savings because air 
carriers would not have to make minor, but costly, changes and 
subsequently pass those costs on to the public in the form of higher 
ticket prices.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    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 
businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
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.
    This final rule will relieve unnecessary costs to operators of 
certain airplanes. Therefore, the FAA expects this rule to impose no 
cost on small entities. Consequently, the FAA certifies that the rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

Trade Impact Assessment

    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 statute also requires consideration of international 
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. 
standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this rulemaking 
and has determined that it will reduce costs to U.S. operators of 
certain airplanes but will have a minimal effect on international 
trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), enacted as 
Public Law 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 
no apply.

Executive Order 3132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this 
action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the 
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. Therefore, we determined 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 notice has been assessed in accordance 
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Public Law 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.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

14 CFR Part 125

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Alcohol abuse, Aviation safety, Drug 
abuse, Drug testing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends Chapter 1 of Title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL 
OPERATIONS

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 41706, 44101, 44701-
44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903-
44904, 44912, 45101-45105, 46105, Pub. L. 107-71, 115 Stat. 597-647.


    2. Amend Appendix M to part 121 to revise numbers 83 and 84 to read 
as follows:

[[Page 54323]]

Appendix M to Part 121--Airplane Flight Recorder Specifications

    The recorded values must meet the designated range, resolution, and 
accuracy requirements during dynamic and static conditions. All data 
recorded must be correlated in time to within one second.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Seconds
                                                    Accuracy         per
          Parameters                 Range       (sensor input)    sampling      Resolution          Remarks
                                                                   interval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
83. Cockpit trim control       Full Range......  5%            1  0.7% of full      Where mechanical
 input position--roll.                                                         range.            means for
                                                                                                 control inputs
                                                                                                 are not
                                                                                                 available,
                                                                                                 cockpit display
                                                                                                 trim position
                                                                                                 should be
                                                                                                 recorded.
84. Cockpit trim control       Full range......  5%            1  0.3% of full      Where mechanical
 input position--yaw.                                                          range.            means for
                                                                                                 control input
                                                                                                 are not
                                                                                                 available,
                                                                                                 cockpit display
                                                                                                 trim positions
                                                                                                 should be
                                                                                                 recorded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 125--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A SEATING 
CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 
6,000 POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH 
AIRCRAFT

    3. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44710-
44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722.

    4. Amend Appendix E to part 125 to revise item numbers 83 and 84 to 
read as follows:

Appendix E to Part 125--Airplane Flight Recorder Specifications

    The recorded values must meet the designated range, resolution, and 
accuracy requirements during dynamic and static conditions. All data 
recorded must be correlated in time to within one second.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Seconds per
          Parameters                 Range          Accuracy       sampling       Resolution         Remarks
                                                 (sensor input)    interval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
83. Cockpit trim control       Full Range......  5%            1   0.7% of full      Where
 input position--roll.                                                          range.            mechanical
                                                                                                  means for
                                                                                                  control inputs
                                                                                                  are not
                                                                                                  available,
                                                                                                  cockpit
                                                                                                  display trim
                                                                                                  position
                                                                                                  should be
                                                                                                  recorded.
84. Cockpit trim control       Full Range......  5%            1   0.3% of full      Where
 input position--yaw.                                                           range.            mechanical
                                                                                                  means for
                                                                                                  control input
                                                                                                  are not
                                                                                                  available,
                                                                                                  cockpit
                                                                                                  display trim
                                                                                                  positions
                                                                                                  should be
                                                                                                  recorded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS 
AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 44113, 44701-44702, 44709, 
44705, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722.

    6. Amend Appendix F to part 135 revise item numbers 83 and 84 to 
read as follows:

Appendix F to Part 135--Airplane Flight Recorder Specifications

    The recorded values must meet the designated range, resolution, and 
accuracy requirements during dynamic and static conditions. All data 
recorded must be correlated in time to within one second.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Seconds per
          Parameters                 Range          Accuracy       sampling       Resolution         Remarks
                                                 (Sensor input)    interval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
83. Cockpit trim control       Full Range......  5%            1   0.7% of full      Where
 input position--roll.                                                          range.            mechanical
                                                                                                  means for
                                                                                                  control inputs
                                                                                                  are not
                                                                                                  available,
                                                                                                  cockpit
                                                                                                  display trim
                                                                                                  position
                                                                                                  should be
                                                                                                  recorded.

[[Page 54324]]

 
84. Cockpit trim control       Full Range......  5%            1   0.3% of full      Where
 input position--yaw.                                                           range.            mechanical
                                                                                                  means for
                                                                                                  control input
                                                                                                  are not
                                                                                                  available,
                                                                                                  cockpit
                                                                                                  display trim
                                                                                                  positions
                                                                                                  should be
                                                                                                  recorded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 2002.
Monte R. Belger,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-21171 Filed 8-19-02; 9:44 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M