[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77326-77348]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-31150]



[[Page 77325]]

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

Part II





Federal Aviation Administration





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



14 CFR Parts 1, et al.



Area Navigation (RNAV) and Miscellaneous Amendments; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2002 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 77326]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 1, 71, 91, 95, 97, 121, 125, 129, and 135

[Docket No. FAA-2002-14002; Notice No. 02-20]
RIN 2120-AH77


Area Navigation (RNAV) and Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing to amend its regulations to reflect 
technological advances that support area navigation (RNAV); make 
certain terms consistent with those of the International Civil Aviation 
Organization; remove the middle marker as a required component of 
instrument landing systems; and clarify airspace terminology. The 
proposed changes are intended to facilitate the transition from ground-
based navigation to new reference sources, enable advancements in 
technology, and increase efficiency of the National Airspace System.

DATES: Send your comments on or before January 31, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Address your comments to the Docket Management System, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Room PL 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590. You must identify the Docket number FAA-2002-
14002 at the beginning of your comments, and you should submit two 
copies. If you wish to receive confirmation that FAA has received your 
comments, include a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the 
Docket number appears.
    You may also submit comments through the Internet to http://dms.dot.gov. You may review the public docket containing comments to 
these proposed regulations in person in the Dockets Office between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
Dockets Office is on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the 
Department of Transportation at the above address. Also, you may review 
public dockets on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawrence Buehler, Flight Technologies 
and Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, AFS-400, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 
20591; telephone: (202) 385-4586.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this 
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The FAA also 
invites comments on the environmental, energy, federalism, or economic 
impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. 
The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, 
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting 
data. The FAA asks that you send two copies of written comments.
    The FAA will file all comments received, as well as a report 
summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel in the 
docket. The docket for this rulemaking is available for public 
inspection before and after the comment closing date. You can review 
the docket in person or using the Internet (see Addresses above).
    Before acting on this proposal, the FAA will consider all comments 
it receives on or before the closing date for comments. The FAA will 
consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without 
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light 
of comments.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of this document 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 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 of the item 
you wish to review.
    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. Be sure 
to identify the docket number, or notice number with amendment number, 
of this rulemaking.

Guide to Terms and Acronyms Used in This Document

AGL--Above ground level
APV--Approach procedures with vertical guidance
ASR--Airport surveillance radar
ATS--Air Traffic Service
DA--Decision altitude
DH--Decision height
DME--Distance measuring equipment
FL--Flight level
GPS--Global Positioning System
ICAO--International Civil Aviation Organization
IAP--Instrument approach procedure
IFR--Instrument flight rules
ILS--Instrument landing system
MAA--Maximum authorized IFR altitude
MCA--Minimum crossing altitude
MDA--Minimum descent altitude
MEA--Minimum en route IFR altitude
MOCA--Minimum obstruction clearance altitude
MSL--Mean sea level
NAS--National Airspace System
NAVAID--Navigational aid
NDB--Nondirectional beacon
NM--Nautical mile
OEP--Operational Evolution Plan
Over the top--Over the top of clouds
PANS--Procedures for Air Navigation Services
PAR--Precision approach radar
RNAV--Area navigation
RVR--Runway visual range
SARPs--International Standards and Recommended Practices
SIAP--Standard Instrument Approach Procedure
TLOF--Touchdown and lift-off area
VOR--Very high frequency omnidirectional range
VORTAC--VOR omnidirectional range/tactical air navigation

Outline of the Preamble

I. Background
    I.A. Area Navigation (RNAV)
    I.B. Recent Technological Improvements
    I.C. International Standardization
    I.D. Middle Markers and Outer Markers
    I.D.1. Elimination of Middle Markers
    I.D.2. Substitutes for Outer Markers
    I.E. Operational Evolution Plan (OEP)
II. General Discussion of the Proposals
    II.A. RNAV
    II.B. ICAO
    II.C. Middle and Outer Markers
    II.D. Changes in Terminology
    II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)
    II.D.2. RNAV
    II.D.3. En Route
    II.D.4. Approach and Landing Using Instrument Approach 
Procedures
III. Section-by-Section Discussion of the Proposed Changes
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act
V. International Compatibility

[[Page 77327]]

VI. Economic Evaluation
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
VIII. International Trade Impact Analysis
IX. Unfunded Mandate Assessment
X. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
XI. Environmental Analysis
XII. Energy Impact

I. Background

I.A. Area Navigation (RNAV)

    Historically, the principal means of air navigation for instrument 
flight rules (IFR) operations in the United States National Airspace 
System (NAS) has been a system of ground-based navigation aids 
(NAVAIDs), including nondirectional beacon (NDB), very high frequency 
omnidirectional range (VOR), and distance measuring equipment (DME). 
Airways and instrument procedures were developed using these NAVAIDs; 
however, this has required pilots to fly directly toward, or away from, 
the NAVAID. This limitation has resulted in less-than-optimal routes 
and instrument procedures, and contributed to an inefficient use of 
airspace.
    The advent of area navigation (RNAV) in the 1960's provided 
enhanced navigation capabilities to the pilot. Early RNAV allowed 
properly equipped aircraft to navigate via a user-defined track without 
the need to fly directly toward or away from a ground-based navigation 
aid. Early RNAV systems still relied, however, on signals from a 
ground-based NAVAID for source information to calculate navigational 
position information. To take advantage of this improved navigation 
capability, in the 1970's, the FAA began to publish a series of 
instrument approach procedures (IAPs) and routes for use by RNAV-
equipped aircraft. A nationwide system of high-altitude RNAV routes was 
established consisting of approximately 156 route segments.
    These fixed routes still depended on reference to ground-based 
NAVAIDs. The FAA later determined that most aircraft using RNAV in the 
en route system were doing so on a random basis using inertial 
navigation systems (INS) with little use being made of the fixed high 
altitude RNAV route structure. Operators were using RNAV by going from 
point to point. They were not using the high-altitude RNAV route 
structure that was designed and published by the FAA. This minimal use 
of the charted RNAV routes proved insufficient to justify their 
retention on a cost-benefit basis. As a result, in January 1983, the 
FAA revoked all high altitude RNAV routes in the coterminous United 
States. The RNAV routes in the State of Alaska were retained and remain 
in use today because of the scarcity of ground-based navigational aids 
there.

I.B. Recent Technological Improvements

    The technology that evolved over the past 40 years gave avionics 
systems increased positional accuracy, which provided users with a 
greater ability to fly direct routes between any two points. In recent 
years, satellite navigation using the Global Positioning System (GPS) 
has provided even greater flexibility in defining routes, establishing 
instrument procedures, and designing airspace. When GPS is combined 
with existing RNAV system capabilities, continuous course guidance is 
available over longer routes than are possible with ground-based 
NAVAIDs, which have limited coverage due to terrain or signal reception 
restrictions. Augmented GPS also introduces the ability to provide 
vertical guidance information for nonprecision instrument approaches. 
This has the potential to significantly reduce the risk of accidents 
caused by controlled flight into terrain (CFIT).
    As a result of these technological advances, the FAA has 
implemented a number of RNAV routes for use by air carriers operating 
suitably equipped aircraft in the northeast, southeast, and southwest 
regions of the United States. The results so far have demonstrated the 
potential of RNAV, when used with new navigation reference sources, 
such as GPS. The entire NAS can be realigned by using more direct and 
user-preferred routes, thus achieving greater system flexibility, 
efficiency, and capacity.
    Air navigation is expected to become increasingly dependent on RNAV 
systems that navigate with reference to geographic positions specified 
in latitude and longitude coordinates rather than to or from a ground-
based navigation aid. Reliance on RNAV in the NAS will expand as 
enhancements to GPS are developed and deployed, increasing its accuracy 
and reliability.
    The changes proposed in this NPRM would facilitate the use of RNAV 
throughout all phases of flight (departure, en route, and approach), 
which is a goal of the Free Flight program. The Free Flight program is 
designed to enhance the safety and efficiency of the NAS. It moves the 
NAS from a centralized command-and-control system between pilots and 
air traffic controllers to a system that allows pilots, whenever 
practical, to choose their own routes and file flight plans that follow 
the most efficient and economical routes. The changes proposed in this 
NPRM would result in greater flexibility in air traffic routing, 
instrument approach procedure design, and airspace use than is now 
possible under a ground-based system structure. The improved navigation 
accuracy and flexibility would enhance both system capacity and overall 
flight safety, and would promote the Free Flight concept in the NAS by 
enabling the NAS to move from reliance on ground-based NAVAIDs.

I.C. International Standardization

    The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is an agency 
of the United Nations that promotes the development of uniform world-
wide procedures and standardization to ensure the safety and efficiency 
of international civil aviation operations. ICAO's standards are found 
in the 18 Annexes to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. To 
achieve this standardization, ICAO publishes various International 
Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and Procedures for Air 
Navigation Services (PANS). This proposal is part of a continuing 
effort to recognize the advent of new technologies and international 
efforts to create a seamless air traffic system by making the terms 
used in FAA's regulations consistent with ICAO terminology.

I.D. Middle Markers and Outer Markers

    Middle and outer markers are beacons that define points along the 
glide path on an instrument landing system (ILS) approach. An outer 
marker is usually located at or near the glide path intercept point of 
an ILS approach, normally 4 to 7 miles from the runway threshold. A 
middle marker indicates a position approximately 3,500 feet from the 
landing threshold. This is normally located near the point where an 
aircraft on the glide path will be at an altitude of approximately 200 
feet above the elevation of the runway touchdown zone. For a Category I 
ILS approach, this coincides with the decision height, or the height at 
which a pilot must decide whether to continue the approach to landing 
or execute a missed approach procedure. This proposal would eliminate 
the middle marker as a required ILS component and would enable the use 
of other navigation means to substitute for the outer marker beacon.
I.D.1. Elimination of Middle Markers
    According to instrument procedure design criteria, all required 
components must be operational in order for the pilot to fly the ILS to 
the lowest authorized approach minimums. Originally, the middle marker 
was a required component of an ILS. Terminal instrument procedure 
design criteria

[[Page 77328]]

required that, when the middle marker was inoperative, a penalty was 
applied to increase the published landing minimums to compensate. The 
higher minimums imposed by these penalties could result in the pilot 
being unable to land at that destination.
    In January 1988, through Operations Specifications, the FAA 
eliminated the landing penalties of increased landing minimums for 14 
CFR part 121 and part 135 operators conducting ILS approaches with 
inoperative middle markers. The justification for this change was the 
long-term operational success experienced by European air carriers and 
the U.S. Department of Defense when not using middle markers and when 
not applying penalties for inoperative middle markers. On December 4, 
1990, therefore, the FAA removed the inoperative middle marker landing 
minimum penalties for all operators through change 10 to the Terminal 
Instrument Procedures (TERPS).
    In June 1992, the FAA completed an evaluation of the operational 
effectiveness and safety benefits of middle markers during ILS 
operations and issued a document entitled ``Middle Marker Evaluation 
Project.'' A copy of the evaluation has been placed in the docket for 
this rulemaking. That evaluation studied 165 missed approaches--83 with 
the middle marker operative, and 82 with the middle marker inoperative. 
The approaches were conducted by 18 pilots. Two pilots worked for the 
FAA, and 16 worked, or had worked, in corporate aviation. None of the 
pilots was told the objective of the flight test until after the flight 
test. The result of the evaluation was that there was no significant 
difference in pilot performance while conducting an ILS approach with 
or without a middle marker. Consequently, on October 15, 1992, the 
landing minima penalties for conducting an ILS approach with an 
inoperative middle marker were removed for the Standard Instrument 
Approach Procedures (SIAPs). This action was taken because the FAA has 
determined that middle markers are redundant and are no longer needed 
for safety. The FAA is therefore proposing that the requirement for 
middle markers be removed from its regulations.
I.D.2. Substitutes for Outer Markers
    The outer marker is another required component of the ILS. In lieu 
of a marker beacon, a compass locator transmitter, DME, or airport 
surveillance radar (ASR) may be used to identify the outer marker 
position. This proposal would allow the use of waypoints for outer 
markers, resulting in additional flexibility in airspace utilization 
and procedure design.

I.E. Operational Evolution Plan (OEP)

    This proposal would address a portion of the FAA's Operational 
Evolution Plan (OEP), which is the FAA's overall plan to modernize the 
NAS. The OEP has several components, including ones to alleviate en 
route congestion, increase arrival and departure rates at airports, 
improve response to en route severe weather, and improve operational 
procedures and tools for operations in poor airport weather conditions. 
Task 3.2 of the OEP states that arrival and departure routes should be 
constructed independent of navigation aids. A subordinate task is to 
review and update the Code of Federal Regulations to allow for routing 
independent of ground-based navigation aids.

II. General Discussion of the Proposals

II.A. RNAV

    The expanded use of RNAV and GPS navigation would fully support the 
FAA's Free Flight concept. RTCA's Task Force 3 issued a report in 1995 
in which it defined the implementation of a concept to move from 
today's largely ground-based system by applying current technologies. 
(See ``Final Report of RTCA Task Force 3, Free Flight Implementation,'' 
October 26, 1995/November 1995. Copies are available for purchase from 
RTCA, 1828 L St. NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036 (telephone 202-
833-9339).) Although the immediate effect of the proposed amendments 
would be to allow increased use of GPS, the proposed terminology 
changes would also be broad enough to allow for new technologies as 
they become available and are approved for use.

II.B. ICAO

    As an ICAO Contracting State, the United States strives to adhere 
to the rules and procedures set forth in the ICAO SARPs and PANS as 
much as possible. For example, in 1993, the United States reclassified 
its domestic airspace to adopt, in part, the ICAO airspace 
classifications (i.e., Class A, Class B, etc.) outlined in Annex 11 to 
the Convention. In formulating this NPRM, the FAA has an opportunity to 
make additional terminology in its regulations consistent with ICAO. 
The current U.S. terminology for naming routes differs from that used 
by ICAO. Through this proposal, the United States would adopt the ICAO 
term ``Air Traffic Service (ATS) Route'' to describe the U.S. en route 
structure. Other examples of how this proposal would promote 
compatibility with ICAO include the proposed addition of the term 
``decision altitude (DA),'' and the proposed change of the abbreviation 
of HAT from ``height above touchdown'' to ``height above threshold.'' 
The proposed changes would be a step in bringing U.S. terminology 
closer to fulfilling the United States' responsibilities as an ICAO 
member.

II.C. Middle and Outer Markers

    In addition to the proposed amendments regarding RNAV, the FAA is 
proposing to update its regulations to eliminate the middle marker as a 
required basic ground component of an ILS, and to increase the number 
of acceptable substitutes for the outer marker component of an ILS. 
These amendments would facilitate flexibility in the development of new 
instrument approach procedures.

II.D. Changes in Terminology

    The following are subject areas in which the FAA is proposing to 
change the terminology in its regulations. For specific sections that 
are amended, see ``III. Section-by-Section Discussion of the Proposed 
Changes'' in this preamble.
II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)
    References to ``decision height'' and ``DH'' are being replaced 
with references to ``decision altitude'' and ``DA,'' respectively, 
where minimums are based upon barometric altitude, which is expressed 
in feet above mean sea level (MSL). In contrast, where minimums are 
based upon height above ground level (AGL), the term decision height 
(DH) is used. These changes are being proposed to make the FAA's 
regulations consistent with ICAO terminology and to more accurately 
describe when the decision to continue the approach below the 
authorized minima or make a missed approach is made.
II.D.2. RNAV
    The FAA is proposing to revise the definition of ``area navigation 
(RNAV).'' The FAA is also proposing to remove references to the words 
``ground'' and ``radio'' where using these words restricts the type of 
navigation and communication systems persons can use. The amendments 
would either replace those words with less restrictive language or 
remove them entirely, which would allow the expanded use of RNAV 
systems and permit persons to take advantage of future changes in 
technology.

[[Page 77329]]

II.D.3. En Route
    The FAA is proposing new terms, ``Air Traffic Service (ATS) route'' 
and ``area navigation (RNAV) route.''
    ``Air Traffic Service (ATS) route'' would be used to describe the 
U.S. en route structure. The term ``ATS route'' would include Federal 
airways, jet routes, and area navigation routes in the United States.
    ``Area navigation (RNAV) route'' would refer to ATS routes 
established for the use of aircraft capable of using area navigation. 
Note that not all RNAV-capable aircraft are suitably equipped to 
operate on all RNAV routes. The FAA would determine the means to 
qualify aircraft for various RNAV operations and the method for 
promulgating the requirements to operate on RNAV routes. These 
requirements would be promulgated similarly to the way part 71 routes 
and part 97 procedures are currently promulgated.
    In addition, the FAA is proposing to change the current definition 
of ``route segment'' to facilitate RNAV operations.
II.D.4. Approach and Landing Using Instrument Approach Procedures
    The FAA is proposing to amend the following definitions--
    [sbull] Nonprecision approach procedure.
    [sbull] Precision approach procedure.
    The FAA is proposing to add the following terms--
    [sbull] Approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV).
    [sbull] Area navigation route.
    [sbull] Category I operations.
    [sbull] Decision altitude (DA).
    [sbull] Instrument approach procedure (IAP).
    The FAA is proposing to revise the following definitions--
    [sbull] Category II, III, IIIa, IIIb, and IIIc operations
    [sbull] Decision height (DH).
    [sbull] Minimum descent altitude (MDA).

III. Section-By-Section Discussion of the Proposed Changes

Section 1.1 General definitions

    Air Traffic Service (ATS) route: The FAA is proposing to adopt the 
term ``Air Traffic Service (ATS) route'' to describe the U.S. route 
structure. The term ATS route would include jet routes, area navigation 
(RNAV) routes, and arrival and departure routes. An ATS route would be 
defined by route specifications. These route specifications may include 
an ATS route designator, the path to or from fixes, distance between 
fixes, reporting requirements, and the lowest safe altitude determined 
by the appropriate authority.
    Approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV): This new term 
would mean an instrument approach procedure based on lateral path and 
glide path. These approach procedures are flown to a decision altitude 
(DA). Although these procedures include glide path information, they 
may not meet the requirements currently established for precision 
approach and landing operations. This includes the vertical navigation 
performance and airport infrastructure requirements (i.e., ICAO Annex 
14 and FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-16). Safety for these 
procedures is maintained by increasing the required obstacle clearance 
height or required visibility. An example of an APV approach is the 
LNAV/VNAV (lateral navigation/vertical navigation) approach minima 
currently published on RNAV approach plates.
    Area navigation low route and Area navigation high route: These 
terms would be removed and replaced with the term ``area navigation 
(RNAV) route.'' See discussion of ``area navigation (RNAV) route'' 
below.
    Area navigation (RNAV): The definition of ``area navigation 
(RNAV)'' would be broadened by removing the words ``station-referenced 
navigation signals,'' which refer to ground-based signals, and adding 
the words ``flight path'' to cover operations in both the lateral and 
vertical planes (i.e. lateral navigation (LNAV) and vertical navigation 
(VNAV)).
    Area navigation (RNAV) route: The new term ``area navigation (RNAV) 
route'' would refer to those ATS routes established for aircraft 
capable of using area navigation equipment suitable for those routes.
    Category I (CAT I) operation: The term ``Category I operation'' 
commonly has been used in the aviation industry and in the preambles of 
FAA regulatory documents for years, but it has never been defined in 
the CFR. The FAA is therefore proposing to add a definition of this 
term. The proposed definition of ``Category I (CAT I) operation'' is 
``a precision approach with a decision altitude that is not lower than 
200 feet (60 meters) above the threshold and with either a visibility 
of not less than one half statute mile (800 meters) or a runway visual 
range (RVR) of not less than 1,800 feet (550 meters).''
    Category II (CAT II) operation, Category III (CAT III) operation, 
Category IIIa (CAT IIIa) operation, Category IIIb (CAT IIIb) operation, 
and Category IIIc (CAT IIIc) operation: These definitions would be 
revised to incorporate the concept of precision RNAV. In each of these 
definitions, the terms ``ILS approach'' or ``ILS instrument approach'' 
would be replaced with the terms ``precision approach'' and ``precision 
instrument approach,'' respectively. The definitions would also be 
updated to be compatible with the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) 
terminology.
    Decision altitude (DA): The FAA proposes to add the definition for 
``decision altitude (DA)'' to describe the mean sea level altitude at 
which the decision to continue the approach below the authorized minima 
or make a missed approach is made. This term would be consistent with 
ICAO terminology.
    Decision height (DH): The definition of ``decision height'' would 
be revised to specify that it applies only to Category II and III 
approaches rather than Category I approaches, which would refer to 
decision altitude. See discussion under ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) 
and Decision Altitude (DA).''
    Final approach fix (FAF): This term would be added to indicate that 
a final approach fix is associated with a nonprecision approach.
    Instrument approach procedure (IAP): This term would be added. It 
is a general term that applies to all types of approach procedures.
    Minimum descent altitude (MDA): The definition of ``minimum descent 
altitude'' would be revised to change the words ``final approach'' to 
``nonprecision final approach,'' and to remove the references to 
``standard instrument approach procedure'' and ``electronic glide 
slope.'' This change would clarify the definition, as an MDA is 
applicable to a SIAP without electronic glide slope.
    Night: The FAA is proposing to revise the definition of the term 
``night'' to reflect that local night may differ from the times 
published in the American Air Almanac. This concept of local night 
could limit operations at a particular location when the FAA determines 
it to be necessary for the safety of operations, for example, when 
terrain causes sunset significantly earlier than the Almanac indicates.
    Nonprecision approach procedure (NPA): The FAA is proposing to 
revise the definition of this term so that there would be no reference 
to ``electronic glide slope.'' The term would apply to navigation 
systems that provide lateral (but not vertical) path deviation 
guidance.
    Precision approach procedure (PA): The FAA is proposing to revise 
the definition so that there would be no references to ``standard 
instrument approach procedure'' and ``electronic glide slope.'' The 
revised term, however,

[[Page 77330]]

would still be based on lateral course and track information with 
vertical glide path information. Currently, ILS, microwave landing 
systems (MLS), Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) landing 
systems (GLS) and precision approach radar (PAR) are recognized 
precision approach systems.
    Precision final approach fix (PFAF): This term would be added to 
indicate that a precision final approach fix is associated with a 
precision or APV approach procedure.
    RNAV waypoint: The FAA proposes to remove the definition of ``RNAV 
way point (W/P)'' because it is overly restrictive.
    Route segment: The definition of ``route segment'' would be revised 
to mean a portion of a route bounded on each end by a fix or NAVAID. 
The proposed change would facilitate the development of RNAV routes.

Section 1.2 Abbreviations and Symbols

    The FAA proposes to add the following acronyms to the list of 
abbreviations and symbols in Sec.  1.2:
    APV means approach procedure with vertical guidance.
    NM means nautical mile.
    NPA means nonprecision approach.
    PA means precision approach.
    RNAV means area navigation.

Part 71 Amended

    The current part 71 is limited to ground-based navigation systems, 
includes extraneous information, and is not organized clearly. Although 
the amendments would not be related directly to the RNAV proposals, the 
FAA proposes to take this opportunity to improve the readability of 
part 71 by separating the sections that provide general information 
about part 71 (Sec. Sec.  71.1 through 71.15) from the sections that 
apply only to Class A airspace, and by combining or realigning the 
sections in part 71 in a more efficient way. These changes are 
discussed in further detail below.

Part 71 Heading Revised

    The FAA proposes to revise the heading of part 71. The current 
title, ``Designation Of Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, And Class E 
Airspace Areas; Airways; Routes; And Reporting Points,'' would be 
revised to read ``Designation of Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, 
and Class E Airspace Areas: Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting 
Points.'' In the new heading, the words ``Airways; Routes'' would be 
replaced with the words ``Air Traffic Service Routes,'' which would 
cover jet routes, VOR Federal airways, Colored Federal airways, and 
area navigation routes. This would be consistent with ICAO's use of the 
term ``air traffic service routes.''

Subpart A--Class A Airspace

    The FAA proposes to move the heading of subpart A so that it 
appears directly before Sec.  71.31 and revise it to read, ``Class A 
Airspace.'' As a result, sections appearing at the beginning of part 71 
would provide general information on multiple sections in part 71, and 
sections in the newly designated subpart A (Sec. Sec.  71.31 and 71.33) 
would contain regulations pertinent only to Class A airspace. This 
would make subpart A consistent with the rest of part 71, where subpart 
designations correspond to the airspace classes covered. For example, 
subpart A would cover class A airspace; subpart B would cover class B 
airspace, and so forth.

Section 71.11 Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes

    The FAA proposes to add Sec.  71.11, Air Traffic Service (ATS) 
routes. The text for the new section would come from the current Sec.  
71.75, Extent of Federal airways, paragraphs (a), (b)(1), and (d). This 
text would be revised to apply to ATS routes in general. The FAA is 
proposing this change to include ATS route terminology and to improve 
the organization of part 71.
    Paragraph (a) of Sec.  71.11 would differ from the text of Sec.  
71.75 in that the words ``navigational aid or intersection'' that are 
currently in Sec.  71.75, would read, ``navigation aid, fix, or 
intersection'' for defining route segments. These changes would 
accommodate the development of ATS routes that are not linked to 
ground-based navigation aids.
    Paragraph (b) of Sec.  71.11 would differ from the text of Sec.  
71.75 by referencing FAA Order 8260.3, ``U.S. Standard for Terminal 
Instrument Procedures (TERPS),'' as the source for criteria regarding 
ATS route dimensions and protected airspace.
    Paragraph (c) would differ from the text of Sec.  71.75 by stating 
that all ATS routes exclude the airspace of prohibited areas, rather 
than just Federal airways. This would mean that if the route passed 
through a prohibited area (i.e., a type of special use airspace 
designated under 14 CFR part 73), the FAA would write an exclusion into 
the legal description of the route that stated that the prohibited area 
airspace was excluded from the route.

Section 71.13 Classification of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes

    The FAA proposes to use the current text of Sec.  71.73, 
Classification of Federal airways, as a basis for proposed new Sec.  
71.13, Classification of Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes, and expand 
the scope of it to classify the Federal airway, jet route, and area 
navigation route components of the U.S. route structure as ATS routes. 
The FAA is proposing this change to improve the organization of part 71 
and to facilitate the development of RNAV routes that are not linked to 
ground-based navigation aids.

Section 71.15 Designation of Jet Routes and VOR Federal Airways

    The text of proposed Sec.  71.15 would come from current Sec.  
71.79, with information added to ensure that the stated place name 
criteria apply to jet routes as well as VOR Federal airways. This 
change is proposed to consolidate similar information and to reorganize 
part 71 for clarity.

Section 71.73 Classification of Federal Airways

    Section 71.73 would be removed and used as a basis for new Sec.  
71.13. This change would result in classifying the various types of ATS 
routes in one section for clarity and would improve the organization of 
part 71. See discussion of Sec.  71.13 above.

Section 71.75 Extent of Federal Airways

    Section 71.75 would be removed and parts of it used as a basis for 
new Sec.  71.11. This change would consolidate related information, 
remove information that is not needed, and improve the organization of 
part 71. See discussion of Sec.  71.11 above.

Section 71.79 Designation of VOR Federal Airways

    The FAA proposes to remove Sec.  71.79 and move the information to 
the proposed new Sec.  71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal 
airways. This change improves the organization of part 71 by 
consolidating related information. See discussion of Sec.  71.15 above.

Section 91.129 Operations in Class D Airspace

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  91.129(e) in clearer language. 
Although substantive changes would be made only in paragraph (e)(2) 
(discussed below), the FAA is taking this opportunity to propose 
clearer language for the rest of (e).
    Currently, Sec.  91.129(e)(2) requires that when a pilot of a large 
or turbine-powered airplane is approaching to land on a runway served 
by an ILS and within Class D airspace, the pilot must

[[Page 77331]]

fly at an altitude at or above the glide slope between the outer marker 
(or the point of interception with the glide slope, if compliance with 
the applicable distance-from-cloud-criteria requires interception 
closer in) and the middle marker. The proposed rule would require that 
a person operate at or above the glide path between the precision final 
approach fix (or point of interception with the glide slope, if 
compliance with the applicable distance-from-cloud criteria requires 
interception closer in) and the published decision altitude or decision 
height. Specifically, changes to (e)(2) would be as follows--
    (1) The phrase ``served by an instrument landing system (ILS)'' 
would read ``served by an APV or precision approach procedure.'' The 
reason for the change is that ILS is not the only type of approach with 
a glide path.
    (2) The term ``glide slope'' would read ``glide path'' because the 
term ``glide slope'' is generally used with respect to ILS, whereas the 
term ``glide path'' includes both ILS and APV.
    (3) The reference to ``outer marker'' would be replaced with 
``precision final approach fix.'' This would facilitate determining 
aircraft position as appropriate (e.g., DME, RNAV, or radar) and would 
make the paragraph consistent with proposed Sec.  91.175(k). The term 
``middle marker'' would be replaced by ``decision altitude or decision 
height.''

Section 91.131 Operations in Class B Airspace

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  91.131(c)(1) by adding the 
words ``suitable RNAV system'' to provide another option for meeting 
the communications and navigation equipment requirement. This change 
would be consistent with the proposed definition of RNAV.

Section 91.175 Takeoff and Landing Under IFR

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  91.175(a) by replacing the 
term ``instrument letdown'' with the term ``instrument approach'' 
because ``letdown'' is outdated terminology.
    The FAA is proposing to revise paragraph (b) to change the term 
``DH'' to ``DA/DH.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and 
Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.
    Paragraph (c) would be amended to change the term ``DH'' to ``DA/
DH.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision 
Altitude (DA)'' above.
    The FAA is proposing to amend the introductory text of paragraph 
(e) by changing the word ``pilot'' to ``person'' to make the regulation 
consistent with the definition of ``person'' currently in Sec.  1.1. In 
addition, paragraph (e)(1)(ii) would be revised to replace the term 
``DH'' with ``DA/DH.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) 
and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.
    The FAA is proposing to revise paragraph (f) to clarify that 
published takeoff minimums are associated with a particular departure 
procedure. Takeoff minimums are determined from the analysis of a 
particular runway environment. Thus, the departure procedure must be 
followed for a particular runway to ensure adequate obstacle clearance.
    Paragraph (h) would be amended by removing the RVR table from 
paragraph (h)(2) and replacing it with a reference to FAA Order 8260.3, 
``U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS),'' which 
contains the RVR table. This would eliminate duplication, and ensure 
that the public has information based on on-going changes in 
technology. In addition to appearing in FAA Order 8260.3, the RVR table 
also appears in the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), the 
Instrument Flying Handbook, and in the Flight Information Publications.
    Paragraph (j) would be amended by changing the word ``pilot'' to 
``person'' to make the regulation consistent with the definition of 
``person'' currently in Sec.  1.1.
    Paragraph (k) would be amended to allow certain locations on the 
ILS to be fixed by other-than-ground-based navigation aids. As 
technology develops, these points could be indicated by fix instead of 
actual markers. Finally, middle markers would be deleted from this 
paragraph as they are no longer a basic component of an ILS. Although 
some middle markers are still in use, no additional middle markers are 
being installed at new ILS sites.

Section 91.177 Minimum Altitudes for IFR Operations

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  91.177 (a) by adding language 
to clarify that the section would apply when both a minimum en route 
IFR altitude (MEA) and a minimum obstruction clearance altitude (MOCA) 
are prescribed for a particular route or route segment. The sentence 
that currently appears as concluding text of paragraph (a)(2) would be 
moved to paragraph (a)(1) and amended by adding the phrase, ``using VOR 
for navigation.'' This proposed change would clarify that a person 
could travel at the MOCA for the full route segment if the person is 
using another navigation system that meets navigation requirements and 
is available, e.g. GPS-based RNAV. If, however, a person were using VOR 
for navigation then the person would have to operate at the MEA except 
within 22 NM of the VOR facilities. If a person were using a navigation 
system other than VOR or GPS, the person would have to take positive 
action to ensure that he or she was receiving a suitable navigation 
signal along the full route. This change would allow operations at the 
MOCA, provided the applicable navigation signals were available. 
Although the change would be permissive, it would not change the 
requirements for communication and surveillance along the route. 
Therefore, the FAA may require a higher altitude to meet all the 
requirements of communication, navigation, and surveillance.

Section 91.179 IFR Cruising Altitude or Flight Level

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  91.179 by adding introductory 
text to read, ``Unless otherwise authorized by the ATC, the following 
rules apply.'' While the FAA recognizes that there will be an ATC 
clearance associated with an IFR operation, adding this clause would 
facilitate the future implementation of new technology by giving the 
FAA the flexibility to allow alternatives to current altitude 
assignment procedures.

Section 91.181 Course To Be Flown

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  91.181(a) by removing the words ``a 
Federal airway'' and adding in their place ``an ATS route,'' since the 
proposed changes in Sec.  71.13 define an ATS route to include Federal 
airways and the new RNAV routes.

Section 91.183 IFR Communications

    The FAA would amend Sec.  91.183 by removing the word ``radio'' 
from the heading and from the introductory text of paragraph (a). 
Paragraph (a) introductory text would also be changed by adding at the 
beginning the phrase, ``Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, * * *'' 
This phrase would facilitate the use of advanced communications by 
means other than voice.

Section 91.185 IFR Operations: Two-Way Communications Failure

    Section 91.185 would be amended by removing the word ``radio'' from 
the heading and from paragraph (a). This would eliminate reliance on 
radio technology.

[[Page 77332]]

Section 91.189 Category II and III Operations: General Operating Rules

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  91.189 (c) by replacing the term 
``DH'' and adding the term ``DA/DH.'' See discussion under ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.
    The FAA would also amend paragraph (d) by changing the word 
``pilot'' to ``person'' to make the regulation consistent with the 
definition of ``person'' currently in Sec.  1.1.

Section 91.205 Powered Civil Aircraft with Standard Category U.S. 
Airworthiness Certificates: Instrument and Equipment Requirements

    Currently, Sec.  91.205 (d)(2) states that, for IFR flight, ``two-
way radio communications system and navigation equipment appropriate to 
the ground facilities to be used'' are required. The FAA is proposing 
to amend (d)(2) by removing references to radio and ground facilities 
to facilitate future developments in communications. As amended, the 
paragraph would prescribe for IFR flight, ``two-way communication and 
navigation systems suitable for the route to be flown.''
    Paragraph (e) would be revised to require that aircraft operating 
at and above 18,000 feet (flight level (FL) 180) would have to be 
equipped with DME. The current rule sets the limit at 24,000 feet MSL 
(FL 240). On October 14, 1971, the FAA completed the lowering of the 
base of the positive control area (now called Class A airspace) from 
24,000 feet to 18,000 feet MSL over the entire 48 contiguous States. 
(See 36 FR 15743; Aug. 18, 1971.) This proposed change would make this 
section consistent with the current floor of Class A airspace. While 
this proposed rule change would extend the equipment requirements for 
civil aircraft to FL 180, most affected aircraft already meet these 
standards. The FAA specifically seeks comments on this proposed change.
    In addition, paragraph (e) would be amended to include suitable 
RNAV system as an alternative to DME. Modern RNAV systems provide 
distance from the active waypoint as an integral function. This 
distance readout can serve any purpose that DME serves.

Section 91.219 Altitude Alerting System or Device: Turbojet-Powered 
Civil Airplanes

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  91.219 (b)(5) by replacing the 
term ``DH'' with the term ``DA/DH.'' See discussion under ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 91.511 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Over-Water 
Operations

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  91.511 by changing the heading 
from ``Radio equipment for over-water operations'' to ``Communication 
and navigation equipment for over-water operations.'' Paragraph (a)(1) 
would be amended by changing the term ``radio communication equipment'' 
to ``communication equipment.'' This change would facilitate future 
developments in technology. Also, in this paragraph the term ``surface 
facility'' would be changed to ``communication facility'' because, in 
the future, communication facilities may not be on the surface.

Section 91.711 Special Rules for Foreign Civil Aircraft

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  91.711 (c)(1)(ii) by changing 
the term ``radio navigational equipment appropriate to the navigational 
facilities to be used'' to ``navigation equipment suitable for the 
route to be flown.'' This change would facilitate future developments 
in navigation technology.
    Paragraph (e) would be amended by changing the specified flight 
level and by adding reference to ``an IFR-approved RNAV system.'' As 
amended, the paragraph would state that foreign aircraft operating at 
and above 18,000 feet (FL 180) must be equipped with DME or an IFR-
approved RNAV system. The current rule sets the limit at 24,000 feet 
MSL (FL 240); however, the altitude defining the base of Class A 
airspace (formerly the positive control area) was lowered from 24,000 
feet (FL 240) to 18,000 feet (FL 180) in October 1971. While this rule 
change would increase the requirements for foreign civil aircraft, the 
FAA believes that the affected aircraft already meet these standards. 
The FAA specifically seeks comments on this proposed change. In 
addition, the provision for a suitable RNAV system is being added 
because modern RNAV systems provide distance from the active waypoint 
as an integral function in lieu of DME. This distance readout from a 
RNAV system can serve any purpose that DME serves.

Section 95.1 Applicability

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  95.1. In paragraphs (a), (b), 
and (d), references to ``Federal airway(s), jet route(s), area 
navigation low or high route(s)'' would be changed to ``ATS route(s).'' 
The use of the term ``ATS route'' would make the FAA's regulations 
consistent with ICAO.
    Paragraph (d) would be further amended in the second sentence by 
adding the phrase, ``Unless otherwise specified,'' to the beginning, 
and by changing the term ``radio fixes'' to ``navigation fixes.'' These 
changes would increase the flexibility of the FAA to allow the use of 
other-than-ground-based navigation systems.)
    Current paragraph (e) uses 25 miles as the distance for reception 
of navigation signals. The FAA proposes to revise the paragraph to 
allow air navigation along the entire route (subject to air traffic 
restrictions) at the MOCA when using suitable navigation systems (e.g., 
GPS). Also, because nautical miles are the standard unit of measurement 
in air navigation, the reference to ``25 miles'' would be converted to 
``22 nautical miles.''
    Paragraph (f) would be revised to specify that an MRA is applicable 
only to intersections defined by ground-based navigation aids.
    In paragraph (g), the term ``facility or way point'' would be 
changed to ``ground-based navigation aid.'' Current paragraph (g)(1), 
which addresses reception requirements, would be retained in proposed 
paragraph (g), and the term ``facilities'' would be changed to 
``signals.'' Finally, the text of current paragraph (g)(2) would be 
removed. These changes would increase the flexibility of the rule to 
allow the use of other-than-ground-based navigation systems.

Part 97--Heading Revised

    The heading for part 97, now reading ``Standard Instrument Approach 
Procedures'' would be revised to read ``Standard Instrument 
Procedures'' because the part is not limited to approach procedures.

Section 97.1 Applicability

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  97.1 to provide a more 
accurate and complete description of the applicability of part 97. The 
words ``standard instrument approach procedures'' would be changed to 
``standard instrument procedures'' to reflect the fact that part 97 
refers to takeoffs and approaches. The proposed rules also would expand 
the scope of part 97 to include departure procedures, since those 
departure procedures are used as the basis for takeoff weather 
minimums. Proposed Sec.  97.1 would clarify that published civil 
takeoff weather minimums are based on a specified route, and that 
pilots must comply with that route unless an alternative route has been 
assigned by ATC. The section would be further amended by deleting the 
words ``for instrument letdown,'' which is obsolete terminology.

[[Page 77333]]

Section 97.3 Symbols and Terms Used in Procedures

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  97.3 by to remove the 
paragraph designations and to organize the terms alphabetically. In 
addition, the following terms would be revised:
    The terms ``A'' (alternate airport weather minimum) in paragraph 
(a), ``C'' (circling landing minimum) in paragraph (d), and ``S'' 
(straight in minimum) in paragraph (s), would be removed in the 
proposed revision of Sec.  97.3. These items are more appropriately 
spelled in full in the legend of the approach charts.
    The term ``approach procedure segments'' would be modified to 
include specification of a path to accommodate RNAV approaches, and 
``DH'' would be replaced with ``DA/DH.''
    The term ``ceiling minimum'' in paragraph (e) would be changed to 
``ceiling'' and clarified to refer to airport elevation rather than the 
current general term ``surface of the airport.''
    The term ``D'' (day) in paragraph (f) would be removed, as the term 
is no longer used.
    The term ``decision height'' that appears in the definition of 
``missed approach'' in paragraph (c)(5), and in the definition of 
``copter procedures'' in paragraph (d)(1), would be changed to 
``decision altitude or decision height (DA/DH).'' See discussion 
``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.
    The term ``copter procedures'' would further be revised to clarify 
the circumstances under which the reduction of the charted visibility 
is authorized. It is also important to highlight that the one-quarter 
mile prevailing visibility and the 1200-foot RVR mentioned in the 
proposed definition are minimum limits. Although both are specified to 
permit the application of reduced visibility minimums if either 
visibility or RVR is reported, no equivalency between one-quarter mile 
and the 1200-foot RVR is intended. For equivalency, see the RVR tables 
in Flight Information Publications.
    The term ``HAA'' (height above airport) in paragraph (h) would be 
revised to add the words, ``expressed in feet.''
    The term ``HAL'' (height above landing) in paragraph (h)(1) would 
be revised to read, ``height of the DA/MDA above a designated 
helicopter landing area elevation used for helicopter instrument 
approach procedures.'' This proposed definition would include 
references to decision altitude (see II.D.1. above) and MDA (see 
discussion of Sec.  1.1 above), and would facilitate future Wide-Area 
Augmentation Systems (WAAS) operations.
    The term ``HAS'' would be added to read, ``height of the DA/MDA 
above the highest terrain/surface within a 5,200-foot radius of the 
missed approach point used in helicopter instrument approach procedures 
and is expressed in feet AGL.'' This definition would support point-in-
space operations and provide additional information for maneuvering in 
the vicinity of a heliport.
    The term ``HAT'' (height above touchdown), which currently appears 
in paragraph (i), would be revised to read, ``height above threshold 
expressed in feet.'' This would be a nomenclature change to make the 
FAA's regulations consistent with ICAO and is not considered 
operationally significant. Changes to approach charts and affected FAA 
documents will be made during regular review process.
    The term ``HCH'' would be added to read, ``helipoint crossing 
height and is the computed height of the vertical guidance path above 
the helipoint elevation at the helipoint expressed in feet.'' This is a 
new technical term used in the construction of helicopter instrument 
approach procedures. The HCH affects the size of the obstacle 
evaluation area for the copter instrument approach and is another means 
of providing a margin of safety to the operator.
    This proposal would also add the term ``helipoint,'' which is 
normally the center point of the touchdown and lift-off area (TLOF). It 
is usually a designated arrival and departure point located in the 
center of an obstacle-free area, 150-feet square, overlying an approved 
landing area, where the approach may be terminated in a hover or 
touchdown. The helipad of intended landing may not be located at the 
helipoint, however.
    The term ``MSA'' (minimum safe altitude) would be revised in more 
general wording. The proposed wording allows for any navigation aid or 
fix to be the reference point, which would provide greater flexibility 
in procedure construction. The distance is specified on the approach 
chart.
    The term ``N'' (night) in paragraph (m) would be removed from Sec.  
97.3 because the abbreviation is no longer in use.
    The term ``point in space approach'' in paragraph (o)(1) would be 
removed because the definition is out of date. The term is accurately 
defined in FAA Order 8260.3 ``U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument 
Procedures (TERPS)'' (incorporated by reference in proposed Sec.  
97.20), and, therefore, would not need to be duplicated in Sec.  97.3.
    The term ``shuttle'' in current paragraph (t), would be removed 
because it is obsolete. It would be replaced with the term ``hold in 
lieu of PT,'' meaning a holding pattern established under applicable 
FAA criteria, and used in lieu of a procedure turn (PT) to execute a 
course reversal. By adding this new term, the FAA intends to codify 
current procedures for using a holding pattern in lieu of a procedure 
turn for course reversal.
    The term ``SIAP'' (standard instrument approach procedure) would be 
added to the section because it is a commonly used acronym.
    The term ``T'' (takeoff minimum) would be revised for clarity and 
accuracy to mean nonstandard takeoff minimums or specified departure 
routes/procedures, or both.

Section 97.5 Bearings, Courses, Headings, Radials, Miles

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  97.5 by adding the word 
``tracks'' to the heading and to paragraph (a). The word ``tracks'' is 
used to describe the type of information provided by GPS and RNAV 
systems. Also, paragraph (a) would be amended by adding the phrase 
``unless otherwise designated'' to the end of the paragraph. This 
change would allow for future changes in technology and flexibility in 
route construction and assignment.

Section 97.10 General

    The FAA is proposing to remove Sec.  97.10, General. This section 
prescribes standard instrument procedures ``other than those based on 
the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument 
Approach Procedures (TERPS).'' These types of approach procedures no 
longer exist.

Section 97.20 General

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  97.20 to incorporate FAA Order 
8260.3, ``U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS),'' 
and FAA Order 8260.19, ``Flight Procedures and Airspace'' into the Code 
of Federal Regulations. These orders would be added to include the 
requirements for the developing and processing of instrument 
procedures. The proposed text is shown in the regulation, and the FAA 
would get approval from the Director of the Federal Register if it is 
adopted as final.

Section 121.99 Communications Facilities

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.99(a) by changing the term 
``two-

[[Page 77334]]

way radio communication system'' to ``two-way communication system.'' 
In addition, the term ``point-to-point circuits'' would be changed to 
``communication links.'' These changes would make the regulation more 
flexible for modern means of communication and would allow for future 
changes in technology. In addition, the FAA is proposing to add a 
requirement for a communication system that would have two-way voice 
communication capability for use between each airplane and the 
appropriate dispatch office, and between each airplane and the 
appropriate ATC unit, for non-normal and emergency conditions. The FAA 
believes it would be necessary from the pilot workload and flight 
safety standpoints to retain two-way voice communication capability for 
non-normal and emergency conditions. Data link communication systems 
currently require a pilot to use a keyboard to communicate between the 
airplane and the stations described above. Reliance on data link 
communications alone during an emergency could cause an unsafe 
condition.
    Additionally, with respect to communications between the airplane 
and the dispatch office, the FAA is proposing to add a definition of 
``rapid communications'' that is based on a legal interpretation issued 
by the Regional Counsel of the FAA's southern region on May 26, 1977. A 
copy of this interpretation can be found in the public docket for this 
rulemaking. Generally speaking, rapid communication means that the 
calling party must be able to establish communication with the called 
party in less than 4 minutes.

Section 121.103 En Route Navigation Systems

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  121.103 by changing the 
heading from ``En route navigational facilities'' to ``En route 
navigation systems.'' In addition, the term ``nonvisual ground aids'' 
would be changed to ``navigation aids'' in paragraphs (a) and (b). The 
wording would be changed to make the regulation performance-based by 
requiring that the navigation aids are available over the route to 
navigate the airplane along the route with the required accuracy, so 
that any suitable navigation system could be used. Demonstration of 
compliance to this requirement would be specific to the operator, the 
aircraft navigation system (e.g., GPS, DME/DME, DME/DME/INS), the 
available navigation aids, and the route (including planned 
contingencies such as alternates). The required accuracy is defined by 
the route specifications (including route width) or as defined by ATC 
if not operating on a route.
    Finally, the section would be revised to permit ``other operations 
approved by the FAA'' to be conducted without navigation aids. These 
revisions would allow for changes in technology.

Section 121.121 En Route Navigation Facilities

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  121.121 by changing the title 
from ``En route navigational facilities'' to ``En route navigation 
systems,'' and the section would be formatted to be consistent with 
Sec.  121.103. In addition, the term ``nonvisual ground aids'' would be 
changed to ``navigation aids'' in paragraphs (a) and (b). The wording 
would be changed to make the regulation performance-based by requiring 
that adequate navigation aids are available to navigate the airplane 
along the route with the required accuracy, so that any suitable 
navigation system could be used. ``Lighted airways'' also would be 
removed because it is an obsolete term. Finally, paragraph (b)(3) would 
be revised, consistent with the proposed change to Sec.  121.103(b)(3), 
to permit ``other operations approved by the FAA.'' This revision would 
allow for future changes in technology.

Section 121.344 Digital Flight Data Recorders for Transport Category 
Airplanes

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  121.344 (a)(54) by replacing the 
term ``decision height'' with the term ``decision altitude/decision 
height.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision 
Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 121.345 Communication Equipment

    Section 121.345 would be revised by replacing the word ``radio'' in 
the heading and in paragraphs (a) and (b), with the word 
``communication.'' This would eliminate the reliance on voice 
technology and allow for future developments in technology.

Section 121.347 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Operations 
Under VFR Over Routes Navigated by Pilotage

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.347 by changing the term 
``radio equipment'' to ``communication and navigation equipment'' in 
the heading. In addition, the FAA would amend paragraph (a) to change 
``radio equipment'' to ``communication equipment,'' remove the word 
``ground'' from (a)(1), and clarify (a)(2) by removing words ``lateral 
boundaries of the surface areas of.''
    Paragraph (b) would be revised to separate the communication and 
navigation equipment requirements, and the requirement for navigation 
equipment would be made more generic to accommodate RNAV systems. A 
marker beacon receiver or ILS receiver would not be required under the 
proposed rule since precision approaches are not appropriate to VFR 
operations, so the last phrase of this paragraph would be deleted.
    These changes would allow for communications that are not ``voice'' 
communications, would make the regulation more flexible for modern 
means of communication, and would allow for future changes in 
technology.

Section 121.349 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Operations 
Under VFR Over Routes Not Navigated by Pilotage or for Operations Under 
IFR or Over the Top

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  121.349 to recodify and 
clarify existing requirements. The proposed paragraph (a) would replace 
the requirement for two independent receivers with a requirement for 
two independent navigation systems. The two independent navigation 
systems must be suitable for the route to be flown, so that they both 
support compliance with the requirements proposed in Sec.  121.103(a) 
or Sec.  121.121(a). There would be no requirement for the two systems 
to be identical, so that a single VOR and a single suitable RNAV system 
would satisfy this requirement on a Victor airway. The intent of this 
rule is to ensure that there is no single point of failure or event 
affecting aircraft navigation systems that causes loss of the ability 
to navigate along the intended route or to navigate to a suitable 
diversion airport. The change is also intended to address the 
vulnerability of GPS, which uses very weak signals that are susceptible 
to interference. For example, two minimum GPS (or other satellite 
navigation) receivers may not be considered ``independent,'' since both 
are so vulnerable to interference. However, the proposed rule would be 
performance-based rather than prescriptive; thus, it is possible that 
two GPS receivers with an anti-jam capability could be considered 
independent, since they would not be so vulnerable to interference. 
Systems are considered independent if there is no probable failure or 
event that could affect both systems. In addition, the allowance for a 
single ILS and marker

[[Page 77335]]

beacon would be extended to any precision approach or APV system.
    The paragraph would also be revised to broaden the exception for 
two independent navigation systems in paragraph (b) to allow for the 
use of any single navigation system consistent with the provisions in 
proposed Sec.  121.349(c). In addition, for non-normal and emergency 
operating conditions, the FAA proposes to add a requirement for at 
least one of the independent communication systems to have two-way 
voice communication capability. The requirement to report DME failures 
has been removed since it is required in current Sec.  91.187. These 
changes would make the regulation more flexible for modern means of 
communication and navigation and would allow for future changes in 
technology.
    The proposed changes to Sec.  121.349 are intended to be broad in 
scope. The proposed wording would allow for the future evolution of 
navigation system technology. Presently the FAA sees a need for a full 
DME infrastructure and a minimal VOR network to remain for the 
foreseeable future. However, as the NAS evolves and navigation 
technology improves, a satellite-based system may become the core of 
the aviation navigation system.
    The proposed rule language is designed to provide the most 
flexibility for the operator rather than being prescriptive. It would 
be through the operations specification process that the operator would 
indicate the suitability of its equipage. The FAA sees a benefit to the 
use of a performance-based rule for both the operator and the 
regulator, as this would be a way to address the variety of navigation 
equipment installed in the various fleets. The FAA seeks comments on 
whether to adopt a broad, performance-based rule language or a narrow, 
prescriptive language requiring specific systems.

Section 121.351 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Extended 
Over-Water Operations and for Certain Other Operations

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.351 by changing the words 
``radio equipment'' to ``communication and navigation equipment'' in 
the heading, and the words ``radio communication'' to ``communication 
and navigation'' in paragraph (a). This would permit the use of data 
link communications systems for normal operating conditions. Also, 
paragraph (a) would be revised to require at least one of the 
independent communication systems to have two-way voice communication 
capability for non-normal and emergency operating conditions. In 
addition, references would be changed to be consistent with other 
proposed changes and requirements would be explained in full instead of 
referring the reader to another section of the CFR.
    Also, paragraph (c)(1) would be revised to use terminology 
consistent with the proposed changes to Sec. Sec.  121.103 and 121.121, 
and paragraph (c)(3) would be revised to apply to aircraft equipped 
with only VHF communications equipment.

Section 121.419 Pilots and Flight Engineers: Initial, Transition, and 
Upgrade Ground Training

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  121.419(a)(1)(vii) by replacing the 
term ``DH'' with the term ``DA/DH.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision 
Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 121.559 Emergencies: Supplemental Operations

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.559(c) by replacing the 
term ``ground radio station'' with the term ``communication facility. 
The term ``communications facility'' is more accurate than the term 
``ground radio station.'' See discussion for Sec.  121.565 below.

Section 121.561 Reporting Potentially Hazardous Meteorological 
Conditions and Irregularities of Ground and Navigation Facilities

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.561 by revising the heading 
to replace the words ``ground and navigation facilities'' with ``ground 
facilities and navigation aids.'' The same change is proposed for 
paragraph (a). The term ``navigation aids'' is used throughout this 
proposal.

Section 121.565 Engine Inoperative: Landing; Reporting

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.565(c) by replacing the 
term ``ground radio station'' with the term ``communication facility'' 
and the term ``station'' with ``facility.'' The term ``communication 
facility'' is more accurate than ``ground radio station'' since the 
communication facility could be other than ATC. For example, if a pilot 
sent a report to dispatch or to the Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) 
service provider, then dispatch or the ARINC service provider would 
forward the report to ATC.

Section 121.579 Minimum Altitudes for Use of Autopilot

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  121.579(b) by replacing the 
term ``decision height'' with the term ``DA/DH.'' See discussion 
``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above. In 
addition, the FAA is proposing to replace the term ``ILS'' with the 
word ``precision'' in (b)(1) and (b)(2). This would be consistent with 
the proposed definition of ``precision approach procedure'' in Sec.  
1.1.

Section 121.651 Takeoff and Landing Weather Minimums: IFR: All 
Certificate Holders

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  121.651 by replacing the term 
``DH'' with ``DA/DH'' in paragraph (c). See discussion ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.
    Current paragraph (d) sets forth requirements for a final approach 
segment of an instrument approach procedure (other than a Category II 
or Category III procedure) at an airport with less-than-certain 
visibility minimums where the ILS and an operative PAR are collocated 
and coincident. The FAA is proposing to amend the paragraph to expand 
it from only ILS to include an operative PAR and any other precision 
instrument approach system.

Section 121.652 Landing Weather Minimums: IFR: All Certificate Holders

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  121.652 by replacing the term 
``DH'' with ``DA/DH'' in paragraph (a). See discussion ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Appendix M to Part 121

    The FAA proposes to amend Appendix M to part 121 by replacing the 
words, ``Selected decision height'' with the words ``Selected decision 
altitude/decision height'' in Parameter Number 54. See discussion 
``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 125.51 En Route Navigational Facilities

    The FAA proposes to revise the heading to read ``En route 
navigation aids'' and to amend paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec.  125.51 
by replacing the words ``nonvisual ground aids'' with ``navigation 
aids'' to allow for navigation by other-than-ground-based navigation 
aids, and to change the heading from ``en route navigational 
facilities'' to ``en route navigation systems.''

Section 125.203 Radio and Navigational Equipment

    Section 125.203 would be revised. In the heading, the words ``Radio 
and navigational'' would be replaced with the words ``Communication and 
navigation.'' Throughout the rest of the

[[Page 77336]]

section, proposed changes would mirror proposed Sec. Sec.  121.349, 
129.17 and 135.165 requirements. These are described in the discussion 
of proposed Sec.  121.349. In addition, because nautical miles are the 
standard unit of measurement in air navigation, the words ``25 miles'' 
in paragraph (a) would be replaced with the words ``22 nautical 
miles.''
    For the purposes of Sec.  125.203, a system that provides both 
communication and navigation may be used in place of separate 
communications and navigation systems. However, existing Sec.  
125.203(d) would be removed because it does not contain a requirement 
and is merely guidance.

Section 125.321 Reporting Potentially Hazardous Meteorological 
Conditions and Irregularities of Ground and Navigation Facilities

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  125.321 so that it would be 
identical to proposed Sec.  121.561.

Section 125.379 Landing Weather Minimums: IFR

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  125.379(a) by replacing the term 
``DH'' with ``DA/DH'' in paragraph (a). See discussion ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 125.381 Takeoff and Landing Weather Minimums: IFR

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  125.381(a) and (b) by changing 
the word ``pilot'' to ``person'' to make the regulation consistent with 
the definition of ``person'' currently in Sec.  1.1.
    The FAA is also proposing to revise Sec.  125.381(c) to update the 
terminology and to reorganize the paragraph to improve its clarity. As 
proposed, the term ``outer marker'' would be replaced with the more 
accurate term ``precision final approach fix'' in paragraph (c)(1). In 
addition, the FAA is proposing to change the term ``DH'' to ``DA/DH.'' 
See discussion under ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and Decision 
Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 129.16 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Rotorcraft 
Operations Under VFR Over Routes Navigated by Pilotage

    The FAA is proposing to add new Sec.  129.16 to mirror the 
requirements of Sec.  121.347 for part 129 rotorcraft VFR operations. 
This would impose no burden on operators of those rotorcraft because 
they are already equipped with the communication equipment, and the 
communication and navigation equipment needed for night VFR operations, 
that would meet the proposed requirements. These changes would make the 
regulation more flexible for modern means of communication and 
navigation and would allow for future changes in technology.

Section 129.17 Radio Equipment

    The FAA is proposing to revise the heading of Sec.  129.17 to 
replace ``radio equipment'' with ``aircraft communication and 
navigation equipment for operations under IFR or over the top.'' 
Throughout the rest of the section, proposed changes would mirror 
proposed Sec. Sec.  121.347, 121.349, and 135.165 requirements. These 
are described in the explanation of changes to Sec.  121.349. The 
change would impose no burden on operators of those aircraft because 
they are already equipped with the communication and navigation 
equipment that would meet the proposed requirements. These changes 
would make the regulation more flexible for modern means of 
communication and navigation and would allow for future changes in 
technology.

Section 129.21 Control of Traffic

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  129.21 to remove references to 
``ground'' and ``voice.'' This revision would enable air carriers to 
take advantage of advances in technology.

Appendix A to Part 129

    The FAA is proposing to revise paragraph (b), Section IV, of part 
129, Appendix A, to replace the words ``Radio Facilities: 
Communications'' with ``Communications Facilities'' in the paragraph 
heading, and by replacing the words ``ground radio communication 
facilities'' with ``communication facilities'' in the text. This would 
allow those facilities to be located wherever appropriate.

Section 135.67 Reporting Potentially Hazardous Meteorological 
Conditions and Irregularities of Communications or Navigation 
Facilities

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.67 so that the section 
would be identical to proposed Sec.  121.561.

Section 135.78 Instrument Approach Procedures and IFR Landing Minimums

    The FAA is proposing to add new Sec.  135.78 to be consistent with 
the requirements in Sec. Sec.  121.567 and 125.325. This would give the 
FAA a regulatory basis for authorizing in the certificate holder's 
operations specifications for new kinds of approaches and revising 
weather minimums for certain conditions.

Section 135.79 Flight Locating Requirements

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.79(a)(3) by replacing the 
term ``radio or telephone communications'' with the term 
``communications.'' By using less specific language, certificate 
holders would have greater flexibility in determining what type of 
communication equipment to use, and thus be able to take advantage of 
changes in technology.

Section 135.93 Autopilot: Minimum Altitudes for Use

    The FAA is proposing to replace the words ``When using an 
instrument approach facility other than ILS,'' at the beginning of 
Sec.  135.93(b) with the words ``For other than precision approaches, * 
* *'' This would eliminate the use of the word ``facility.'' Under the 
existing language, paragraph (b) already allows for approach and 
landing operations with vertical guidance (APV) by using the phrase 
``other than ILS.'' The term ``facility'' is not necessary and would be 
removed to improve clarity.
    Paragraph (c) would be amended to facilitate future technology by 
replacing the words ``For ILS approaches'' in the beginning of the 
paragraph with ``For precision approaches.''

Section 135.152 Flight Recorders

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  135.152 (h)(54) by replacing the 
words ``decision height'' with the words ``decision altitude/decision 
height'' in paragraph (a). See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height 
(DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 135.161 Communication and Navigation Equipment for Aircraft 
Operations Under VFR Over Routes Navigated by Pilotage

    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  135.161 to mirror the 
requirements of Sec.  121.347 (a) and (b) for operations conducted 
under VFR over routes navigated by pilotage. This would not result in a 
substantive change to the existing requirements in the section. These 
changes would make the regulation more flexible for modern means of 
communication and would allow for future changes in technology. In 
addition, the FAA is proposing to remove the words ``carrying 
passengers'' to make the section applicable to all VFR operations, 
including all-cargo.

Section 135.165 Radio and Navigational Equipment: Extended Over-Water 
or IFR Operations

    The FAA is proposing to revise the heading of Sec.  135.165 and to 
amend the section by removing the words ``radio

[[Page 77337]]

communication and navigational equipment appropriate to the facilities 
to be used'' and using the words ``communication systems,'' 
``navigation systems'' and ``suitable for the route to be flown.''
    Throughout the rest of the section, proposed changes would mirror 
proposed Sec. Sec.  121.349, 125.203, and 129.17 requirements. These 
are described in the discussion of proposed Sec.  121.349. Also, for 
non-normal and emergency conditions, the FAA would add a requirement 
that aircraft used in extended over-water or IFR operations be equipped 
with at least one independent communication system having two-way voice 
communication capability. These changes would make the regulation more 
flexible for modern means of communication and navigation and would 
allow for future changes in technology. For the purposes of Sec.  
135.165, a system that provides both communication and navigation may 
be used in place of separate communications and navigation systems. 
However, existing Sec.  135.165(c) would be removed because it does not 
contain a requirement and is merely guidance.

Section 135.225 IFR: Takeoff, Approach and Landing Minimums

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.225 (a), (b), (e), (f), and 
(g) by changing the word ``pilot'' to ``person'' to make the regulation 
consistent with the definition of ``person'' currently in Sec.  1.1.
    The FAA is also proposing to amend paragraph (c)(1) by changing the 
term ``an ILS final approach'' to the term ``a precision or APV 
approach.'' This would broaden the term to address any precision 
approach and the new APV approaches, not only ILS.
    In the introductory text of paragraph (c)(3), the words ``on a 
final approach using a VOR, NDB, or comparable approach procedure'' 
would be changed to ``on a nonprecision final approach.''
    In paragraphs (c)(3)(ii) and (d), the term ``DH'' would be changed 
to ``DA/DH.'' See discussion ``II.D.1. Decision Height (DH) and 
Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 135.345 Pilots: Initial, Transition, and Upgrade Ground 
Training

    The FAA proposes to amend Sec.  135.345(a)(7) by replacing the term 
``DH'' with ``DA/DH'' in paragraph (a). See discussion ``II.D.1. 
Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

Section 135.371 Large Transport Category Airplanes: Reciprocating 
Engine Powered: En Route Limitations: One Engine Inoperative

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.371(c)(2) by removing the 
word ``radio.'' This would eliminate the reliance on ground-based 
navigational aid fixes and permit the use of other means such as RNAV 
waypoints to identify such fixes.

Section 135.381 Large Transport Category Airplanes: Turbine Engine 
Powered: En Route Limitations: One Engine Inoperative

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.381(b)(2) by removing the 
word ``radio.'' This would eliminate the reliance on voice technology.

Appendix F to Part 135

    The FAA proposes to amend Appendix F to part 135 by replacing the 
words, ``Selected decision height'' with the words ``Selected decision 
altitude/decision height'' in Parameter Number 54. See discussion 
``II.D.1.Decision Height (DH) and Decision Altitude (DA)'' above.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires 
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information 
collection burdens imposed on the public. We have determined that there 
are no new information collection requirements associated with this 
proposed rule.

V. International Compatibility

    In keeping with United States obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is the FAA's policy to comply with 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that corresponded to these proposed regulations.

VI. Economic Evaluation

    Proposed and final rule changes to federal regulations must undergo 
several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 
each Federal agency 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. 2531 through 2533) prohibits 
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to 
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. 
standards, the Trade Agreements 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 
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).
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
NPRM: (1) Would not be ``a significant regulatory action'' as defined 
in the Executive Order, and would not be ``significant'' as defined in 
the Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; 
(2) would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities; (3) would not impose barriers to international trade; 
and (4) would not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal 
governments, or on the private sector. These analyses are available in 
the docket, and are summarized below.

Benefits and Costs

    The proposed rule expands the use of area navigation systems to 
allow for technological advances that support RNAV, such as GPS, while 
retaining the current ground-based systems. The proposed rule would not 
impose an obligation to change current navigation systems, and 
therefore, the proposed rule would mandate no costs on aircraft 
operators. The proposed rule would also add language that would codify 
current practice and, therefore, would not impose costs. To enhance 
safety, the proposed rule would revise the definition of ``night,'' 
which would allow the FAA to limit operations at locations where 
terrain might result in an earlier nightfall than published in the 
American Air Almanac. This could affect a very small number of airports 
in the United States, and, while the FAA does not expect any cost 
impact, the agency asks for comments.
    Cost savings might result because the proposed rule would enable 
the use of advanced RNAV navigation routes that the FAA has been 
developing. These routes are typically more direct, and therefore, 
shorter than the current Federal Airways and jet routes and in 
following these advanced RNAV routes aircraft may require less fuel and 
time to reach their destinations. Advanced

[[Page 77338]]

area navigation routes have not been planned, so cost savings cannot be 
reliably estimated at this time. However, estimates of cost savings 
from flying advanced RNAV test routes that the FAA has established are 
in excess of $30 million annually.
    In addition, the proposed rule would amend the current regulation 
and eliminate the middle marker as a required ILS component, as 
indicated in Sec.  91.175 (k) of the proposed amendments. In 1992, the 
FAA completed an evaluation of the operational effectiveness and safety 
benefits provided by a middle marker during ILS operations. The 
evaluation concluded that a middle marker makes no significant 
difference in pilot performance while conducting an ILS approach. 
Elimination of the middle marker as a required ILS component would 
result in net cost savings to owners of middle marker facilities who 
choose to decommission their middle marker facilities. Owners of middle 
marker facilities would save a total of $2.3 million per year if all 
the 672 middle marker facilities are decommissioned. The total 
operating cost savings over 15 years would be $34 million 
(approximately $20 million discounted). However, there are costs to 
decommission the facilities and these costs range from $10,000 to 
$30,000 per facility. The FAA assumes that half the middle markers 
would be decommissioned at the end of 2003 and the other half at the 
end of 2004. The total cost to decommission all the middle marker 
facilities would range from a total of $6.7 million ($6.0 million 
discounted) to approximately $20.2 million ($18.2 million discounted). 
The net cost savings would be $27.2 million ($13.5 million discounted) 
over the 15 year period given the low estimate of decommissioning costs 
to $13.8 million ($1.3 million discounted) given the high estimate.
    In addition, the proposed amendments would expand the number of 
acceptable substitutes for the outer marker. This would allow more 
flexibility in the design of future instrument approaches.

VII. 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 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale for their actions. The RFA 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 RFA.
    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 proposed rule may effect those privately owned small airports 
that would be allowed to decommission their middle marker facilities. 
There are an estimated 38 non-Federal middle marker facilities. For the 
purposes of this regulatory flexibility determination, the FAA assumes 
that all 38 middle marker facilities are at airports operated by small 
entities. The estimated cost to decommission a middle marker facility 
ranges from $10,000 to $30,000 per facility. On the other hand, the 
non-Federal navigation facilities would save operating costs by no 
longer having to maintain and operate these middle marker facilities. 
These savings would be about $3,400 annually per facility. Over a 
period of 15 years, each facility would save $51,000 in operating costs 
if it decommissioned its middle markers. However, the proposed rule 
would not mandate that the middle marker facilities be decommissioned. 
The private facility owners would not be required to decommission their 
facilities; therefore they would only do so if they believed it to be 
cost-beneficial. Consequently, the FAA certifies that the proposed rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The FAA solicits comments from the public regarding 
this finding.

VIII. International Trade Impact Analysis

    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.
    This action proposes to impose requirements on foreign air carriers 
operating in the United States that would mirror the communication and 
navigation equipment requirements placed on domestic air carriers 
operating in the United States. This would mean that the requirements 
imposed on foreign air carriers operating in the United States would be 
consistent with those that are imposed on U.S. commercial operators and 
air carriers operating domestically. For example, proposed Sec. Sec.  
121.349, 125.203, and 135.165 would impose substantially the same 
communication and navigation system requirements for operations in the 
United States under IFR or over the top as proposed in Sec.  129.17 for 
foreign air carriers that conduct IFR or over the top operations in the 
United States. Therefore the FAA has determined that the proposed rule 
would have a neutral impact on foreign trade and would create no 
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.

IX. Unfunded Mandate Assessment

    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 proposed rule would not contain such a 
mandate. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.

X. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The FAA has determined 
that this action would 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,

[[Page 77339]]

we determined that this proposal would not have federalism 
implications.

XI. 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 proposed rulemaking action qualifies 
for a categorical exclusion.

XII. Energy Impact

    The energy impact of this proposed 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. The FAA has 
determined that the proposed rule is not a major regulatory action 
under the provisions of the EPCA.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 1

    Air transportation.

14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Navigation (air).

14 CFR Part 91

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

14 CFR Part 95

    Air traffic control, Airspace, Alaska, Navigation (air), Puerto 
Rico.

14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Navigation (air), Weather.

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Charter flights, 
Drug testing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, 
Transportation.

14 CFR Part 125

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements

14 CFR Part 129

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security, Smoking.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

The Proposed Amendments

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Administration 
Aviation proposes to amend chapter I of 14 CFR as follows:

PART 1--DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

    2. Amend Sec.  1.1 as follows:
    a. Remove the definitions of Area navigation high route, Area 
navigation low route, Category II operations, Category III operations, 
Category IIIa operations, Category IIIb operations, Category IIIc 
operations, Decision height, Minimum descent altitude, Nonprecision 
approach procedure, Precision approach procedure, and RNAV way point.
    b. Add definitions for Air Traffic Service (ATS) route, Approach 
procedure with vertical guidance (APV), Area navigation (RNAV) route, 
Category I (CAT I) operation, Category II (CAT II) operation, Category 
III (CAT III) operation, Category IIIa (CAT IIIa) operation, Category 
IIIb (CAT IIIb) operation, Category IIIc (CAT IIIc) operation, Decision 
altitude (DA), Decision height (DH), Final approach fix (FAF), 
Instrument approach procedure (IAP), Minimum descent altitude (MDA), 
Nonprecision approach procedure (NPA), Precision approach procedure 
(PA), and Precision final approach fix (PFAF) in alphabetical order to 
read as set forth below.
    c. Revise the definitions of Area navigation (RNAV), Night, and 
Route segment to read as set forth below.


Sec.  1.1  General definitions.

* * * * *
    Air Traffic Service (ATS) route is a specified route designated for 
channeling the flow of traffic as necessary for the provision of air 
traffic services. The term ``ATS route'' refers to a variety of 
airways, including jet routes, area navigation (RNAV) routes, and 
arrival and departure routes. An ATS route is defined by route 
specifications, which may include:
    (1) An ATS route designator;
    (2) The path to or from significant points;
    (3) Distance between significant points;
    (4) Reporting requirements; and
    (5) The lowest safe altitude determined by the appropriate 
authority.
* * * * *
    Approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV) is an instrument 
approach procedure based on lateral path and vertical glide path. These 
procedures may not conform to requirements for precision approaches.
* * * * *
    Area navigation (RNAV) is a method of navigation that permits 
aircraft operations on any desired flight path.
    Area navigation (RNAV) route is an ATS route based on RNAV that can 
be used by suitably equipped aircraft.
* * * * *
    Category I (CAT I) operation is a precision instrument approach and 
landing with a decision altitude that is not lower than 200 feet (60 
meters) above the threshold and with either a visibility of not less 
than \1/2\ statute mile (800 meters), or a runway visual range of not 
less than 1,800 feet (550 meters).
    Category II (CAT II) operation is a precision instrument approach 
and landing with a decision height lower than 200 feet (60 meters), but 
not lower than 100 feet (30 meters), and with a runway visual range of 
not less than 1,200 feet (350 meters).
    Category III (CAT III) operation is a precision instrument approach 
and landing with a decision height lower than 100 feet (30 meters) or 
no DH, and with a runway visual range less than 1,200 feet (350 
meters).
    Category IIIa (CAT IIIa) operation is a precision instrument 
approach and landing with a decision height lower than 100 feet (30 
meters), or no decision height, and with a runway visual range of not 
less than 700 feet (200 meters).
    Category IIIb (CAT IIIb) operation is a precision instrument 
approach and landing with a decision height lower than 50 feet (15 
meters), or no decision height, and with a runway visual range of less 
than 700 feet (200 meters), but not less than 150 feet (50 meters).
    Category IIIc (CAT IIIc) operation is a precision instrument 
approach and landing with no decision height and with a runway visual 
range less than 150 feet (50 meters).
* * * * *
    Decision altitude (DA) is a specified altitude at which a person 
must initiate a missed approach if the person does not see the required 
visual reference. Decision altitude is expressed in feet above mean sea 
level.
    Decision height (DH) is a specified height above the ground level 
at which a person must initiate a missed approach during a Category II 
or III approach if the person does not see the required visual 
reference.
    Final approach fix (FAF) defines the beginning of the nonprecision 
final

[[Page 77340]]

approach segment and the point where final segment descent may begin.
* * * * *
    Instrument approach procedure (IAP) is a predetermined ground track 
and vertical profile that provides prescribed measures of obstruction 
clearance and assurance of navigation signal reception capability. An 
IAP enables a person to maneuver a properly equipped aircraft with 
reference to approved flight instruments from a specified position and 
altitude to--
    (1) A position and altitude from which a landing can be completed; 
or
    (2) A position and altitude at which holding or en route flight may 
begin.
* * * * *
    Minimum descent altitude (MDA) is the lowest altitude to which a 
person may descend on a nonprecision final approach, or during a 
circle-to-land maneuver, until the visual reference requirements of 
Sec.  91.175(c) of this chapter are met. Minimum descent altitude is 
expressed in feet above mean sea level.
* * * * *
    Night is the time between the end of evening civil twilight and the 
beginning of morning civil twilight, as published in the American Air 
Almanac, converted to local time or such other period between sunset 
and sunrise, as may be prescribed by the FAA.
* * * * *
    Nonprecision approach procedure (NPA) is an instrument approach 
procedure based on a lateral path and no vertical glide path.
* * * * *
    Precision approach procedure (PA) is an instrument approach 
procedure based on a lateral path and a vertical glide path.
    Precision final approach fix (PFAF) defines the beginning of the 
precision or APV final approach segment, and denotes the location where 
the glide path intersects the intermediate segment altitude; i.e., 
where final segment descent on glide path may begin.
* * * * *
    Route segment is a portion of a route bounded on each end by a fix 
or navigation aid (NAVAID).
* * * * *
    3. Amend Sec.  1.2 by adding the following abbreviations in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  1.2  Abbreviations and symbols.

* * * * *
    APV means approach procedure with vertical guidance.
* * * * *
    NM means nautical mile.
    NPA means nonprecision approach procedure.
* * * * *
    PA means precision approach procedure.
* * * * *
    RNAV means area navigation.
* * * * *

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING 
POINTS

    4. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

    5. Revise the heading of part 71 to read as set forth above.

Subpart A--Class A Airspace

    6. Transfer the heading ``Subpart A--General; Class A Airspace'' 
from where it appears preceding Sec.  71.1 to preceding Sec.  71.31 and 
revise it to read as set forth above.
    7. Add Sec.  71.11 to read as follows:


Sec.  71.11  Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes.

    Unless otherwise specified, the following apply:
    (a) An Air Traffic Service (ATS) route is based on a centerline 
that extends from one navigation aid, fix, or intersection, to another 
navigation aid, fix, or intersection (or through several navigation 
aids, fixes, or intersections) specified for that route.
    (b) ATS routes include the primary protected airspace dimensions 
defined in FAA Order 8260.3, ``United States Standard For Terminal 
Instrument Procedures (TERPS).'' Order 8260.3 is incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  97.20 of this chapter.
    (c) An ATS route does not include the airspace of a prohibited 
area.
    8. Add Sec.  71.13 to read as follows:


Sec.  71.13  Classification of Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes.

    Unless otherwise specified, ATS routes are classified as follows:
    (a) In subpart A of this part:
    (1) Jet routes.
    (2) Area navigation (RNAV) routes.
    (b) In subpart E of this part:
    (1) VOR Federal airways.
    (2) Colored Federal airways.
    (i) Green Federal airways.
    (ii) Amber Federal airways.
    (iii) Red Federal airways.
    (iv) Blue Federal airways.
    (3) Area navigation (RNAV) routes.
    9. Add Sec.  71.15 to read as follows:


Sec.  71.15  Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways.

    Unless otherwise specified, the place names appearing in the 
descriptions of airspace areas designated as jet routes in subpart A of 
FAA Order 7400.9, and as VOR Federal airways in subpart E of FAA Order 
7400.9, are the names of VOR or VORTAC navigation aids. FAA Order 
7400.9 is incorporated by reference in Sec.  71.1.


Sec.  71.73  [Removed]

    10. Remove Sec.  71.73.


Sec.  71.75  [Removed]

    11. Remove Sec.  71.75.


Sec.  71.77  [Removed]

    12. Remove Sec.  71.77.


Sec.  71.79  [Removed]

    13. Remove Sec.  71.79.

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

    14. 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).

    15. Amend Sec.  91.129 by revising paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  91.129  Operations in Class D airspace.

* * * * *
    (e) Minimum altitudes when operating to an airport in Class D 
airspace. (1) Unless required by the applicable distance-from-cloud 
criteria, each person operating a large or turbine-powered airplane 
must enter the traffic pattern at an altitude of at least 1,500 feet 
above the elevation of the airport and maintain at least 1,500 feet 
until further descent is required for a safe landing.
    (2) Each person operating a large or turbine-powered airplane that 
is performing approach and landing operations with vertical guidance 
(APV) or a precision approach procedure must:
    (i) Operate at an altitude at or above the glide path between the 
published precision final approach fix and the decision altitude (DA), 
or decision height (DH), as applicable; or
    (ii) If compliance with the applicable distance-from-cloud criteria 
requires interception closer in, operate at or above the glide path, 
between the point of interception of glide path and the DA or the DH.
    (3) Each person operating an airplane approaching to land on a 
runway served

[[Page 77341]]

by a visual approach slope indicator must maintain an altitude at or 
above the glide path until a lower altitude is necessary for a safe 
landing.
    (4) Paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) of this section do not prohibit 
normal bracketing maneuvers above or below the glide slope that are 
conducted for the purpose of remaining on the glide path.
* * * * *
    16. Amend Sec.  91.131 by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  91.131  Operations in Class B airspace.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) For IFR operation. An operable and suitable RNAV system, or VOR 
or TACAN receiver; and
* * * * *
    17. Amend Sec.  91.175 by amending paragraphs (e) introductory text 
and (j) by removing the word ``pilot'' and adding in its place the word 
``person,'' by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c) introductory text, 
(e)(1)(ii), (f) introductory text, (h), and (k) to read as follows:


Sec.  91.175  Takeoff and landing under IFR.

    (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. Unless otherwise 
authorized by the FAA, when it is necessary to use an instrument 
approach to a civil airport, each person operating an aircraft must use 
a standard instrument approach procedure prescribed in part 97 of this 
chapter for that airport. This paragraph does not apply to United 
States military aircraft.
    (b) Authorized DA/DH or MDA. For the purpose of this section, when 
an approach procedure requires the use of DA/DH or MDA, the authorized 
DA/DH or MDA is the highest of the following--
    (1) The DA/DH or MDA prescribed by the approach procedure.
    (2) The DA/DH or MDA prescribed for the pilot in command.
    (3) The DA/DH or MDA for which the aircraft is equipped.
    (c) Operation below DA/DH or MDA. Where a DA/DH or MDA is 
applicable, no pilot may operate an aircraft, except a military 
aircraft of the United States, at any airport below the authorized MDA 
or continue an approach below the authorized DA/DH unless--
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Upon arrival at the missed approach point, including a DA/DH 
where a DA/DH is specified and its use is required, and at any time 
after that until touchdown.
* * * * *
    (f) Civil airport takeoff minimums. Unless otherwise authorized by 
the FAA, no person operating an aircraft under part 121, 125, 129, or 
135 of this chapter may takeoff from a civil airport under IFR unless 
weather conditions are at or above the weather minimums for IFR takeoff 
prescribed for that airport under part 97 of this chapter. Where 
published civil takeoff minimums are based on a specified route, 
persons operating that aircraft must comply with that route unless an 
alternative route has been assigned by ATC. If takeoff minimums are not 
prescribed under part 97 of this chapter for a particular airport, the 
following minimums apply to takeoffs under IFR for aircraft operating 
under part 121, 125, 129, or 135 of this chapter:
* * * * *
    (h) Comparable values of RVR and ground visibility. Except for 
Category II or Category III minimums, if RVR minimums for takeoff or 
landing are prescribed in an instrument approach procedure, but RVR is 
not reported for the runway of intended operation, the RVR minimum must 
be converted to ground visibility in accordance with the Comparable 
Values of RVR and Ground Visibility table in FAA Order 8260.3, ``United 
States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)'' 
(incorporated by reference in Sec.  97.20 of this chapter). This 
visibility is the minimum for takeoff or landing on that runway.
* * * * *
    (k) ILS components. The basic components of an ILS are the 
localizer, glide slope, and outer marker, and, when installed for use 
with Category II or Category III instrument approach procedures, an 
inner marker. The following means may be used to substitute for the 
outer marker: compass locator; precision approach radar (PAR) or 
airport surveillance radar (ASR); DME, VOR, or nondirectional beacon 
fixes authorized in the standard instrument approach procedure; and a 
suitable RNAV system in conjunction with a fix identified in the 
standard instrument approach procedure. Applicability of, and 
substitution for, the inner marker for a Category II or III approach is 
determined by the appropriate 14 CFR part 97 approach procedure, letter 
of authorization, or operations specification pertinent to the 
operation.
    18. Amend Sec.  91.177 by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  91.177  Minimum altitudes for IFR operations.

    (a) Operation of aircraft at minimum altitudes. Except when 
necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft 
under IFR below--
    (1) The applicable minimum altitudes prescribed in parts 95 and 97 
of this chapter. However, if both a MEA and a MOCA are prescribed for a 
particular route or route segment, a person may operate an aircraft 
below the MEA down to, but not below, the MOCA, provided the applicable 
navigation signals are available. For aircraft using VOR for 
navigation, this applies only when the aircraft is within 22 nautical 
miles of that VOR (based on the reasonable estimate by the pilot 
operating the aircraft of that distance); or
    (2) If no applicable minimum altitude is prescribed in parts 95 and 
97 of this chapter, then--
    (i) In the case of operations over an area designated as a 
mountainous area in part 95 of this chapter, an altitude of 2,000 feet 
above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of 4 nautical 
miles from the course to be flown; or
    (ii) In any other case, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest 
obstacle within a horizontal distance of 4 nautical miles from the 
course to be flown.
* * * * *
    19. Amend Sec.  91.179 by adding introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec.  91.179  IFR cruising altitude or flight level.

    Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, the following rules apply--
* * * * *


Sec.  91.181  [Amended]

    20. Amend Sec.  91.181 by removing the words ``a Federal airway'' 
and adding in their place the words ``an ATS route'' in paragraph (a).
    21. Amend Sec.  91.183 by revising the heading and the introductory 
text to read as follows:


Sec.  91.183  IFR communications.

    Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, the pilot in command of 
each aircraft operated under IFR in controlled airspace must monitor 
the appropriate frequency and must report the following as soon as 
possible--
* * * * *


Sec.  91.185  [Amended]

    22. Amend Sec.  91.185 heading and paragraph (a) by removing the 
word ``radio.''


Sec.  91.189  [Amended]

    23. Amend Sec.  91.189 (c) by removing the term ``DH'' and adding 
in its place the term ``DA/DH'' wherever it appears, and amend 
paragraph (d) by removing

[[Page 77342]]

the word ``pilot'' and inserting the word ``person.''
    24. Amend Sec.  91.205 by revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (e) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  91.205  Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. 
airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Two-way communication and navigation equipment suitable for the 
route to be flown.
* * * * *
    (e) Flight at and above 18,000 feet MSL (FL 180). If VOR navigation 
equipment is required under paragraph (d)(2) of this section, no person 
may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft within the 50 states and 
the District of Columbia at or above FL 180 unless that aircraft is 
equipped with approved DME or a suitable RNAV system. When the DME or 
RNAV system required by this paragraph fails at and above FL 180, the 
pilot in command of the aircraft must notify ATC immediately, and then 
may continue operations at and above FL 180 to the next airport of 
intended landing where repairs or replacement of the equipment can be 
made.
* * * * *


Sec.  91.219  [Amended]

    25. Amend Sec.  91.219(b)(5) by removing the term ``DH'' and adding 
in its place the term ``DA/DH.''
    26. Amend Sec.  91.511 by revising the heading and paragraph (a)(1) 
introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  91.511  Communication and navigation equipment for over-water 
operations.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Communication equipment appropriate to the facilities to be 
used that can transmit to, and receive from, at least one communication 
facility from any place along the route:
* * * * *
    27. Amend Sec.  91.711 by revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i), 
(c)(1)(ii), and (e) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  91.711  Special rules for foreign civil aircraft.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Communication equipment.
    (ii) Navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
* * * * *
    (e) Flight at and above FL 180. If VOR navigation equipment is 
required under paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, no person may 
operate a foreign civil aircraft within the 50 States and the District 
of Columbia at or above FL 180, unless the aircraft is equipped with 
DME or an IFR-approved RNAV system. When the DME or RNAV system 
required by this paragraph fails at and above FL 180, the pilot in 
command of the aircraft must notify ATC immediately and may then 
continue operations at and above FL 180 to the next airport of intended 
landing where repairs or replacement of the equipment can be made. A 
foreign civil aircraft may be operated within the 50 States and the 
District of Columbia at or above FL 180 without DME or an IFR-approved 
RNAV system when operated for the following purposes, and ATC is 
notified before each takeoff:
* * * * *

PART 95--IFR ALTITUDES

    28. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, and 14 CFR 
11.49(b)(2).

    29. Revise Sec.  95.1 to read as follows:


Sec.  95.1  Applicability.

    (a) This part prescribes altitudes governing the operation of 
aircraft under IFR on ATS routes, or other direct routes for which an 
MEA is designated in this part. In addition, it designates mountainous 
areas and changeover points.
    (b) The MAA is the highest altitude on an ATS route, or other 
direct route for which an MEA is designated, at which adequate 
reception of VOR signals is assured.
    (c) The MCA applies to the operation of an aircraft proceeding to a 
higher minimum en route altitude when crossing specified fixes.
    (d) The MEA is the minimum en route IFR altitude on an ATS route, 
ATS route segment, or other direct route. The MEA applies to the entire 
width of the ATS route, ATS route segment, or other direct route 
between fixes defining that route. Unless otherwise specified, an MEA 
prescribed for an off airway route or route segment applies to the 
airspace 4 nautical miles on each side of a direct course between the 
navigation fixes defining that route or route segment.
    (e) The MOCA assures obstruction clearance on an ATS route, ATS 
route segment, or other direct route, and adequate reception of VOR 
navigation signals within 22 nautical miles of a VOR station used to 
define the route.
    (f) The MRA applies to the operation of an aircraft over an 
intersection defined by ground-based navigation aids. The MRA is the 
lowest altitude at which the intersection can be determined using the 
ground-based navigation aids.
    (g) The changeover point (COP) applies to operation of an aircraft
    along a Federal airway, jet route, or other direct route; for which 
an MEA is designated in this part. It is the point for transfer of the 
airborne navigation reference from the ground-based navigation aid 
behind the aircraft to the next appropriate ground-based navigation aid 
to ensure continuous reception of signals.

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT PROCEDURES

    30. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, 44701; and 14 
CFR 11.49(b)(2).

    31. Revise the heading for part 97 to read as set forth above.
    32. Revise Sec.  97.1 to read as follows:


Sec.  97.1  Applicability.

    (a) General. This part prescribes standard instrument procedures to 
airports in the United States and the weather minimums that apply to 
takeoffs and landings under IFR at those airports.
    (b) Departure procedures. This part also prescribes departure 
procedures (DPs) developed for aircraft operating under parts 121, 125, 
129, and 135 of this chapter to avoid obstacles, and establishes 
weather minimums that apply for takeoff under IFR at civil airports. 
Where published civil takeoff weather minimums are based on a specified 
route, persons operating that aircraft must comply with that route 
unless an alternative route has been assigned by ATC.
    33. Revise Sec.  97.3 to read as follows:


Sec.  97.3  Symbols and terms used in procedures.

    As used in the standard instrument procedures prescribed in this 
part--
    Aircraft approach category means a grouping of aircraft based on a 
speed of 1.3 Vso (at maximum certificated landing weight). 
Vso and the maximum certificated landing weight are those 
values established for the aircraft by the certificating authority of 
the country of registry. The categories are as follows--
    (1) Category A: Speed less than 91 knots.
    (2) Category B: Speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots.
    (3) Category C: Speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots.
    (4) Category D: Speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots.
    (5) Category E: Speed 166 knots or more.

[[Page 77343]]

    Approach procedure segments for which altitudes (minimum altitudes, 
unless otherwise specified) and paths are prescribed in procedures, are 
as follows--
    (1) Initial approach is the segment between the initial approach 
fix and the intermediate fix or the point where the aircraft is 
established on the intermediate course or final approach course.
    (2) Initial approach altitude is the altitude (or altitudes, in 
high altitude procedure) prescribed for the initial approach segment of 
an instrument approach.
    (3) Intermediate approach is the segment between the intermediate 
fix or point and the final approach fix.
    (4) Final approach is the segment between the final approach fix or 
point and the runway, airport, or missed approach point.
    (5) Missed approach is the segment between the missed approach 
point, or point of arrival at decision altitude or decision height (DA/
DH), and the missed approach fix at the prescribed altitude.
    Ceiling means the minimum ceiling, expressed in feet above the 
airport elevation, required for takeoff or required for designating an 
airport as an alternate airport.
    Copter procedures means helicopter procedures, with applicable 
minimums as prescribed in Sec.  97.35. Helicopters may also use other 
procedures prescribed in subpart C of this part and may use the 
Category A minimum descent altitude (MDA), or decision altitude or 
decision height (DA/DH). For other than ``copter-only'' approaches, the 
required visibility minimum for Category I approaches may be reduced to 
one-half the published visibility minimum for Category A aircraft, but 
in no case may it be reduced to less than one-quarter mile prevailing 
visibility, or, if reported, 1,200 feet RVR. Reduction of visibility 
minima on Category II instrument approach procedures is prohibited.
    FAF means final approach fix.
    HAA means height above airport and is expressed in feet.
    HAL means height above landing and is the height of the DA/MDA 
above a designated helicopter landing area elevation used for 
helicopter instrument approach procedures and is expressed in feet.
    HAS means height above the surface and is the height of the DA/MDA 
above the highest terrain/surface within a 5,200-foot radius of the 
missed approach point used in helicopter instrument approach procedures 
and is expressed in feet AGL.
    HAT means height above threshold expressed in feet.
    HCH means helipoint crossing height and is the computed height of 
the vertical guidance path above the helipoint elevation at the 
helipoint expressed in feet.
    Helipoint means the aiming point for the final approach course for 
heliports. It is normally the center point of the touchdown and lift-
off area (TLOF). The helipoint elevation is the highest point on the 
TLOF and is the same elevation as heliport elevation.
    Hold in lieu of PT means a holding pattern established under 
applicable FAA criteria, and used in lieu of a procedure turn to 
execute a course reversal.
    MAP means missed approach point.
    More than 65 knots means an aircraft that has a stalling speed of 
more than 65 knots (as established in an approved flight manual) at 
maximum certificated landing weight with full flaps, landing gear 
extended, and power off.
    MSA means minimum safe altitude, expressed in feet above mean sea 
level, depicted on an approach chart that provides at least 1,000 feet 
of obstacle clearance for emergency use within a certain distance from 
the specified navigation facility or fix.
    NA means not authorized.
    NOPT means no procedure turn required. Altitude prescribed applies 
only if procedure turn is not executed.
    Procedure turn means the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary 
to reverse direction to establish the aircraft on an intermediate or 
final approach course. The outbound course, direction of turn, distance 
within which the turn must be completed, and minimum altitude are 
specified in the procedure. However, the point at which the turn may be 
begun, and the type and rate of turn, is left to the discretion of the 
pilot.
    RA means radio altimeter setting height.
    RVV means runway visibility value.
    SIAP means standard instrument approach procedure.
    65 knots or less means an aircraft that has a stalling speed of 65 
knots or less (as established in an approved flight manual) at maximum 
certificated landing weight with full flaps, landing gear extended, and 
power off.
    T means nonstandard takeoff minimums or specified departure routes/
procedures or both.
    TDZ means touchdown zone.
    Visibility minimum means the minimum visibility specified for 
approach, landing, or takeoff, expressed in statute miles, or in feet 
where RVR is reported.
    34. Amend Sec.  97.5 by revising the heading and paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  97.5  Bearings, courses, tracks, headings, radials, miles.

    (a) All bearings, courses, tracks, headings, and radials in this 
part are magnetic, unless otherwise designated.
* * * * *


Sec.  97.10  [Removed and reserved]

    35. Remove and reserve Sec.  97.10.
    36. Revise Sec.  97.20 to read as follows:


Sec.  97.20  General.

    (a) This subpart prescribes standard instrument procedures based on 
the criteria contained in FAA Order 8260.3, ``U.S. Standard for 
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)'' and FAA Order 8260.19, 
``Flight Procedures and Airspace.'' These standard instrument 
procedures and FAA Orders were approved for incorporation by reference 
by the Director of the Federal Register pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 
1 CFR part 51. They may be examined at the following locations:
    (1) FAA Orders 8260.3 and 8260.19 may be examined at the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Flight Standards Service, Flight Technologies 
and Procedures Division (AFS-420), 6500 S. MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma 
City, OK, and at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol 
Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC. These Orders are available for 
purchase from the U.S. Government Printing Office, 710 N. Capitol 
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20401.
    (2) Standard instrument procedures may be examined at the Federal 
Aviation Administration, National Flight Data Center (ATA-110), 800 
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC, and at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, 
DC.
    (b) Standard instrument procedures and associated supporting data 
are documented on specific forms under FAA Order 8260.19 and are 
promulgated by the FAA through the National Flight Data Center (NFDC) 
as the source for aeronautical charts and avionics databases. These 
procedures are then portrayed on aeronautical charts and included in 
avionics databases prepared by the National Aeronautical Charting 
Office (AVN-500) and other publishers of aeronautical data for use by 
pilots using the NFDC source data. The terminal aeronautical charts 
published by the U.S. Government were approved for incorporation by 
reference by the Director of the Federal Register pursuant

[[Page 77344]]

to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. They may be examined at the 
Federal Aviation Administration, National Flight Data Center (ATA-110), 
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, and at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, 
DC. These charts are available for purchase from the FAA National 
Aeronautical Charting Office, Distribution Division AVN-530, 6303 Ivy 
Lane, Suite 400, Greenbelt, MD 20770.

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

    37. 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, 46105.

    38. Amend Sec.  121.99 by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  121.99  Communications facilities.

    (a) Each certificate holder conducting domestic or flag operations 
must show that a two-way communication system, or other means of 
communication approved by the FAA, is available over the entire route 
under normal operating conditions. The communications may be direct 
links or via an approved communication link that will provide reliable 
and rapid communications under normal operating conditions between each 
airplane and the appropriate dispatch office, and between each airplane 
and the appropriate air traffic control unit, except as specified in 
Sec.  121.351(c). For non-normal and emergency operation conditions, 
the communication system for use between each airplane and the 
appropriate dispatch office and between each airplane and the 
appropriate ATC unit must have two-way voice communication capability. 
For the purpose of communications between the airplane and the dispatch 
office under this section, the term ``rapid communications'' means that 
the caller must be able to establish communications with the called 
party in less than four minutes.
* * * * *
    39. Revise Sec.  121.103 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.103  En route navigation systems.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each 
certificate holder conducting domestic or flag operations must show, 
for each proposed route (including to any regular, provisional, 
refueling or alternate airports), that suitable navigation aids are 
available over the route to navigate the airplane along the route with 
the required accuracy. Navigation aids required for approval of routes 
outside of controlled airspace are listed in the certificate holder's 
operations specifications except for those aids required for routes to 
alternate airports.
    (b) Navigation aids are not required for any of the following 
operations--
    (1) Day VFR operations that the certificate holder shows can be 
conducted safely by pilotage because of the characteristics of the 
terrain;
    (2) Night VFR operations on routes that the certificate holder 
shows have reliably lighted landmarks adequate for safe operation; and
    (3) Other operations approved by the FAA.
    40. Revise Sec.  121.121 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.121  En route navigation systems.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no 
certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may conduct any 
operation over a route (including to any destination, refueling or 
alternate airports) unless suitable navigation aids are available over 
the route to navigate the airplane along the route with the required 
accuracy. Navigation aids required for routes outside of controlled 
airspace are listed in the certificate holder's operations 
specifications except for those aids required for routes to alternate 
airports.
    (b) Navigation aids are not required for any of the following 
operations--
    (1) Day VFR operations that the certificate holder shows can be 
conducted safely by pilotage because of the characteristics of the 
terrain;
    (2) Night VFR operations on routes that the certificate holder 
shows have reliably lighted landmarks adequate for safe operation; and
    (3) Other operations approved by the FAA.


Sec.  121.344  [Amended]

    41. Amend Sec.  121.344 by removing the words ``decision height'' 
and adding in their place the words ``decision altitude/decision 
height'' in paragraph (a)(54).


Sec.  121.345  [Amended]

    42. Amend Sec.  121.345 by removing the word ``radio'' in the 
heading and in paragraphs (a) and (b) and adding in its place the word 
``communication.''
    43. Amend Sec.  121.347 by revising the heading, paragraphs (a) 
introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2), and (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  121.347  Communication and navigation equipment for operations 
under VFR over routes navigated by pilotage.

    (a) No person may operate an airplane under VFR over routes that 
can be navigated by pilotage unless the airplane is equipped with the 
communication equipment necessary under normal operating conditions to 
fulfill the following:
    (1) Communicate with at least one appropriate station from any 
point on the route; and
    (2) Communicate with appropriate air traffic control facilities 
from any point within Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace, or within 
a Class E airspace surface area designated for an airport in which 
flights are intended.
* * * * *
    (b) No person may operate an airplane at night under VFR over 
routes that can be navigated by pilotage unless that airplane is 
equipped with--
    (1) Communication equipment necessary under normal operating 
conditions to fulfill the functions specified in paragraph (a) of this 
section; and
    (2) Navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
    44. Revise Sec.  121.349 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.349  Communication and navigation equipment for operations 
under VFR over routes not navigated by pilotage or for operations under 
IFR or over the top.

    (a) Navigation equipment requirements. Except as provided in 
paragraph (c) of this section, no person may conduct operations under 
VFR over routes that cannot be navigated by pilotage, or operations 
conducted under IFR or over the top, unless the airplane used in those 
operations is equipped with at least two approved independent 
navigation systems suitable for the route to be flown and authorized in 
the certificate holder's operations specifications. However, only one 
navigation system need be provided for precision approach and APV 
operations. Equipment used to receive signals en route also may be used 
to receive signals on approach, if it is capable of receiving both 
signals.
    (b) Communication equipment requirements. No person may operate an 
airplane under VFR over routes that cannot be navigated by pilotage, 
and no person may operate an airplane under IFR or over the top, unless 
the airplane is equipped with--
    (1) For normal operating conditions, at least two independent 
communication systems that fulfill the functions specified in Sec.  
121.347(a); and
    (2) Except as required in Sec.  121.99, for non-normal and 
emergency operating

[[Page 77345]]

conditions, at least one of the two independent communication systems 
that fulfills the functions specified in Sec.  121.347(a), and has two-
way voice communication capability.
    (c) Use of a single independent navigation system. Notwithstanding 
the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, the airplane may be 
equipped with a single independent navigation system suitable for the 
route to be flown if:
    (1) The airplane is equipped with at least one other independent 
navigation system suitable, in the event of loss of the navigation 
capability of the single system at any point along the route, for 
navigating safely to a suitable airport and completing an instrument 
approach;
    (2) Both navigation systems are authorized by the FAA in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications; and
    (3) The airplane has sufficient fuel so that the flight may proceed 
safely to a suitable airport by use of the remaining navigation system, 
and complete an instrument approach and land.
    (d) Use of VOR navigation equipment. If VOR navigation equipment is 
used to comply with paragraph (a) or (c) of this section, no person may 
operate an airplane unless it is equipped with at least one approved 
DME or suitable IFR approved RNAV system.
    (e) Additional communication system equipment requirements. In 
addition to the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section, no 
person may operate an airplane having a passenger seat configuration of 
10 to 30 seats, excluding each crewmember seat, and a maximum payload 
capacity of 7,500 pounds or less, under IFR, over the top, or in 
extended over-water operations unless it is equipped with at least--
    (1) Two microphones; and
    (2) Two headsets, or one headset and one speaker.
    45. Amend Sec.  121.351 by revising the heading and paragraphs (a), 
(c)(1), and (c)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  121.351  Communication and navigation equipment for extended 
over-water operations and for certain other operations.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person 
may conduct an extended over-water operation unless the airplane is 
equipped with at least two independent communication systems that meet 
the following requirements--
    (1) The communication equipment necessary under normal operating 
conditions to communicate with at least one appropriate station from 
any point on the route;
    (2) The communication equipment necessary under normal operating 
conditions to receive meteorological information from any point on the 
route by either of two independent communication systems. One of the 
communication systems used to comply with this paragraph may be used to 
comply with paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3) of this section;
    (3) For non-normal and emergency operating conditions, one 
communication system having two way voice communication capability; and
    (4) Two LRNSs when VOR or ADF radio navigation equipment is 
unusable along a portion of the route.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The ability of the flightcrew to navigate the airplane along 
the route with the required accuracy,
* * * * *
    (3) The duration of the very high frequency communications gap, if 
only very high frequency communication equipment is installed.


Sec.  121.419  [Amended]

    46. Amend Sec.  121.419(a)(1)(vii) by removing the term ``DH'' and 
adding in its place the term ``DA/DH''.


Sec.  121.559  [Amended]

    47. Amend Sec.  121.559(c) by removing the words ``ground radio 
station'' and adding in their place the words ``communication 
facility''.
    48. Amend Sec.  121.561 by revising the heading to read as set 
forth below and by amending paragraph (a) by removing the words 
``ground or navigational facility'' and adding in their place the words 
``ground facility or navigation aid''.


Sec.  121.561  Reporting potentially hazardous meteorological 
conditions and irregularities of ground facilities or navigation aids.

* * * * *


Sec.  121.565  [Amended]

    49. Amend Sec.  121.565(c) by removing the words ``ground radio 
station'' and adding in their place the words ``communication 
facility'' and by removing the word ``station'' and adding in its place 
the word ``facility''.


Sec.  121.579  [Amended]

    50. Amend Sec.  121.579(b) introductory text by removing the words 
``decision height'' and adding in their place the term ``DA/DH'' and 
amend paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) by removing the term ``ILS'' and 
adding in its place the word ``precision''.
    51. Amend Sec.  121.651 by replacing the term ``DH'' with the term 
``DA/DH'' wherever it appears in paragraph (c) and by revising 
paragraph (d) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  121.651  Takeoff and landing weather minimums: IFR: All 
certificate holders.

* * * * *
    (d) A pilot may begin the final approach segment of a Category I 
precision approach procedure at an airport when the visibility is less 
than the visibility minimums prescribed for that procedure if that 
airport is served by an operative PAR and another operative precision 
instrument approach system, and both the PAR and the precision approach 
are used by the pilot. However, no person may continue an approach 
below the authorized DA, unless--
* * * * *


Sec.  121.652  [Amended]

    52. Amend Sec.  121.652(a) by removing the term ``DH'' wherever it 
appears and adding in its place the term ``DA/DH''.

Appendix M to Part 121 [Amended]

    53. Amend Appendix M by removing the words ``Selected decision 
height'' and adding in their place the words ``Selected decision 
altitude/decision height'' in Parameter number 54.

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

    54. 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.

    55. Amend Sec.  125.51 by revising the heading to read as set forth 
below and amend paragraphs (a) and (b) by removing the words 
``nonvisual ground aids'' and adding in their place the words 
``navigation aids''.


Sec.  125.51  En route navigation aids.

* * * * *
    56. Revise Sec.  125.203 to read as follows:


Sec.  125.203  Communication and navigation equipment.

    (a) No person may operate an airplane unless it has two-way 
communication equipment able, at least in flight, to transmit to, and 
receive from, appropriate facilities 22 nautical miles away.
    (b) No person may operate an airplane over the top unless it has 
navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
    (c) No person may operate an airplane carrying passengers under IFR 
or in

[[Page 77346]]

extended over-water operations unless the airplane has at least the 
following equipment:
    (1) Two transmitters;
    (2) Two microphones;
    (3) Two headsets or one headset and one speaker;
    (4) Two independent communication systems, one of which must have 
two-way voice communication capability, capable of transmitting to, and 
receiving from, at least one appropriate facility from any place on the 
route to be flown; and
    (5) Two approved independent navigation systems suitable for the 
route to be flown and authorized in the certificate holder's operations 
specifications. However, only one navigation system need be provided 
for precision approach and APV operations. Equipment used to receive 
signals en route also may be used to receive signals on approach, if it 
is capable of receiving both signals.
    (d) Use of a single independent navigation system. Notwithstanding 
the requirements in paragraph (c) of this section, the airplane may be 
equipped with a single independent navigation system suitable for the 
route to be flown if--
    (1) The airplane is equipped with at least one other independent 
navigation system suitable, in the event of loss of the navigation 
capability of the single system at any point along the route, for 
navigating safely to a suitable airport and completing an instrument 
approach;
    (2) Both navigation systems are authorized by the FAA in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications; and
    (3) The airplane has sufficient fuel so that the flight may proceed 
safely to a suitable airport by use of the remaining navigation system, 
and complete an instrument approach and land.
    (e) Use of VOR navigation equipment. If VOR navigation equipment is 
required by paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, no person may operate 
an airplane unless it is equipped with at least one approved DME or a 
suitable IFR approved RNAV system.
    (f) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (c) of this 
section, installation and use of a single LRNS and a single LRCS for 
extended over-water operations in certain geographic areas may be 
authorized by the Administrator and approved in the certificate 
holder's operations specifications. The following are among the 
operational factors the Administrator may consider in granting an 
authorization:
    (1) The ability of the flight crew to navigate the airplane along 
the route with the required accuracy;
    (2) The length of the route being flown with a single navigation or 
communication system; and
    (3) The duration of the very high frequency communications gap, if 
only very high frequency communication equipment is installed.
    57. Amend Sec.  125.321 by revising the heading to read as set 
forth below and by removing the words ``ground or navigational 
facility''and adding in their place the words ``ground facility or 
navigation aid''.


Sec.  125.321  Reporting potentially hazardous meteorological 
conditions and irregularities of ground facilities or navigation aids.

* * * * *


Sec.  125.379  [Amended]

    58. Amend Sec.  125.379(a) by removing the term ``DH'' wherever it 
appears and adding in its place the term ``DA/DH''.
    59. Amend Sec.  125.381 (a) and (b) by removing the word ``pilot'' 
and adding in its place the word ``person'', and by revising paragraph 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  125.381  Takeoff and landing weather minimums: IFR.

* * * * *
    (c) If a pilot initiates an instrument approach procedure based on 
a weather report that indicates that the specified visibility minimums 
exist and subsequently receives another weather report that indicates 
that conditions have worsened to below the minimum requirements, then 
the pilot may continue with the approach and landing only if both of 
the following conditions are met--
    (1) The later weather report is received when the airplane is in 
one of the following landing phases:
    (i) The airplane is on a precision approach or APV and has passed 
the precision final approach fix.
    (ii) The airplane is on the final approach segment using a 
nonprecision approach procedure.
    (iii) The airplane is on a PAR final approach and has been turned 
over to the final approach controller.
    (2) The pilot in command finds, on reaching the authorized MAP or 
DA/DH, that the actual weather conditions are at or above the minimums 
prescribed in the certificate holder's operations specifications.

PART 129--OPERATIONS: FOREIGN AIR CARRIERS AND FOREIGN OPERATORS OF 
U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON CARRIAGE

    60. The authority citation for part 129 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40104-40105, 40113, 40119, 41706, 
44701-44702, 44712, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901-44904, 44906.

    61. Add Sec.  129.16 to read as follows:


Sec.  129.16  Communication and navigation equipment for rotorcraft 
operations under VFR over routes navigated by pilotage.

    (a) No person may operate a rotorcraft under VFR over routes that 
can be navigated by pilotage unless the rotorcraft is equipped with the 
communication equipment necessary under normal operating conditions to 
fulfill the following:
    (1) Communicate with at least one appropriate station from any 
point on the route;
    (2) Communicate with appropriate air traffic control facilities 
from any point within Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace, or within 
a Class E airspace surface area designated for an airport in which 
flights are intended; and
    (3) Receive meteorological information from any point en route.
    (b) No person may operate a rotorcraft at night under VFR over 
routes that can be navigated by pilotage unless that rotorcraft is 
equipped with--
    (1) Communication equipment necessary under normal operating 
conditions to fulfill the functions specified in paragraph (a) of this 
section; and
    (2) Navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
    62. Revise Sec.  129.17 to read as follows:


Sec.  129.17  Aircraft communication and navigation equipment for 
operations under IFR or over the top.

    (a) Aircraft navigation equipment requirements. No person may 
conduct operations under IFR or over the top unless the aircraft used 
in those operations is equipped with at least two approved independent 
navigation systems suitable for the route to be flown and authorized in 
the certificate holder's operations specifications. However, only one 
navigation system needs to be provided for precision approach and APV 
operations. Equipment used to receive signals en route also may be used 
to receive signals on approach, it if is capable of receiving both 
signals.
    (b) Aircraft communication equipment requirements. No person may 
operate an aircraft under IFR or

[[Page 77347]]

over the top, unless it is equipped with--
    (1) For normal operating conditions, at least two independent 
communication systems that fulfill the functions specified in Sec.  
121.347(a) of this chapter; and
    (2) For non-normal and emergency operating conditions, at least one 
of the two independent communication systems that fulfills the 
functions specified in Sec.  121.347(a) of this chapter must have two-
way voice communication capability.
    (c) Use of a single independent navigation system. Not withstanding 
the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, the aircraft may be 
equipped with a single independent navigation system suitable for the 
route to be flown if--
    (1) The aircraft is equipped with at least one other independent 
navigation system suitable, in the event of loss of the navigation 
capability of the single system at any point along the route, for 
navigating safely to a suitable airport and completing an instrument 
approach.
    (2) Both navigation systems are authorized by the FAA in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications; and
    (3) The aircraft has sufficient fuel so that the flight may proceed 
safely to a suitable airport by use of the remaining navigation system, 
and complete an instrument approach and land.
    (d) VOR navigation equipment. If VOR navigation equipment is 
required by paragraph (a) or (c) of this section, no person may operate 
an aircraft unless it is equipped with at least one approved DME or 
suitable IFR approved RNAV system.
    63. Revise Sec.  129.21 to read as follows:


Sec.  129.21  Control of traffic.

    (a) Subject to applicable immigration laws and regulations, each 
foreign air carrier must furnish sufficient personnel necessary to 
provide two-way communications between its aircraft and stations at 
places where the FAA finds that communication is necessary but cannot 
be maintained in a language with which station operators are familiar.
    (b) Each person furnished by a foreign air carrier under paragraph 
(a) of this section must be able to speak English and the language 
necessary to maintain communications with its aircraft and must assist 
station operators in directing traffic.
    64. Amend Appendix A to part 129 by revising paragraph (b), Section 
IV, to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 129--Application for Operations Specifications by 
Foreign Air Carriers

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

    Sec. IV. Communications facilities. List all communication 
facilities to be used by the applicant in the conduct of the 
proposed operations within the United States and over that portion 
of the route between the last point of foreign departure and the 
United States.

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

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

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

    66. Amend Sec.  135.67 by revising the heading to read as set forth 
below and by removing the words ``ground communications or navigational 
facility'' and adding in their place the words ``ground facility or 
navigation aid''.


Sec.  135.67  Reporting potentially hazardous meteorological conditions 
and irregularities of ground facilities or navigation aids.

* * * * *
    67. Add Sec.  135.78 to read as follows:


Sec.  135.78  Instrument approach procedures and IFR landing minimums.

    No person may make an instrument approach at an airport except in 
accordance with IFR weather minimums and instrument approach procedures 
set forth in the certificate holder's operations specifications.


Sec.  135.79  [Amended]

    68. Amend Sec.  135.79(a)(3) by removing the words ``radio or 
telephone communications'' and adding in their place the word 
``communications''.


Sec.  135.93  [Amended]

    69. Amend Sec.  135.93(b) by removing the words ``When using an 
instrument approach facility other than ILS,'' and adding in their 
place the words ``For other than precision approaches,'' and amend 
paragraph (c) by removing the words ``For ILS approaches,'' and adding 
in their place the words ``For precision approaches,''.


Sec.  135.152  [Amended]

    70. Amend Sec.  135.152(h)(54) by removing the words ``decision 
height'' and adding in their place the words ``decision altitude/
decision height''.
    71. Revise Sec.  135.161 to read as follows:


Sec.  135.161  Communication and navigation equipment for aircraft 
operations under VFR over routes navigated by pilotage.

    (a) No person may operate an aircraft under VFR over routes that 
can be navigated by pilotage unless the aircraft is equipped with the 
communication equipment necessary under normal operating conditions to 
fulfill the following:
    (1) Communicate with at least one appropriate station from any 
point on the route.
    (2) Communicate with appropriate air traffic control facilities 
from any point within Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace, or within 
a Class E airspace surface area designated for an airport in which 
flights are intended.
    (3) Receive meteorological information from any point en route.
    (b) No person may operate an aircraft at night under VFR over 
routes that can be navigated by pilotage unless that aircraft is 
equipped with--
    (1) Communication equipment necessary under normal operating 
conditions to fulfill the functions specified in paragraph (a) of this 
section; and
    (2) Navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
    72. Revise Sec.  135.165 to read as follows:


Sec.  135.165  Communication and navigation equipment: Extended over-
water or IFR operations.

    (a) Aircraft navigation equipment requirements. No person may 
conduct operations under IFR or extended over-water unless the aircraft 
used in those operations is equipped with at least two approved 
independent navigation systems suitable for the route to be flown and 
authorized in the certificate holder's operations specifications. 
However, only one navigation system need be provided for precision 
approach and APV operations. Equipment used to receive signals en route 
also may be used to receive signals on approach, if it is capable of 
receiving both signals.
    (b) Use of a single independent navigation system. Notwithstanding 
the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, the aircraft may be 
equipped with a single independent navigation system suitable for the 
route to be flown if:
    (1) The aircraft is equipped with at least one other independent 
navigation system suitable, in the event of loss of the navigation 
capability of the single system at any point along the route, for 
navigating safely to a suitable airport

[[Page 77348]]

and completing an instrument approach;
    (2) Both navigation systems are authorized by the FAA in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications; and
    (3) The aircraft has sufficient fuel so that the flight may proceed 
safely to a suitable airport by use of the remaining navigation system, 
and complete an instrument approach and land.
    (c) VOR navigation equipment. Whenever VOR navigation equipment is 
required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, no person may operate 
an aircraft unless it is equipped with at least one approved DME or 
suitable IFR approved RNAV system.
    (d) Aircraft communication equipment requirements. Except as 
permitted in paragraph (e) of this section, no person may operate a 
turbojet airplane having a passenger seat configuration, excluding any 
pilot seat, of 10 seats or more, or a multiengine airplane in a 
commuter operation, as defined in part 119 of this chapter, under IFR 
or in extended over-water operations unless it is equipped with--
    (1) For normal operating conditions, at least two independent 
communication systems that fulfill the functions specified in Sec.  
121.347(a) of this chapter; and
    (2) For non-normal and emergency operating conditions, at least one 
of the two independent communication systems that fulfills the 
functions specified in Sec.  121.347(a) of this chapter must have two-
way voice communication capability.
    (e) IFR or extended over-water communications equipment 
requirements. A person may operate an aircraft other than that 
specified in paragraph (d) of this section under IFR or in extended 
over-water operations if it meets all of the requirements of this 
section, with the exception that only one communication system 
transmitter is required for operations other than extended over-water 
operations.
    (f) Additional aircraft communication equipment requirements. In 
addition to the requirements in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, 
no person may operate an aircraft under IFR or in extended over-water 
operations unless it is equipped with at least:
    (1) Two microphones; and
    (2) Two headsets or one headset and one speaker.
    (g) Extended over-water exceptions. Notwithstanding the 
requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), (d) and (e) of this section, 
installation and use of a single LRNS and a single LRCS for extended 
over-water operations in certain geographic areas may be authorized by 
the Administrator and approved in the certificate holder's operations 
specifications. The following are among the operational factors the 
Administrator may consider in granting an authorization:
    (1) The ability of the flight crew to navigate the airplane along 
the route with the required accuracy,
    (2) The length of the route being flown with a single navigation or 
communication system; and
    (3) The duration of the very high frequency communications gap, if 
very high frequency communications equipment is installed.
    73. Amend Sec.  135.225 (a), (b), (e), (f), and (g) by removing the 
word ``pilot'' and adding in its place the word ``person'', and by 
revising paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(3) introductory text, (c)(3)(ii), and 
(d) to read as follows:


Sec.  135.225  IFR: Takeoff, approach and landing minimums.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) On a precision or APV approach and has passed the precision 
final approach fix; or
* * * * *
    (3) On a nonprecision final approach; and the aircraft--
* * * * *
    (ii) Where a final approach fix is not specified, has completed the 
procedure turn and is established inbound toward the airport on the 
final approach course within the distance prescribed in the procedure. 
The approach may be continued, and a landing made, if the pilot finds, 
upon reaching the authorized MDA or DA/DH, that actual weather 
conditions are at or above the minimums prescribed for the procedure.
    (d) For each pilot in command of a turbine-powered airplane who has 
not served at least 100 hours as pilot in command in that type of 
airplane, the MDA or DA/DH and visibility landing minimums prescribed 
in part 97 of this chapter or in the certificate holder's operations 
specifications for a particular approach must be increased by 100 feet 
and one half statute mile, respectively, but not to exceed the ceiling 
and visibility minimums for that approach when used as an alternate 
airport.
* * * * *


Sec.  135.345  [Amended]

    74. Amend Sec.  135.345(a)(7) by removing the term ``DH'' and 
adding in its place the term ``DA/DH''.


Sec.  135.371  [Amended]

    75. Amend Sec.  135.371(c)(2) by removing the word ``radio''.


Sec.  135.381  [Amended]

    76. Amend Sec.  135.381(b)(2) by removing the word ``radio''.

Appendix F to Part 135 [Amended]

    77. Amend Appendix F by removing the words ``Selected decision 
height'' and adding in their place the words ``Selected DA/DH'' in 
Parameter number 54.

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 3, 2002.
Louis C. Cusimano,
Acting Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 02-31150 Filed 12-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P