[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 14, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42324-42327]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-15969]



[[Page 42323]]

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

Part V





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135



Use of Certain Portable Oxygen Concentrator Devices Onboard Aircraft; 
Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2004 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 42324]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135

[Docket No. FAA-2004-18596; SFAR No. XX; Notice No. 04-10]
RIN 2120-AI30


Use of Certain Portable Oxygen Concentrator Devices Onboard 
Aircraft

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to address the traveling needs of persons 
on oxygen therapy by permitting the use of certain portable oxygen 
concentrator devices on aircraft, providing certain conditions are 
satisfied.

DATES: Send your comments on or before August 13, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Address your comments to the Docket Management System, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-
2004-18596 at the beginning of your comments, and you should submit two 
copies of your comments. If you wish to receive confirmation that FAA 
received your comments, include a self-addressed, stamped postcard.
    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: James W. Whitlow, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, AGC-2, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3222; facsimile 
(202) 267-3227.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited: Interested persons are 
invited to participate in the making of the proposed action by 
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. 
Comments relating to the environmental, energy, federalism, or economic 
impact that might result from adopting the proposals in this document 
also are invited. Substantive comments should be accompanied by cost 
estimates. Comments must identify the regulatory docket or notice 
number and be submitted in duplicate to the DOT Rules Docket address 
specified above.
    All comments received, as well as a report summarizing each 
substantive public contact with DOT personnel concerning this proposed 
rulemaking, will be filed in the docket. The docket is available for 
public inspection before and after the comment closing date.
    All comments received on or before the closing date will be 
considered by FAA before taking action on this proposed rulemaking. 
Comments filed late will be considered as far as possible without 
incurring expense or delay. The proposals in this document may be 
changed in light of the comments received.
    Commenters wishing FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this document must include a pre-addressed, 
stamped postcard with those comments on which the following statement 
is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2004-18596.'' The postcard will 
be date stamped and mailed to the commenter.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by taking the 
following steps:
    (1) Go to the search function of the Department of Transportation's 
electronic Docket Management System (DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search).
    (2) On the search page type in the last four digits of the Docket 
number shown at the beginning of this notice. Click on ``search.''
    (3) On the next page, which contains the Docket summary information 
for the Docket you selected, click on the document number of the item 
you wish to view.

Background

    The FAA is proposing this Special Federal Aviation Regulation 
(SFAR) to address the traveling needs of persons on oxygen therapy. The 
FAA has been made aware of the critical need for improved service to 
passengers who must travel with oxygen while on the aircraft. 
Consequently, the FAA is proposing this SFAR to permit the use of 
certain portable oxygen concentrator devices on aircraft, provided 
certain conditions are satisfied. The NPRM proposes to limit the SFAR 
to the AirSep LifeStyle Portable Oxygen Concentrator because this is 
the only device of this type the FAA has evaluated and determined to be 
safe. Other devices may be added to the SFAR after the FAA has been 
satisfied that they can be safely used on board aircraft. The FAA seeks 
comments, particularly technical information about other assistive 
devices which may be of benefit to users of medical oxygen delivery 
systems, to enable the FAA to evaluate the safety of these devices and 
the feasibility of including these devices in the SFAR. In order for an 
oxygen delivery system to be considered safe by the FAA for use onboard 
an aircraft, at a minimum the Research and Special Programs 
Administration (RSPA) must first determine that the device does not 
contain hazardous materials and is not subject to its hazardous 
materials regulations.
    Currently, 14 CFR 121.574, 125.219, and 135.91 allow a passenger to 
carry and operate equipment generating, storing or dispensing medical 
oxygen on board an aircraft only if the equipment is furnished by the 
certificate holder and certain other conditions are satisfied. The 
oxygen furnished in compliance with these regulations is compressed 
oxygen, which is regulated as a hazardous material in transportation by 
the RSPA. Several of the conditions contained in Sec. Sec.  121.574, 
125.219, and 135.91 are designed to ensure that the oxygen cylinder is 
in compliance with RSPA's hazardous materials regulations. Other 
conditions are designed to ensure that the oxygen is dispensed safely 
while in use on the aircraft. Currently, air carriers are not required 
to provide medical oxygen and many regional carriers and some larger 
carriers do not provide this service. Those carriers that do allow 
passengers to use the medical oxygen typically provide the compressed 
oxygen themselves and charge a fee for this service.
    Over the last two years, a new portability technology for 
dispensing medical oxygen to users has been brought to the FAA's 
attention-- (1) the AirSep Corporation's LifeStyle Portable Oxygen 
Concentrator (POC), which is the first unit to be evaluated by the FAA; 
and (2) the Inogen, Inc.'s Inogen One POC, which is currently being 
evaluated by the FAA. The FAA has reviewed the documentation on both 
these products and had several discussions with their manufacturers 
regarding the use of these units on board aircraft. Based on 
information received to date, the FAA believes that the AirSep POC unit 
warrants special consideration for use on aircraft. The FAA currently 
is reviewing the Inogen One POC to determine if it too warrants such 
special consideration. Therefore, this proposed rule only pertains to 
the AirSep POC.

[[Page 42325]]

    The AirSep POC, which does not contain hazardous materials, 
operates by separating oxygen from nitrogen and other gases comprising 
ambient air and dispensing it in concentrated form to the user at a 
purity level of approximately 90% (3%). The AirSep units 
deliver five oxygen flow rates of 1 to 5 liters per minute. The AirSep 
units must have their filters changed by an authorized equipment 
distributor every 3000 hours. There is an hour meter on the device that 
notifies the user how many hours have gone by since the last 
maintenance check. The AirSep units may be operated either from an 
aircraft electrical outlet (if installed) or by a rechargeable battery 
with a duration of 50 minutes fully charged.
    RSPA has reviewed and evaluated both the AirSep POC and the Inogen 
POC and determined that these devices are not regulated as hazardous 
materials in transportation. RSPA issued letters to the manufacturers 
stating this conclusion in May 2003 (AirSep POC) and March 2004 (Inogen 
POC).
    While the RSPA determination is an important step for the FAA's 
review of the POCs, the FAA must still make an independent 
determination whether the devices pose a hazard in aviation. If there 
is no hazard, then the FAA could grant an exemption to petitioners from 
either Sec.  121.574, 125.219, or 135.91, as applicable, allowing the 
use of the POCs because the FAA's regulations apply to devices that 
dispense oxygen. The FAA informed the portable oxygen community that an 
exemption would be needed in order for a passenger to carry on and 
operate a POC not furnished by the aircraft operator via a letter 
issued through the Department of Transportation's Office of the 
Secretary in November 2002. To date, the FAA has not yet received any 
petitions for exemption. The FAA has been informed that several air 
carriers are interested in this technology and are in the process of 
evaluating whether these devices interfere with the electrical, 
navigation or communication equipment on board its aircraft. Rather 
than waiting for a carrier to apply to the FAA for an exemption under 
the existing regulatory structure, the FAA has decided to propose an 
amendment to its regulations to permit passengers to carry on and 
operate their own POC on board an aircraft as long as certain 
conditions are met.

Section-by-Section Discussion of the Proposals

    Section 1 of the SFAR would indicate that this SFAR prescribes 
special operating rules for the AirSep POC. It also establishes that 
the SFAR would apply to both the aircraft operator and the passenger 
using the POC. Section 2 would then define the AirSep POC.
    Section 3 would establish the requirements for operating this 
device on board an aircraft. Section 3(a)(1) specifies that the 
aircraft operator is responsible for determining whether the device 
would interfere with the electrical, navigation or communication 
equipment aboard each aircraft on which the device is used. The 
operator is responsible for making this determination pursuant to 14 
CFR 91.21, 121.306, 125.204, or 135.144. Given the broad array of 
aircraft and equipment combinations, only the operator can be 
responsible for making such a determination.
    Section 3(a)(2) would mirror a safety warning contained in the 
AirSep Patient User Manual. In this Manual, AirSep states that leaving 
the nasal cannula under bed coverings or chair cushions while the POC 
is turned on but not in use could result in the oxygen ``mak[ing] the 
material flammable.'' However, the FAA has also been informed by AirSep 
that if the nasal cannula is not positioned to sense inhalation, no 
oxygen will flow from the cannula. The FAA seeks comments regarding 
risks associated with the POC being turned on but not in use.
    Section 3(a)(3) would require the operator to assure that the user 
is capable of hearing the unit's various alarms, seeing the alarm light 
indicators, and taking the appropriate action in response to the alarm, 
or travel with someone who is capable of performing those functions. 
This proposed condition also mirrors several warning statements in the 
AirSep Patient User Manual. The POC is equipped with an alarm that will 
sound in the event that the unit fails to sense user breathing, 
overheats, or otherwise malfunctions. Section 3(b)(1) requires that the 
operator assure that the user turns off the unit in the event that the 
alarm sounds indicating a general malfunction of the unit while in use 
on the aircraft.
    Section 3(a)(4) would prohibit the operator from allowing smoking 
or open flame within 10 feet of any person using a POC. The FAA's 
regulations at Sec.  121.574, 125.219, and 135.91 require no less than 
10 feet between a person smoking and a passenger using oxygen. Given 
the unique environment of an aircraft, and the devastating consequences 
that can occur in the event oxygen is used too close to someone who is 
smoking, the FAA is proposing a limit of at least 10 feet. While 
smoking is no longer allowed on scheduled flights, it may be permitted 
on non-scheduled flights.
    Section 3(a)(5) requires that the operator prevent the air intake/
gross particle filter and air outlet from being blocked while in use. 
The FAA believes it is important to include this statement in its 
conditions because blocking off the filter or outlet could result in 
the unit malfunctioning and having to be turned off.
    Section 3(a)(6) and (7) would require that the device be stowed 
either underneath the seat in front of the user, or in another approved 
stowage location, and that the user is seated, so as not to restrict 
access to or use of any required emergency, or regular exit or of the 
aisle in the passenger compartment. These two conditions are consistent 
with the FAA's existing regulations and are necessary to ensure safe 
movement within the cabin, prevent injury from loose objects within the 
cabin and, if necessary, not obstruct evacuation of the aircraft.
    Section 3(a)(8) would require the operator to ensure that the 
device is free from oil, grease or petroleum products. Again this 
condition is similar to a warning statement contained in the AirSep 
Patient User Manual and to a condition contained in the FAA's current 
medical oxygen regulations. This condition also obligates the operator 
to look at the condition of the device and ensure that it is free from 
damage and other signs of excessive wear or abuse. Section 3(a)(9) 
would require the operator to verify that the hour meter indicates that 
the hours will not exceed 3000 hours by the end of the scheduled flight 
time of that flight leg. Section 3(a)(10) would require the pilot in 
command to be notified when a passenger is using the portable oxygen 
concentrator on board the aircraft. This is consistent with current 
Sec. Sec.  121.574, 125.219, and 135.91, and ensures that the pilot in 
command (PIC) is fully informed.
    Section 3(b) would impose certain standards and requirements on the 
unit's user. Section 3(b)(1) would require the user to be capable of 
hearing the unit's alarms, seeing the alarm light indicators, and 
taking the appropriate action in response to the various alarms and 
alarm light indicators, or be traveling with someone who is capable of 
hearing the unit's alarms, seeing the alarm light indicators, and 
taking the appropriate action in response to the various alarms and 
alarm light indicators.
    Section 3(b)(2) would obligate the user to turn off the unit if a 
warning alarm and associated alarm light indicator detects a general 
malfunction of the unit. However, FAA has received information from 
AirSep that a warning

[[Page 42326]]

alarm will sound if the gross particle filter or air outlet is blocked. 
According to AirSep, once the blockage is removed the alarm sound will 
stop and the unit does not need to be turned off. The FAA is seeking 
comments as to the various reasons an alarm may sound and how these 
situations can be remedied.
    Section 3(b)(3) would mandate that the user must have a statement 
signed by a licensed physician that specifies the use of the POC and 
establishes the maximum flow rate corresponding to the pressure in the 
cabin of the aircraft under normal operating conditions.
    Section 3(b)(4) would mirror the AirSep Patient User Manual by 
requiring that the user only use lotions or salves that are approved 
for use with oxygen.
    Section 3(b)(5) stipulates that the user must ascertain from the 
aircraft operator the duration of the flight (including any anticipated 
delays) and provide a sufficient number of batteries to power the 
device for the duration of the flight, including reasonable delays. 
This proposal is not intended to require that the AirSep portable 
oxygen concentrator be powered by batteries as a condition of carriage. 
Rather, this portion of the NPRM proposes that a user have a sufficient 
number of batteries to potentially serve as a power source during all 
phases of flight. This condition is consistent with the means for 
determining the oxygen quantity needed for the duration of a flight 
contained in 14 CFR 121.574(a)(5).
    The FAA seeks comments on the following questions. First, should 
the aircraft operator be required to inform the user about the 
availability of electrical outlets suitable for the AirSep portable 
oxygen concentrator? Second, should the user be required to carry 
batteries for the duration of the flight including reasonable delays if 
there are electrical outlets available on the flight? Third, are the 
meanings of the terms ``anticipated delay'' and ``reasonable delay'' 
sufficiently clear? In a related Office of the Secretary rulemaking 
under the Air Carrier Access Act, the Department will seek comment on 
whether carriers must permit users of AirSep portable oxygen 
concentrator to plug their devices into available on-board power 
outlets, consistent with FAA safety rules related to electronic 
devices.

Paperwork Reduction Act

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

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

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency 
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the 
economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the 
Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. section 2531-2533) prohibits agencies 
from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 
commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. standards, this Trade 
Act requires agencies to consider international standards and, where 
appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. standards. And fourth, the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a 
written assessment of 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, in any one year 
(adjusted for inflation).
    However, for regulations with an expected minimal impact the above-
specified regulatory evaluation is not required. The Department of 
Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and procedures for 
simplification, analysis and review of regulations. If it is determined 
that the expected economic impact is so minimal that the proposal does 
not warrant a full evaluation, a statement to that effect and the basis 
for it is included in the proposed regulation.
    This proposed SFAR would permit the use of certain portable oxygen 
concentrator (POC) devices on aircraft, provided certain conditions are 
satisfied. These conditions are described elsewhere in this document 
and would impose some costs on aircraft operators who choose to allow 
FAA approved POCs on board their aircraft. This proposal does not 
require operators to allow their use, however, and therefore it imposes 
no costs. The FAA assumes that operators who choose to allow POC use 
would voluntarily decide to take this action only if it were 
advantageous for them to do so. Since this proposal imposes no required 
costs, no economic evaluation was proposed.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ``as a 
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, 
consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, 
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the 
business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to the 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale for their actions. The Act covers a wide range of small 
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations and 
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or 
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in 
the Act. However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule 
is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides that 
the head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility 
analysis is not required. The certification must include a statement 
providing the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning 
should be clear.
    Since meeting the requirements of this proposed SFAR is entirely 
voluntary on the part of the aircraft operators, it imposes no economic 
burden. Consequently, the FAA certifies that the rule would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Analysis

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from 
engaging in any standards or related activities that create any 
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. 
Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered 
unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of 
international standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis 
for U.S. standards. In addition, consistent with the Administration's 
belief in the general superiority and desirability of free trade, it is 
the policy of the Administration to remove or diminish to the extent 
feasible, barriers to international trade, including both barriers 
affecting the export of American goods and services to foreign 
countries

[[Page 42327]]

and barriers affecting the import of foreign goods and services to the 
United States.
    In accordance with the above statute and policy, the FAA has 
assessed the potential effect of this proposed SFAR to be minimal and 
therefore has determined that this proposal will not result in an 
impact on international trade by companies doing business in or with 
the United States.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act) 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 an expenditure of $100 million or more (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.'' The FAA currently 
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu of $100 
million.
    This proposed SFAR does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do 
not apply.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    FAA analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and criteria 
of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. It 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, FAA has concluded that this notice of proposed 
rulemaking does not have federalism implications.

Energy Impact

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Charter flights, 
Safety, Transportation, Air taxis.

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration proposes to add SFAR No.-------- to Chapter II of Title 
14, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

    1. The authority citation for this SFAR shall read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 40102, 40103, 40113, 
41721, 44105, 44106, 44111, 44701-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 44904, 
44906, 44912, 44914, 44936, 44938, 46103, 46105.
    2. Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. XX is added to read as 
follows:

Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. XX Rules for Use of Portable 
Oxygen Concentrator Systems on Board Aircraft

    Section 1. Applicability--This rule prescribes special operating 
rules for the use of portable oxygen concentrator units on board civil 
aircraft. This rule applies to both the aircraft operator and the 
passenger using the portable oxygen concentrator on board the aircraft.
    Section 2. Definitions--For the purposes of this SFAR the following 
definitions apply: AirSep LifeStyle Portable Oxygen Concentrator units 
are medical devices that: (1) Do not contain hazardous materials as 
determined by the Research and Special Programs Administration; (2) are 
regulated by the Food and Drug Administration; (3) provide oxygen 
therapy through pulse technology; and (4) assists a user of medical 
oxygen under a doctor's care. These units perform by separating oxygen 
from nitrogen and other gases comprising ambient air and dispenses it 
in concentrated form to the user.
    Section 3. Operating requirements--(a) The AirSep LifeStyle 
Portable Oxygen Concentrator unit may be used by a passenger on board 
an aircraft provided the operator ensures that the following conditions 
are satisfied:
    (1) The device does not cause interference with the electrical, 
navigation or communication equipment on the aircraft on which the 
device is to be used;
    (2) The unit must be turned off if the nasal cannula is not 
positioned for oxygen delivery to the user;
    (3) The user must be capable of seeing the alarm indicator lights, 
hearing the various warning alarms, and taking the appropriate action 
should the unit fail to detect the user's breathing or a general 
malfunction occurs, or is traveling with someone who is capable of 
performing those functions for the user;
    (4) No smoking or open flame is permitted within 10 feet of any 
person using a portable oxygen concentrator;
    (5) The air intake/gross particle filter or the air outlet must not 
be blocked during use;
    (6) The unit must either be stowed under the seat in front of the 
user, or in another approved stowage location, so that it does not 
block the aisle way or the entryway into the row;
    (7) No person using a portable oxygen concentrator is permitted to 
be seated in an exit row;
    (8) The portable oxygen concentrator must be free from oil, grease 
or other petroleum products and be in good condition free from damage 
or other signs of excessive wear or abuse;
    (9) The number of hours before maintenance must be below 3,000 at 
the end of the scheduled flight time for that flight leg; and
    (10) The pilot in command must be apprised when a passenger is 
using a portable oxygen concentrator.
    (b) The user of the portable oxygen concentrator must comply with 
the following conditions to use the device on board the aircraft:
    (1) The user must be capable of hearing the unit's alarms, seeing 
the alarm light indicators, and taking the appropriate action in 
response to the various alarms and alarm light indicators, or be 
traveling with someone who is capable of performing those functions;
    (2) In the event the warning alarm sounds, the portable oxygen 
concentrator unit must be turned off if the warning alarm and the 
associated alarm light indicator detects a general malfunction of the 
unit;
    (3) The passenger must have a statement signed by a licensed 
physician that specifies the use of the portable oxygen concentrator 
and establishes the maximum flow rate corresponding to the pressure in 
the cabin of the aircraft under normal operating conditions;
    (4) Only lotions or salves that are oxygen approved may be used by 
persons using the portable oxygen device; and
    (5) The user must obtain from the aircraft operator the duration of 
the planned flight, including any anticipated delays. The user must 
provide a sufficient number of batteries to power the device for the 
duration of the flight, including any reasonable delays.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 8, 2004.
James W. Whitlow,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 04-15969 Filed 7-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P