[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 170 (Friday, August 31, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53159-53163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21577]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 91, 121, 125, and 135
[Docket No. FAA-2012-0752]
Passenger Use of Portable Electronic Devices on Board Aircraft
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of policy; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA seeks comments on current policy, guidance, and
procedures that aircraft operators (ranging from pilots of general
aviation aircraft up to and including air carrier certificate holders
at the major airlines) use when determining if passenger use of
portable electronic devices (PEDs)
[[Page 53160]]
may be allowed during any phase of flight on their aircraft. Current
FAA regulations generally prohibit the use of all PEDs during flight,
with the exception of portable voice recorders, hearing aids, heart
pacemakers, and electric shavers. These regulations also provide an
exception for any other PED that the aircraft operator has determined
will not cause interference with the navigation or communication
systems on the aircraft. To better effectuate the safety purposes of
these regulations, this notice requests comments about key areas of
policy and guidance that are used by aircraft operators when making
these determinations. It also requests comments about other technical
challenges for addressing the problems associated with determining if
and when PEDs can be used. The desired outcome of this solicitation is
to have sufficient information to allow operators to better assess
whether more widespread use of PEDs during flight is appropriate, while
maintaining the highest levels of safety to passengers and aircraft.
The Agency stresses that the existing regulations allow the operator to
authorize the use of PEDs, and that no specific FAA approval is
required. The aircraft operator is responsible for assuring that the
interference from PEDs does not pose a flight risk. Once all the
comments have been collected, the FAA intends to establish an Aviation
Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to review the comments and provide
recommendations that might permit the more widespread use of PEDs
during flight while maintaining the highest levels of safety for the
passengers and aircraft. The FCC will be a key partner in this activity
working collaboratively with the FAA, airlines, and the manufacturers
to explore broader use of PEDS in flight.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 30, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2012-0752
using any of the following methods:
Email: Submit your comments via email to
[email protected].
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA dockets, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or contact Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning this action,
contact Timothy W. Shaver, Avionics Maintenance Branch, Flight
Standards Service, AFS-360, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 385-
4292; facsimile (202) 385-6474; email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are reviewing the policies, guidance, and
procedures that establish the methods and criteria aircraft operators
use to determine if they can allow PED usage during flight. The FAA has
long recognized that PEDs have the potential for causing interference
with aircraft navigation or communication systems. Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Sec. Sec. 91.21, 121.306, 125.204, and
135.144 establish the requirements prohibiting the use of PEDs without
the authorization of the aircraft operator.
The FAA's first published rulemaking \1\ to address this issue was
in 1966. That rulemaking was prompted after studies of PED interference
conducted between 1958 to 1961 concluded that portable frequency
modulation (FM) radio receivers caused interference to navigation
systems such as very high frequency (VHF) Omni Range (VOR) navigation
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 14 CFR 91.19, Docket No. 7247; Amdt 91-35 (later superseded
by Sec. Sec. 91.21, 121.306, 125.204, and 135.144).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During that rulemaking process, the FAA received comments on the
subject of FAA involvement in the authorization of use of PEDs. The
public expressed concerns that authorization of devices not
specifically excepted in the rule (e.g., portable voice recorders,
hearing aids, heart pacemakers, and electric shavers) would subject
operators to a considerable amount of ``red tape.'' In response to
those comments, the FAA concluded that the aircraft operators were best
suited to make the determination of which PEDs would not cause
interference with the navigation or communication system on their
aircraft. The FAA also recognized that for it to place requirements
upon itself to conduct or verify tests of every conceivable PED, as an
alternative to a determination made by the operator, would thereby
place an excessive and unnecessary burden on the agency.
The potential for aircraft interference depends on the aircraft and
its electrical and electronic systems, as well as the type of PED being
used. Prior to fly-by-wire flight controls, the primary concern was the
susceptibility of sensitive aircraft communication and navigation radio
receivers to spurious radio frequency emissions from PEDs. Many of
these aircraft using this older technology are still in service and are
as susceptible today to interference as they were when they first
entered service. When aircraft included fly-by-wire controls and
electronic displays, the susceptibility of these aircraft systems also
became a concern. The FAA defined requirements for high-intensity
radiated fields (HIRF) that provide assurance that newer aircraft with
such systems have sufficient protection to continue to operate safely
when exposed to spurious emissions \2\ of PEDs and intentional
transmissions \3\ from transmitting PEDs. While the highly critical
fly-by-wire controls and electronic displays were designed and
certified to withstand the fields from transmitting PEDs, all aircraft
electrical and electronic systems were not designed to withstand these
fields. These newer aircraft still have sensitive navigation,
communication, and surveillance radio receivers that may be susceptible
at certain frequencies to spurious radio frequency emissions from PEDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A spurious emission is any radio frequency not deliberately
created or transmitted.
\3\ Intentional transmission is the transmission of signals
through free space by electromagnetic waves on specific radio
frequencies that are used to communicate information between
devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 53161]]
PEDs have changed considerably in the past few decades and output a
wide variety of signals. Some devices do not transmit or receive any
signals but generate low-power, radio frequency emissions. Other PEDs,
such as e-readers, are only active in this manner during the short time
that a page is being changed. Of greater concern are intentional
transmissions from PEDs. Most portable electronic devices have internet
connectivity that includes transmitting and receiving signals
wirelessly using radio waves, such as Wi-Fi,\4\ Bluetooth,\5\ and
various other cellular technologies. These devices transmit high-
powered emissions and can generate spurious signals at undesired
frequencies, particularly if the device is damaged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Wi-Fi is defined as ``wireless local area network (WLAN)
products that are based on the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers' (IEEE) 802.11 standards.'' Wi-Fi is a
trademark of the Wi-Fi Alliance.
\5\ Bluetooth is managed by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group
(SIG). The SIG is the body that oversees the development of
Bluetooth standards and the licensing of the Bluetooth technologies
and trademarks to manufacturers. The SIG is a privately held, not-
for-profit trade association founded in September 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avionics equipment has also undergone significant changes. When the
regulations were first established, communication and navigations
systems were basic systems. In today's avionics, there are various
systems--global positioning, traffic collision and avoidance,
transponder, automatic flight guidance and control, and many other
advanced avionics systems--that depend on signals transmitted from the
ground, other aircraft, and satellites for proper operation. In
addition, there are advanced flight management systems that use these
avionics as a critical component for performing precision operational
procedures. Many of these systems are also essential to realize the
capabilities and operational improvements envisioned in the Next
Generation airspace system. As such, harmful interference from PEDs
cannot be tolerated.
Under FAA regulation, the aircraft operator is responsible for
determining which PEDs may be used by the passengers and during which
phase of flight this utilization may occur. The aircraft operator is
best suited to make the determination of which PEDs would not cause
interference with the navigation or communication system on its
aircraft. The operators' PED policy determines what types of devices
may be used on board their aircraft and during which phase(s) of
flight. The responsibility for enforcing an aircraft operator's PED
policy typically falls on the cabin crew. On occasion, enforcement of a
commercial airline's PED policy results in a conflict between a flight
attendant and a passenger. Noncompliance with crewmember safety
instructions on the use of PEDs has resulted in passengers being
removed from an aircraft and, in some cases, has caused in-flight
diversions. The FAA provides oversight of aircraft operators to ensure
that they have established and are currently following robust PED-
allowance procedures.
Policy and Guidance
As aircraft and consumer electronics evolved, the FAA recognized
that the industry needed assistance to keep up with the challenges of
determining if devices would interfere with the aircraft navigation or
communication systems. In 1958, at the FAA's request, the first RTCA,
Inc., (previously Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) documents
\6\ were written to help airlines make the PED allowance determination.
Since that time, the FAA has requested three other activities; the most
recent concluded in 2008. The current guidelines to assist aircraft
operators in developing their PED policy are in Advisory Circular (AC)
91-21-1B, Use of Portable Electronic Devices Aboard Aircraft, dated
August 25, 2006, which references industry-developed guidelines
identified in RTCA/DO-233 and RTCA/DO-294.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ RTCA is a private, not-for-profit corporation that functions
as a Federal Advisory Committee for the FAA. It develops consensus-
based recommendations regarding communications, navigation,
surveillance, and air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system issues.
See FAA Order 1110.77T, RTCA Inc. (utilized as an Advisory
Committee) (Apr. 1, 2011). The following are RTCA recommendations
and guidance documents regarding PEDS:
DO-307, Aircraft Design and Certification for Portable
Electronic Device (PED) Tolerance, issued 10-11-07, and Change 1,
issued 12-16-08. Prepared by SC-202.
DO-294C, Guidance on Allowing Transmitting Portable Electronic
Devices (T-PEDs) on Aircraft, issued 12-16-08. Prepared by SC-202.
DO-233, Portable Electronic Devices Carried on Board Aircraft,
issued 8-20-96. Prepared by SC-177. Errata issued 8-18-99.
DO-199, Potential Interference to Aircraft Electronic Equipment
from Devices Carried Aboard, issued 9-16-88. Prepared by SC-156.
Supersedes DO-119.
DO-119, Interference To Aircraft Electronic Equipment From
Devices Carried Aboard, issued 9-16-88. Prepared by SC-88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These joint industry-government committees studied the risks
associated with PED usage and are the basis for the FAA's guidance
today. For instance, based on these studies, FAA has recommended that
operators allowing passenger use of PEDs do so only during non-critical
phases of flight and prohibit PED use during takeoff and landing. See
AC 91-21-1B. While these recommendations are non-binding, most
commercial airlines allow the use of non-transmitting PEDs in flight
after the aircraft has reached a safe altitude, and those airlines
continue to allow PED usage until near the end of the flight.
The FAA has also published AC 20-164, Designing and Demonstrating
Aircraft Tolerance to Portable Electronic Devices. This AC is based on
RTCA/DO-307, Aircraft Design and Certification for Portable Electronic
Device (PED) Tolerance, dated October 11, 2007. Further, AC 20-164
provides guidance to demonstrate aircraft electrical and electronic
system tolerance to the use of PEDs. This approach allows the aircraft
designers to build in protections to help prevent interference to
navigation or communication systems.
PEDs Today
Smart phones, personal computers, and wireless technology have
become ingrained in peoples' day-to-day lives. Passengers not only use
these devices to remain connected to their work, family, and friends,
but also to read books, play games, and accomplish many of their day-
to-day tasks. This has naturally led to the passengers' desire to use
PEDs from the time they board an aircraft until they exit the aircraft
at their destination. In some cases, a transmitting radio is embedded
in a PED so that the operation of the transmitter is not apparent to
the user. Many of these devices incorporate transmitters such as
Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and cellular phone modems, which may operate without
specific actions from the passenger.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This notice does not address flightcrew member use of PEDs
during flight. Section 44732 of Title 49 of the United States Code
generally prohibits flightcrew member use of PEDs on the flightdeck
while the aircraft is being operated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While FAA regulations allow aircraft operators to demonstrate when
and which PEDs can be safely used, few aircraft operators have allowed
use of devices during critical phases of flight (e.g., takeoff and
landing). Recognizing that some passengers may wish to use their
devices throughout a flight, the FAA is requesting comments regarding
the FAA's policies, guidance, and procedures that aircraft operators
use to determine whether to allow a particular PED for usage during
flight.
Request for Information
Considerations for Comment
The FAA is interested in obtaining comments related to the use of
PEDs on aircraft from the viewpoints of aircraft
[[Page 53162]]
operators, passengers, and other stakeholders. We are soliciting
comments on the following:
Aircraft operators' concerns, both technical and
operational;
Flight attendants' and pilots' concerns;
Security concerns;
Manufacturers and designers of PEDs;
Passenger perspectives; and
How the FAA can support the aviation industry in
considering how to allow greater use of PEDs.
The FAA has identified the following specific areas for comments.
(1) Procedures and methods for operators to allow the use of PEDs.
Guidance on the procedures and methods that an operator can use to
determine allowance of PEDs is published in AC 91-21-1B. This AC
references the industry-developed guidelines of RTCA/DO-233 and RTCA/
DO-294C. Those guidelines address testing and analysis procedures for
advanced avionics system interference from both transmitting and non-
transmitting PEDs.
What processes and methods are aircraft operators
currently using to evaluate PED technology interference?
How can those procedures and methods be improved?
Is additional FAA guidance and policy needed?
One concept is for operators to improve the sharing of test and
compatibility data, so that the same compatibility testing could be
leveraged to support many aircraft operators. Data concerning PED and
aircraft compatibility could be used by the operators to analyze
incidents involving PED interference.
Should the industry develop data sharing for this purpose?
(2) Reliability of aircraft systems. Future aircraft could be
manufactured to be immune to the PED environment. To support commercial
aircraft operators' authorization of PED use, the FAA has issued AC 20-
164 describing criteria for aircraft manufacturers and modifiers to
establish PED-tolerance for new and existing aircraft.
Is it necessary to establish aircraft certification
regulations to require new aircraft to be PED-tolerant?
In addition, many aircraft systems have already qualified for operation
in high intensity radiated field environments.
How can these demonstrations best be leveraged to help an
operator allow the use of PEDs?
(3) Aircraft Immunity to PED Interference. Some aircraft
manufacturers and avionics equipment manufacturers have already
demonstrated PED and aircraft system compatibility.
Should aircraft manufacturers and avionics equipment
manufacturers provide documentation of aircraft PED tolerance, aircraft
systems that meet RF susceptibility requirements, interference path
loss, etc., to the operators to support the operator's PED allowance
determination?
Should it be mandatory that aircraft manufacturers and
modifiers provide this information to the operators for new and
modified aircraft?
(4) Promote aircraft-compatible PED transmissions. The
transmissions from PEDs vary widely, making it very difficult for an
aircraft operator to discriminate between PEDs that may be acceptable
and those that may not.
Could the consumer electronics industry develop standards
for aircraft-friendly PEDs, or aircraft-compatible modes of operation,
that would reduce the risk of interference to aircraft systems by
defining maximum emissions in designated bands?
(5) Passenger perspectives on use of PEDs. Increased access and
usage of PEDs may distract passengers during crewmember safety
briefings and instructions. In addition, PED usage may have an adverse
impact on flight and cabin crew responsibilities and duties. In 2005,
the FCC \8\ solicited comments on the potential to expand the use of
cellular phones in flight and received responses from passengers
concerned about the use of cell phones by other passengers. One of the
main concerns expressed by the public comment was the fear of passenger
disruptions caused by cell phone use in a crowded public conveyance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Federal Communications Commission's Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 04-288, in WT Docket No. 04-435, adopted
December 15, 2004, and released February 15, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If some PEDs are found to be compatible with aircraft
systems, should there be restrictions on the use of PEDs for other
reasons?
Should voice communications using other technologies such
as voice over IP be limited or restricted?
Should aircraft operators be required to publish their PED
policies?
(6) PED article retention risk considerations. Personal belongings
must be stowed for take-off, approach and landing, to reduce the risk
of injury from projectiles and to ensure rapid egress in the event of
an emergency. Some PEDs are large enough to be of concern for egress,
while smaller handheld devices may have risks comparable to a small
book.
If some PEDs are found to be compatible with aircraft
systems, should requirements to stow PEDs for takeoff, approach,
landing and abnormal conditions exist nonetheless to prevent personal
injury?
(7) Active monitoring for harmful interference. A handheld device
or installed system could be used by the crewmembers to detect harmful
interference from PEDs. This could allow the crewmembers to identify
problems and instruct passengers to disable devices when they generate
harmful signals.
Should the FAA consider working with industry to develop
standards for an active PED monitoring system?
(8) Technical Challenges.
What are the technical, operation, and regulatory
challenges commercial aircraft operators face in expanding their PED
usage policy?
What are the technical challenges the aircraft
manufacturers, modifiers, and avionics equipment manufacturers see with
further PED usage allowance?
What data and support can they provide to commercial
aircraft operators to address these technical challenges?
(9) Operational Challenges.
What are the operational, safety and security challenges
and concerns associated with expanding PED usage policy?
What is needed to alleviate those concerns?
Again, this information must be submitted by October 30, 2012.
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to submit written comments,
data, or views. The agency also invites comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from changes in our current policy. The most helpful comments
reference a specific area of concern, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one
copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically,
commenters should submit only one time.
The FAA will file in the docket a summary of all comments it
receives. The FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay.
Proprietary or Confidential Business Information: Commenters should
not file proprietary or confidential business information in the
docket. Such information must be sent or delivered directly to the
person identified in the
[[Page 53163]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document, and marked as
proprietary or confidential. If submitting information on a disk or CD
ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as proprietary or
confidential, and identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is aware of proprietary
information filed with a comment, the Agency does not place it in the
docket. It is held in a separate file to which the public does not have
access, and the FAA places a note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to examine or copy this information,
it treats it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act
(5 U.S.C. 552). The FAA processes such a request under Department of
Transportation procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
Issued in Washington, DC on August 28, 2012.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Asst. Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-21577 Filed 8-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P