
[Federal Register: April 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 63)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 17243-17246]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01ap08-2]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 61

[Docket No. FAA-2002-13744; Amendment No. 61-120]
RIN 2120-AJ25

 
Robinson R-22/R-44 Special Training and Experience Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule continues the existing special training and 
experience requirements in Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 
No. 73 and extends the termination date for SFAR 73 to June 30, 2009. 
SFAR No. 73 requires special training and experience for pilots 
operating the Robinson model R-22 or R-44 helicopters in order to 
maintain the safe operation of Robinson helicopters. It also requires 
special training and experience for certified flight instructors 
conducting student instruction or flight reviews in R-22 or R-44 
helicopters.

DATES: This final rule is effective March 31, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Lynch, Certification and General 
Aviation Operations Branch, AFS-810, General Aviation and Commercial 
Division, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: 
(202) 267-8212.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for this Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is 
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, section 106, 
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator, including the 
authority to issue, rescind, and revise regulations. Subtitle VII, 
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's 
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447--Safety Regulation. Under section 
44701, the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft 
in air commerce by prescribing regulations necessary for safety. Under 
section 44703, the FAA issues an airman certificate to an individual 
when we find, after investigation, that the individual is qualified 
for, and physically able to perform the duties related to, the position 
authorized by the certificate. In this final rule, we are continuing 
the existing special training and experience requirements in Special 
Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 73 and extending the termination 
date for SFAR 73 to June 30, 2009.

Background

    Part 61 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR part 
61) details the certification requirements for pilots and flight 
instructors. Particular requirements for pilots and flight instructors 
in rotorcraft are found in Subparts C through G, and Appendix B of part 
61. These requirements do not address any specific type or model of 
rotorcraft. However, in 1995 the Federal Aviation Administration 
(referred to as ``we'') determined that specific training and 
experience requirements are necessary for the safe operation of 
Robinson R-22 and R-44 model helicopters.
    The R-22 is a 2-seat, reciprocating engine powered helicopter that 
is frequently used as a low-cost initial student training aircraft. The 
R-44 is a

[[Page 17244]]

4-seat helicopter with operating characteristics and design features 
that are similar to the R-22. The R-22 is the smallest helicopter in 
its class and incorporates a unique cyclic control and rotor system. 
Certain aerodynamic and design features of the aircraft cause specific 
flight characteristics that require particular pilot awareness and 
responsiveness.
    We found that the R-22 met 14 CFR part 27 certification 
requirements and issued a type certificate in 1979. The small size and 
relatively low operating costs of this helicopter made it popular as a 
training or small utility aircraft. Thus, a significant number of the 
pilots operating R-22 helicopters were relatively inexperienced. Prior 
to issuance of SFAR No. 73, the Robinson R-22 experienced a higher 
number of fatal accidents due to main rotor/airframe contact than other 
piston-powered helicopters. Many of these accidents were caused by low 
rotor revolutions per minute (RPM) or low ``G'' conditions that 
resulted in mast bumping or main rotor-airframe contact accidents. 
Aviation safety authorities attributed this to pilot error by 
inexperienced pilots. In our analysis of accident data prior to the 
first issuance of SFAR No. 73, we found that apparently qualified 
pilots may not be properly prepared to safely operate the R-22 and R-44 
helicopters in certain flight conditions.
    A recent analysis of approximately 100 R-22 accidents that occurred 
between 2005 and 2008 indicated that none of them involved mast 
bumping, low rotor RPM (blade stall) or low ``G'' hazards. Because the 
training required by this SFAR addressed these hazards, the FAA 
believes that the training has been effective. Therefore, we have 
determined that additional pilot training, originally established by 
SFAR No. 73, as modified in SFAR No. 73-1, continues to be needed for 
the safe operation of these helicopters.

Previous Regulatory Action

    On March 1, 1995, the FAA published SFAR No. 73 (60 FR 11256). This 
SFAR required certain experience and training to perform pilot-in-
command (PIC) and/or certified flight instructor (CFI) duties. SFAR No. 
73 was issued on an emergency basis, with an expiration date of 
December 31, 1997. On November 21, 1997 (62 FR 62486), the FAA 
published an NPRM to extend SFAR No. 73 to December 31, 2002, with a 
minor amendment. The final rule extending SFAR No. 73 to December 31, 
2002 was published on January 7, 1998 (63 FR 660). On November 14, 
2002, the FAA published an NPRM (67 FR 69106) proposing to extend SFAR 
No. 73 an additional 5 years. On January 2, 2003, the FAA again re-
issued SFAR No. 73 (68 FR 39-43) and extended the rule's expiration 
date to March 31, 2008.

Regulatory 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 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires 
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small 
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) 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. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 
104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 
1995).
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this rule--(1) Has 
benefits which do justify its costs, is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' as defined in the Executive Order and is not ``significant'' 
as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (2) will not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities; 
(3) will not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States; and (4) does not impose an unfunded mandate on 
state, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies 
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations. 
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule 
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement 
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a 
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning 
for this determination follows:
    This final rule extends the termination date of this SFAR for 15 
months. The expected outcome will be a minimal impact with positive net 
benefits, and a regulatory evaluation was not prepared. FAA has, 
therefore, determined that this final rule is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 establishes ``as a principle 
of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 
the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory 
and informational requirements to the scale of the business, 
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to 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 (RFA) as 
described in the Act.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 Act provides that 
the head of the agency may so certify and an RFA is not required. The 
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for 
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    This rule will extend SFAR 73, initially published on March 1, 
1995, and extended twice since, to June 30, 2009. The SFAR is limited 
to experience and training requirements to perform pilot-in-command and 
certified flight instructor duties, thereby impacting individuals 
rather than entities. Therefore, as the acting FAA Administrator, I 
certify that this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on small entities.

International Trade Impact Statement

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from 
engaging in any standards or related

[[Page 17245]]

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.
    In accordance with the above statute, the FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this final rule and has determined that it will 
have only a domestic impact and therefore create no obstacles to the 
foreign commerce of the United States.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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 $136.1 million in lieu of $100 
million. This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The 
requirements of Title II do not apply.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this 
action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the 
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. Therefore, we determined that this final rule does not have 
federalism implications.

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and Joint Aviation 
Regulations

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with ICAO 
Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. 
The FAA has determined that this final rule does not conflict with any 
international agreement of the United States.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The OMB control number assigned to the collection of information 
for this final rule is 2120-0021.

Good Cause Justification for Adoption Without Prior Notice

    The FAA has determined that the continuation of this SFAR is in the 
public interest. The extension does not impose a new burden, but simply 
continues in effect the safety critical training and experience 
requirements of the SFAR. The FAA has extended this SFAR on two 
separate occasions. In those extensions, the comments received 
consistently demonstrated a consensus that the training and experience 
requirements are beneficial to those operating Robinson helicopters. 
The FAA intends to conduct rulemaking in which it will propose to make 
the SFAR permanent. A full opportunity for notice and comment will be 
provided. This extension is being adopted to allow continuation of the 
SFAR until that rulemaking is complete. Accordingly, the FAA has 
determined that notice and public procedure on this action is contrary 
to the public interest because the circumstances described herein 
warrant immediate action by the FAA to maintain in effect the safety 
requirements of this SFAR.

Good Cause Justification for Immediate Adoption

    The reasons that justified the original issuance of SFAR 73 and the 
subsequent extensions of the termination date of SFAR 73 still exist. 
Ordinarily under the Administrative Procedure Act, a substantive rule 
must be published not less than 30 days before its effective date 
except, among other things, if the agency finds ``good cause'' for 
making it effective sooner. See 5 U.S.C. Section 553(d)(3). The FAA 
finds that the continuation of SFAR 73 for an additional 15 months is 
necessary to keep in effect safety critical training and experience 
requirements that are beneficial to those operating Robinson 
helicopters while the FAA completes rulemaking in which it plans to 
make the SFAR permanent. For these reasons, and because this SFAR does 
not impose an additional burden on any person, the FAA finds good cause 
for making this amendment, which extends the duration of SFAR 73, 
effective March 31, 2008.

Plain Language

    In response to the June 1, 1998 Presidential Memorandum regarding 
the use of plain language, the FAA re-examined the writing style 
currently used in the development of regulations. The memorandum 
requires federal agencies to communicate clearly with the public. We 
are interested in your comments on whether the style of this document 
is clear, and in any other suggestions you might have to improve the 
clarity of FAA communications that affect you. You can get more 
information about the Presidential memorandum and the plain language 
initiative at http://www.plainlanguage.gov.

Proprietary or Confidential Business Information

    Do not file in the docket information that you consider to be 
proprietary or confidential business information. Send or deliver this 
information directly to the person identified in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. You must mark the 
information that you consider proprietary or confidential. If you send 
the information on a disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or 
CD-ROM and also identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
    Under Sec.  11.35(b), when we are aware of proprietary information 
filed with a comment, we do not place it in the docket. We hold it in a 
separate file to which the public does not have access, and place a 
note in the docket that we have received it. If we receive a request to 
examine or copy this information, we treat it as any other request 
under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We process such a 
request under the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the 
Internet by--(1) Searching the Federal eRulemaking portal (http://
www.regulations.gov); (2) Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies 
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations--policies/; or (3) Accessing 
the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gopaccess.gov/
fr/index.html.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make 
sure to identify the amendment number or document number of this 
rulemaking.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA) requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for 
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations 
within its jurisdiction. If you are a small entity

[[Page 17246]]

and you have a question regarding this document, you may contact your 
local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble. You can 
find out more about SBREFA on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/
regulations--policies/rulemaking/sbre--act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Aircraft pilots, Airmen, Airplanes, Air safety, Air 
transportation, Aviation safety, Balloons, Helicopters, Rotorcraft, 
Students.

The Final Rule

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends part 61 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (14 CFR part 61) as follows:

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND 
INSTRUCTORS

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-
44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.

0
2. Revise section 3 of SFAR NO. 73 to read as follows:

SPECIAL FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION NO. 73-ROBINSON R-22/R-44 SPECIAL 
TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS

* * * * *

0
3. Expiration date. This SFAR number 73 shall remain in effect until 
June 30, 2009.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 28, 2008.
Robert A. Sturgell,
Acting Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E8-6804 Filed 3-31-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
