
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 84090-84098]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26144]



[[Page 84090]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 91, 121, 125, and 135

[Docket No.: FAA-2023-2270; Notice No. 24-04]
RIN 2120-AL92


25-Hour Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) Requirement, New Aircraft 
Production

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would increase the recording time of cockpit 
voice recorders from the mandated 2 hours to a proposed 25-hour 
recording time for all future manufactured aircraft. This rulemaking 
would provide accident investigators, aircraft operators, and civil 
aviation authorities with substantially more cockpit voice recorder 
data to help find the probable causes of incidents and accidents, 
prevent future incidents and accidents, and make the FAA's regulations 
more consistent with existing international requirements.

DATES: Send comments on or before February 2, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2023-2270 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments 
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts 
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the 
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system 
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at 
www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions for 
accessing the docket or go to the 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: Charisse Green, AFS-340, Aircraft 
Maintenance Division, Office of Safety Standards, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591; 
telephone (202) 267-1675; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 
title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, section 106 describes 
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the FAA's authority.
    This rulemaking is issued under the authority described in subtitle 
VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701. Under that section, the FAA is 
charged with prescribing regulations providing minimum standards for 
other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air 
commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority since 
flight data recorders are the only means available to account for 
aircraft movement and flight crew actions critical to finding the 
probable cause of incidents or accidents, including data that could 
prevent future incidents or accidents.

I. Executive Summary

A. Overview of Proposed Rule

    This rulemaking effort proposes to amend the cockpit voice recorder 
(CVR) regulations to increase the recording duration of CVRs. 
Currently, CVRs are required to retain the last two hours of recorded 
information. Once this 2-hour limit is reached, a CVR overwrites the 
oldest data to maintain a rolling 2-hour recording. This proposal would 
increase the minimum duration of CVR recordings to 25 hours. The 
proposed change would affect all newly manufactured aircraft operating 
under title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 91, 
121, 125, and 135, one year after the effective date of the final rule.

B. Statement of the Problem

    The current 2-hour recording duration requirement does not meet the 
NTSB's needs for investigations and subsequent safety recommendations. 
Since the NTSB issued Safety Recommendation A-18-030, it has 
investigated numerous accidents and incidents where CVR data relevant 
to the accident or incident has been overwritten because the relevant 
recording occurred earlier than the available two hours of recording.

C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits

    Benefits of the proposed rule are expected to stem from a reduction 
in accident risk and time savings. Specifically, the additional audio 
of longer duration CVRs would provide authorities with more information 
on events and procedures undertaken in the flight deck in investigated 
incidents. This increased data may lead to new or more fully informed 
FAA recommendations or policy changes that could further enhance safety 
and reduce the risk that an incident becomes an accident. In addition, 
updated CVR models have also revamped the CVR interface tools, 
resulting in time-saving benefits. The simplified and more intuitive 
tools allow personnel to be trained quicker on operation, retrieve 
audio data faster, and perform additional diagnostic services to 
shorten downtime. The FAA currently lacks data to predict the exact 
reduction in accident risk and labor hours and requests comments on the 
expected value of these benefits.
    The FAA has assessed projected compliance costs using the 
incremental cost of equipping a 25-hour capable CVR over a comparable 
2-hour unit to all applicable newly produced aircraft. Market research 
indicates that the difference between these units is minimal, ranging 
from near parity to an upper bound of approximately $4,500. Using that 
upper bound, the total cost over 20 years is estimated to be $102.42 
million at 7 percent present value, with annualized costs of $9.67 
million. As operational procedures are expected to be similar between 
the older 2-hour and newer 25-hour capable models, the FAA anticipates 
no other notable costs. The FAA invites comments on the cost estimates 
and assumptions.

II. Background

A. CVRs: National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Recommendations 
and FAA Responses

    The FAA previously has engaged in rulemaking to address past NTSB 
recommendations concerning CVRs.

[[Page 84091]]

    In December 1996, the NTSB issued Safety Recommendation A-96-171 as 
a result of its investigation of an accident in January 1996.\1\ In 
this accident, an aircraft touched down hard in the approach light area 
short of a runway at the Nashville International Airport, resulting in 
minor injuries to passengers and crew and substantial damage to the 
aircraft's tail section, nose gear, and engines. During the 
investigation, the NTSB was hampered by the fact that the 30-minute 
closed-loop CVR tape did not include recordings of the initial approach 
to the runway, the hard landing event, or the go-around because that 
information had been recorded over and permanently lost after the 
airplane safely stopped on the ground.\2\ As a result, the NTSB 
recommended that the recording limitation for newly manufactured CVRs 
meet a minimum recording duration of two hours.\3\ The FAA adopted this 
recommendation in 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NTSB. Safety Recommendation A-96-171, December 11, 1996.
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In August 2002, the NTSB issued a safety recommendation letter to 
the FAA, identifying delays or failures by the operator to deactivate 
CVRs after reportable events as a major factor in the systemic problem 
of retaining data, as information was overwritten in the remainder of a 
flight with an incident or accident.\4\ The NTSB recommended that the 
FAA require the CVR be deactivated immediately upon completion of 
flight after a reportable incident or accident has occurred. In 
response, the FAA issued Notice 8400.48, ``Cockpit Voice Recorder 
Deactivation After a Reportable Event,'' on April 25, 2003. This notice 
advised air carriers to add a checklist item to deactivate the CVR, 
manually or automatically, immediately upon completion of a flight with 
a reportable accident or incident. On October 6, 2003, the NTSB 
considered Notice 8400.48 to have met the intent of Safety 
Recommendation A-02-24 for aircraft operating under parts 121 and 135 
requirements, but not part 91 requirements as the notice did not 
address part 91 operators.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NTSB. Safety Recommendation A-02-24, August 29, 2002.
    \5\ NTSB. Safety Recommendation Report A-18-04 at 3, October 2, 
2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 7, 2008, the FAA amended the CVR regulations in accordance 
with NTSB Safety Recommendation A-96-171.\6\ The final rule, 
``Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital Flight Data Recorder 
Regulations,'' increased the duration of certain CVR recordings, 
increased the data recording rate for certain digital flight data 
recorder (DFDR) parameters, physically separated DFDRs and CVRs, 
improved power supply to both CVRs and DFDRs, and required certain 
datalink communications received on an aircraft to be recorded if 
datalink communication equipment was installed.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 73 FR 12541 (2008).
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 10, 2018, the NTSB published an Aviation Safety 
Recommendation Report titled ``Extended Duration Cockpit Voice 
Recorders.'' Within this safety report, Safety Recommendation A-18-030 
recommended that the FAA require all newly manufactured aircraft that 
must have a CVR to be fitted with and operate a CVR capable of 
recording the last 25 hours of audio. This recommendation stemmed from 
an aircraft incident that occurred in July 2017 at San Francisco 
International Airport, in which the flight crew of an Airbus A320 was 
cleared to land on a set runway but instead lined up with a parallel 
taxiway. After descending to an altitude of 100 feet above ground level 
(AGL), the aircraft overflew an airplane on the taxiway. The incident 
aircraft subsequently overflew a second airplane on the taxiway before 
starting to climb.
    During the investigation of the incident, the NTSB found it 
difficult to gather relevant information as the CVR data was 
overwritten before Air Canada officials learned of the severity of the 
event. The report stated that had the NTSB been able to obtain the 
overwritten data, investigators would have been able to assess the 
timing and content of the flight crew's conversations during final 
approach, conversations during and after the go-around, and the flight 
crew's crew resource management (CRM), workload, and fatigue based on 
verbalizations or flight deck sounds. In this instance, the NTSB 
identified several serious safety issues; however, this investigation 
lacked direct evidence of the flight crew's decision making, 
coordination, and perception of its environment.

B. FAA Aviation Safety Summit of 2023

    On March 15, 2023, the FAA convened an aviation safety summit, 
where approximately 200 safety leaders from the aviation industry met 
to discuss safety improvements in response to several recent near-miss 
incidents and runway incursions.\8\ The summit focused on ways to 
enhance flight safety for commercial operations, the air traffic 
system, airport and ground operations, and general aviation operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The FAA. Readout from the FAA Aviation Safety Summit 
Breakout Panels. March 15, 2023. Accessed from www.faa.gov/newsroom/readout-faa-aviation-safety-summit-breakout-panels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of discussions at the summit, the FAA committed to 
initiate rulemaking that would require CVRs to capture 25 hours of 
information for newly manufactured aircraft.

C. ICAO and EASA Adoption of a 25-Hour Cockpit Voice Recorder 
Requirement

    In 2013, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) proposed 
an amendment that would have required large commercial aircraft 
manufactured after January 1, 2019, to carry a CVR capable of recording 
the last 15 hours of aircraft operation.\9\ In 2015, after considering 
the comments received on the proposed amendment and after technical 
review, EASA extended the recording duration requirement to 25 
hours.\10\ The 25-hour mandate took effect on January 1, 2021. The 
regulation requires any aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 
27,000 kg (60,000 pounds) or more, manufactured after January 1, 2021, 
to be equipped with a CVR with at least a 25-hour recording 
capability.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``Amendment of requirements for flight recorders and 
underwater locating devices,'' Notice of Proposed Amendment 2013-26, 
European Union Aviation Safety Agency, December 20, 2013.
    \10\ Commission Regulation 2015/2338, 2015 O.J. Amending 
Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as regards requirements for flight 
recorders, underwater locating devices and aircraft tracking 
systems.
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2016, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) also 
adopted a new standard calling for the installation of CVRs capable of 
recording the last 25 hours of aircraft operation on all aircraft 
manufactured after January 1, 2021, with a maximum certificated takeoff 
mass of over 27,000 kg and engaged in commercial transport.\12\ In 
adopting this standard, ICAO emphasized the value of CVR recordings in 
analyzing human factors and other sounds.\13\ ICAO noted that extending 
the recording duration of CVRs was necessary to cover the longest 
flight duration, including pre- and postflight activities, delays, and 
the time required to secure the recordings.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ NTSB. Aviation Safety Recommendation Report. ASR-18-04 at 
2. October 2, 2018.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since September 2013, the CVR technical standard in European 
Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE) ED-112A, ``Minimum 
Operational Performance Specification for Crash Protected Airborne 
Recorder Systems,'' used by all

[[Page 84092]]

manufacturers,\15\ already provides design standards for a 25-hour 
CVR.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ All manufacturers, regardless of US-based or foreign, are 
required to use this standard in order to meet the carriage 
requirements in Sec. Sec.  91.609, 121.359, 125.227, and 135.151, 
which reference TSO-C123, which in turn specifies ED-112A.
    \16\ GlobalSpec. ``EUROCAE ED 112.'' Accessible at 
standards.globalspec.com/std/1629860/EUROCAE%20ED%20112.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of the Proposal

    Since the FAA updated the CVR regulations in 2008, the NTSB has 
reported issues with accessing relevant CVR data with existing 2-hour 
recording duration. Numerous aircraft incidents have occurred in which 
relevant CVR data was overwritten and thereby made unavailable because 
of the time it took to retrieve the CVR. The lack of relevant CVR data 
hampers NTSB investigations and its ability to provide appropriate 
safety recommendations that can help prevent future accidents and 
incidents.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ NTSB. (March 15, 2023). Transcript of NTSB Chair's Remarks 
at the FAA Safety Summit. www.ntsb.gov/Advocacy/Activities/Pages/Homendy-20230315.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to Safety Recommendation A-18-030, the FAA proposes to 
amend all CVR operational regulations related to CVR recording time by 
expanding the recording duration from two hours to 25 hours for 
aircraft manufactured one year after the date of publication of the 
final rule.
    The NTSB's Safety Recommendation also included the recommendation 
to retrofit the current fleet. While retrofitting the current fleet 
would more expeditiously increase the number of aircraft fitted with 
the newer 25-hour CVR units and, thereby, the projected benefits to 
safety, the costs would be significant. Specifically, retrofitting the 
current fleet would increase by two-thirds the number of aircraft 
required to install 25-hour CVRs (estimated 29,561 aircraft in the 
current fleet added to the estimated 43,470 aircraft being built in the 
next 20 years). Further, the cost to retrofit existing aircraft with 
25-hour CVRs would be several times higher than the cost to equip 
future-built aircraft with a 25-hour CVR instead of a 2-hour model. 
Assuming no replacement, applying a $25,000 CVR unit cost spread across 
the estimated 29,651 current fleet would result in roughly $741.28 
million (undiscounted) in equipment cost compared to the $195.62 
million (undiscounted) in incremental upgrade costs from the proposed 
rule. Retrofitting current aircraft would also incur additional costs, 
such as aircraft downtime and labor hours required to replace the CVR 
unit, which would further increase the total cost. Therefore, in an 
effort to provide the increased benefit of making more substantive data 
available to accident investigators while maintaining the lowest 
economic impact on operators, this proposed rule would apply to newly 
manufactured aircraft only. For more information, please see the 
regulatory impact analysis in the docket.
    The proposed change would affect the following regulations:

 Section 91.609(i)(2);
 Section 121.359(i)(2);
 Section 121.359(j)(2);
 Section 125.227(g)(2);
 Section 125.227(h)(2);
 Section 135.151(g)(1)(iii); and
 Section 135.151(g)(2)(iii).

    Certificate holders operating under part 129 requirements would be 
affected because, in accordance with Sec.  129.24, their CVRs are 
required to record as if the aircraft were operated under parts 121, 
125, or 135.

A. Cockpit Voice Recorder Capabilities and Investigative Use

    Aircraft operating under parts 91, 121, 125, and 135 are required 
to be equipped with a CVR that records radio transmissions and sounds 
in the flight deck to aid subsequent investigation should an accident 
or incident occur. The recorder's flight deck area microphone is 
usually located on the overhead instrument panel between the two 
pilots.
    CVRs preserve the recent history of sounds in the flight deck and 
provide unique information such as engine noise, stall warnings, 
landing gear extension and retraction, and other clicks and pops. These 
sounds may help an investigator to determine parameters such as engine 
rpm, system failures, speed, and the time at which certain events 
occur. The CVR also records communications with Air Traffic Control, 
automated radio weather briefings, conversations between the pilots and 
ground or cabin crew, flight crew verbalizations of intentions and 
coordination, as well as the pilots' awareness of the aircraft and 
flight deck information.\18\ Access to this information allows 
investigators to more thoroughly investigate accident and incident 
factors. Incident factors include the flight crew's procedural 
compliance, distraction, decision-making, workload, fatigue, and 
situational awareness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ NTSB. (2023) ``Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVR) and Flight 
Data Recorders (FDR).'' www.ntsb.gov/news/Pages/cvr_fdr.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A CVR starts recording when an aircraft is powered up and will 
continue to record until the aircraft is powered down or the CVR is 
deactivated. Once a CVR reaches the end of its recording limit, it will 
overwrite existing data with a new recording.
    CVRs typically deactivate due to two forms of power loss. The first 
occurs when the CVR is deactivated after a major or catastrophic event 
causing a loss of electrical power. When this event occurs, the CVR 
preserves relevant audio recorded in the two hours prior to the 
accident. The second form occurs during less severe incidents, such as 
when the flight crew manually deactivates the CVR immediately upon 
landing in order to prevent the relevant audio from being overwritten.
    After an accident or incident, the CVR data is transferred to an 
NTSB lab for retrieval. The NTSB will eventually receive a readout from 
the CVR software.
    Since CVRs were implemented in 1966, recording capabilities have 
significantly increased from the original 30 minutes. The latest 
designs employ more easily expandable solid-state memory and use fault 
tolerant digital recording technique with an incorporated battery so 
that recording can continue until the end of flight, even when the 
aircraft's electrical system fails.
    The technical limit for recording time has expanded such that 25 
hours is now well within CVR capability. In addition, because both EASA 
and ICAO have adopted a 25-hour CVR recording duration minimum for 
aircraft manufactured after January 1, 2021, multiple manufacturers 
already produce CVRs capable of recording for 25 hours.

B. National Transportation Safety Board

    Since 2008, the NTSB has expressed concerns regarding the 
availability of CVR information, the length of CVR recording time, and 
how to prevent relevant information from being overwritten after an 
incident or accident. The current 2-hour recording requirement has not 
fully resolved the issue of overwritten data, which continues to 
negatively impact NTSB investigations.
    There are two common causes for CVR data to be overwritten. First, 
there may be a delay between a safety event and the flight crew 
recognizing that event to be a serious incident or accident, resulting 
in the relevant CVR data being overwritten as the CVR continued to 
record throughout the delay. Second, the recording of a safety event 
may be overwritten during the course of the flight itself (e.g., where 
flight duration exceeds the 2-hour CVR recording duration).

[[Page 84093]]

    The NTSB reported that, in 2017, approximately 56 percent of U.S. 
block times \19\ consisted of long and medium flights with durations 
longer than two hours, including some international flights lasting 
over 12 hours.\20\ When ICAO adopted the standard for the installation 
of 25-hour CVRs in 2016, it noted that extended duration of CVRs is 
necessary to cover the longest duration of flights, including pre- and 
postflight activities, delays, and the time required to secure the 
recordings.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ ICAO defines block time to include the moment an aircraft 
is pushed back from the gate to the moment it comes to a final stop 
at a gate or parking stand after landing.
    \20\ NTSB. Aviation Safety Recommendation Report. ASR-18-04 at 
5. October 2, 2018.
    \21\ Id. NTSB Report, citing ``Minimum Operational Performance 
Specification for Crash Protected Airborne Recorder Systems,'' ED-
112A, European Organization for Civil Aviation Equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the 2-hour standard came into effect in 2008, numerous 
accidents and incidents have occurred where the CVR data was 
overwritten and, had it been available, would have positively 
contributed to NTSB investigations. Notable incidents include the 
following:

                      Table 1--Safety Events for Which Pertinent CVR Data Were Overwritten
                                                  [Up to 2018]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Date                 Event type               NTSB No.               Location        Event description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6/21/2018.............  Incident..............  OPS18IA015............  Chicago, IL........  Runway excursion.
4/18/2018.............  Accident..............  DCA18LA163............  Atlanta, GA........  Engine fire.
7/07/2017.............  Incident..............  DCA17IA148............  San Francisco, CA..  Taxiway line-up and
                                                                                              overflight of 4
                                                                                              air carrier
                                                                                              airplanes by an
                                                                                              Airbus A320 (46-
                                                                                              hour notification
                                                                                              delay).
5/09/2014.............  Accident..............  CEN14LA239............  Columbus, OH.......  Ground engine fire.
9/12/2013.............  Incident..............  CEN13IA563............  Austin, TX.........  Loss of pitch
                                                                                              control during
                                                                                              takeoff (4-day
                                                                                              notification
                                                                                              delay).
7/31/2012.............  Incident..............  CEN12IA502............  Denver, CO.........  Bird strike.
12/1/2011.............  Accident..............  WPR12LA053............  Oakland, CA........  Enroute turbulence.
6/21/2011.............  Incident..............  ENG11IA035............  Atlanta, GA........  Engine fire.
2/09/2011.............  Incident..............  ENG11IA016............  Minneapolis, MN....  Tailpipe fire
                                                                                              following push
                                                                                              back.
11/23/2010............  Accident..............  WPR11LA058............  Salt Lake City, UT.  On ground collision
                                                                                              with tow tractor.
6/28/2010.............  Accident..............  CEN10LA363............  Pioneer, LA........  En route
                                                                                              turbulence.
12/31/2009............  Incident..............  DCA10IA015............  Charlotte, NC......  Wing tip strike
                                                                                              during landing.
6/29/2007.............  Incident..............  LAX07IA198............  Los Angeles, CA....  Blown tires on
                                                                                              takeoff.
3/21/2006.............  Incident..............  DEN06IA051............  Denver, CO.........  Tail strike on
                                                                                              landing.
10/16/2003............  Accident..............  MIA04LA004............  Tampa, FL..........  Taxiway excursion.
6/03/2002.............  Accident..............  DCA02MA039............  Subic Bay,           Abrupt maneuver due
                                                                         Philippines.         to ground
                                                                                              proximity warning
                                                                                              system alert and
                                                                                              elevator damage.
6/02/2002.............  Accident..............  DCA02MA042............  Subic Bay,           Flight control
                                                                         Philippines.         malfunction during
                                                                                              approach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the incidents noted by the NTSB, CVR data overwrites 
have hampered several other investigations. For example, on October 21, 
2009, an incident occurred on a 4-hour flight where the flight crew did 
not communicate with air traffic control for about 1 hour and 17 
minutes, during which time the airplane overflew its intended location 
at a cruise altitude of 27,000 ft.\22\ The flight crew later reported 
that ``cockpit distractions'' led to the event. The airplane's CVR had 
a 30-minute recording duration; upon review, the NTSB discovered that 
all pertinent information had been overwritten by the remaining two 
hours and 11 minutes of the 4-hour flight.\23\ Even if the airplane had 
been equipped with a CVR recording for two hours, the information still 
would have been overwritten. Having lost this CVR data to overwriting, 
the NTSB was unable to determine the nature of the flight crew's 
distraction, the events that led to the distraction, why the 
distraction lasted for as long as it did, and what mitigating 
procedures or actions could have prevented that distraction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id. at 4.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More recently, on January 13, 2023, a runway incursion incident 
occurred at John F. Kennedy (JFK) Airport in New York, New York. The 
incursion involved a taxiing Boeing 777-200 and a Boeing 737-900ER 
cleared for takeoff. The Boeing 777-200 accessed a taxiway without Air 
Traffic Control (ATC) clearance, crossing the runway that the Boeing 
737-900ER was utilizing for takeoff. ATC was notified of the potential 
conflict, cancelled the Boeing 737-900ER's takeoff clearance, and the 
flight crew aborted the flight. Because the incident did not result in 
any damage or injuries, the two flights eventually took off to their 
respective destinations. During its investigation, the NTSB discovered 
the CVR data for both flights had been overwritten.
    On February 4, 2023, a runway incursion occurred at Austin 
Bergstrom International Airport (AUS) when a Boeing 767F freighter 
attempted to land on a runway from which a Boeing 737-700 was also 
cleared to depart.\24\ Due to poor weather conditions, the Boeing 767F 
crew did not see the conflict until late in the approach, and the two 
planes came close to colliding; specifically, the Boeing 767F needed to 
overfly the Boeing 737-700 to avoid a collision. There were no injuries 
reported to the 128 passengers and crew onboard the Boeing 737-700 or 
to the 3 crew members onboard the Boeing 767F. During its 
investigation, the NTSB discovered the CVR data for both flights had 
been overwritten.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ NTSB. Aviation Investigation Preliminary Report No. 
DCA23LA149. Feb. 4, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA had sought to prevent such recording issues by creating the 
retention requirements found in Sec. Sec.  91.609(g), 121.343(i), and 
135.152(e), where an operator must remove the recording media following 
an accident or incident and keep the recorded data for at least 60 
days, or longer if necessary. The FAA also provided guidance in 
Advisory Circular 20-186, ``Airworthiness and Operational Approval of 
Cockpit Voice Recorder Systems,'' \25\ which recommended the operator 
to address CVR recording retention after an accident or incident in its 
maintenance and operational programs, such as inclusion in a flight 
crew checklist, or in the company standard operating procedures or 
emergency procedures. However, since recording issues continue to 
occur, the

[[Page 84094]]

FAA agrees with the NTSB that an extension to the CVR recording 
duration requirement to 25 hours is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Advisory Circular 20-186, Paragraph 3.2.4. July 22, 2016. 
www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_20-186.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Privacy Concerns

    The FAA acknowledges that pilot-focused organizations may have 
concerns regarding how the NTSB or the FAA would use the CVR data 
collected for investigative purposes.
    This issue previously arose when the FAA increased the CVR 
recording duration from 30 minutes to 2 hours. At that time, the FAA 
determined that the investigative need and benefit of this information 
outweighed these privacy concerns.\26\ The FAA maintains this stance. 
The proposed increase to a 25-hour CVR recording duration would further 
improve current investigative capabilities. It would also provide 
investigating bodies, such as the NTSB, with more complete context 
surrounding the accidents and incidents under investigation and support 
their safety analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital Flight Data 
Recorder Regulations. 73 FR 12541, 12544 (March 7, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Importantly, this proposed increase is designed to provide more 
context for any flight deck activity that might be pertinent to an 
investigation. Specifically, this increase expands the possible range 
of data available to investigators. This proposal does not alter or 
modify the existing processes for requesting or use of this data. 
Sections 91.609(g), 121.359(h), 121.227(f), and 135.151(c) specify that 
the information obtained from the CVR recording is to be used for 
investigation purposes and that the FAA will not use the CVR record in 
any civil penalty or certificate action. This proposal does not modify 
these regulations.

D. International Requirements

    ICAO and EASA both require the carriage of CVRs with 25-hour 
recording duration on airplanes with a maximum certificated takeoff 
mass of more than 27,000 kg. These are aircraft that have the 
capability to fly transatlantic or international flights, i.e., long-
haul flights that can last ten or more hours. In contrast, the FAA 
requirement would apply to all newly manufactured aircraft required to 
carry a CVR, based on existing operating rules. This distinction 
reflects differences between the FAA and ICAO/EASA regulatory schemes: 
the FAA's existing regulatory scheme differentiates aircraft by 
operation type, not by weight. This rulemaking would not change that 
regulatory scheme.
    With both EASA and ICAO amending their CVR rules to require 25 
hours of audio recording time, this proposed change also presents an 
opportunity to ensure U.S. regulations are consistent in intent with 
international authorities. This should lead to a reduction of risk for 
some operators who would otherwise face conflicting requirements and 
the cumbersome task of ascertaining guidance for the appropriate 
authorities in an attempt to satisfy differing regulations. 
Historically, the FAA has implemented CVR regulations by operation 
unlike ICAO and EASA, which put forth their standards and regulations 
by aircraft weight. As a result, the FAA's proposal would encompass 
more aircraft than international requirements would because newly 
manufactured aircraft with less than a maximum takeoff weight of 27,000 
kg would be affected.

E. Conclusion and Compliance

    The FAA concurs with the NTSB's recommendation and believes that 
extending CVR recording duration to 25 hours would increase aviation 
safety by providing investigative bodies with more thorough context and 
background surrounding accidents and incidents. This proposal would 
also make FAA regulations more consistent with ICAO recommendations and 
EASA requirements.
    Given that the technology already exists to implement this 
proposal, the FAA proposes a compliance deadline for newly manufactured 
aircraft of one year after the effective date of the final regulation. 
Any aircraft with a newly issued airworthiness certificate dated on or 
after that compliance date would be required to be equipped with a CVR 
with 25-hour recording duration.
    In addition, the FAA will update the version of the technical 
standard order (TSO) referenced in the regulatory text from TSO-C123a 
to the latest version, TSO-C123c, for newly manufactured aircraft.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a 
variety of Executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive 
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563, as amended by Executive Order 
14094 (``Modernizing Regulatory Review''), direct that each Federal 
agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the 
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. 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 that 
may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, 
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more 
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The current 
threshold after adjustment for inflation is $177 million using the most 
current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. 
The FAA has provided a detailed Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) in the 
docket for this rulemaking. This portion of the preamble summarizes the 
FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
proposed rule: will result in benefits that justify costs; is not an 
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 
3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866; will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities; will not create 
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States; and 
will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal 
governments, or on the private sector.

A. Summary of the Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Benefits for the proposed rule were assessed qualitatively as the 
FAA currently lacks data to make projections on the benefit totals. The 
primary expected benefit is changes in safety from a potential 
reduction in accident risk. The expanded available audio from this 
proposed rule would provide authorities with more information on events 
and procedures undertaken in the flight deck in investigated incidents. 
This increased data may lead to new FAA recommendations or policy 
changes that could further enhance safety and reduce the risk that a 
future incident becomes an accident. The reduction in the risk of one 
fatality generates benefits equal to the value of statistical life 
(VSL), approximately $12.5 million in 2022 according to the Department 
of Transportation (DOT).\27\ Given the annualized costs of $9.67 
million from this proposed rule,

[[Page 84095]]

reducing the risk of a single fatality in any year due to effective 
safety measures resulting from the ability to gather additional CVR 
data would generate benefits greater than the expected costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ DOT. Treatment of the Value of Preventing Fatalities and 
Injuries in Preparing Economic Analyses. Office of the Secretary of 
Transportation. 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, there are some potential time-saving benefits 
associated with the updated CVR model deployment. In updating their CVR 
models, manufacturers also have revamped the CVR interface tools. These 
simplified and more intuitive tools allow personnel to be trained 
quicker on operation, retrieve audio data faster, and perform 
additional diagnostic services to shorten downtime. The FAA does not 
currently have enough data to predict the value of these benefits and 
invites public comments on the expected totals.
    The FAA assessed the costs for the proposed rule as the incremental 
cost increase of equipping a 25-hour capable CVR instead of a 
comparable 2-hour unit to all applicable new aircraft being produced. 
The total aircraft that will be built and equipped with the 25-hour CVR 
includes projected new aircraft needed to handle future demand 
increases as well as estimated replacements for the current fleet. 
Market research indicates the cost increase between comparable 2 and 
25-hour CVRs to be minimal, ranging from near parity to an upper bound 
of approximately $4,500. Using that upper bound as the incremental cost 
to equip all applicable projected new aircraft with a 25-hour capable 
CVR, the estimated highest total cost over 20 years, at seven percent 
present value, is $102.42 million with an annualized cost of $9.67 
million (table 2). At three percent present value, the total cost is 
$144.77 million with an annualized cost of $9.73 million.

                                     Table 2--Summary of Costs Over 20 Years
                                               [Millions of 2021$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         7% Present value                3% Present value
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
             14 CFR operational part                Annualized                      Annualized
                                                       costs        Total costs        costs        Total costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 91 \1\.....................................           $3.55          $37.57           $3.56          $52.98
Part 121........................................            3.18           33.66            3.19           47.41
Part 125........................................            0.16            1.65            0.16            2.32
Part 135........................................            2.79           29.55            2.83           42.06
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total \2\...................................            9.67          102.42            9.73          144.77
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consists of Part 91 turbine powered and Part 91K aircraft.
\2\ Total reflects combined costs of each CFR part.
Note: Columns may not sum to total due to rounding.

    The FAA does not anticipate other costs besides the incremental 
costs of forward fitting 25-hour capable CVRs to comply with the 
proposed rule. Based on the technical standards for CVRs, market 
research indicates that 25-hour models tend to match the older 2-hour 
variants in a manner that allows them to be swapped without much 
difficulty. This compatibility implies that other operational 
procedures and costs should be similar and not result in notable 
change. The FAA invites comments on the expected costs for this 
proposed rule.
    Please see the RIA available in the docket for more details.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, Public Law 96-354, 94 
Stat. 1164 (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 
857, Mar. 29, 1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 
111-240, 124 Stat. 2504 Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal agencies to 
consider the effects of the regulatory action on small business and 
other small entities and to minimize any significant economic impact. 
The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses and not-for-
profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are 
not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with 
populations of less than 50,000.
    The proposed rule affects CVR manufacturers by requiring the 
development and certification of 25-hour capable models. A major change 
to the CVR components, such as in this case, would require a 
manufacturer to go through the development and certification of a new 
model, which could involve extra cost and time. However, due to EASA 
and ICAO standards for 25-hour capability taking effect in 2021, market 
research shows that manufacturers already have developed 25-hour 
compliant variants that meet FAA TSO-C123 compliance. Therefore, the 
proposed regulation is not expected to result in new or significant 
impacts on CVR manufacturers. The FAA invites comments on the expected 
effects of the proposed rule on CVR manufacturers.
    As described in the RIA, the FAA identified six U.S. manufacturers 
that would be affected by the proposed rule. Based on the Small 
Business Administration (SBA) 2023 size standard for Other Aircraft 
Part and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS 336413),\28\ and on 
publicly available data on employment for these entities, all six 
identified manufacturers are large businesses that exceed the 1,250-
employee size maximum for a small business. Therefore, the FAA 
certifies that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities because the proposed 
rule does not impact any small entity. The FAA welcomes comments on the 
number of U.S. CVR manufacturers and this certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards, 
effective March 17, 2023, can be found at www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities 
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United 
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not 
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the 
United States, so long as the standard has a

[[Page 84096]]

legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and 
does not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this 
objective. The statute also requires consideration of international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. 
standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed 
rule and determined that it promotes the safety of the American public 
and does not exclude imports that meet the recording length 
requirement. As a result, the FAA does not consider this proposed rule 
as creating an unnecessary obstacle to foreign commerce.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    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 
that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The 
current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $177 million using 
the most current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic 
Product.
    The FAA determined that the proposed rule will not result in the 
expenditure of $177 million or more by State, local, or tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, in any one year.

E. 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. According to the 1995 
amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an 
agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor 
may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays 
a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    This action contains the following proposed amendments to the 
existing information collection requirements previously approved under 
OMB Control Number 2120-0700. As required by the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted these proposed 
information collection amendments to OMB for its review.
    Summary: This notice proposes to amend parts 91, 121, 125, and 135 
requirements so aircraft manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE] that are required to be installed 
with a cockpit voice recorder would be required to have a recording 
limit of 25 hours, expanded from the current requirement of 2 hours.
    Use: Such a record would provide additional information to accident 
and incident investigators to determine flight crew's procedural 
compliance, distraction, decision-making, workload, fatigue, and 
situational awareness. The expansion to 25 hours would address the 
issue in which data is overwritten because the relevant recording 
occurred earlier than the available two hours of recording.
    Respondents (including number of): The respondents all would be 
certificate holders operating the above-referenced U.S.-registered 
aircraft under parts 91, 121, 125, 129, and 135. Certificate holders 
operating under part 129 requirements would be affected because, in 
accordance with Sec.  129.24, a cockpit voice recorder would be 
required to record as if the aircraft were operated under parts 121, 
125, or 135.
    Frequency: The 25 hours of recorded data would be overwritten on a 
continuing basis and would only be accessed following an accident or 
incident.
    Annual Burden Estimate: This proposed requirement would not change 
the current information collection activity; therefore, it does not 
contain a measurable hour burden.
    The FAA is soliciting comments to--
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the FAA, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the FAA's estimate of the burden;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of collecting information on those who are 
to respond, including by using appropriate automated, electronic, 
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms 
of information technology.
    Individuals and organizations may send comments on the information 
collection requirement to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section 
at the beginning of this preamble by February 2, 2024. Comments also 
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for FAA, 
New Executive Office Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20053.

F. International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and 
has identified the following differences with these proposed 
regulations. The proposed rule would harmonize with ICAO regarding the 
required length of the CVR recordings at 25 hours. However, the U.S. 
does not regulate carriage requirements of CVRs based on the aircraft 
gross weight, as do the ICAO and EASA, and the proposed rule change 
would not change this. If this proposal is adopted, the FAA intends to 
amend its currently filed difference on this topic with ICAO.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically 
excluded from the preparation of an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has 
determined this proposed rulemaking action qualifies for the 
categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6f for regulations 
and involves no extraordinary circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, Federalism. The FAA has 
determined that this proposed action would not have a substantial 
direct effect on the States, or the relationship between the Federal 
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government and, therefore, 
would not have federalism implications.

B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Consistent with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,\29\ and FAA Order 1210.20, 
American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and 
Procedures,\30\ the FAA ensures that Federally Recognized

[[Page 84097]]

Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity to provide meaningful and 
timely input regarding proposed Federal actions that have the potential 
to affect uniquely or significantly their respective Tribes. At this 
point, the FAA has not identified any unique or significant effects, 
environmental or otherwise, on tribes resulting from this proposed 
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
    \30\ The FAA. (Jan. 28, 2004). FAA Order No. 1210.20. 
www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The FAA has determined that it 
would not be a ``significant energy action'' under the Executive order 
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet 
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, 
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent 
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has 
analyzed this proposed action under the policies and agency 
responsibilities of E.O. 13609 and has determined that this proposed 
action would have no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

VI. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this 
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The FAA also 
invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or 
federalism 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. To ensure the docket does not contain 
duplicate comments, commenters should submit only one time if comments 
are filed electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of 
written comments if comments are filed in writing.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well 
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. 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 
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without 
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light 
of the comments it receives.

B. Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial 
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by 
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), 
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to 
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is 
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and 
that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you 
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page 
of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat 
such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will 
not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing 
CBI should be sent to the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section of this document. Any commentary that the FAA receives that is 
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket 
for this rulemaking.

C. Electronic Access and Filing

    A copy of this NPRM, all comments received, any final rule, and all 
background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov using 
the docket number listed above. A copy of this proposed rule will be 
placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are 
available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days 
each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded 
from the Office of the Federal Register's website at 
www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website 
at www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also be found at the FAA's Regulations 
and Policies website at www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
    Copies may also be obtained 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) 267-9677. 
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this 
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule, 
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in 
the electronic docket for this rulemaking.

D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996 requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for 
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations 
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this 
document may contact its local FAA official or the person listed under 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the 
preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit 
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 91

    Aircraft, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 121

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

14 CFR Part 125

    Aircraft, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 40103, 40105, 
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 
47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 
U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).

0
2. Amend Sec.  91.609 by revising paragraph (i)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  91.609  Flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (2) Retains at least--
    (i) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE

[[Page 84098]]

OF THE FINAL RULE,] the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision.
* * * * *

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

0
3. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40119, 41706, 
42301 preceding note added by Pub. L. 112-95, sec. 412, 126 Stat. 
89, 44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 
44722, 44729, 44732; 46105; Pub. L. 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49 
U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 
note); Pub. L. 115-254, 132 Stat. 3186 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note).

0
4. Amend Sec.  121.359 by revising paragraphs (i)(2) and (j)(2) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  121.359  Cockpit voice recorders.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (2) Retains at least--
    (i) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision; and
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (2) Retains at least--
    (i) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision; and
* * * * *

PART 125--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: AIRCRAFT 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

0
5. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as follows:

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

0
6. Amend Sec.  125.227 by revising paragraphs (g)(2) and (h)(2) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  125.227  Cockpit voice recorders.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) Retains at least--
    (i) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision; and
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (2) Retains at least--
    (i) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (ii) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision; and
* * * * *

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

0
7. The authority citation for part 135 continue to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 41706, 44701-44702, 
44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 44730, 45101-45105; 
Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 44730).

0
8. Amend Sec.  135.151 by revising paragraphs (g)(1)(iii) and 
(g)(2)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  135.151  Cockpit voice recorders.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Retains at least--
    (A) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (B) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Retains at least--
    (A) The last 2 hours of recorded information using a recorder that 
meets the standards of TSO-C123a, or later revision; or
    (B) If manufactured on or after [ONE YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THE FINAL RULE], the last 25 hours of recorded information using a 
recorder that meets the standards of TSO-C123c, or later revision.
* * * * *

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a) 
in Washington, DC.
Lawrence Fields,
Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-26144 Filed 12-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


