![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM)
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: December 10, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 237)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63887-63895]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10de01-12]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. FAA-2000-8490; Amdt. No. 91-271]
RIN 2120-AH12
Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the list of airspace locations where
Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) may be applied to include
the New York Flight Information Region (FIR) portion of West Atlantic
Route System (WATRS) airspace. RVSM is the reduction of vertical
separation between aircraft at certain higher altitudes. RVSM is
applied only between aircraft that meet stringent altimeter and auto-
pilot performance requirements. The introduction of RVSM in WATRS
airspace will save operators fuel and time and will enhance airspace
capacity. This rule also requires any aircraft that is equipped with
Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System version II (TCAS II) and
that is flying in RVSM airspace to incorporate a version of TCAS II
that is compatible with RVSM operations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 2001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Maloy, Flight Technologies and
Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, AFS-400, Federal
Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591, telephone (860) 654-1006.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by taking the
following steps:
(1) Go to the search function of the Department of Transportation's
electronic Docket Management System (DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/
search). 
(2) On the search page type in the last four digits of the Docket
number shown at the beginning of this notice. Click on ``search.''
(3) On the next page, which contains the Docket summary information
for the Docket you selected, click on the document number for the item
you wish to view.
You can also get an electronic copy using the Internet through the
Office of Rulemaking's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/armhome.htm
or the Federal Register Web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/
aces/aces140.html.
You can also get a copy by submitting a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this
rulemaking.
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. Therefore, any small entity that has a
question regarding this document may contact their local FAA official,
or the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can
find out more about SBREFA on the Internet at our site, http://
www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm. For more information on SBREFA, e-mail
us at 9-AWA-SBREFA@faa.gov.
Background
This final rule is based on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
No. 00-16 published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2000 (65 FR
79283). That NPRM proposed to amend Appendix G of 14 CFR part 91,
Operations within Airspace designated as Reduced Vertical Separation
Minimum (RVSM) Airspace. RVSM is the reduction of vertical separation
between aircraft from 2,000 feet to 1,000 feet at flight levels (FLs)
between FL 290 (29,000 feet) and FL 410 (41,000 feet).
Statement of the Problem
Air traffic in WATRS airspace has increased steadily in the past
few years and is projected to continue to increase. Between 1997 and
1999, the annual traffic count in the WATRS airspace increased from
72,020 to 109,044 flights. This represents an increase of 51 percent.
This is a result of a resurgence of activity after several years of
economic downturn. The Office of International Operations for the FAA's
New York Enroute Air Traffic Center estimates a similar increase over
at least the next several years, assuming the economy stays healthy. A
substantial portion of the increase is the Europe to Caribbean traffic
that overflies the WATRS airspace.
Unless efficiency is improved, the FAA may not be able to
accommodate these greater numbers of aircraft without altitude
restrictions that can result in traffic delays and fuel penalties. RVSM
alleviates the limitation on air traffic management at high altitudes
imposed by the conventional 2,000-foot vertical separation standard.
Increasing the number of flight levels available in the WATRS airspace
is projected to provide operator benefits similar to those achieved in
the North Atlantic (NAT) and Pacific (PAC). Operators will save fuel
and time by using optimum altitudes and tracks.
In the WATRS airspace, the FAA plans to initially implement RVSM
between FL 310 and FL 390 (inclusive). This is in line with the
altitudes in the NAT.
Oversight for Implementation
The New York Oceanic Capacity Enhancements Task Force (NYOCETF)
(the Task Force), provides oversight for plans and policy related to:
1. Changes to separation minima.
2. Issues relating to traffic management.
3. Airspace/ATS Routes.
4. Standardization of ATC and Operator procedures.
5. Contingency procedures.
6. Communication issues.
7. Status of oceanic ATC automation.
The NYOCETF is the body that is developing WATRS RVSM
implementation plans. The New York Air Route Traffic Control Center
(ARTCC) Plans and Procedures Manager chairs the Task Force. The Task
Force is using the policy and criteria developed in International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) forums to build the RVSM program for the
WATRS airspace.
History of RVSM
Rising traffic volume and fuel costs, which made flight at fuel-
efficient altitudes a priority for operators, sparked an interest in
the early 1970s in implementing RVSM above FL 290. In April 1973, the
Air Transport Association of America (ATA) petitioned the FAA for a
rule change to reduce the vertical separation minimum to 1,000 feet for
aircraft operating above FL 290. The petition was denied in 1977 in
part because (1) aircraft altimeters had not been improved
sufficiently, (2) improved maintenance and operational standards had
not been developed, and (3) altitude correction was not available in
all aircraft. In addition, the cost of modifying nonconforming aircraft
was prohibitive. The FAA concluded that granting the ATA petition at
that time would have adversely affected safety. Nevertheless, the FAA
recognized the
[[Page 63889]]
potential benefits of RVSM under certain circumstances and continued to
review technological developments, committing extensive resources to
studying aircraft altitude-keeping performance and necessary criteria
for safely reducing vertical separation above FL 290. Data showing that
RVSM implementation is technically and economically feasible has been
published in studies conducted cooperatively in international forums,
as well as separately by the FAA.
Because of the high standard of performance and equipment required
for RVSM, the FAA advocated initial introduction of RVSM in oceanic
airspace where special navigation performance standards were already
required. Special navigation areas require high levels of long-range
navigation precision due to the separation standard applied. RVSM
implementation in such airspace requires an increased level of
precision demanded of operators, aircraft, and vertical navigation
systems.
On March 27, 1997, RVSM was implemented in one such special
navigation area of operation established in the ICAO NAT Region, the
NAT Minimum Navigation Performance Specification (MNPS) airspace. In
designated NAT MNPS airspace, tracks are spaced 60 nautical miles (NM)
apart. Between FLS 310 and 390 (inclusive), aircraft are separated
vertically by 1000 feet. All aircraft operating in this airspace must
be appropriately equipped and capable of meeting required lateral
navigation performance standards of 14 CFR 91.705 and the vertical
navigation performance standards of 91.706. Operators must follow
procedures that ensure that the navigation standards are met. Flight
crews must also be trained on RVSM policy and procedures. Each
operator, aircraft, and navigation system combination must receive and
maintain authorization to operate in the NAT MNPS. The North Atlantic
Systems Planning Group (NATSPG) Central Monitoring Agency (CMA)
monitors NAT aircraft fleet performance to ensure that a safe operating
environment is maintained.
In addition, Pacific RVSM was implemented on February 24, 2000. The
Asia/Pacific Approval Registry and Monitoring Agency performs the
function of the CMA in the Pacific.
Current Aircraft Capabilities
FAA data indicate that the altitude-keeping performance of most
aircraft flying in oceanic airspace meet the standards for RVSM
operations. The FAA and ICAO research to determine the feasibility of
implementing RVSM included the following four efforts:
1. FAA Vertical Studies Program. This program began in mid-1981,
with the objectives of collecting and analyzing data on aircraft
performance in maintaining assigned altitude, developing program
requirements to reduce vertical separation, and providing technical and
operational representation on the various working groups studying the
issue outside the FAA.
2. RTCA Special Committee (SC)-150. RTCA, Inc., (formerly Radio
Technical Commission for Aeronautics). This committee is an industry
organization in Washington, DC, that addresses aviation technical
requirements and concepts, and procedures, recommended standards. When
the FAA hosted a public meeting in early 1982 on vertical separation,
it was recommended that RTCA be the forum for development of minimum
system performance standards for RVSM. RTCA SC-150 was formed in March
1982 to develop minimum system performance requirements, identify
required improvements to aircraft equipment and changes to operational
procedures, and assess the impact of the requirements on the aviation
community. SC-150 served as the focal point for the study and
development of RVSM criteria and programs in the United States from
1982 to 1987, including analysis of the results of the FAA Vertical
Studies Program.
3. ICAO Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP).
In 1987, the FAA concentrated its resources for the development of RVSM
programs in the ICAO RGCSP. The U.S. delegation to the ICAO RGCSP used
the material developed by SC-150 as the foundation for U.S. positions
and plans on RVSM criteria and programs. The panel's major conclusions
were:
RVSM is technically feasible without imposing unreasonably
demanding technical requirements on the equipment.
RVSM provides significant benefits in terms of economy and
en route airspace capacity.
Implementation of RVSM on either a regional or global
basis requires sound operational judgment supported by an assessment of
system performance based on: aircraft altitude-keeping capability,
operational considerations, system performance monitoring, and risk
assessment.
4. NATSPG and the NATSPG Vertical Separation Implementation Group
(VSIG). The NATSPG Task Force was established in 1988 to identify the
requirements to be met by the future NAT Region air traffic services
system; to design the framework for the NAT airspace system concept;
and to prepare a general plan for the phased introduction of the
elements of the concept. The objective of this effort was to permit
significant increases in airspace capacity and improvements in flight
economy. At the meeting of the NATSPG in June 1991, all of the NAT air
traffic service provider States, as well as the International Air
Transport Association (IATA) and International Federation of Airline
Pilots Association (IFALPA), endorsed the Future NAT Air Traffic
Services System Concept Description developed by the NATSPG Task Force.
With regard to the implementation of RVSM, the Concept Description
concludes that priority must be given to implementation of this measure
as it is believed to be achievable within the early part of the concept
timeframe. The NATSPG's initial goal was to implement RVSM between 1996
and 1997. To meet this goal, the NATSPG established the VSIG in June
1991 to take the necessary actions to implement RVSM in the NAT. These
actions included:
Programs, and supporting documents, to approve aircraft
and operators for conducting flight in the RVSM environment and to
address all issues related to aircraft airworthiness, maintenance, and
operations. The group has produced guidance material for aircraft and
operator approval that ICAO has distributed to civil aviation
authorities and NAT users. Also, ICAO has planned that the guidance
material be incorporated in the approal process established by the
States.
Developing the system for monitoring aircraft altitude-
keeping performance. This system is used to observe aircraft
performance in the vertical plane to determine that the approval
process is uniformly effective and that the RVSM airspace system is
safe.
Evaluating and developing Air Traffic Control (ATC)
procedures for RVSM, conducting simulation studies to assess the effect
of RVSM on ATC, and developing documents to address ATC issues.
The ICAO Limited NAT Regional Air Navigation Meeting held in
Portugal in November 1992 endorsed the NATSPG RVSM implementation
program. At that meeting, it was concluded that RVSM implementation
should be pursued. The FAA concurred with the conclusions of the NATSPG
on RVSM implementation.
[[Page 63890]]
Discussion of Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
II, Version 7.0 for RVSM Operations
Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) is a general
term for equipment that warns pilots of nearby aircraft and provides
collision avoidance protection. It is designed to serve as a safety
back-up to the air traffic control system.
TCAS I warns pilots of the potential for collision by providing
traffic advisories (TAs). These TAs show where another aircraft is
relative to the TCAS-equipped aircraft. TAs generally include the
range, altitude, and bearing of the intruding aircraft.
TCAS II provides both TAs and recommended vertical escape
maneuvers, known as resolution advisories (RAs) Resolution advisories
provide pilots with information to change a flight path or prevent a
maneuver that could cause insufficient separation between airplanes.
TCAS II also coordinates RAs between two TCAS-equipped airplanes (i.e.,
each pilot would receive an RA that would not conflict with the other
RA).
The regulations require under 14 CFR sections 121.356, 125.224, and
135.180, that certain aircraft must be operated with TCAS II, or an
equivalent, and the appropriate class of Mode S transponder. Certain
other aircraft may be operated with TCAS I or its equivalent.
Airworthiness Directives issued to the avionics manufacturers in 1994
require that those aircraft that are required to be TACS II equipped be
equipped with TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced. Approximately 90% of the
flights now conducted in RVSM airspace are equipped with TCAS II,
version 6.04 Enhanced.
This rule will require that aircraft operated in RVSM airspace and
equipped with TCAS II, must be modified to incorporate collision
avoidance system logic software Version 7.0, or a later version.
Version 7.0 is necessary because only Version 7.0 and later versions
incorporate revised alert thresholds for traffic alerts (TA) and
resolution advisories (RA) for flight levels (FL) 300 through FL 420
that are compatible with RVSM operations. The alert thresholds in
Version 6.04 Enhanced are not totally compatible with RVSM operations.
The logic for these alert thresholds does not consider the reduced
separation in RVSM airspace and occasionally causes false alerts.
This rule will not require aircraft in RVSM airspace to be equipped
with TCAS II. Other rules regulate which aircraft are required to be
equipped with TCAS II. The rule will, however, require any aircraft
that is equipped with TCAS II to use Version 7.0 to be approved to fly
in RVSM airspace.
Status of TCAS I
TCAS I is compatible with RVSM operations and no modifications are
necessary.
Background of TCAS II Operation in RVSM Airspace
RVSM was implemented in North Atlantic (NAT) Minimum Navigation
Specifications Airspace (NAT MNPSA) in March 1997. In preparation for
RVSM implementation, the North Atlantic System Planning Group (NATSPG)
Operations/Airworthiness (Ops/Air) group reviewed the effect that RVSM
would have on the operation of TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced in NAT
oceanic airspace. The group recognized that TCAS II, Version 6.04
Enhanced was designed with a TA alert threshold of 1,200 feet for FL
300 through FL 420 and would produce inappropriate TA's for aircraft
that were separated in RVSM airspace by 1,000 feet vertically,
especially in certain situations. For example, the group recognized
that in situations where two aircraft were separated by 1,000 feet
vertically and one nautical mile or less longitudinally, on the same
track and proceeding in the same direction at approximately the same
speed, TA's could be received in the cockpit repeatedly over an
extended period of time. The group observed, however, that the traffic
levels in oceanic airspace are low relative to continental operations
and operations are relatively stable (i.e., aircraft generally climb or
descend infrequently). For this reason, it concluded that TCAS II,
Version 6.04 Enhanced was acceptable during the early stages of RVSM
operations in oceanic airspace provided pilots were informed on the
operating characteristics of TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced operations
in RVSM airspace. To inform pilots of the potential problem with
Version 6.04, the group developed and distributed a document to educate
pilots on these characteristics. The document also recommended that
pilots limit their vertical speed to 1,000 feet per minute when close
to other aircraft to reduce the number of unnecessary alerts.
RVSM has been implemented for over three years in North Atlantic
airspace and since February 2000 in the Pacific oceanic Flight
Information Regions. In that time, TCAS II, Version 6.04 Enhanced has
proven generally acceptable for RVSM operations in oceanic airspace.
Multiple TA events have, however, been found to occur in situations
where aircraft are on the same track, speed and direction with one
nautical mile or less longitudinal spacing.
How Unnecessary TA's May Affect Safety
TCAS provides an aural TA in the form of the announcement
``Traffic, Traffic'' in the cockpit. The ``Traffic, Traffic''
announcement repeated over a period of time distracts the pilot from
the execution of his or her duties and produces the potential to cause
a pilot error. As an example, during the flight, pilots program
navigation computers with a series of numbers representing positions on
the route of flight. A distraction while programming the navigation
computer can cause the pilot to make an error that results in the
aircraft straying from its assigned route and posing a hazard to itself
and other aircraft.
Increase in RVSM Operations
As air traffic increases in areas where RVSM is currently
implemented and as RVSM is implemented in new areas, there will be more
aircraft conducting RVSM flights and increased exposure to distracting
TA's. Air traffic in NAT and Pacific oceanic airspace where RVSM has
already been implemented is projected to increase 4-6% each year. New
RVSM implementations are planned in the near future in airspace over
the Western and South Atlantic, the western Pacific, and the Caribbean.
The number of RVSM flights will continue to increase and therefore, the
probability of aircraft experiencing distracting multiple TA's will
also increase.
TCAS II, Version 7.0 Compatibility With RVSM Operations
To avoid the potential for an increase in distracting TA's that can
lead to pilot errors, those aircraft that are used in RVSM operations
that are equipped with TCAS II systems must be modified to incorporate
a version of TCAS that is compatible with RVSM operations. TCAS II,
Version 7.0 was designed to be compatible with RVSM operations and
mitigates the occurrence of unnecessary TA's in RVSM operations. In
TCAD, Version 7.0, the TA alert threshold between flight levels 300 and
420 is reduced from 1,200 feet to 850 feet. This revision will
eliminate unwarranted TA's between aircraft that are correctly
separated by 1,000 feet vertically in RVSM airspace.
[[Page 63891]]
ICAO and Foreign Standards
ICAO Annexes and civil aviation authorities in foreign countries
have already established standards and requirements for specified
aircraft to be equipped with TCAS II, Version 7.0. ACAS II is the ICAO
term that describes aircraft collision avoidance systems and related
equipment. To comply with ICAO ACAS II Standards, Version 7.0 must be
incorporated in TCAS II. The aircraft covered and compliance dates for
ACAS II (TCAS II, Version 7.0) are discussed in the paragraph below.
Part 91, Section 91.703 Requirements Applicable to U.S. Operations
Various countries throughout the world have adopted the ICAO Annex
6 requirements discussed below for ACAS II equipage in their airspace.
In some major areas, countries and regions have adopted accelerated
equipage compliance dates. Because 14 CFR 91.703 requires United States
operators to comply with the regulations of the countries in which they
are operating, the ACAS II equipage requirements of foreign countries
have already required United States operators to plan to equip with
Version 7.0.
Section 91.703 is entitled ``Operations of civil aircraft of U.S.
registry outside of the United States''. Paragraph 91.703(a)(2) states
that each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside
the United States shall ``when within a foreign country, comply with
the regulations relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there
in force''.
ICAO Annex 6 Standards for ACAS II Equipage.
ICAO Annex 6 (Operation of Aircraft), part 1 (International
Commercial Air Transport--Aeroplanes), paragraph 6.18 contains
standards calling for TCAS II, Version 7.0 (ACAS II) equipage for
specified aircraft by January 1, 2003. Specifically, it states that all
turbine-engined aircraft with a maximum certified take-off mass (gross
weight) that exceeds 15,000 kg (33,000 pounds) or authorized to carry
more than 30 passengers shall be equipped with ACAS II by January 1,
2003. Annex 6 also calls for all aircraft to be equipped with a
pressure altitude reporting transponder that operates in accordance
with the relevant provisions of ICAO Annex 10.
Asia/Pacific Regional Standards for ACAS II
The ICAO Regional Supplements for the Middle East/Asia and the
Pacific are published in the ICAO document entitled ``Regional
Supplementary Procedures'' (ICAO Doc 7030). Those regional Supplements
call for TCAS II, Version 7.0 equipage for the aircraft specified in
Annex 6 by January 1, 2000. Since Version 7.0 was not widely available
from avionics manufacturers, most aircraft were not able to meet that
date. In response, the Asia/Pacific Air Navigation Planning and
Implementation Regional Group (APAN/PIRG) has adopted a regional policy
that calls for the specified aircraft to be equipped by January 1,
2002.
North Atlantic Regional Standards for ACAS II
The ICAO Doc 7030 Regional Supplement for the NAT Regional calls
for TCAS II, Version 7.0 equipage for the aircraft specified in Annex 6
by March 31, 2001. (The ICAO NAT Region encompasses most of WATRS
airspace).
European Country Requirements for ACAS II
The requirements for ACAS II equipage in European countries have
been published in the European Regional Supplements contained in ICAO
DOC 7030. European Supplement paragraph 16.1 (Carriage and operation of
ACAS II) calls for the aircraft specified in Annex 6, Part 1 to be ACAS
II equipped by January 1, 2000. In response to the lack of availability
of Version 7.0, the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) member
States have granted exemptions to allow aircraft to continue to operate
until March 31, 2001 with TCAS, Version 6.04 Enhanced.
Requirements for TCAS II, Version 7.0 in Countries in the Pacific and
Asian Regions
The ICAO Bangkok office has conducted a survey of countries in Asia
and the Pacific to determine those countries that have established or
plan to establish requirements for ACAS II equipage in their airspace.
To date, 28 countries have established or are developing requirements
for operators to equip by the ICAO Annex 6 compliance date of January
1, 2003 or sooner. This list includes: Australia, China, Japan, Korea,
New Zealand and Singapore.
Effect of Linking TCAS, II, Version 7.0 Equipage to RVSM Operations
The rule requires aircraft that are used in RVSM operations and
equipped with TCAS II to be equipped with Version 7.0 because it is
compatible with RVSM operations. Because other countries and ICAO
Regions are already requiring ACAS II (Version 7.0), however, the
economic and aircraft engineering impact directly related to this rule
will be minimal.
RVSM is currently applied only in certain major oceanic airspace
outside the U.S.--the NAT and Pacific. As detailed above, requirements
for TCAS II, Version 7.0 have already been established for operators
and aircraft operating outside the US to destinations in Europe, Asia
and the Pacific. Since operators will already be required to equip with
TCAS II, Version 7.0 to operate in the airspace of most countries in
the Pacific and European regions, the effect of requiring TCAS II,
Version 7.0 for RVSM operations after March 31, 2002 will be minimal.
Compliance Date for Version 7.0
This amendment requires operators to incorporate Version 7.0
software into TCAS II equipped airplanes used in RVSM operations by
March 31, 2002. The following are factors considered in this decision.
First, there have not been adequate numbers of Version 7.0 units
and upgrade kits available to operators. TCAS II, Version 7.0
requirement for European airspace was delayed to March 31, 2001 for
this reason. To allow time for adequate numbers of Version 7.0 units
and upgrade kits to be made available following the European compliance
date, the FAA is delaying its TCAS II Version 7.0 requirement for RVSM
operations to March 31, 2002. This will allow 12 months after the
initial demand for Version 7.0 to meet the European requirement.
Second, incorporation of Version 7.0 in TCAS II unites is not a
major aircraft engineering effort. Incorporation of Version 7.0 is a
software change. Existing equipment is removed from the aircraft and
the Version 7.0 modification is accomplished by an authorized service
facility. Considering these factors, the FAA believes establishing a
requirement for incorporation of Version 7.0 for operations after March
31, 2002 will provide adequate time for aircraft not affected by the
European requirements to comply.
Discussion of Comments
The FAA received comments on the proposed rule from the following 6
organizations:
(1) The Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA).
(2) Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA).
(3) Cessna Aircraft Company.
(4) General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA).
(5) The Department of Defense (DOD).
(6) The Coalition of Airlines Pilots Association (CAPA).
[[Page 63892]]
1. ATCA Comments. ATCA states that it concurs with the proposed
rule to implement RVSM in WATRS airspace and also concurs with the
requirement that aircraft equipped with TCAS incorporate a version of
TCAS that is compatible with RVSM operations. ATCA also states that the
rule offers the prospect of greater availability of the most time and
efficient tracks and routes as well as increased capacity in the North
Atlantic Route System.
FAA Response
ATCA comments support publication of the final rule. No FAA
response required.
2. AOPA Comments. AOPA states that procedures such as WATRS RVSM
will likely have minimal short-term repercussions. AOPA is concerned
that the introduction of exclusionary RVSM airspace brings the
potential to improve service to participating users at the expense of
non-RVSM operators. AOPA's greater concern is that RVSM procedures, and
with them new equipment mandates and certification processes, will
reduce access afforded to some operators if implemented domestically
within the United States.
FAA Response
This rule only affects WATRS airspace, not domestic airspace. The
FAA will give careful consideration to AOPA's concern in any future
rulemaking.
3. Cessna Aircraft Company Comments. Cessna states that it will not
have an adequate number of modification kits to be able to meet WATRS
RVSM requirements by the compliance dates proposed in the NPRM.
FAA Response
First, aircraft that are not RVSM compliant retain the option to
operate above and/or below RVSM airspace. The option for unapproved
aircraft to climb through RVSM flight levels to operate above RVSM
airspace has been used successfully in both North Atlantic and Pacific
operations, and it will be available to WATRS operators. Aircraft that
are not RVSM compliant may also operate below WATRS RVSM airspace.
Maximum leg lengths across WATRS RVSM airspace are approximately two
hours. Fuel consumption at lower altitudes for two hours or less should
not provide unacceptable operational limitations.
Second, the FAA provided industry with over 3 years of notice of
its intent to implement WATRS RVSM. The FAA announced its intention to
implement RVSM in the New York FIR portion of WATRS airspace at the New
York Oceanic Capacity Enhancement Task Force on August 28, 1998. The
FAA believes it has given the aircraft manufacturers and operator
community adequate time to prepare for WATRS RVSM implementation and
has made extensive efforts to keep them informed on the progress of
implementation plans. RVSM has been implemented for over four years in
the North Atlantic and for a year and a half in the PAC. Operators and
aircraft manufacturers have been well informed of the planned expansion
of RVSM to other airspace.
4. General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA). GAMA states
that its member companies support the planned implementation of RVSM
where airspace is congested. However, it is concerned that the proposed
rule to implement RVSM in WATRS on November 1, 2001 may not allow
enough time for the fleet to be properly equipped.
FAA Response
The FAA responses to the Cessna comments also apply to the GAMA
comments.
Additionally, by November 1, 2001, a significant majority of
flights are projected to be conducted by RVSM compliant aircraft. As of
May 2001 (six months prior to the planned implementation date), 75
percent of all flights operating at and above FL 290 in WATRS airspace
had already been approved for RVSM operations. The FAA has observed a
steady increase in the number of RVSM approved aircraft and projects
that by November 1 RVSM compliant aircraft will conduct a significant
majority of WATRS flights. In addition, business aviation aircraft
conduct approximately 7.5 per cent of the flights in WATRS airspace. As
of May, 51% of business jets operating above FL 290 in WATRS airspace
had already been RVSM approved. The FAA anticipates that this
percentage will continue to increase as implementation approaches. The
FAA estimates that the percentage of WATRS flights projected to be
conducted by unapproved business jets will be 3% or less.
5. DOD Comments. DOD is concerned that it would have to separately
notify each sector/center in the route of flight when an aircraft is
not RVSM approved. DOD requests that the FAA adopt the following
guidance: ``For operational purposes, it is the desire of the
Department of Defense that filing of a routine flight plan will suffice
for advance notification of non-RVSM equipped aircraft and request that
the first oceanic center make all subsequent coordination.''
FAA Response
The FAA accepts the DOD's recommendation. Specifically, filing a
flight plan for non-RVSM equipped aircraft is adequate advance notice
to ATC and no additional notice is required.
6. CAPA Comments. CAPA does not object in principle to the concept
of reducing vertical separation, as long as safety is not compromised.
CAPA states, however, that reducing vertical separation minima without
requiring TCAS for all aircraft will jeopardize safety.
FAA Response
The FAA does not agree that reducing separation without requiring
TCAS equipage will create a safety problem. The FAA does recognize,
however, the significant enhancements to operational safety provided by
TCAS. In its comments on this issue below, the FAA discusses the FAA
and ICAO initiatives that should lead to increased TCAS equipage in
oceanic operations. The FAA does not agree with the CAPA position for
the following reasons:
First, 1,000-foot vertical separation has been applied below flight
level 290 since the early 1960's (over 40 years) without special
aircraft equipage or performance requirements, including TCAS. ICAO
Annex 2 (Rules of the Air), Appendix 3 (Table of Cruising Levels)
provides for 1,000 ft vertical separation to be applied globally below
FL 290.
Second, standardized aircraft altitude-keeping performance and
pilot/controller contingency procedures maintain safe RVSM operations.
Section 91.706 and Appendix G require that for an aircraft to be
approved for RVSM operations, the aircraft altimetry systems, automatic
altitude-keeping devices and altitude alerters must meet stringent
performance requirements.\1\ In addition, pilot and controller
procedures in contingencies and emergencies were developed and revised
prior to RVSM implementation. Pilot and controller actions in events
such as aircraft system malfunctions, turbulence encounters and wake
turbulence encounters have proven to be effective over the past four
and one half years of RVSM operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Aircraft equipage and performance were developed in the ICAO
Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP) and
published in ICAO Document 9574 in 1992. Section 91.706 and Appendix
G reflect the ICAO requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, RVSM has been applied successfully without a TCAS
requirement since March 1997 in North Atlantic oceanic airspace and
since
[[Page 63893]]
February 2000 in Pacific airspace. Over that period of time,
approximately 1.7 million flights have been conducted in RVSM airspace
and approximately 7.2 million hours of RVSM successful flight
experience have been accumulated. NAT airspace has the highest traffic
density of any oceanic airspace in the world. Between 900 to 1100
flights are conducted each day in the RVSM airspace of the North
Atlantic. The busiest route system in the Pacific is the North Pacific
Route System (NOPAC) where approximately 175 flights are conducted each
day and in the entire Pacific, approximately 440 flights operate per
day.
Fourth, monitoring of system safety has shown that the probability
of collision in RVSM operations is extremely low when measured against
the agreed Target Level of Safety (TLS). The ICAO recommended Target
Level of Safety applied in the vertical dimension is five fatal
accidents in one billion hours of flight time. Both NAT and Pac RVSM
airspace have been assessed against this TLS. When considering the
major components of Collision Risk Modeling (CRM), RVSM operations have
been shown to meet the TLS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The major CRM components are: Traffic density, aircraft
altitude-keeping performance and the frequency of large errors
attributed to human and aircraft system errors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability of CAPA Comments to TCAS Rulemaking
The FAA believes that the CAPA comments relate more specifically to
the benefits of TCAS as a safety net in general operations. We do not
believe that the CAPA recommendation for TCAS equipage is relevant to
the expansion of 1,000-foot vertical separation above FL 290. The FAA
has reviewed incidents where TCAS could have or did contribute to the
prevention of an accident. None of these incidents occurred in airspace
where RVSM is applied and many of them occurred below FL 290.
Current Rule Projects Related to TCAS Equipage.
There are efforts under way in the United States to revise the
regulations related to TCAS equipage. Also, ICAO has published
Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) that address TCAS eqipage.
The status of these efforts is as follows:
Revision of Regulations Related to TCAS Eqipage.
In response to an Independent Pilot Association (IPA) petition for
rulemaking, the FAA is developing an NPRM. We believe that the CAPA
comments are more applicable to this effort than to RVSM rulemaking.
ICAO Annex 6 (Operation of Aircraft).
In November 1998, Annex 6 Part 1 (International Commercial
Transport Airplanes) was amended to require TCAS equipage by January 1,
2003 for aircraft in excess of 15,000 kg (33,000 pounds) takeoff weight
or authorized to carry more than 30 passengers. By January 1, 2005,
aircraft in excess of 5,700 kg (12,500 pounds) take off weight or
authorized to carry more than 19 passengers will be required to be TCAS
equipped. In addition, Annex 6 Part II (International General Aviation
Airplanes) has been amended to require IGA aircraft eqipage with a
pressure altitude reporting transponder by January 1, 2003. This
amendment was made to enhance the effectiveness of TCAS operations.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting and recording keeping requirements associated with
this rule remain the same as under current rules and have previously
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)),
and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0026. There are no new
requirements for information collection associated with this amendment.
International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices (SARP) to the maximum extent practicable. The
operator and aircraft approval process was developed jointly by the FAA
and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) under the auspices of NATSPG.
The FAA has determined that this amendment does not present any
differences.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the
economic effect of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, OMB
directs agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on
international trade. And 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 private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation).
In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
rule: (1) Generates benefits that justify its costs and is not ``a
significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Executive Order; (2)
is not significant as defined in the Department of Transportation's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (3) does not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities; and 94) does not
constitute a barrier to international trade. These analyses, available
in the docket, are summarized below.
This rule amends 14 CFR 91, Appendix G, Section 8 (Airspace
Designation) by adding the New York FIR portion of the WATRS airspace
to the list of airspace where RVSM would be implemented. It also amends
section 2 (Aircraft Approval) by adding a new paragraph that requires
any aircraft that are equipped with TCAS II to use Version 7.0, which
is RVSM compatible.
This rule will provide operators the following benefits: (1) Permit
more operations at fuel/time efficient tracks and altitudes, thereby
providing fuel savings, (2) increase the number of available flight
levels, and (3) enhance airspace capacity.
In addition to operator fuel savings, many non-quantifiable or
value-added benefits will result from the implementation of RVSM in
WATRS. Input from air traffic managers, controllers, and operators has
identified numerous additional benefits.
These benefits include:
Enhanced capacity.
Reduced airspace complexity.
Decreased operational errors in these regions.
Reduction of user-requested off course climbs for,
altitude changes.
Improved flexibility for peak traffic demands.
More options in deviating aircraft during periods of
adverse weather.
The operational benefits realized in the NAT and PAC regions are
anticipated in WATRS as well.
Specific benefits cited by aircraft operators are:
Decreased flight delays.
Improved access to desired flight levels.
Reduced average flight times.
Increased availability of step climbs.
[[Page 63894]]
Increased likelihood of receiving a clearance for weather
deviations.
Seamless, transparent, and harmonious operations between
the NAT and WATRS regions.
Consistent procedural environment throughout the entire
flight.
Reduced impact of adverse weather by permitting aircraft
deviations to other airways without any efficiency loss.
Implementing RVSM in WATRS should increase user satisfaction. The
benefits described in this section are compelling in number and
operational impact. These benefits are alos significant in that both
air traffic service providers and aircraft operators will enjoy them.
Most of the costs of this rule will be incurred by those operators
who choose to participate in WATRS RVSM and, therefore, must upgrade
various equipment and altimetry systems to meet requirements. The
quantifiable benefits of the rule result from fuel savings to
participating operators who may operate at more fuel-efficient
altitudes. Significant non-quantifiable benefits are also associated
with the rule as previously discussed.
The FAA assumed for the purpose of this analysis that all existing
operators in the area would become WATRS RVSM participants. Based on
that assumption, the agency's final quantified estimates of the costs
and benefits are nearly equal. For the period 2001-2015, estimated
undiscounted benefits in fuel savings are $34.2 million, while
undiscounted costs are $26.2 million. Discounted benefits, however, are
$18.4 million while discounted costs equal $23.4 million. Discounted
benefits fall below discounted estimated costs because costs are
incurred early in the 15-year analysis period and benefits are
distributed more evenly throughout the period.
Although the FAA's quantified estimates of costs and benefits are
nearly equal, there are substantial non-quantifiable benefits. Each
operator will be free, under this rule, to decide for itself if the
benefits to that operator justify the costs to that operator. As stated
previously, participating in WATRS RVSM is entirely voluntary.
Operators who choose not to participate will still be able to fly above
or beneath WATRS RVSM airspace.
The FAA believes that many operators will decide that benefits
justify costs and participate in WATRS RVSM. This belief is
strengthened by the widespread acceptance of similar RVSM programs
recently implemented in the North Atlantic and Pacific regions, and
further reinforced by the fact that no comments on the NPRM opposed the
rule on economic grounds.
TCAS II Version 7.0 is mandated for any operator who uses TCAS II.
There is no economic impact to operators upgrading to TCAS II Version
7.0 due to their upgrading for other international requirements.
Final 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 regulations.''
To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rational 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 significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, then
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.
Operators that met the Small Business Administration (SBA) small
entity criteria were extracted from the 44-day traffic sample of ETMS
data. These operators were cross-referenced with the Central Monitoring
Agency (CMA) and the Asia Pacific Approvals and Monitoring Organization
(APARMO) databases to determine if they operated any RVSM-approved
aircraft. The small entity operators with RVSM-approved aircraft were
not considered further in this impact determination.
The list of potential small entity operators, taken from the
traffic sample, was used to identify six operators currently reporting
financial data to the FAA Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Revenue
information for these small entities for year 1999 was obtained from
the Air Carrier Financial Statistics Quarterly. The operators were then
ranked with respect to their total operating revenue.
The annualized cost of compliance is less than one-half of one
percent of annual operating revenues for all but one small entity
operator. The FAA does not consider one operator being significantly
impacted by this rule to be a substantial number of small operators
being significantly impacted. Moreover, the FAA does not mandate these
costs. Only operators who choose to participate in the RVSM program and
WATRS will incur costs. The FAA therefore certifies that this rule does
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
International Trade Impact Statement
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary
obstacles. The statue 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 rule and has determined that it will impose
the same costs on domestic and international entities and thus has a
neutral trade impact.
Federalism Implications
The regulations proposed herein will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive order 12612, it is determined that this rule
will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism assessment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act),
codified as 2 U.S.C. 1501 1571, requires each Federal agency, to the
extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment of the effects
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule 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. Section 204(a) of
the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to develop an
effective process to permit timely input by
[[Page 63895]]
elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal
governments on a proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A
``significant intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any
provision in a Federal agency regulation that would impose an
enforceable duty upon state, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in
any one year. Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements
section 204(a), provides that before establishing any regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, the agency shall have developed a plan that, among other
things, provides for notice to potentially affected small governments,
if any, and for a meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in
the development of regulatory proposals.
This rule does not contain a Federal intergovernmental and private
sector mandate that exceeds $100 million a year, therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do
not apply.
Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA actions that may be categorically
excluded from preparation of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. In
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this
rule qualifies for a categorical exclusion.
Energy Impact
The energy impact of the notice has been assessed in accordance
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) and P. L. 94-163, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. It has been determined
that the final rule is not a major regulatory action under the
provisions of the EPCA.
Immediate Adoption
Expansion of RVSM into WATRS is part of an internationally
coordinated plan to expand RVSM in the ICAO North Atlantic Region.
Operators have already committed financial and engineering resources
and obtained RVSM approval. Because of the efficiencies that RVSM will
bring to operations in this area, good cause exists for making this
rule effective on publication.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends part 91 of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations
as follows:
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111,
44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306,
46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531.
2. In Appendix G, amend section 2 by revising paragraph (g), and
adding a new paragraph (h), and in section 8 add a new paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
Appendix G to Part 91--Operations in Reduced Vertical Separation
Minimum (RVSM) Airspace
* * * * *
Section 2. Aircraft Approval
* * * * *
(g) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Compatibility With RVSM Operations: All aircraft. After March 31,
2002, unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, if you
operate an aircraft that is equipped with TCAS II in RVSM airspace,
it must be a TCAS II that meets TSO C-119b (Version 7.0), or a later
version.
(h) If the Administrator finds that the applicant's aircraft
comply with this section, the Administrator notifies the applicant
in writing.
* * * * *
Section 8. Airspace Designation
* * * * *
(c) RVSM in the West Atlantic Route System (WATRS). RVSM may be
applied in the New York FIR portion of the West Atlantic Route
System (WATRS). The area is defined as beginning at a point
38 deg.30' N/60 deg.00'W direct to 38 deg.30'N/69 deg.15' W direct
to 38 deg.20' N/69 deg.57' W direct to 37 deg.31' N/71 deg.41' W
direct to 37 deg.13' N/72 deg.40' W direct to 35 deg.05' N/
72 deg.40' W direct to 34 deg.54' N/72 deg.57' W direct to
34 deg.29' N/73 deg.34' W direct to 34 deg.33' N/73 deg.41' W direct
to 34 deg.19' N/74 deg.02' W direct to 34 deg.14' N/73 deg.57' W
direct to 32 deg.12' N/76 deg.49' W direct to 32 deg.20' N/
77 deg.00' W direct to 28 deg.08' N/77 deg.00' W direct to
27 deg.50' N/76 deg.32' W direct to 27 deg.50' N/74 deg.50' W direct
to 25 deg.00' N/73 deg.21' W direct to 25 deg.00'05" N/69 deg.13'06"
W direct to 25 deg.00' N/69 deg.07' W direct to 23 deg.30' N/
68 deg.40' W direct to 23 deg.30' N/60 deg.00' W to the point of
beginning.
Issued in Washington, DC on December 4, 2001.
Jane F. Garvey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-30358 Filed 12-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M