Helicopter Air Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter, and Part 91 Helicopter Operations
Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. |
Final rule.
CFR Part: "14 CFR Parts 91, 120, and 135"
RIN Number: "RIN 2120-AJ53"
Citation: "79 FR 9932"
Document Number: "Docket No.:
"Rules and Regulations"
SUMMARY: This final rule addresses helicopter air ambulance, commercial helicopter, and general aviation helicopter operations. To address an increase in fatal helicopter air ambulance accidents, the
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in SUBSEC 135.168 and 135.605 is approved by the Director of the
ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking documents and other information related to this final rule, see "How to Obtain Additional Information" in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions about this action contact
For legal questions about this action contact
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C.). This rulemaking is promulgated under the general authority described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a), and the specific authority set forth in section 306 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95), which is now codified at 49 U.S.C. 44730.
Specifically, 49 U.S.C. 44730 requires that part 135 certificate holders providing air ambulance services comply with part 135 regulations pertaining to weather minimums and flight and duty time when medical personnel are onboard the aircraft. The statute also directs the
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in This Document
AC--Advisory Circular
ARC--Aviation Rulemaking Committee
AWOS--Automated Weather Observation System
CFIT--Controlled Flight into Terrain
CVR--Cockpit Voice Recorder
ELT--Emergency Locator Transmitter
EMS--Emergency Medical Service
FDR--Flight Data Recorder
FDMS--Flight Data Monitoring System
FOQA--Flight Operational Quality Assurance
GPS--Global Positioning System
HEMS--
HTAWS--Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning System
ICAO--
IFR--Instrument Flight Rules
IMC--Instrument Meteorological Conditions
LARS--Light-weight Aircraft Recording System
MHz--Megahertz
MEL--Minimum Equipment List
MOU--Memorandum of Understanding
NM--Nautical Mile
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB--
NVG--Night Vision Goggles
NVIS--Night-Vision Imaging System
OCC--
OCS--Operations Control Specialist
OpSpec--Operations Specification
PinS--Point-in-Space Approach
PV--Present Value
SAFO--Safety Alert for Operators
TAWS--Terrain Avoidance and Warning System
TSO--Technical Standard Order
VFR--Visual Flight Rules
VMC--Visual Meteorological Conditions
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
B. Related Actions
C. NTSB Recommendations
D. Congressional Action
E. Summary of the NPRM
F. General Overview of Comments
III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
A. Weather Minimums for Helicopters Flying Under Visual Flight Rules in Class G Airspace (
B. Load Manifest Requirement for All Aircraft Operating Under Part 135 (
C. Rules Applicable to All Part 135 Helicopter Operations
1. Radio Altimeter (
2. Safety Equipment for Overwater Operations (SUBSEC 1.1, 135.117, 135.167, and 135.168)
3. Pilot Testing for Recovery From IIMC, Whiteout, Brownout, and Flat-Light Conditions (
4. IFR Alternate Airport Weather Minimums (
D. Rules Applicable to Helicopter Air Ambulance Operations
1. Applicability of Part 135 Rules to Helicopter Air Ambulance Operations (SUBSEC 135.1, 135.267, 135.271, 135.601)
2. Weather Minimums (
3. IFR Operations at Airports Without Weather Reporting (
4. Approach/Departure IFR Transitions (
5. VFR Flight Planning (
6. Pre-Flight Risk Analysis (
7. Operations Control Centers (SUBSEC 135.619, 120.105, and 120.215)
8. Briefing of Medical Personnel (SUBSEC 135.117, 135.621)
9. Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (HTAWS) (
10. Flight Data Monitoring System (
11. Pilot Instrument Ratings (
E. General Comments
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analysis
A. Regulatory Evaluation
B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
D. International Trade Impact Assessment
E. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. International Compatibility
H. Environmental Analysis
I.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Table 1 Affected Entities
Table 2 Comparison of Benefits and Costs Over 10 Years by Population
Table 3 Costs Over 10 Years by Rule Provision
Table 4 VFR Minimum Altitudes and Visibility Requirements
Table 5 SBA Size Standards
Table 6 Cost and Present Value (PV) Costs for Small Air Ambulance Operators That Apply to the Paperwork Provision
I. Executive Summary
The provisions of this rule are directed primarily toward helicopter air ambulance operations and all commercial helicopter operations conducted under part 135. This rule also establishes new weather minimums for helicopters operating under part 91 in Class G airspace.
For helicopter air ambulances, this rule requires operations with medical personnel on board to be conducted under part 135 operating rules and introduces new weather minimums and visibility requirements for part 135 operations. It mandates flight planning, preflight risk analyses, safety briefings for medical personnel, and the establishment of operations control centers (OCC) for certain operators to help with risk management and flight monitoring. The rule also includes provisions to encourage instrument flight rules (IFR) operations. It requires helicopter air ambulances to be equipped with both helicopter terrain awareness and warning systems (HTAWS) (the HTAWS will warn pilots about obstacles in their flight path), and flight data monitoring systems. Finally, helicopter air ambulance pilots will be required to hold instrument ratings.
For all helicopters operated under part 135, these rules require that operators carry more survival equipment for operations over water. Alternate airports named in flight plans must have higher weather minimums than are currently required. These helicopters must be equipped with radio altimeters and pilots must be able to demonstrate that they can maneuver the aircraft during an inadvertent encounter with instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) to get out of those conditions safely.
Additionally, this rule contains a provision affecting part 91 helicopter operations. The rule assigns new weather minimums to part 91 helicopter operations in Class G airspace.
Below, Table 1 shows those affected by today's new rules and how existing rules are being changed; Table 2 shows the costs and benefits of the rule by affected population; and Table 3 shows the cost of the rule by rule provision.
Table 1--Affected Entities Affected entities Requirements established by this rule Part 91--All Helicopter Revises S. 91.155 Class G airspace weather Operators minimums for part 91 helicopter operations. This rule provides a greater margin of safety for operators because pilots are required to maintain a fixed amount of visibility and would be less likely to suddenly encounter instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). Part 135--All Rotorcraft . Requires each rotorcraft to be equipped with a Operators radio altimeter ( S. 135.160). Radio altimeters can greatly improve a pilot's awareness of height above the ground during hover, landing in unimproved landing zones, and landings in confined areas where a more vertical approach may be required. Additionally, radio altimeters help increase situational awareness during inadvertent flight into instrument meteorological conditions (IIMC), night operations, and flat-light, whiteout, and brownout conditions. . Adds S. 135.168 equipment requirements for rotorcraft operated over water. Helicopter operations conducted over water will be required to carry additional safety equipment to assist passengers and crew in the event an accident occurs over water. . Revises alternate airport weather minimums for rotorcraft in S. 135.221. This rule improves the likelihood of being able to land at the alternate airport if weather conditions in the area deteriorate while the helicopter is en route. . Revises S. 135.293 to require pilot testing of rotorcraft handling in flat-light, whiteout, and brownout conditions and demonstration of competency in recovery from an IIMC. This rule improves safety by increasing a pilot's likelihood of escaping and handling IIMC and other hazards. Part 135--Helicopter Air . Requires helicopter air ambulance flights with Ambulance Operators. medical personnel on board to be conducted under part 135 ( SS 135.1, 135.601). The safety of helicopter air ambulance flights, including the welfare of the medical personnel and patients on board, will be increased when complying with the more stringent part 135 rules rather than part 91 rules. . Requires certificate holders with 10 or more helicopter air ambulances to establish operations control centers (OCC) ( S. 135.619) and requires drug and alcohol testing for operations control specialists ( SS 120.105 and 120.215). OCC personnel will communicate with pilots, provide weather information, monitor flights and assist with preflight risk assessments providing an additional measure of safety for complex operations. Operations control specialists perform safety-sensitive functions, similar to an aircraft dispatcher, and therefore must be subject to the restrictions on drug and alcohol use. . Requires helicopter air ambulances to be equipped with HTAWS ( S. 135.605). HTAWS will assist helicopter air ambulance pilots in maintaining situational awareness of surrounding terrain and obstacles, and therefore help prevent accidents. . Requires helicopter air ambulances to be equipped with a flight data monitoring system ( S. 135.607). This will promote operational safety and can provide critical information to investigators in the event of an accident. . Requires each helicopter air ambulance operator to establish and document, in its operations manual, anFAA -approved preflight risk analysis ( S. 135.617). A preflight risk analysis provides certificate holders with the means to assess and mitigate risk, and make determinations regarding the flight's safety before launch. . Requires pilots to identify and document the highest obstacle along the planned route ( S. 135.615). This rule will prevent obstacle collisions by requiring pilots to be aware of the terrain and obstacles along their route. . Requires safety briefings or training for helicopter air ambulance medical personnel ( S. 135.621). Medical personnel will be less likely to inadvertently introduce risk to an operation because of increased familiarity with the aircraft and emergency procedures. . Establishes visual flight rules (VFR) weather minimums for helicopter air ambulance operations ( S. 135.609). More stringent VFR weather minimums for helicopter air ambulances operations in uncontrolled airspace will have the effect of ensuring that these operations are not conducted in marginal weather conditions. . Permits instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at airports without weather reporting ( S. 135.611). This rule is intended to facilitate IFR operations by helicopter air ambulance operators and result in more aircraft operating in a positively controlled environment, thereby increasing safety. . Establishes procedures for transitioning between IFR and VFR on approach to, and departure from, heliports or landing areas ( S. 135.613). This rule benefits pilots by enabling them to access more destinations by flying within the IFR structure and its associated safety benefits. . Requires pilots in command to hold an instrument rating ( S. 135.603). Having the skills to navigate by instruments will assist helicopter air ambulance pilots to extract themselves from dangerous situations such as inadvertent flight into IMC.
See Illustration in Original Document.
II. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
Helicopter air ambulance accidents reached historic levels during the years from 2003 through 2008. /1/ The year 2008 was the deadliest. In 2008, five air ambulance accidents killed 21 people, including pilots, patients, and medical personnel. This rule addresses the causes of 62 helicopter air ambulance accidents that occurred during the period from 1991 through 2010. One hundred twenty-five people died in those accidents. The
FOOTNOTE 1 GAO, Aviation Safety: Potential Strategies to Address Air Ambulance Safety Concerns (2009). END FOOTNOTE
Helicopter air ambulances operate under unique conditions. Their flights are often time sensitive, which puts pressure on the pilots. Helicopter air ambulances fly at low altitudes and under varied weather conditions. They must often land at unfamiliar, remote, or unimproved sites with hazards like trees, buildings, towers, wires, and uneven terrain. In an emergency, many patients will not have a choice of whether they want to be transported in a helicopter or not. They may be in a medical condition that prevents them from making decisions about transportation or indicating what they want. They cannot choose between competing carriers because the company that responds to the scene may be either the first one called or the only one in the area. For these reasons, the
The FAA also identified an increase in accidents in other commercial helicopter operations. This rule addresses the causes of 20 commercial helicopter accidents that occurred from 1991 through 2010. Thirty-nine people died in those accidents. Also from 1991 to 2010, there were 49 accidents that occurred while the helicopter was operating under basic VFR weather minimums and those accidents caused 63 fatalities. The
FOOTNOTE 2 Flat light is the diffused lighting that occurs under cloudy skies, especially when the ground is snow-covered, greatly impairing the pilot's ability to perceive depth, distance, altitude, or topographical features when operating under VFR. See NTSB Safety Recommendation A-02-33. Whiteout occurs when parallel rays of the sun are broken up and diffused when passing through the cloud layer so that they strike a snow-covered surface from many angles. The diffused light then reflects back and forth countless times between the snow and the cloud, eliminating all shadows, resulting in loss of depth perception. See FAA AC 00-6A, Aviation Weather for Pilots and Flight Operations Personnel. Brownout conditions occur when sand or other particles restrict visibility and depth perception. END FOOTNOTE
In addition to addressing the causal factors of these accidents, this rule also addresses
B. Related Actions
The FAA has taken actions to address the problem of helicopter accidents, such as developing standards and issuing guidance, which were discussed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (published
ARC Recommendations
On
C. NTSB Recommendations for Helicopter Operations
Many of the requirements in this rule were developed, in part, in response to safety recommendations from the NTSB. The following is a list of those recommendations, what they required, and how they relate to the rules being codified today.
Recommendations on Helicopter Air Ambulance Operations
A-06-12--Recommends that the
A-06-13--Recommends that the
A-06-14--Recommends that the
A-06-15--Recommends that the
A-09-87--Recommends that the
A-09-89--Recommends that the
A-09-90--Recommends that the
Recommendations for Commercial Helicopter Operations
A-02-33--Recommends that the
A-02-34--Recommends that the
A-02-35--Recommends that the
A-06-17--Recommends that the
A-07-87--Recommends that the
A-07-88--Recommends that the
A-99-61--Recommends that the
D. Congressional Action
On
The FAA is also directed to conduct a subsequent rulemaking addressing pilot training standards, and the use of safety equipment that should be worn or used by flight crewmembers and medical personnel on helicopter air ambulance flights.
Section 318 of the Act requires the
E. Summary of the NPRM
An NPRM was published in the
* Revised weather minimums for all helicopter operations under part 91.
* New load manifest requirements for all aircraft operations under part 135.
* New operations, training, and equipment requirements for all helicopter operations under part 135.
* New operations, training, equipment, and flightcrew requirements for helicopter air ambulance operations under part 135.
The comment period for that NPRM closed on
F. General Overview of Comments
The FAA received 179 comments about the proposal for this rulemaking. Among those commenting were 32 operators, 11 manufacturers, and 13 associations. Almost all of the commenters expressed support for the intent of the proposal but many suggested changes to individual requirements. Almost all of the provisions of the rule received some comment.
III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
This final rule affects three categories of operators--part 91 helicopter operators, part 135 helicopter operators, and helicopter air ambulance operators in part 135. Although addressed in the NPRM, the final rule does not contain a load manifest requirement for all aircraft operations under part 135. Following is a discussion of the current standards, each new rule as it was proposed, the public comments that were received about that rule, and the final rule as it is adopted today.
A. Weather Minimums for Helicopters Flying Under Visual Flight Rules in Class G Airspace (
Currently, helicopters operating in Class G airspace, under VFR and less than 1,200 feet above the surface, are required by
Accident Analysis
The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) commented that the
Air Shasta Rotor and Wing, LLC (Air Shasta) commented that in a review of the last 5 years of NTSB non-EMS part 91 helicopter accident data, it was "unable to find a particular accident that could have been avoided if the pilot did not have the proposed requirement" of 1/2 mile visibility and clear of clouds. Likewise,
The FAA acknowledges that the NPRM did not contain accident data relating to this proposed change. However, in response to these comments, the
Operational Limitations
Several commenters expressed concern that the proposed change would prevent operations that are currently being conducted safely. EAA stated that
Commenters from EGLI Air Haul also believe that part 91 should remain unchanged so that the pilot can decide whether visibility is adequate. In support of leaving the regulation unchanged, they cited an instance when an
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's department wrote that public safety agencies must be able to make "go/no go" decisions based on the higher experience level of their pilots and knowledge of the local flying areas. The commenter stated that weather restrictions would limit its ability to perform numerous search and rescue missions. Air Shasta also stated that a "detrimental consequence of these proposed limitations would be cancelling or delaying of search and rescue missions" it occasionally performs.
Westlog stated that the current requirement is safe for helicopters operating clear of clouds because they can stop and land at zero airspeed and commented that this helicopter operation is safer than an airplane operating clear of clouds at night with one mile of visibility when within 1/2 mile of the runway under
One commenter, Safety and Flight Evaluations, International stated that the proposed rule would have an insufficient impact on safety because the proposed weather minimums are equivalent to
The FAA has determined that the change proposed in the NPRM is warranted. As discussed above, the
FOOTNOTE 3 See 14 CFR 1.1. END FOOTNOTE
The FAA recognizes that this change will prohibit operations that are currently conducted in very low visibility conditions in Class G airspace, including civil and public aircraft operations. However, the
In response to the comment by Safety and Flight Evaluations, International that the visibility requirements should be doubled, implementing more restrictive visibility minimums than those proposed would be outside of the scope of the proposed rule.
Final Rule
Based on the comments received and an additional review of the NPRM, the
B. Load Manifest Requirement for All Aircraft Operating Under Part 135 (
Currently,
In the NPRM, the
The FAA estimated this provision would impose costs of
The NTSB supported this revision and commented that it responds to NTSB Safety Recommendation A-99-61.
Based on the comments received and additional review of the NPRM, the
The FAA notes that other regulations currently in place require pilots to comply with the operating limitations of the aircraft and to be familiar with all information concerning a flight, which would include the type of information included on a load manifest. See SUBSEC 91.9(a) and 91.103. Additionally, the
C. Rules Applicable to All Part 135 Helicopter Operations
1. Radio Altimeters (
The FAA proposed a new requirement for all rotorcraft operated under part 135 to be equipped with a radio altimeter. Commenters, including AAMS and various
Other commenters, however, objected to this provision on grounds that radio altimeters are not effective in all situations, that the rule would not be cost beneficial, and that not all helicopters can incorporate radio altimeters. These comments are discussed in detail below.
EffectivenessPHI claimed radio altimeters have minimal impact on pilots flying by visual reference in daytime and that the accident record shows that radio altimeters have not prevented controlled-flight-into-terrain accidents. NorthStar Trekking, an Alaskan operator, commented that radio altimeters are unreliable, give erroneous information over snow-covered surfaces, and realistically create nothing more than a distraction in a day VFR environment. One commenter stated that TAWS is a better investment because radio altimeters "tell distance to where the aircraft has already been not where it's going to impact."
Finally, FreeFlight Systems, an avionics manufacturer, commented that the radio altimeter should have the "performance guarantees of [Technical Standard Order] TSO-C87 and be designated in accordance with DO-178B and DO-254 with at least a Level C design assurance." It further stated that some radio altimeters with "only a PMA--lacking a TSO" are less accurate at low altitudes which could impact the ability to gauge altitude in critical conditions.
The FAA determined that radio altimeters are an important safety device designed to inform the pilot of the aircraft's actual height above the surface. Although it is true that a radio altimeter may have minimal impact on daytime visual reference flight, this device gives pilots an additional tool to maintain situational awareness in an inadvertent encounter with IMC, where vision is suddenly limited due to brownout or whiteout, or other situations where pilots lose their reference to the horizon and the ground. Additionally, as stated in the NPRM, a radio altimeter can aid a pilot's awareness of height above the ground during hover, when landing in unimproved landing zones, or where a more vertical approach is required. All of these scenarios can occur during the day.
In response to the comments that a radio altimeter may not prevent a controlled-flight-into-terrain accident, as discussed in the NPRM, NTSB safety recommendation A-02-35 noted that radio altimeters might aid pilots in recognizing proximity to the ground in flat-light and whiteout conditions. Additionally, the
In response to NorthStar Trekking, the
In response to the comment that this device only tells where the aircraft has been, meaning that it cannot detect obstacles in the flight path, a descending altitude read-out on the radio altimeter could alert a pilot to rising terrain or decreasing altitude over level terrain. Accordingly, although the radio altimeter does not reveal obstacles in the flight path, it does provide valuable information to maintain situational awareness. The
Finally, the
Cost
NorthStar Trekking commented that contrary to the
Westlog claimed that requiring a non-air ambulance operator to have a radio altimeter installed is simply too onerous with very little documented benefit. Westlog based this comment on its review of NTSB accident data for the non-air ambulance part 135 helicopter industry. It noted that the only non-air ambulance accident cited in the NPRM occurred in
With respect to the comment on the cost of a radio altimeter, in the initial regulatory evaluation, the
Need for Flexibility
Westlog and Air Shasta expressed concern that their helicopters cannot accommodate additional equipment. Both commenters said that if they are forced to install a radio altimeter, they would have to remove vital equipment, such as the artificial horizon, because there is no room to fit anything more on the instrument panel. Several commenters, including REACH, supported the rule, provided they were able to continue operation without a radio altimeter within a limited period and with acceptable alternative procedures as prescribed under minimum equipment lists (MELs).
The final rule states that an operator must have an "
Finally, the
Compliance Date
The FAA asked for comments on the proposed 3-year compliance period for the radio altimeter provision. The NTSB responded that the compliance period for this requirement should be reduced to 1 year because radio altimeters are readily available for helicopter installation. FreeFlight Systems encouraged adoption as soon as possible, but commented that a 3-year time frame "seems reasonable since affordable, light-weight equipment is already available." The
The FAA is implementing the 3-year compliance period proposed in the NPRM. We have determined, based on the comments, that part 135 helicopter operators will be able to comply with the rule in that time period. The
Requirement for Helicopter Air Ambulances To Be Equipped With Radio Altimeters and HTAWS
The FAA proposed that helicopters used in air ambulance operations be equipped with both a radio altimeter and an HTAWS unit and asked for comments on the safety benefits of installing both devices. The
We reiterate the statements in the NPRM that an HTAWS that incorporates or works in conjunction with a radio altimeter function would meet the requirements of
The rule is adopted as proposed. /4/
FOOTNOTE 4 Section 306(c)(3) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
2. Safety Equipment for Overwater Operations (SUBSEC 1.1, 135.117, 135.167, and 135.168)
Currently, aircraft operating in extended overwater operations must comply with the equipment requirements in
In the NPRM, the requirements for helicopter overwater operations were contained in a new section,
Primarily, the
The FAA is also not implementing the proposed revision to the definition of "extended over-water operation" in
Additionally, the final rule does not adopt the changes proposed to
Nevertheless, as discussed below, the
The FAA is not adopting the proposed pyrotechnic signaling device requirement because
406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitters
This final rule requires that each helicopter have an approved emergency locator transmitter (ELT)--ELT 406/121.5MHz. The NPRM proposed a TSO-C126a approved 406 MHz ELT that only needed to be carried on the rafts. The final rule language has been changed to require that single and multiengine helicopters, not the raft, be equipped with an ELT. This will ensure that all helicopters that conduct operations beyond autorotational distance from the shoreline will have the added safety benefit of a rescue locating and signaling device. This final rule requires an ELT that transmits on the 406 MHz frequency but also includes a low-power 121.5 MHz homing device. The 121.5 MHz frequency remains allocated to aviation emergencies and continues to be monitored by air traffic control, flight service stations, other emergency organizations, and aircraft. We also note that since publication of the NPRM the
Operators required to comply with this rule can find ELT minimum performance standards in FAA TSO-C126b "406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitter," dated
RTCA DO-204 and DO-204a include minimum performance standards for both 406 and 121.5 MHz ELTs. When beneficial to the operator, the
Life Preservers
In the NPRM, the
PHI asked the
Many commenters recommended that the
The FAA agrees with commenters that passengers should be able to don life preservers only for the overwater portion of the flight. After reviewing the proposal, the
Applicability
As proposed in the NPRM and adopted in this final rule,
Final Rule
Based on the comments received and additional review of the NPRM, the
The final rule requires helicopters to be equipped with a 406 MHz ELT and occupants to wear life preservers on helicopter flights operated beyond autorotational distance from shoreline.
The FAA also notes that passenger briefing requirements proposed in the NPRM as
These changes will take effect 3 years after this rule's publication.
3. Pilot Testing for Recovery From IIMC, Whiteout, Brownout, and Flat-Light Conditions (
The FAA proposed adding new requirements to
Some commenters stated that the testing requirements should be tailored to the certificate holder's operating environment. NorthStar Trekking, an Alaskan operator, noted that it trains its pilots for flat-light and whiteout conditions, but not for brownout conditions.
PHI also stated that this regulation would be redundant with
LifeFlight of
AAMS, AMOA, and Air EVAC EMS commented that pilots should be able to use simulators and flight training devices to complete this training. The NTSB also supported increased use of simulators for helicopter pilot training.
The FAA finds that helicopter pilots would benefit from annual testing on all three conditions--whiteout, flat light, and brownout. Although some conditions may be more prevalent in certain areas, such as whiteout conditions in
This new requirement does not duplicate the crewmember training requirements of
We note that the IMC recovery portion of the competency check could be performed in a simulator or flight training device, provided that it is consistent with that device's specific approval.
Final Rule
This rule is adopted as proposed and will take effect 60 days after publication of the final rule. /5/ Section 135.293 requires individuals to complete testing in the 12 calendar months prior to serving as a pilot in part 135 operation. The
FOOTNOTE 5 Section 306(c)(2) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
4. IFR Alternate Airport Weather Minimums (
Current rules, as provided for in
Kestrel Air commented that the
Safety and Flight Evaluations, International agreed that increased weather minimums would increase the likelihood of being able to land at the alternate if weather deteriorates. However, it also stated that because it is often more difficult for a helicopter to fly out of a weather system to an alternate airport, as noted in the NPRM, that "there is little likelihood that an alternate airfield exists that would have significantly different weather conditions than at the primary airfield." Accordingly, Safety and Flight Evaluations, International stated that the rule would discourage pilots from flying IFR.
Kestrel Air is correct that the
This rule is adopted as proposed.
D. Rules Applicable to Helicopter Air Ambulance Operations
This final rule establishes several new requirements for certificate holders conducting helicopter air ambulance operations. It changes the applicability section of part 135 (
1. Applicability of Part 135 Rules to Helicopter Air Ambulance Operations (SUBSEC 135.1, 135.267, 135.271, 135.601)
The FAA proposed requiring that all helicopter air ambulance operations with medical personnel on board be conducted under part 135 operating rules. Flights to pick up a patient, the patient transport leg, and the flight returning to base after the patient is dropped off, or other flights with a patient or medical personnel on board would be conducted under part 135. The
Definition of Medical Personnel
The NPRM defined "medical personnel" as "persons with medical training, including, but not limited to a flight physician, a flight nurse, or a flight paramedic, who are carried aboard a helicopter during helicopter air ambulance operations in order to provide medical care." With this rule, any flights for medical transportation that carry a patient or medical personnel must now be conducted under part 135 rules.
NEMSPA suggested a change in the definition of medical personnel to "medical personnel means persons approved by State or Federal EMS regulations who are carried aboard a helicopter during helicopter air ambulance operations in order to provide onboard medical care." AMOA requested a change in the proposed definition of medical personnel to "persons who are carried aboard a helicopter during helicopter air ambulance operations in order to provide onboard medical care" because the rule would limit the types of medical professionals often transported and could confuse the rule.
The FAA clarifies that this definition is intended to be applied broadly to individuals who might be carried aboard to provide care. Requiring medical personnel to be approved under State or Federal EMS regulations may result in preventing people currently performing these functions from performing them any longer, because they may be licensed medical professionals but not certified under state or federal EMS regulation. For example, a nurse might be certified to practice by the State board of nursing, but not under a State's EMS regulations. Limiting the definition to this certification could also have the unintentional result of allowing operators to use medical caregivers who are not specifically certified under State or Federal EMS regulations. As a result, these individuals would not be included in the definition and thus the operator could avoid the part 135 requirements.
Additionally, we note that the definition of medical personnel proposed in the NPRM referenced "persons with medical training, including but not limited to a flight physician, a flight nurse, or a flight paramedic. . . ." (See 75 FR 62621) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the definition does not apply to those persons only. Any person with medical training who is "carried aboard a helicopter during helicopter air ambulance operations in order to provide medical care" would fall into the definition of medical personnel. The
Accident Analysis
AMOA and PHI contended that the
The NTSB noted in its comment that, as detailed in its Special Investigation Report on Emergency Medical Services Operations, 32 of the 41 helicopter air ambulance accidents investigated by the NTSB occurred while the aircraft was operating under the flight rules specified in part 91.
The FAA acknowledges that the commenters correctly described the way accidents are categorized under the MOU. In light of the information received from the commenters, the
The FAA determined that 17 of those 33 accidents occurred while the helicopters were flying in weather minimums below those proposed and that will be required under
FOOTNOTE 6 The remaining sixteen accidents originally identified as part 91 operations were flying above the weather minimums established in this rule and are therefore no longer being used to support
Relationship Between Parts 91 and 135
AMOA,
The NTSB supported the proposal and stated that it would likely meet the intent of Safety Recommendation A-06-12. However, it also stated that the list of flights conducted under part 135 must be as complete as possible and should include maintenance flights, training flights, helicopter positioning flights performed without medical crewmembers on board, and other operations that would not be required to be conducted under part 135 under this rule.
The commenters are correct that, as discussed in the NPRM, currently non-patient-carrying legs of helicopter air ambulance operations may be conducted under part 91. The
Additionally, the
Further, the
The FAA received several comments about this rule's impact on helicopter air ambulance operations. First, AMOA, Air Evac EMS, AAMS, NEMSPA, and PHI commented on the need for flexibility from the part 135 requirements during the repositioning leg for training purposes. They have traditionally used this leg for training newly hired second pilots on instrument approach procedures and stated that they cannot do the same kind of training when operating under part 135 rules as they can when operating under part 91 rules because the pilot in training would not be able to manipulate the controls. Commenters were concerned this proposal could significantly inhibit IFR operations by helicopter air ambulance operators. Second, HAI commented that a requirement to conduct helicopter air ambulance operations under part 135 would prevent operators from using GPS approaches certified for part 91 operations.
The FAA has determined that applying part 135 rules will have only a limited effect on training. Operators may continue training pilots on instrument approaches during flights with no passengers, medical personnel, or patients on board. The
The FAA finds HAI's concern about limitations on GPS approaches to be unwarranted. All instrument approaches are designed and certified to part 97 Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) requirements. Use of these approaches is not restricted to flights conducted under certain operating rules. They can be used by an operator conducting flights under part 91, 121, or 135.
The NTSB also stated that although part 91 may provide additional "operational flexibilities due to decreased visual flight rules (VFR) weather minimums and no flight crew rest requirements" it believes that these benefits "are greatly overshadowed by the increased risk that such operations have historically posed."
Additionally, the
Air Methods commented that operators should follow the weather minimums specified in A021, which are more stringent than the baseline part 135 weather minimums. The
Flight and Duty Time Limitations (Proposed SUBSEC 135.267 and 135.271)
As discussed in the NPRM, one impact of requiring flights traditionally conducted under part 91 to be conducted under part 135 is that these flights will now count toward a pilot's flight time limitations. In the NPRM, the
Members of
PHI, AMOA, and Air Evac EMS commented that the current flight time and duty limitations in
PHI also commented that there currently are no part 135 regulations that prevent a pilot from flying while fatigued. The commenter said that the pertinent regulation resides in part 91, part 135 operators must comply with part 91, and that current rest and duty requirements do not guarantee that a pilot will not be fatigued, even if complying with the regulations. Air Evac EMS commented that SUBSEC 91.13 and 135.69(a) afford sufficient protection and claimed that the best measure against pilot fatigue is the pilot knowing when to decline a flight request and appropriate oversight.
AMOA and
PHI and numerous other commenters requested flexibility for pilot rest requirements under circumstances beyond the control of the pilot or operator.
The FAA did not propose any substantive changes to SUBSEC 135.267 and 135.271 flight time and rest requirements but instead added language to those sections to clarify "flight time" as a term that includes any helicopter air ambulance operation as defined in
In the final rule, the
The FAA also notes that it received several comments about whether circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder would permit exceeding the flight time limitations in
Final Rule
Upon review of the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 7 Section 306(a) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires helicopter air ambulance operations to comply with part 135 weather minimums and flight and duty time rules whenever medical personnel are onboard the aircraft. END FOOTNOTE
2. Weather Minimums (
Currently, part 135 regulations require visibility of at least 1/2 statute mile during the day and 1 statute mile at night for VFR helicopter operations at an altitude of 1,200 feet or less above the surface in Class G airspace. In the NPRM, the
Table 4--VFR Ceiling and Flight Visibility Requirements Day Night Night using an approved NVIS or HTAWS Location Ceiling Flight Ceiling Flight Ceiling Flight visibility visibility visibility Nonmountain 800-feet 2 statute 1,000-feet 3 statute 800-feet 3 statute ous local miles miles miles. flying areas Nonmountain 800-feet 3 statute 1,000-feet 5 statute 1,000-feet 3 statute ous non- miles miles miles. local flying areas Mountainous 800-feet 3 statute 1,500-feet 3 statute 1,000-feet 3 statute local miles miles miles. flying areas Mountainous 1,000-feet 3 statute 1,500-feet 5 statute 1,000-feet 5 statute non-local miles miles miles. flying areas
The FAA received support for this provision from several commenters. The NTSB supports codifying the more stringent weather minimums of OpSpec A021. PHI agrees with the proposal. AAMS expressed support for this provision but opposed the requirement that operators must designate a local flying area, commenting that there are some areas where using cross country weather minimums would be preferable. They recommended replacing the word "must" with "may." Similarly, AMOA, Air Evac EMS, and individual members of
Final Rule
The FAA is adopting this provision with several changes. Based on the comments received, the
As discussed in the NPRM, a pilot must demonstrate familiarity and detailed knowledge of the hazards and high altitude terrain in local flying areas in order to use the lower minimums. Thus, the final rule includes a requirement that a pilot may not use the local flying area weather minimums unless that pilot has passed an examination given by the certificate holder within the 12 months prior to using the local flying area weather minimums.
Additionally, the final rule will allow non-contiguous local flying areas rather than tying them to the certificate holder's base of operations. This rule does not restrict the number of local flying areas an operator may designate. The intended safety standard will be maintained because before using the less restrictive local flying area weather minimums pilots will demonstrate knowledge of that area. The title of this section has been changed for clarification.
3. IFR Operations at Airports Without Weather Reporting (
Current part 135 regulations only permit instrument flight into and out of airports with an on-site weather reporting source. The
The NTSB supported the proposal, agreeing that it would "provide an environment suitable for increased use of IFR," and noting that it would partially respond to Safety Recommendation A-06-93 "because of the potential increase in the availability of IFR approaches for HEMS operators."
AMOA commented that all part 135 operators should be able to use these procedures. The
Use of an Area Forecast as an Alternate Weather Source
Currently, OpSpec A021 is issued to helicopter air ambulance operators and allows the use of an area forecast as an alternate weather source.
The Society of Aviation and Flight Educators contended that this proposal would require an operator to either add an approved automated weather station at a location within 15 NM or to operate with visual flight rules. This, according to the commenter, would significantly undermine the ability of operators to add instrument operations as a safety improvement. PHI, AMOA,
The NPRM proposed a higher standard than that required by OpSpec A021. That operations specification permits an operator to use an approved weather reporting source if one is located within 15 NM of the landing area but if there is not such a source within that distance from the landing area, an area forecast may be used.
In response to comments, and upon further review, the
FOOTNOTE 8 Exemptions No. 9490 and 9490B (Regulatory Docket No.
Pilot and Equipment Requirements
The FAA also revised the rule language to eliminate several sections that were determined to be redundant with existing part 135 regulations. The redundancies removed were the requirements for pilots to: (1) Have a current
The FAA also deleted the proposed requirements for aircraft to be equipped with an autopilot if used in lieu of a second in command as required by
In response to a comment from AMOA that the references to "storm scopes" were outdated, the
Requirements for Departures
The rule requires that the weather at the departure point must be at or above the minimums for visual flight rules for a pilot to make an IFR departure. The pilot in command is authorized to determine whether the weather meets the takeoff requirements of part 97 or of the certificate holder's operation specification.
The FAA concludes that this new provision will increase instrument flight and result in more air ambulance helicopters operating in a positively controlled environment, thereby increasing safety.
4. Approach/Departure IFR Transitions (
This rule was proposed to establish weather minimums for helicopter air ambulances that have been using an instrument approach and are now transitioning to visual flight for landing. This section is intended to encourage IFR operations because of their safety benefits. Pilots on an instrument approach would, upon reaching a point in space at a minimum descent altitude or decision altitude, continue the flight to the landing area under visual flight rules if conditions permit. The weather minimums that pilots will follow are based on the type of approach the pilot is flying and the distance between the missed approach point and the heliport or landing area. Pilots continuing on the "proceed visually" segment of an instrument approach into an airport or heliport for which the approach is designed would follow the weather minimums on the approach chart when completing that approach.
The FAA notes that in most cases the rule permits flight under less restrictive weather minimums than are currently allowed for cruise flight in uncontrolled airspace. As noted in the NPRM, obstacles in the vicinity of an instrument approach are flight-checked and marked on instrument approach charts. It is less likely that pilots would encounter unexpected obstacles when following an instrument approach chart. However, if the distance of the VFR portion of the flight is 3 NM or more, then the VFR weather minimums for that class of airspace apply. We emphasize that if a 3-NM-or-more VFR segment is flown in Class G airspace, the applicable VFR weather minimums would be those found in
The rule also permits a pilot to depart with a VFR-to-IFR transition under the less restrictive weather minimums allowed for approaches if the pilot follows an
A total of 21 individuals affiliated with PHI commented on the proposal for this rule. These commenters supported the proposed rule and noted that it is consistent with current OpSpec A021 requirements. Commenters also noted that proposed
Safety and Flight Evaluations, International stated concerns with the construction of some PinS approaches. First, it noted the complexity in distinguishing between "proceed visually" and "proceed VFR," because the weather minimums on the approach charts apply to "proceed visually" segments, while the distance from the missed approach point to the landing area dictates the weather minimums. It stated that having various minimums was complex and would not encourage IFR operations. Next, it noted the possibility that a pilot could reach the missed approach point, determine that the weather meets the requirements to proceed VFR, and then lose sight of the landing area. This would leave the pilot unable to continue IFR because the pilot would no longer be in protected airspace. Finally, Safety and Flight Evaluations, International commented that ICAO has established clearer requirements for similar operations and asked whether the proposed requirements comply with ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services--Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS) definitions which limits the proceed VFR PinS procedure to no more than 3 kilometers.
As a result of this comment, the
The FAA has reviewed the ICAO PANS-OPS requirements and concludes that the ICAO operational requirements are not significantly different from this rule. In both cases, once the pilot concludes the IFR portion of the flight, the pilot is no longer under air traffic control and is operating under VFR. Further, the ICAO PANS-OPS paragraph 4.1.2.2 contemplates that member States may establish minimum visibility for PinS Proceed VFR procedures. We note that this rule does not address instrument approach design standards. These are what dictate the length of a segment between a missed approach point and a landing area. The
The title of
5. VFR Flight Planning (
In the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 9 Section 306(a) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
As proposed, the rule requires helicopter air ambulance pilots conducting VFR operations to evaluate, document, and plan to clear terrain and obstacles by no less than 300 feet for day operations, and 500 feet at night. With this minimum safe cruise altitude established, the pilot must then use it to determine the minimum required ceiling and visibility for the flight. If the weather minimum will not permit visual flight at the minimum safe cruise altitude, the pilot must conduct the flight under IFR or not fly at all. The proposed rule allowed for deviations from the planned flight path if conditions or operational considerations make it necessary. If deviating, however, the pilot must still observe the weather or terrain/obstruction clearance requirements. This rule is intended to prevent obstacle collisions by requiring pilots to be aware of the terrain and highest obstacles along a planned route.
The FAA received 79 comments on the proposal for VFR flight planning, including comments from several individuals affiliated with
NEMSPA strongly opposed the "highest obstacle determination" of the proposed rule, commenting that this requirement would have dangerous unintended consequences since pilots with launch time requirements would have up to 40 percent of their available preflight time taken up by a superfluous task, resulting in the likelihood that some critical items will not be accomplished. This commenter further asserted that the highest obstacle requirement should only apply when flying outside of the local flying area in a helicopter not equipped with a night vision imaging system or HTAWS, when the reported or forecasted weather conditions are less than 5 statute miles visibility and/or the ceiling is less than 3,000 feet above ground level or above the highest obstacle on the course.
Although agreeing with this proposal, several commenters, including AMOA, Air Evac EMS, and individual members of
The FAA has determined that establishing a minimum route width would have an overly burdensome effect on helicopter air ambulance operations and pose operational difficulties for pilots who fly in mountainous or urban environments. A minimum route width would require pilots to fly at an altitude sufficient to clear the obstacles within the designated route width. As an example, a 3-mile route width requirement could force a pilot who safely flies under visual flight rules in a valley to operate at an altitude above the highest peak because the mountains on each side would be included in the route width. This could easily place a visual flight operator into instrument flight conditions. The
This requirement is intended to prevent obstacle collisions by ensuring that pilots know the minimum safe altitude that would permit clearance for all obstacles along the route. Therefore, the
This rule requires a pilot to perform preflight planning from takeoff to landing for each flight conducted under VFR. This rule does not permit a pilot to conduct preflight planning on a less frequent basis for frequently flown routes. The purpose of flight planning before each flight is to ensure that the information used is current, as conditions and obstacles may change between each flight. However, the
The FAA will not apply this requirement to all commercial helicopter operations because it is not within the scope of the rulemaking.
This requirement is adopted as proposed with minor edits for clarification.
6. Pre-Flight Risk Analysis (
The FAA proposed establishing a requirement for helicopter air ambulance operators to conduct a preflight risk analysis. The risk analysis would focus on such variables as the characteristics of the planned flight path, flight crewmember ability to safely conduct the operation, weather, and whether the flight has been rejected by another operator. The purpose of this exercise is to give certificate holders a way to assess risk and determine whether any risks can be mitigated so that the flight can be conducted safely.
A total of 83 commenters, including
Operational Considerations
The NTSB noted that this rule should not be a substitute for the safety benefits that would be provided by an OCC. Other commenters, including HAI,
The FAA disagrees that a pilot's in-flight assessment of risks is a sufficient substitute for the preflight risk assessment. Rather, they are complementary. The purpose of assessing risk before an operation is to be able to mitigate those risks before the operation, thereby preventing a pilot from encountering an unmanageable situation while in the air. It is of course possible that a pilot will encounter risks while conducting the helicopter air ambulance operation despite having performed a preflight risk assessment, and it is then that the pilot's skills will be used to mitigate those risks. As discussed in the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 10 NTSB, Special Investigation Report on Emergency Medical Services Operations (NTSB/SIR-06/01) 4 (
This rule requires the pilot in command to conduct a preflight risk analysis before the first leg of a helicopter air ambulance operation. As discussed in the NPRM, it would be completed before departure on the first leg, but take into account factors that may be encountered during the entire operation. The
The FAA acknowledges that the pre-flight risk analysis will be an additional requirement that must be performed before beginning a helicopter air ambulance operation and certificate holders may not be able to launch a flight as quickly as before. The initial regulatory evaluation estimated that the preflight risk analysis would take 10 minutes to complete. The
The FAA also understands that there will be overlap between this requirement and the OCC requirement for certificate holders with 10 or more helicopter air ambulances. Under that requirement, both the operations control specialist and the pilot in command will be required to complete and approve the risk analysis worksheet. This overlap is intended to provide larger operations with an additional measure of review over the flight's risk analysis.
Content of the Pre-Flight Risk Analysis
Thirty-five commenters, including
The FAA has communicated with State EMS medical directors, advising them of the problem of helicopter shopping. We will continue this outreach to emphasize the importance of obtaining the reasons for flight refusal by helicopter air ambulance operators. We will also work with emergency dispatchers and certificate holders in sharing this information.
Two commenters, including the
PHI requested eliminating the requirement for the pilot's signature on the risk assessment before takeoff. Another commenter asked whether an electronic signature would be sufficient.
The rule requires operators to establish and document, and include in their
The FAA has determined that although the flight refusal or rejection information need not be definitive, it can yield useful information about the potential risk of a flight. Additionally, the
In the final rule, the
Regarding whether an electronic signature on the preflight risk assessment would be accepted, the final rule does not specify the method by which a pilot must sign a preflight risk assessment. The purpose of the risk analysis requirement is to ensure that pilots examine the risks associated with an operation and get information to mitigate those risks. The signature is important because it is the pilot's verification that the information in the risk analysis is accurate and complete. Therefore, an electronic signature would be acceptable.
Other Comments
A few commenters, including
Some commenters asked the
This requirement is based on FAA Notice 8000.301, Operational Risk Assessment Programs for
Finally, the
FOOTNOTE 11 Section 306(d)(1) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
7. Operations Control Centers (OCCs) (SUBSEC 135.619, 120.105, and 120.215)
The proposal included a new requirement that certificate holders with 10 or more helicopter air ambulances establish OCCs staffed with operations control specialists. These specialists would take part in preflight risk analysis required by
Applicability of the Rule
A number of commenters (including AMOA, NTSB, LifeFlight of
These commenters objected to applying this requirement only to operators with 10 or more helicopter air ambulances. One commenter said that fleet size has no bearing on the stated risks a pilot faces. AMOA, Air Evac EMS,
The NTSB commented that if operators with less than 10 helicopters are not included in this requirement, then they "will transport approximately 100,000 patients or more per year without the added safety benefit of an OCC." Commenters explained that while the requirement should apply to all operators, it should be scalable for those with less than 10 helicopters. Comments referenced AC 120-96, which provides guidance for setting up OCCs for four levels of operators based on size.
LifeFlight of
AAMS recommended allowing smaller operators to subcontract OCC services from larger providers or private vendors for certain flight tracking and communication services, while maintaining ultimate operational control of the flight.
Med-Trans and REACH also suggested an alternate way of applying the OCC requirements. They said that "[s]everal companies currently operate aircraft on several different certificates but only utilize one [OCC]. Several air medical operators operate air ambulances on multiple certificates. Operations control center functions can be conducted without imposing a requirement for an [OCC] for each certificate." They stated that the rule must allow air medical operators to combine OCC functions for multiple certificate holders that are under the same management. They said that this will achieve the benefits of an OCC without the additional cost. They also noted that this change would prevent companies from establishing multiple certificates with 9 or fewer helicopters on each to avoid the OCC requirement.
Angel One Transport, a hospital-based pediatric critical care transport in
Another small operator, A.L.E.R.T. in
NEMSPA said that "for smaller operations with a dispatch or communications center, placing personnel in that facility who meet the requirements for an operational control specialist should satisfy the requirements for the facility to be an operational control center."
LifeFlight of
It is possible that a small operator with only one or two helicopters could reach a set hourly limit, but would not have the same level of operational complexity as a certificate holder flying the same number of hours but with 10 or more helicopters. Nevertheless, the
The FAA specifically asked for comments on whether the applicability of this requirement should be based on the number of operations or hours flown by each aircraft, rather than fleet size. After evaluating the comments, the
The FAA acknowledges that one company may hold several certificates for helicopter air ambulance operations. In these circumstances, each certificate would be evaluated independently rather than in the aggregate. Provided that each certificate holder has fewer than 10 helicopters used for air ambulances in its fleet, then no OCC would be required.
Other OCC Comments
PHI noted that OCCs were originally an invention of air medical operators to more effectively manage operations control. PHI said its
LifeFlight of
As noted in the NPRM, the duties and training requirements of operations control specialists are based on AC 120-96, Integration of Operations Control Centers into Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Operations (
FOOTNOTE 12 Statement from the
One commenter said that the
The NTSB also supported
NEMSPA recommended a standard for operations control specialist training set by the industry and approved by the
The FAA received comments stating that the operations control specialist training proposed in the NPRM too closely follows the training program for part 121 dispatchers. The
Commenters also asked for a clearer distinction between the operations control specialists required by this rule and "CommSpecs," the communication specialists currently employed in the air ambulance industry. NAACS asked whether the aviation base curriculum for operations control specialists would enhance safety benefits beyond the current "Certified Flight Communicator" program offered by NAACS. In response to this question, the
Thirty-four commenters, including Air Evac EMS, Intermountain,
After reviewing these comments, the
In conjunction with the proposal for OCCs, the
Operations control specialists will be performing safety-sensitive functions such as providing preflight weather assessment, assisting with fuel planning and alternate airport weather minimums, and communicating with pilots about operational concerns during flight. These duties are similar to those of an aircraft dispatcher, and thus operations control specialists would be subject to the same restrictions on drug and alcohol use, and to a certificate holder's drug and alcohol testing program, as described in 14 CFR part 120.
An operations control specialist who failed a drug test, functioned as an operations control specialist without completing training or passing examinations, or verified false entries on a preflight analysis worksheet, could be subject to enforcement action or civil penalties. /13/
FOOTNOTE 13 See SUBSEC 13.14 (Civil Penalties: General); 13.16 (Civil Penalties); 120.33 (Use of Prohibited Drugs); 120.37 (Misuse of Alcohol). END FOOTNOTE
The FAA's reference to "formalized dispatch" in the NPRM refers to an established consistent process that certificate holders will use when dispatching a flight. The term "enhanced operational control" involves more people than only the pilot in the flight release process. For example, it may include the pilot and an operational control specialist, the chief pilot, or the director of flight operations.
Section 135.619 is adopted as proposed. The wording has been modified to ensure clarity. /14/
FOOTNOTE 14 Section 306(d)(2) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
8. Briefing of Medical Personnel (SUBSEC 135.117 and 135.621--Proposed
In the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 15 Section 306(a) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
The NTSB, A.L.E.R.T., LifeFlight of
AAMS, while supporting this proposal, suggested that the
Several commenters, including the NTSB, NEMSPA, and the
AMOA, PHI, and Air Evac EMS expressed several concerns with this provision. They commented that a lack of formal guidance would lead to misunderstanding of the requirements along with inconsistent application and enforcement.
The FAA finds that medical personnel on helicopter air ambulance flights will benefit from an increased familiarity with the helicopter and emergency procedures due to their unique role of providing patient care while simultaneously working around an operating helicopter. The preflight briefing and training is intended to prevent medical personnel from inadvertently introducing risk to the operation when outfitting the passenger compartment for the purpose of providing medical treatment and when providing medical care to a patient.
The FAA notes that medical personnel preflight briefing and training is distinct from AMRM training. The AMRM program is not a preflight safety briefing, but rather a tool used by operators to improve communication and teambuilding skills among its employees during air medical operations. While the
As proposed in the NPRM and contained in the final rule, this provision requires a briefing for medical personnel on the physiological aspects of flight, patient loading and unloading, safety in and around the helicopter, in-flight emergency procedures, emergency landing procedures, emergency evacuation procedures, efficient and safe communications with the pilot, and operational differences between day and night operation. The
The FAA will not provide exceptions or accommodations to permit briefings that are not as extensive as those proposed for the rare instances when medical personnel not associated with air medical operations are transported. All medical personnel onboard a helicopter air ambulance flight who have not received the optional training provided for by this rule must receive the preflight safety briefing. Medical personnel not associated with that particular operation may still inadvertently introduce risk to the operation when on board the flight. The preflight safety briefing will provide these medical personnel with familiarity with the helicopter and emergency procedures, thus reducing the risk that those personnel will affect the overall safety of the operation. If medical personnel are not being transported during a "helicopter air ambulance operation" as defined in
The FAA has determined that medical personnel safety training will be conducted every 24 months. The NPRM proposed training every 24 months, and although commenters suggested that training occur on an annual basis, the
Final Rule
Based on the comments received, the
9. Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (HTAWS) (
The FAA proposed a requirement for equipping helicopter air ambulances with HTAWS. There is no existing requirement for this equipment. One commenter stated that installation of HTAWS has been "the single most effective technology for reducing helicopter mishaps" among U.S. military helicopters. The NTSB concurred with the proposal and noted that it would meet Safety Recommendation A-06-15. However, commenters also raised concerns over the effectiveness of HTAWS, the need for flexibility, and the cost of the rule.
A number of commenters, including NEMSPA, questioned why the
EADS Cassidian Electronics stated that air ambulance operators are the most prominent part of the flying community for which HTAWS can assist in preventing controlled flight into terrain and obstacle strike accidents, but the
AAMS commented that HTAWS and night vision goggles (NVGs) should be required together as each provides benefits that complement the other. LifeFlight of
The FAA disagrees with comments that HTAWS is not proven technology as it relates to helicopters and that it would not be effective in preventing controlled-flight-into-terrain accidents. RTCA/DO-309 Minimum Operational Performance Standards for HTAWS and Airborne Equipment TSO-C194 set the standards for HTAWS. The
The FAA concludes that the use of HTAWS would create a safer environment for emergency medical services flight operations by preventing controlled flight into terrain at night or during bad weather. As noted in the NPRM, the NTSB cites 17 accidents in its Special Investigation Report on Emergency Medical Services Operations (
FOOTNOTE 16 The report can be accessed at: http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safetystudies/sir0601.html (December, 10, 2013). END FOOTNOTE
The FAA acknowledges that there may be lags between the time when new obstacles are erected and the time when they are put into an HTAWS database. However, the
The FAA received several comments addressing the flexibility in the rule and whether the implementation timeline is appropriate. Commenters including AMOA and PHI expressed the need for minimum equipment list (MEL) relief for HTAWS in the event that the unit is inoperable.
LifeFlight of
Bristow Group noted its support for requiring all helicopters engaged in commercial service to be equipped with HTAWS if not already equipped with a radio-altimeter-based warning system.
The FAA acknowledges that technology could be improved over time, but does not agree that mandating this particular type of equipment will constrain the ability to embrace new technologies. Incorporation by reference of new TSO requirements allows the agency to adopt revised technological standards. The need to incorporate new TSOs into the regulation, due to technological innovation, will not hinder adoption of that technology in helicopter air ambulances.
In response to comments on the need for flexibility should an HTAWS unit become inoperable, the
Based on the comments received, the
Finally, West Michigan Air Care estimated that its cost of compliance with the HTAWS requirement would be
This rule is adopted as proposed with minor edits for clarification. /17/
FOOTNOTE 17 Section 306(c)(3) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
10. Flight Data Monitoring System (
FOOTNOTE 18 Section 306(a) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) directs the
In the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 19 Although the NPRM did not contain proposed rule text, the
In the NPRM, the
The FAA received numerous comments on this proposal regarding flight data monitoring system use in accident investigation and Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) programs, the standards for the flight data monitoring system, the rule's implementation date, and the
Accident Investigation/Use in a FOQA Program
Many commenters supported a requirement for FOQA. LifeFlight of
PHI supports installation and use of a flight data monitoring system in air ambulance aircraft. It suggested requiring operators to develop an internal process for using data collected by the system for analysis, identification and mitigation of at-risk behaviors across the organization, as well as development of supplemental educational opportunities for air ambulance pilots. PHI said that the focus of the flight data monitoring system should be to prevent accidents. It said the emphasis should be placed on FOQA and flight data management implementation and benefits. HAI supports and encourages flight data monitoring technology because it has obvious safety benefits for accident investigation and the potential for development of FOQA and other safety programs.
An individual commented that satellite tracking, currently in use by his company, records flight information that can be used to help rescue the aircraft and provides the necessary information on aircraft operations making a flight data monitoring system unnecessary.
A FOQA program is meant to improve flight safety by providing more information about, and greater insight into, the total flight operations environment. This is accomplished with selective automated recording and analysis of data generated during flight operations. Analysis of FOQA data can reveal situations that require improvement--in operations, in training, and in maintenance procedures, practices, equipment, or infrastructure.
In response to comments about mandatory FOQA participation, the
As discussed in the NPRM, this equipment may be used to provide significant information for investigators to determine accident causation, which may help to prevent future accidents. In addition, the data can be used proactively by an operator to modify operational and maintenance procedures for increased efficiency and lower costs, to provide immediate feedback to pilots in training, and to highlight areas where additional training may be needed.
The final rule requires certificate holders operating helicopter air ambulances to install and operate a flight data monitoring system in their helicopters. The
Although operators will not be required to collect data from the flight data monitoring system, the
The FAA anticipates that the information that this equipment can gather may be used as a supplement to a certificate holder's training program.
Flight Data Monitoring System Capabilities
The FAA received many comments on the flight data monitoring system standards discussed in the NPRM, including several stating that a regulation is not appropriate at this time. However, the
AAMS supports installation of a flight data monitoring system on air ambulance helicopters but says the proposal was not specific enough to justify a regulation at this time.
AMOA suggested waiting to establish a regulation until there is a more thorough understanding of current products, but also noted the need for MEL relief if a rule were adopted. HAI stated the technology is not sufficiently mature at this time to justify a regulation.
The FAA also received several comments on whether the flight data monitoring system under the rule would need to comply with
NTSB said that a recorder that complies with ED-155 would be a valuable aid to accident investigations and would be fully capable of supporting a structured flight data monitoring program. The NTSB notes that a considerable amount of work has been done by EUROCAE (with full participation by both the
FreeFlight Systems, an avionics manufacturer, said that TSO-C197 will drive up costs because it does not allow commercial-grade operating systems. This commenter said that, rather than using a TSO, a parts manufacturer approval (PMA) should suffice, since a flight data monitor failure does not endanger the airframe or other systems in the aircraft. For accident investigation purposes, FreeFlight indicated that it produces a hardened memory unit which provides protection of vital information in the event of a crash. It has significant ballistics protection and can withstand a temperature of 1,100 degrees Celsius for up to an hour.
The General Aviation Safety Network commented that no certification should be required, except for RTCA DO-160E environmental categorization.
The FAA agrees with the NTSB that several manufacturers have recording systems able to record flight performance data, audio, images, and data-link messages. This final rule is performance based and compliance with this rule does not necessarily require installation of a TSO-approved system. However, TSO-C197-approved articles are an acceptable means of compliance with new
In response to these comments, the
It would be outside the scope of the rule to require satellite tracking of helicopter air ambulances because it was not proposed in the NPRM. In developing the 2010 NPRM, the
The FAA anticipates that relief could be granted for operations with an inoperable flight data monitoring system. While a flight data monitoring system is a valuable tool that can be used for accident investigation, it is a passive device that collects information and is not essential for safe operation in the way an oil pressure gauge would be. The particular requirements relating to operations with an inoperable flight data monitoring system would be developed by
Implementation Date for the Flight Data Monitoring System
AMOA recommended that the
The FAA has carefully reviewed the comments that industry needs sufficient time to manufacture, obtain and install equipment that meets the required performance standards. After considering comments, the
Cost Estimate for Flight Data Monitoring Systems
In the NPRM, the
Bristow Group stated that this equipment is affordable and effective and that the
Some commenters, including AMOA, PHI, LifeFlight of
PHI agreed with AMOA on the cost analysis, saying that the
In response to these comments, we note that the FDM capability described in the NPRM was meant to illustrate the type of data that could be collected by this equipment. We did not intend to propose an FDM system that must record all information pertaining to the aircraft's state (such as heading, altitude, and attitude), condition (such as rotors, transmission, engine parameters, and flight controls), and system performance (such as full authority digital engine control, and electronic flight instrumentation system) that was discussed in the NPRM. Under this rule, the operator would be able to determine the parameters that the FDM would record. Our estimate of
However, based on the comments received, the
Final Rule
This final rule will require installation of a flight data monitoring system capable of recording helicopter flight performance and operational data. /20/ It will not require data collection or prescribe standards or parameters for data collection. The flight data monitoring system must be activated and operative from the time electrical power is turned on before takeoff until it is turned off after the end of the flight. Helicopter air ambulance operators will have 4 years to comply with the rule. Helicopters equipped with an operational FDR that meets the requirements of
FOOTNOTE 20 Section 306(d)(2) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
This rule addresses parts of NTSB Safety Recommendations A-06-17 and A-09-90.
11. Pilot Instrument Ratings (
The FAA proposed to add
The FAA received comments expressing support for the proposal from commenters including the NTSB, AMOA, AAMS, Air Evac EMS, NEMSPA, and Safety and Flight Evaluations, International.
The NTSB agreed with the requirement for a helicopter air ambulance pilot to hold an instrument rating, but stated that helicopter air ambulance pilots should maintain instrument currency. It commented that instrument currency is generally acknowledged to be a skill that deteriorates rapidly without continued practice and use. AMOA, NEMSPA, Safety and Flight Evaluations, International and numerous individual commenters also suggested that the
Identical comments from two individuals suggested requiring frequent short training sessions involving unplanned entry into IMC followed by an instrument approach to landing at least quarterly in an approved aircraft or simulator. They suggested a requirement that a table-top PC-based navigation system trainer or similar device be used at least monthly. They commented that the
The FAA notes that IIMC is a common factor in helicopter air ambulance accidents and the intent of the instrument rating requirement is to ensure that helicopter air ambulance pilots are better equipped to handle these situations. A pilot who receives this rating is better equipped to maintain situational awareness and maneuver the helicopter into a safe environment. Requiring an instrument rating, without a requirement to maintain instrument currency, will allow a VFR operator to expend fewer resources than required to meet full currency requirements while ensuring that pilots have the skills necessary to extract themselves from IIMC. Additionally, mandating instrument currency for all commercial pilots is beyond the scope of the current rulemaking.
To prevent IIMC accidents,
This rule is adopted as proposed.
E. General Comments
<p>FAA Oversight Resources/Delay in Approval/Expedited Approval Process
AMOA commented that numerous operators report significant delays in the approval process for all types of equipment installations. It expressed concern about the
The FAA understands the commenter's concern and has issued guidance for inspectors to ensure uniform application of the rule's requirements. This rule also contains delayed compliance dates for several of its provisions, which will give certificate holders time to purchase and install the required equipment and to develop and implement required procedures.
Night Vision Goggles and Autopilots
The NPRM did not propose requiring night vision goggles (NVGs) or night vision imaging systems (NVIS). The NPRM included a statement explaining that the
Numerous commenters, including AMOA, PHI, Air Evac EMS, NEMSPA, LifeFlight of
As stated in the NPRM, the
FOOTNOTE 21 Section 318 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95) requires the
Similarly the
The FAA did not include an autopilot requirement in the NPRM. Therefore, mandating an autopilot unit is outside the scope of this current rulemaking. Furthermore, the
Public Aircraft Operations
The FAA received several comments from public safety organizations, including the
In contrast, several commenters, including AMOA, PHI, and West Michigan Air Care, expressed support for extending the provisions of this rule to include public aircraft operations. PHI expressed support for requiring public aircraft operations to comply with the rules proposed in the NPRM, stating that the thousands of passengers transported every year by government operators should benefit from the safety enhancements in the proposed rule. It stated that the
In response, the
Public aircraft operation is limited by statute to certain government operations within U.S. airspace. See 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(41), 40125. Although these operations must comply with certain general operating rules (including those applicable to all aircraft in the National Airspace System), other civil certification and safety oversight regulations do not apply. Whether an operation may be considered a public aircraft operation is determined on a flight-by-flight basis, under the terms of the statute. The
Specifically, 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(41)(C) includes as a public aircraft "an aircraft owned or operated by the government of a State . . . or a political subdivision of [one of these] governments, except as provided in section 40125(b)." See Legal Interpretation to Ray Borrato, from
To that end, we note that the part 135 provisions of this rule would apply only to civil aircraft operations and would not apply to public aircraft operations. Accordingly, an aircraft operator that only performs public aircraft operations would not need to hold a part 119 operating certificate permitting part 135 operations. An operator that conducts both public aircraft operations and civil operations would need to hold a part 119 operating certificate and conduct its civil operations pursuant to part 135 rules. We also note that public aircraft operations must adhere to part 91 airspace rules; therefore, the provisions of
The FAA encourages government entities that conduct public aircraft operations to inform the local FSDO that they conduct public aircraft operations in the FSDO's area to avoid confusion about the oversight of those operations. The
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analysis
A. Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 directs that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
In conducting these analyses,
Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
The estimated mean benefit value for the rule will be about
Who is potentially affected by this rule?
Helicopter air ambulance operators, commercial helicopter operators, helicopter aerial application operators, and helicopter external load operators.
Assumptions:
* The rule is expected to take effect in 2013. The time horizon for these potential benefits is 10 years, 2013 through 2022.
* All monetary values are expressed in constant 2013 dollars. We calculated the present value of the potential benefit stream by discounting the monetary values using a 7 percent interest rate from 2013 to 2022.
* The
Benefits of This Rule
Benefits will accrue from the implementation of new operational procedures and additional equipment requirements for helicopter air ambulances. This final rule also increases safety for commercial helicopter operations by revising requirements for equipment, pilot training, and alternate airports and it increases weather minimums for helicopters operating under part 91. The estimated mean benefit value for these provisions will be
Costs of This Rule
The FAA estimates the cost of this rule will be approximately
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes "as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation." To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions. The RFA covers a wide range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations and small governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the Act.
Based on the criteria used in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis and used again here, this rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
This final rule will impact air ambulance, air tour, on demand, aerial application, and external load operators. The
See Illustration in Original Document.
Air Ambulance Operators
Because we did not have actual annual revenues for air ambulance operators, we estimated them using helicopter counts as a revenue driver. We assumed an average of 367 operations per year for each helicopter and a charge of
Air Tour Operators
We assumed an average of 747 air tour operations per year for each helicopter and a charge of
FOOTNOTE 22 We multiplied the average revenue per person for 5 different operators (
On Demand Operators
The FAA identified 370 small on- demand operators (with 1,500 or fewer employees) out of the 379 that will be affected by this regulation, which we consider a substantial number of small entities. Although their annualized compliance costs range from
Aerial Application Operators (Part 137)
We assumed an average of 81 aerial application operations per year for each helicopter and a charge of
External Load Operators (Part 133)
We assumed an average of 1,159 external load operations per year for each helicopter and a charge of
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Under section 603(b) of the RFA (as amended), each regulatory flexibility analysis is required to address the following points: (1) Reasons the agency considered the rule, (2) the objectives and legal basis for the rule, (3) the kind and number of small entities to which the rule will apply, (4) the reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the rule, and (5) all Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the rule.
Reasons the FAA Considered the Rule
Helicopter air ambulance accidents reached the highest levels in history during the years from 2003 through 2008. /23/ The year 2008 was the deadliest. In 2008, five air ambulance accidents killed 21 people, including pilots, patients, and medical personnel. A total of 62 helicopter air ambulance accidents occurred during the period from 1991 through 2010, and this number included 125 fatalities and a midair collision between two helicopter air ambulances. Commercial helicopters other than air ambulances had accidents as well. From 1991 through 2010, these helicopters had 20 accidents and 39 fatalities.
FOOTNOTE 23 GAO, Aviation Safety: Potential Strategies to Address Air Ambulance Safety Concerns (2009). END FOOTNOTE
There were four common factors in these accidents--night conditions, inadvertent flight into instrument meteorological conditions, loss of control, and controlled flight into terrain.
The impetus for this rulemaking is the number of helicopter accidents, noted above. Helicopter air ambulances operate under unique conditions. Their flights are often time-sensitive, putting pressure on the pilots. Helicopter air ambulances operate at low altitudes and under varied weather conditions. These pilots fly year-round in rural and urban settings, over mountainous and non- mountainous terrain, during the day and during the night, and in conditions where visibility is good and in conditions where it is not. They must often land at unfamiliar, remote, or unimproved sites with hazards like trees, buildings, towers, wires, and uneven terrain.
In an emergency, many patients will not have a choice of whether they want to be transported in a helicopter. They may be in a medical condition that prevents them from making decisions about transportation or indicating what they want. They cannot choose between competing carriers because the company that responds to the scene may be either the only one in the area or the first one called. For these reasons, and those discussed previously, the
The Objectives and Legal Basis for the Rule
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(4), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations in the interest of safety for the maximum hours or periods of service of airmen and other employees of air carriers, and 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air commerce and national security.
The Kind and Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply
The FAA identified 35 small air ambulance operators on which the rule will have a significant economic impact. We estimate that the small air ambulance operators have annual revenues between
The Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of the Rule
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the
See Illustration in Original Document.
All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Rule
The FAA is unaware of any Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.
Other Considerations
Affordability Analysis
For the purpose of this analysis, the degree to which small entities can afford the cost of the rule is predicated on the availability of financial resources. Costs can be paid from existing assets such as cash, by borrowing, through the provision of additional equity capital, by accepting reduced profits, by raising prices, or by finding other ways of offsetting costs.
One means of assessing the affordability is by determining the ability of each of the small entities to meet its short-term obligations by looking at net income, working capital and financial strength ratios. However, the
The average ratio of annualized costs to estimated annual revenues for small air ambulance operators ranges from 1.80% percent to 1.87 percent. Thus, the
Competitiveness Analysis
For small air ambulance operators, the average ratio of annualized cost to estimated annual revenue ranges from 1.80 percent to 1.87 percent. For large air ambulance operators, it ranges from 0.90 percent to 1.94 percent. For 33 out of the 38 large air ambulance operators, it ranges from 1.74 percent to 1.94 percent. The
Alternatives
Alternative One --This alternative considers excluding the Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (HTAWS) unit from the rulemaking. Although this alternative would reduce the ratio of annualized compliance cost to annual revenue from a range of 1.80 percent to 1.87 percent to a range of 1.61 percent to 1.68 percent, there would also be a significant reduction in safety.
Conclusion --The HTAWS is a tool for situational awareness and for helping helicopter air ambulance pilots during night operations. This equipment enhances situational awareness in all aspects of flying including day or night flight, and flight in instrument meteorological conditions. The
Alternative Two --This alternative would affect the requirement for certificate holders engaged in helicopter air ambulance operations to have an OCC. The population affected would change from operators with 10 or more helicopters to those with 15 or more.
Conclusion --The
Minimizing the Burden on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to consider the impact of their regulatory proposals on small entities and to analyze one or more significant alternatives to minimize the rule's burden on small entities. The
Conclusion
This rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small air ambulance operators. The
D. 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
E. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result in an expenditure of
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the
The final rule will impose the following new information collection requirements.
Private Sector Costs
(1) Require all rotorcraft used in part 135 operations to be equipped with radio altimeters (
See Illustration in Original Document.
(2) Establish VFR ceiling and visibility requirements for helicopter air ambulance operations conducted in class G airspace (
Air ambulance operators = 73.
Air ambulance operators affected = 50%.
Time needed to develop local flying area = 2 hours.
Salary of chief pilot =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(3) Require air ambulance operators to document the highest obstacle along the planned route prior to a VFR flight (
Air Ambulance Helicopters = 1,073-1,371.
Air Ambulance operations per helicopter = 367 per year.
Flight planning time = 5 minutes per operation.
Salary of pilot =
See Illustration in Original Document.</p>
(4) Require each certificate holder performing helicopter air ambulance operations to implement an
Air ambulance operators = 73.
Time for chief pilot to develop risk analysis program = 30 hours.
Time for clerk to develop risk analysis worksheet and insert program into operations manual = 30 hours.
Salary of chief pilot =
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(5) Require pilots in command to conduct a pre-flight risk analysis, including completion of a risk analysis worksheet before a helicopter air ambulance operation (
Air Ambulance Helicopters = 1,073-1,371.
Air Ambulance operations per helicopter = 367 per year.
Flight planning time = 10 minutes per operation.
Salary of pilot =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(6) Require operations control specialists to participate in the pre-flight risk analysis required by
Air Ambulance Helicopters operated by certificate holders with an OCC = 895-1,144.
Air Ambulance operations per helicopter = 367 per year.
Time spent by OCS per pilot's worksheet = 5 minutes.
Salary of operations control specialist (OCS) =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(7) Require certificate holders with 10 or more helicopter air ambulances to establish operational control centers and document operations control specialist duties and training in their operations manuals. (
Operators that need to develop the OCS training = 13.
Operators that need to change their manuals = 2.
Time for chief pilot to develop OCS training = 60 hours.
Time for clerk to develop OCS training = 30 hours.
Time for chief pilot to change manual = 1 hour.
Time for clerk to change manual = 0.5 hour.
Salary of chief pilot =
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(8) Require certificate holders that do not currently have operations control centers but will be required to have them to retain records of the training given to operations control specialists (
Operations control specialists = 119-152.
Time per OCS training record = 5 minutes.
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(9) Require certificate holders with operations control centers to retain operations control specialist training records (
Operations control specialists = 369-472.
Time per OCS training record = 5 minutes.
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(10) Require that medical personnel on board helicopter air ambulance flights receive either a supplemental safety briefing or safety training in lieu of a pre-flight briefing (
Affected air ambulance operators = 37.
Time for chief pilot to develop training = 10 hours.
Time for clerk to incorporate training into operations manual = 10 hours.
Salary of chief pilot =
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(11) Certificate holders choosing the option to provide safety training would be required to retain training records for persons receiving the training (
Medical personnel = 5,858.
Time per medical personnel training record = 5 minutes.
Training: every 24 calendar months.
Salary of clerk =
See Illustration in Original Document.
Note:
Operations control specialists would be subject to certificate holders' drug and alcohol testing programs (SUBSEC 120.5, 120.15). The
Summary of All Burden Hours and Costs
See Illustration in Original Document.
Cost to the Federal Government
(1) Radio altimeters for rotorcraft operations (
Applications for deviations from radio altimeter requirement = 107.
Time needed for review and operations specification = 1.5 hour.
Salary of inspector at headquarters =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(2) Local Flying Area (
Air ambulance operators = 73.
Air ambulance operators affected = 50%.
Time needed to review request = 1 hour.
Salary of inspector at field office =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(3) Review pre-flight risk analysis procedure and worksheet (
Air ambulance operators = 73.
Time to review = 1 hour.
Salary of inspector at field office =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(4) OCS training/amendment to existing manual (
Operators = 15.
Time to review OCS training = 1 hour.
Salary of inspector at field office =
See Illustration in Original Document.
(5) Review Medical Personnel Training (
Air ambulance operators = 73.
Time to review = 1 hour.
Salary of inspector at field office =
See Illustration in Original Document.
Summary of All Burden Hours and Costs Over 10 Year Period
See Illustration in Original Document.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the
G. International Compatibility and Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the
ICAO Annex 6 Part III, Section II, Chapter 4 sets standards for helicopter overwater equipment requirements based on performance class and distance from land based on time at normal cruise speed. The
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
H. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies
I.
Section 1205 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110
The agency received comments pertaining to this rule's application in
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined that this action will 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, does not have Federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by using the Internet--
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visit the
3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by going to http://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions to search the docket number for this action. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of the
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 requires
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 91
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 120
Airmen, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism, Alcohol testing, Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Operators, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Safety-sensitive, Transportation.
14 CFR Part 135
Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
1. Revise the authority citation for part 91 to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, articles 12 and 29 of the
2. Amend
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section and
Airspace Flight visibility Distance from clouds Class A Not Applicable Not Applicable. Class B 3 statute miles Clear of Clouds. Class C 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. Class D 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. Class E: Less than 10,000 feet MSL 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. At or above 10,000 feet MSL 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal. Class G: 1,200 feet or less above the surface (regardless of MSL altitude) For aircraft other than helicopters: Day, except as provided in S. 1 statute mile Clear of clouds. 91.155(b) Night, except as provided in S. 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 91.155(b) 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. For helicopters: Day, except as provided in S. 1/2 statute mile Clear of clouds. 91.155(b) Night, except as provided in S. 1 statute mile Clear of clouds. 91.155(b) More than 1,200 feet above the surface but less than 10,000 feet MSL Day 1 statute mile 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. Night 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. More than 1,200 feet above the surface 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. and at or above 10,000 feet MSL 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal.
(b) * * *
(1) Helicopter. A helicopter may be operated clear of clouds in an airport traffic pattern within 1/2 mile of the runway or helipad of intended landing if the flight visibility is not less than 1/2 statute mile.
* * * * *
PART 120--DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING PROGRAM
3. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101-40103, 40113, 40120, 41706, 41721, 44106, 44701, 44702, 44703, 44709, 44710, 44711, 45101-45105, 46105, 46306.
4. Amend
* * * * *
(i) Operations control specialist duties.
5. Amend
(a) * * *
(9) Operations control specialist duties.
* * * * *
PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
6. The authority citation for part 135 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 44730, 45101-45105; Pub. L. 112-95, 126
7. Amend
(a) * * *
(9) Helicopter air ambulance operations as defined in
* * * * *
8. Amend
(a) * * *
(9) If a rotorcraft operation involves flight beyond autorotational distance from the shoreline, as defined in
* * * * *
9. Add
(a) After
(b) Deviation authority. The Administrator may authorize deviations from paragraph (a) of this section for rotorcraft that are unable to incorporate a radio altimeter. This deviation will be issued as a Letter of Deviation Authority. The deviation may be terminated or amended at any time by the Administrator. The request for deviation authority is applicable to rotorcraft with a maximum gross takeoff weight no greater than 2,950 pounds. The request for deviation authority must contain a complete statement of the circumstances and justification, and must be submitted to the nearest Flight Standards District Office, not less than 60 days prior to the date of intended operations.
10. Add
(a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply--
Autorotational distance refers to the distance a rotorcraft can travel in autorotation as described by the manufacturer in the approved Rotorcraft Flight Manual.
Shoreline means that area of the land adjacent to the water of an ocean, sea, lake, pond, river, or tidal basin that is above the high-water mark at which a rotorcraft could be landed safely. This does not include land areas which are unsuitable for landing such as vertical cliffs or land intermittently under water.
(b) Required equipment. After
(1) An approved life preserver equipped with an approved survivor locator light for each occupant of the rotorcraft. The life preserver must be worn by each occupant while the rotorcraft is beyond autorotational distance from the shoreline, except for a patient transported during a helicopter air ambulance operation, as defined in
(2) An approved and installed 406 MHz emergency locator transmitter (ELT) with 121.5 MHz homing capability. Batteries used in ELTs must be maintained in accordance with the following--
(i) Non-rechargeable batteries must be replaced when the transmitter has been in use for more than 1 cumulative hour or when 50% of their useful lives have expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval. The new expiration date for replacing the batteries must be legibly marked on the outside of the transmitter. The battery useful life requirements of this paragraph (b)(2) do not apply to batteries (such as water-activated batteries) that are essentially unaffected during probable storage intervals; or
(ii) Rechargeable batteries used in the transmitter must be recharged when the transmitter has been in use for more than 1 cumulative hour or when 50% of their useful-life-of-charge has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval. The new expiration date for recharging the batteries must be legibly marked on the outside of the transmitter. The battery useful-life-of-charge requirements of this paragraph (b)(2) do not apply to batteries (such as water-activated batteries) that are essentially unaffected during probable storage intervals.
(c) Maintenance. The equipment required by this section must be maintained in accordance with
(d) ELT standards. The ELT required by paragraph (b)(2) of this section must meet the requirements in:
(1) TSO-C126, TSO-C126a, or TSO-C126b; and
(2) Section 2 of either RTCA DO-204 or RTCA DO-204A, as specified by the TSO complied with in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(e) ELT alternative compliance. Operators with an ELT required by paragraph (b)(2) of this section, or an ELT with an approved deviation under
(f) Incorporation by reference. The standards required in this section are incorporated by reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the
(1)
(i) TSO-C126, 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT),
(ii) TSO-C126a, 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT),
(iii) TSO-C126b, 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT),
(2)
(i) RTCA DO-204, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs),
(ii) RTCA DO-204A, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELT),
11. Revise
(a) Aircraft other than rotorcraft. No person may designate an alternate airport unless the weather reports or forecasts, or any combination of them, indicate that the weather conditions will be at or above authorized alternate airport landing minimums for that airport at the estimated time of arrival.
(b) Rotorcraft. Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may include an alternate airport in an IFR flight plan unless appropriate weather reports or weather forecasts, or a combination of them, indicate that, at the estimated time of arrival at the alternate airport, the ceiling and visibility at that airport will be at or above the following weather minimums--
(1) If, for the alternate airport, an instrument approach procedure has been published in part 97 of this chapter or a special instrument approach procedure has been issued by the
(2) If, for the alternate airport, no instrument approach procedure has been published in part 97 of this chapter and no special instrument approach procedure has been issued by the
12. Amend
a. Removing the word "and" from the end of paragraph (a)(7)(iii);
b. Removing the period and adding "; and" in its place at the end of paragraph (a)(8);
c. Adding paragraph (a)(9);
d. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (f) as paragraphs (d) through (g) respectively; and
e. Adding new paragraph (c).
The additions read as follows:
(a) * * *
(9) After the next scheduled competency check after
* * * * *
(c) Each competency check given in a rotorcraft must include a demonstration of the pilot's ability to maneuver the rotorcraft solely by reference to instruments. The check must determine the pilot's ability to safely maneuver the rotorcraft into visual meteorological conditions following an inadvertent encounter with instrument meteorological conditions. For competency checks in non-IFR-certified rotorcraft, the pilot must perform such maneuvers as are appropriate to the rotorcraft's installed equipment, the certificate holder's operations specifications, and the operating environment.
* * * * *
13. Amend
14. Add subpart L to part 135 to read as follows:
Subpart L--Helicopter Air Ambulance Equipment, Operations, and Training Requirements
Sec.
135.601 Applicability and definitions.
135.603 Pilot-in-command instrument qualifications.
135.605 Helicopter terrain awareness and warning system (HTAWS).
135.607 Flight Data Monitoring System.
135.609 VFR ceiling and visibility requirements for Class G airspace.
135.611 IFR operations at locations without weather reporting.
135.613 Approach/departure IFR transitions.
135.615 VFR flight planning.
135.617 Pre-flight risk analysis.
135.619 Operations control centers.
135.621 Briefing of medical personnel.
Subpart L--Helicopter Air Ambulance Equipment, Operations, and Training Requirements
(a) Applicability. This subpart prescribes the requirements applicable to each certificate holder conducting helicopter air ambulance operations.
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this subpart, the following definitions apply:
(1) Helicopter air ambulance operation means a flight, or sequence of flights, with a patient or medical personnel on board, for the purpose of medical transportation, by a part 135 certificate holder authorized by the Administrator to conduct helicopter air ambulance operations. A helicopter air ambulance operation includes, but is not limited to--
(i) Flights conducted to position the helicopter at the site at which a patient or donor organ will be picked up.
(ii) Flights conducted to reposition the helicopter after completing the patient, or donor organ transport.
(iii) Flights initiated for the transport of a patient or donor organ that are terminated due to weather or other reasons.
(2) Medical personnel means a person or persons with medical training, including but not limited to flight physicians, flight nurses, or flight paramedics, who are carried aboard a helicopter during helicopter air ambulance operations in order to provide medical care.
(3) Mountainous means designated mountainous areas as listed in part 95 of this chapter.
(4) Nonmountainous means areas other than mountainous areas as listed in part 95 of this chapter.
After
(a) After
(b) The certificate holder's Rotorcraft Flight Manual must contain appropriate procedures for--
(1) The use of the HTAWS; and
(2) Proper flight crew response to HTAWS audio and visual warnings.
(c) Certificate holders with HTAWS required by this section with an approved deviation under
(d) The standards required in this section are incorporated by reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the
(1)
(i) TSO C-194, Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning System (HTAWS),
(ii) [Reserved]
(2)
(i) RTCA DO-309, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning System (HTAWS) Airborne Equipment,
(ii) [Reserved]
After
(a) Receive electrical power from the bus that provides the maximum reliability for operation without jeopardizing service to essential or emergency loads, and
(b) Be operated from the application of electrical power before takeoff until the removal of electrical power after termination of flight.
(a) Unless otherwise specified in the certificate holder's operations specifications, when conducting helicopter air ambulance operations in Class G airspace, the weather minimums in the following table apply:
See Illustration in Original Document.
(b) A certificate holder may designate local flying areas in a manner acceptable to the Administrator, that must--
(1) Not exceed 50 nautical miles in any direction from each designated location;
(2) Take into account obstacles and terrain features that are easily identifiable by the pilot in command and from which the pilot in command may visually determine a position; and
(3) Take into account the operating environment and capabilities of the certificate holder's helicopters.
(c) A pilot must demonstrate a level of familiarity with the local flying area by passing an examination given by the certificate holder within the 12 calendar months prior to using the local flying area.
(a) If a certificate holder is authorized to conduct helicopter IFR operations, the Administrator may authorize the certificate holder to conduct IFR helicopter air ambulance operations at airports with an instrument approach procedure and at which a weather report is not available from the
(1) The certificate holder must obtain a weather report from a weather reporting facility operated by the NWS, a source approved by the NWS, or a source approved by the
(2) Flight planning for IFR flights conducted under this paragraph must include selection of an alternate airport that meets the requirements of SUBSEC 135.221 and 135.223;
(3) In Class G airspace, IFR departures are authorized only after the pilot in command determines that the weather conditions at the departure point are at or above VFR minimums in accordance with
(4) All approaches must be conducted at Category A approach speeds as established in part 97 or those required for the type of approach being used.
(b) Each helicopter air ambulance operated under this section must be equipped with functioning severe weather detection equipment.
(c) Pilots conducting operations pursuant to this section may use the weather information obtained in paragraph (a) to satisfy the weather report and forecast requirements of
(d) After completing a landing at the airport at which a weather report is not available, the pilot in command is authorized to determine if the weather meets the takeoff requirements of part 97 of this chapter or the certificate holder's operations specification, as applicable.
(a) Approaches. When conducting an authorized instrument approach and transitioning from IFR to VFR flight, upon transitioning to VFR flight the following weather minimums apply--
(1)
(2) For all instrument approaches, including PinS when paragraph (a)(1) of this section does not apply, if the distance from the missed approach point to the landing area is 3 NM or less, the applicable VFR weather minimums are--
(i) For Day Operations: No less than a 600-foot ceiling and 2 statute miles flight visibility;
(ii) For Night Operations: No less than a 600-foot ceiling and 3 statute miles flight visibility; or
(3) For all instrument approaches, including PinS, if the distance from the missed approach point to the landing area is greater than 3 NM, the VFR weather minimums required by the class of airspace.
(b) Departures. For transitions from VFR to IFR upon departure--
(1) The VFR weather minimums of paragraph (a) of this section apply if--
(i) An FAA-approved obstacle departure procedure is followed; and
(ii) An IFR clearance is obtained on or before reaching a predetermined location that is not more than 3 NM from the departure location.
(2) If the departure does not meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the VFR weather minimums required by the class of airspace apply.
(a) Pre-flight. Prior to conducting VFR operations, the pilot in command must--
(1) Determine the minimum safe cruise altitude by evaluating the terrain and obstacles along the planned route of flight;
(2) Identify and document the highest obstacle along the planned route of flight; and
(3) Using the minimum safe cruise altitudes in paragraphs (b)(1)-(2) of this section, determine the minimum required ceiling and visibility to conduct the planned flight by applying the weather minimums appropriate to the class of airspace for the planned flight.
(b) Enroute. While conducting VFR operations, the pilot in command must ensure that all terrain and obstacles along the route of flight are cleared vertically by no less than the following:
(1) 300 feet for day operations.
(2) 500 feet for night operations.
(c) Rerouting the planned flight path. A pilot in command may deviate from the planned flight path for reasons such as weather conditions or operational considerations. Such deviations do not relieve the pilot in command of the weather requirements or the requirements for terrain and obstacle clearance contained in this part and in part 91 of this chapter. Rerouting, change in destination, or other changes to the planned flight that occur while the helicopter is on the ground at an intermediate stop require evaluation of the new route in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) Operations manual. Each certificate holder must document its VFR flight planning procedures in its operations manual.
(a) Each certificate holder conducting helicopter air ambulance operations must establish, and document in its operations manual, an
(1) Flight considerations, to include obstacles and terrain along the planned route of flight, landing zone conditions, and fuel requirements;
(2) Human factors, such as crew fatigue, life events, and other stressors;
(3) Weather, including departure, en route, destination, and forecasted;
(4) A procedure for determining whether another helicopter air ambulance operator has refused or rejected a flight request; and
(5) Strategies and procedures for mitigating identified risks, including procedures for obtaining and documenting approval of the certificate holder's management personnel to release a flight when a risk exceeds a level predetermined by the certificate holder.
(b) Each certificate holder must develop a preflight risk analysis worksheet to include, at a minimum, the items in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Prior to the first leg of each helicopter air ambulance operation, the pilot in command must conduct a preflight risk analysis and complete the preflight risk analysis worksheet in accordance with the certificate holder's
(d) The certificate holder must retain the original or a copy of each completed preflight risk analysis worksheet at a location specified in its operations manual for at least 90 days from the date of the operation.
(a) Operations control center. After
(1) Provide two-way communications with pilots;
(2) Provide pilots with weather briefings, to include current and forecasted weather along the planned route of flight;
(3) Monitor the progress of the flight; and
(4) Participate in the preflight risk analysis required under
(i) Ensure the pilot has completed all required items on the preflight risk analysis worksheet;
(ii) Confirm and verify all entries on the preflight risk analysis worksheet;
(iii) Assist the pilot in mitigating any identified risk prior to takeoff; and
(iv) Acknowledge in writing, specifying the date and time, that the preflight risk analysis worksheet has been accurately completed and that, according to their professional judgment, the flight can be conducted safely.
(b) Operations control center staffing. Each certificate holder conducting helicopter air ambulance operations must provide enough operations control specialists at each operations control center to ensure the certificate holder maintains operational control of each flight.
(c) Documentation of duties and responsibilities. Each certificate holder must describe in its operations manual the duties and responsibilities of operations control specialists, including preflight risk mitigation strategies and control measures, shift change checklist, and training and testing procedures to hold the position, including procedures for retesting.
(d) Training requirements. No certificate holder may use, nor may any person perform the duties of, an operations control specialist unless the operations control specialist has satisfactorily completed the training requirements of this paragraph.
(1) Initial training. Before performing the duties of an operations control specialist, each person must satisfactorily complete the certificate holder's
(i) In military aircraft operations as a pilot, flight navigator, or meteorologist;
(ii) In air carrier operations as a pilot, flight engineer, certified aircraft dispatcher, or meteorologist; or
(iii) In aircraft operations as an air traffic controller or a flight service specialist.
(2) Recurrent training. Every 12 months after satisfactory completion of the initial training, each operations control specialist must complete a minimum of 40 hours of recurrent training on the topics listed in paragraph (f) of this section and pass an
(e) Training records. The certificate holder must maintain a training record for each operations control specialist employed by the certificate holder for the duration of that individual's employment and for 90 days thereafter. The training record must include a chronological log for each training course, including the number of training hours and the examination dates and results.
(f) Training topics. Each certificate holder must have an
(1) Aviation weather, including:
(i) General meteorology;
(ii) Prevailing weather;
(iii) Adverse and deteriorating weather;
(iv) Windshear;
(v) Icing conditions;
(vi) Use of aviation weather products;
(vii) Available sources of information; and
(viii) Weather minimums;
(2) Navigation, including:
(i) Navigation aids;
(ii) Instrument approach procedures;
(iii) Navigational publications; and
(iv) Navigation techniques;
(3) Flight monitoring, including:
(i) Available flight-monitoring procedures; and
(ii) Alternate flight-monitoring procedures;
(4) Air traffic control, including:
(i) Airspace;
(ii) Air traffic control procedures;
(iii) Aeronautical charts; and
(iv) Aeronautical data sources;
(5) Aviation communication, including:
(i) Available aircraft communications systems;
(ii) Normal communication procedures;
(iii) Abnormal communication procedures; and
(iv) Emergency communication procedures;
(6) Aircraft systems, including:
(i) Communications systems;
(ii) Navigation systems;
(iii) Surveillance systems;
(iv) Fueling systems;
(v) Specialized systems;
(vi) General maintenance requirements; and
(vii) Minimum equipment lists;
(7) Aircraft limitations and performance, including:
(i) Aircraft operational limitations;
(ii) Aircraft performance;
(iii) Weight and balance procedures and limitations; and
(iv) Landing zone and landing facility requirements;
(8) Aviation policy and regulations, including:
(i) 14 CFR Parts 1, 27, 29, 61, 71, 91, and 135;
(ii) 49 CFR Part 830;
(iii) Company operations specifications;
(iv) Company general operations policies;
(v) Enhanced operational control policies;
(vi) Aeronautical decision making and risk management;
(vii) Lost aircraft procedures; and
(viii) Emergency and search and rescue procedures, including plotting coordinates in degrees, minutes, seconds format, and degrees, decimal minutes format;
(9) Crew resource management, including:
(i) Concepts and practical application;
(ii) Risk management and risk mitigation; and
(iii) Pre-flight risk analysis procedures required under
(10) Local flying area orientation, including:
(i) Terrain features;
(ii) Obstructions;
(iii) Weather phenomena for local area;
(iv) Airspace and air traffic control facilities;
(v) Heliports, airports, landing zones, and fuel facilities;
(vi) Instrument approaches;
(vii) Predominant air traffic flow;
(viii) Landmarks and cultural features, including areas prone to flat-light, whiteout, and brownout conditions; and
(ix) Local aviation and safety resources and contact information; and
(11) Any other requirements as determined by the Administrator to ensure safe operations.
(g) Operations control specialist duty time limitations. (1) Each certificate holder must establish the daily duty period for an operations control specialist so that it begins at a time that allows that person to become thoroughly familiar with operational considerations, including existing and anticipated weather conditions in the area of operations, helicopter operations in progress, and helicopter maintenance status, before performing duties associated with any helicopter air ambulance operation. The operations control specialist must remain on duty until relieved by another qualified operations control specialist or until each helicopter air ambulance monitored by that person has completed its flight or gone beyond that person's jurisdiction.
(2) Except in cases where circumstances or emergency conditions beyond the control of the certificate holder require otherwise--
(i) No certificate holder may schedule an operations control specialist for more than 10 consecutive hours of duty;
(ii) If an operations control specialist is scheduled for more than 10 hours of duty in 24 consecutive hours, the certificate holder must provide that person a rest period of at least 8 hours at or before the end of 10 hours of duty;
(iii) If an operations control specialist is on duty for more than 10 consecutive hours, the certificate holder must provide that person a rest period of at least 8 hours before that person's next duty period;
(iv) Each operations control specialist must be relieved of all duty with the certificate holder for at least 24 consecutive hours during any 7 consecutive days.
(h) Drug and alcohol testing. Operations control specialists must be tested for drugs and alcohol according to the certificate holder's Drug and Alcohol Testing Program administered under part 120 of this chapter.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, prior to each helicopter air ambulance operation, each pilot in command, or other flight crewmember designated by the certificate holder, must ensure that all medical personnel have been briefed on the following--
(1) Passenger briefing requirements in
(2) Physiological aspects of flight;
(3) Patient loading and unloading;
(4) Safety in and around the helicopter;
(5) In-flight emergency procedures;
(6) Emergency landing procedures;
(7) Emergency evacuation procedures;
(8) Efficient and safe communications with the pilot; and
(9) Operational differences between day and night operations, if appropriate.
(b) The briefing required in paragraphs (a)(2) through (9) of this section may be omitted if all medical personnel on board have satisfactorily completed the certificate holder's
(c) Each certificate holder must maintain a record for each person trained under this section that--
(1) Contains the individual's name, the most recent training completion date, and a description, copy, or reference to training materials used to meet the training requirement.
(2) Is maintained for 24 calendar months following the individual's completion of training.
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), 49 U.S.C. 44730, in
Administrator,
[FR Doc. 2014-03689 Filed 2-20-14;
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Copyright: | (c) 2014 Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. |
Wordcount: | 40080 |
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News