[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 209 (Tuesday, November 2, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60424-60434]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23253]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 121

[Docket No.: FAA-2019-0770; Notice No. 22-01]
RIN 2120-AL41

Flight Attendant Duty Period Limitations and Rest Requirements

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action arises out of a statutory mandate in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2018, which requires rulemaking to increase the
minimum rest period for flight attendants in domestic, flag, and
supplemental operations who are scheduled for a duty period of 14 hours
or less. The statute also requires rulemaking to prohibit a reduction
of the rest period under any circumstances. Consistent with the
statutory mandate, the FAA proposes to amend its regulations to ensure
that flight attendants scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less
are given a scheduled rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours and
that the rest period is not reduced under any circumstances.

DATES: Send comments on or before January 3, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2019-0770
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.

     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building, Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building, Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel T. Ronneberg, Part 121 Air
Carrier Operations, Air Transportation Division, AFS-220, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

    This proposed rule addresses the requirement of section 335(a) of
the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (the FAARA 2018), codified at 49
U.S.C. 44701 note. Section 335(a) requires the FAA to conduct
rulemaking to increase to 10 hours the minimum rest period for flight
attendants in domestic, flag, and supplemental operations who are
scheduled for a duty period of 14 hours or less; and to prohibit the
reduction of the rest period under any circumstances. The FAA's
existing regulations require only a 9-hour rest period for these flight
attendants which can be reduced to 8 hours in certain circumstances.
Consistent with the requirement of section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018,
the FAA proposes to amend Sec.  121.467(b)(2) and (b)(3) to require 10
hours of consecutive rest, remove the existing allowance for a
reduction in rest time, and prohibit the reduction of the 10 hours of
consecutive rest time under any circumstances.

II. Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C.). Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Section 106(f) vests
final authority in the Administrator for carrying out all functions,
powers, and duties of the administration relating to the promulgation
of regulations and rules.
    Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope
of the Agency's authority. Section 44701(a)(4) 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.'' Section 44701(a)(5) requires the Administrator to
promulgate ``regulations and minimum standards for other practices,
methods, and procedure that the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce and national security.'' In addition, 49 U.S.C.
44701(d)(1)(A) specifically states that the Administrator, when
prescribing safety regulations, must consider the duty of an air
carrier to provide service with the highest possible degree of safety
in the public interest. Such authority applies to the oversight the FAA
exercises to ensure safety of air carrier operations, including
crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements.
    Further, section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018 (Pub. L. 115-254, 132
Stat. 3186 (Oct. 5, 2018)), codified at 49 U.S.C. 44701 note, requires
the FAA to amend the flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
regulation to increase the minimum rest period for flight attendants in
domestic, flag, and supplemental operations who are scheduled for a
duty period of 14 hours or less. Section 335(a) also prohibits
reduction of the rest period under any circumstances.

III. Background

Flight Attendant Requirements

    The FAA defines a flight attendant serving in operations conducted
under 14 Sec.  part 121 as an individual, other than a flightcrew
member,\1\ who is assigned by a certificate holder conducting domestic,
flag, or supplemental operations to duty in an aircraft during flight
time and whose duties include activities related to ensuring cabin
safety.\2\ Section 121.391 specifies the minimum number of flight
attendants required on board a flight, based on maximum payload
capacity and seating capacity, for certificate holders conducting
passenger-carrying operations under part 121.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``flightcrew member'' is a pilot, flight engineer, or
flight navigator assigned to duty in an aircraft during flight time.
14 CFR 1.1.
    \2\ 14 CFR 121.467(a).
    \3\ 14 CFR 121.391 provides that a certificate holder may,
however, use more than the required number of flight attendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person serving as a flight attendant in part 121 operations
must complete the training and qualification requirements of part 121
subparts N and O.\4\ These training and qualification requirements
include specific programmed hours,\5\ as well as airplane type specific
knowledge and skill requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 14 CFR 121.392.
    \5\ Under 14 CFR 121.421, ``programmed hours'' refers to hours
of training or instruction in specific subjects, in a flight
attendant training program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Flight attendants are responsible for taking action during
emergencies, including administering first aid, conducting aircraft
evacuations, responding to inflight fires, managing medical
emergencies, and handling passengers who threaten the safety of other
passengers or might be unruly or disruptive. They must also be prepared
to respond to situations that could threaten the safety of the
passengers and the flight, including turbulent air, airplane
decompression, and hijackings. They must know the location of emergency
exits, fire extinguishers, first aid kits, flotation devices, oxygen
masks, and emergency slides, and check emergency equipment before
flight. They must assess and verify the suitability of passengers that
occupy exit seating, brief passengers on safety equipment, evacuation,
and crash landing procedures, and ensure compliance with applicable
safety regulations.

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) and Discussion of Public
Comments

    On September 25, 2019, the FAA published an ANPRM, Flight Attendant
Duty Period Limitations and Rest Requirements (84 FR 50349). The FAA
determined that soliciting public input on the regulatory impact of the
changes to flight attendant duty and rest requirements codified in
Section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018 was appropriate. The FAA also intended
for the ANPRM to provide additional avenues for public participation
and to inform the FAA's analysis and rulemaking development.
    The FAA received 216 comments on the ANPRM. Commenters included
many individuals, Airlines for America

(A4A), Endeavor Air, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Transportation
Trades Department (TTD), Transport Workers Union of America (TWU),
American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM), Association of Flight
Attendants (AFA), International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT),
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM),
and Association of Professional Flight Attendants (AFPA).
    The commenters raised three principal issues: Increased rest
period, costs, and implementation. A4A and Endeavor Air provided
information indicating the increased rest period would increase costs
to certificate holders. ALPA, TTD, TWU, AASM, AFA, IBT, IAM, APFA, and
many individuals supported the increased rest period, emphasizing the
roles and responsibilities of flight attendants with regard to aviation
safety, commenting that flight attendants' performance of their duties
is fatigue-inducing and that they would benefit from increased rest.
These commenters also stated that the increased rest would not always
result in increased costs.

Rest Period

    Many commenters supported increasing the rest period to at least 10
consecutive hours. AASM stated that providing flight attendants with a
10-hour minimum rest period should increase their sleep duration and
subsequent on-the-job alertness and performance. Some commenters went
further to request that the FAA require flight attendants to receive
more rest hours, such as a period of 12 hours. Other commenters
recommended that for every hour of duty, the FAA should require
certificate holders to provide a flight attendant one hour or one and a
half hours of rest. In addition, some commenters recommended that the
rest period should only begin at hotel check-in, to maximize rest.
    Some commenters asked the FAA to consider research on flight
attendant fatigue and to look generally at its flight, duty, and rest
scheme for flight attendants. AASM stated that further research is
required to determine whether the minimum rest period should be
modified for duty periods that encroach on the biological night.
Additionally, one individual recommended the FAA review existing
research on flight attendant fatigue from the Civil Aerospace Medical
Institute (CAMI) and suggested that the FAA align flight attendant
flight, duty, and rest requirements with flightcrew members' rest
schemes.
    A4A and Endeavor Air provided information indicating the increased
rest period would increase costs to certificate holders. A4A commented
that flight attendant rest requirements are necessary and that they
strongly support scientifically validated and data-driven
countermeasures to prevent fatigue. A4A stated, however, that
regulations should be limited to implementing only what is required by
the statute and stated the FAA should incorporate cost mitigation
measures. A4A also mentioned that the FAA could achieve the safety
benefits of this regulation effectively and more efficiently through a
risk-based rule in lieu of prescriptive hours-based requirements.
    The FAA's action to propose this rulemaking complies with the
requirements of section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018. Accordingly, the FAA
has scoped this rulemaking to address the discrete, specific statutory
mandate in section 335(a) and does not propose further amendments to
flight attendant flight, duty, and rest schemes, as some commenters
suggested. In addition, the FAA lacks data and supporting research or
studies that would support a further increase in the rest period.
    The rest requirement provided in this rulemaking is a minimum rest
requirement. The FAA notes that, while not part of this rulemaking,
section 335(b) of the FAARA 2018 mandates certificate holders
conducting operations under part 121 to submit to the FAA flight
attendant fatigue risk management plans (FRMP), which encompass a risk-
based approach to flight attendant rest consistent with the FAA
regulations on rest requirements for flight attendants. Certificate
holders have the option to amend their FRMPs to provide flight
attendants with more rest than the FAA requires, and nothing in this
NPRM would preclude a certificate holder from increasing the rest
period.

Cost

    A4A stated that implementing this proposal would reduce schedule
flexibility, result in a potential loss of income for flight
attendants, and increase cost to certificate holders due to new hire
turnover costs, training costs, scheduling software costs, and travel
costs. A4A estimated that it would cost $786 million over 10 years for
the 66 percent of flight attendants who are employed by certificate
holders that are members of A4A's organization, and estimated $1
billion over 10 years for all certificate holders. A4A noted that the
increased rest period may result in flight attendants having ``unpaid
idle time'' away from their home base, resulting in a reduction in the
average pay credit per calendar day spent at work. A4A also stated that
certificate holders will need to plan for 11 hours of rest instead of
10 hours, in order to ensure an appropriate buffer for delays, and that
eliminating certificate holders' ability to reduce rest during day-of
operations will drive extensive additional costs and harm flight
attendants, who might otherwise choose to stay on duty longer. A4A
stated that flight attendants may need to change the way they bid for
schedules and may have to choose between flying longer at night or
flying more days during the month to get the same hours they are
getting now. A4A also stated that less senior flight attendants are
likely to be exposed to trips that are most impacted by the
implementation of section 335(a) and less desirable schedules, and that
flight attendants will have fewer days off per month because they will
have to increase the number of trips they fly each month to maintain
the same number of flight hours and standard of living they had prior
to implementing section 335(a).
    A4A further commented that, if a certificate holder does not
increase its flight attendant scheduling construction and aircraft
route scheduling buffer, it will simply have to manage the consequences
and costs of delays that arise out of irregular operations and
maintenance. In these circumstances, A4A suggested certificate holders
will have to remove the flight attendants that are about to ``time
out'' because they have not received the scheduled rest required by
section 335(a) and must assign other flight attendants (if any are
available, which might not be the case at many smaller airports) to
finish the trip while paying both the timed out and active flight
attendant. In the alternative, A4A mentioned certificate holders might
push back the departure time of the next flight to which these flight
attendants are assigned in order to preserve the scheduled rest
periods, creating a cascading chain of delays.
    Endeavor Airlines provided a chart indicating that compliance with
the increased rest period would result in initial costs of $205,000 and
recurring costs of $203,800, based on their estimates for 2020, 2021,
and 2022. It stated that because planned rest must increase, less daily
activity would be scheduled, driving fewer days off. It also indicated
that the increased rest would drive increased costs for software, new
hires, and training.
    AFA and IBT stated that multiple airlines have already included the
additional rest that would result from the rule change required by
section

335(a) in their contracts. AFA and IBT further state that these
airlines have implemented the additional rest quickly and without
incurring additional costs, and that the argument that the increased
rest is too costly and difficult to implement is without merit. APFA,
IAM, and TWU stated that it is unlikely that certificate holders would
undertake any significant costs in implementing a change to a 10-hour
minimum rest period for flight attendants. These commenters stated
while some airlines claim possible additional costs, the vast majority
of flight attendants are guaranteed approximately 10 hours of rest
today under their existing terms of work. They also mentioned that
costs of compliance would be minimal, as major certificate holders
making up over 90 percent of total available seat miles of certificate
holders affected by the proposed rule already schedule their crews with
at least 10 hours of rest between shifts. TTD stated that current
scheduling, operations, and training practices, combined with the fact
that a number of certificate holders currently operate with 10-hour
rest periods, means that costs incurred by certificate holders are
likely to be tempered. TTD expressed skepticism that the rulemaking
would qualify as an economically significant rule.
    The FAA carefully analyzed the varied comments received on the
economic impact of the required rulemaking. In the course of analyzing
these comments to the ANPRM, the FAA determined it needed additional,
individualized data. As a result, after the ANPRM comment period
closed, the FAA conducted additional outreach as discussed later in
this preamble.

Implementation

    Many commenters expressed concern that the FAA is past due on
rulemaking and implementation of the section 335(a) mandate. APFA, IAM,
and TWU stated that delay in implementation is inconsistent with
Congressional requirements and that flight attendants deserved more
rest, noting the physically demanding aspects of flight attendant
duties. TTD endorsed the comments filed by APFA, IAM, and TWU and
called on the FAA to proceed immediately with an interim final rule to
implement the flight attendant duty period and rest requirements
mandated by the FAARA 2018, stating that the FAA must not create
artificial impediments to the promulgation of this urgently needed
regulatory change. TTD stated that even if the FAA determines that the
proposed rule is economically significant, that determination should
have no impact on expeditiously publishing a final rule. TTD further
stated that by taking aggressive action to apply these fatigue
protections, the FAA can swiftly improve the safety and security of the
aviation system. ALPA indicated that it understood that the majority of
U.S. flight attendants either currently receive 10 hours of rest or
would receive such rest by the time the FAA issues a final rule, and
that delay in implementing the rest requirement is not acceptable in
view of aviation safety and security.
    AFA and other commenters stated they assumed the FAA would allow a
six-month implementation period. AFA noted that after the FAA published
the ANPRM (September 2019), Delta Airlines announced its plans to
implement the new rest period in February 2020. AFA asserted that
Delta's actions show that certificate holders can implement the new
provisions in a few months' time. A4A, however, recommended the FAA
propose and adopt an implementation period of at least 12 months to
reduce costs.
    Section 335(a) required the FAA, in a narrow timeframe, to modify
an existing final rule to require that flight attendants receive
increased rest. The FAA is implementing this rulemaking requirement
consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act and DOT Order 2100.6A,
Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures. Regarding comments addressing the
compliance period, an extended implementation period would be
inconsistent with the intent of this statutory mandate. Moreover, the
FAA expects that a delay in the compliance period would only delay the
realization of both benefits and costs. Additionally, a delay in the
compliance period of less than a full year would be imperceptible in
the monetized cost estimates.

Additional Outreach

    The FAA received only limited quantitative information from
certificate holders estimating costs in response to the questions
contained in the ANPRM. A4A provided aggregated data, but the FAA
needed individualized data to complete its regulatory impact analysis
of the regulatory change required by section 335(a). Therefore, after
the comment period for the ANPRM closed, the FAA conducted additional
outreach to nine air carrier certificate holders that would be subject
to the amended requirements. The FAA's outreach focused on the current
amount of rest the certificate holder provided flight attendants; the
impacts from implementing the statutorily mandated rest; and barriers
to implementing the statutorily mandated rest. The FAA was able to
gather sufficient data to assess the anticipated impacts of requiring
the increased rest. Due to the proprietary and confidential nature of
the information collected from certificate holders, the FAA has
published this information as aggregated summary results. This NPRM and
the regulatory evaluation for this proposed rule, however, summarize
the correspondence with certificate holders and the information the FAA
received from certificate holders to the extent necessary to inform the
public of the bases for its proposed determinations in the regulatory
evaluation.

IV. Discussion of the Proposal

    Currently, certificate holders conducting domestic, flag, and
supplemental operations must fulfill the flight attendant duty period
limitations and rest requirements in 14 CFR 121.467. Paragraph (b) of
Sec.  121.467 provides that a flight attendant scheduled to a duty
period of 14 hours or less must be given a scheduled rest period of at
least nine consecutive hours. This rest period must occur between the
completion of the scheduled duty period and the commencement of the
subsequent duty period. The certificate holder may schedule or reduce
the rest period to eight consecutive hours if the certificate holder
provides a subsequent rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours that
is scheduled to begin no later than 24 hours after the beginning of the
reduced rest period.
    Section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018 requires ``[modification of] the
final rule'' \6\ relating to flight attendant duty period limitations
and rest requirements to ``ensure that--(A) a flight attendant
scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less is given a scheduled
rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours; and (B) the rest period
is not reduced under any circumstances.'' Consistent with the
requirement of section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018, the proposed rule
would amend Sec.  121.467(b)(2) and (b)(3) to require certificate
holders operating under part 121 to provide 10 hours of consecutive
rest for flight attendants scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or
less, remove the allowance for a reduction in rest, and explicitly
prohibit

a reduction in the 10 hours of rest. For the reasons described in the
FAA's response to ANPRM comments on implementation, certificate holders
would be required to comply with the proposed rule upon the effective
date, 30 days after publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Section 335(a)(1) requires modification of ``the final rule
of the Federal Aviation Administration published in the Federal
Register on August 19, 1994 (59 FR 42974; relating to flight
attendant duty period limitations and rest requirements) in
accordance with the requirements of this subsection.'' The citation
to the Federal Register publication refers to the final rule
implementing the flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements of Sec.  121.467.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United States. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The current
threshold after adjustment for inflation is $158,000,000, using the
most current (2020) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic
Product. The FAA has provided a detailed Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) in the docket for this rulemaking. This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed
rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
proposed rule: Is a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866; may have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities; will not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States; and
will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal
governments, or on the private sector.

A. Regulatory Impact Analysis

    This section provides a summary of the FAA's Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA). Please see the RIA available in the docket for the
rulemaking for more details.
Baseline for the Analysis
    The baseline for analysis of the incremental benefits and costs of
the proposed rule includes the regulations regarding flight attendant
rest and existing practices, the affected entities and flight
attendants, and potential safety and health risks. Again, note that the
baseline presented in this document predates the coronavirus (COVID-19)
public health emergency. It is possible that when the rulemaking
becomes final, the actual conditions for certificate holders may differ
from the information collected prior to the public health emergency.
    Currently, certificate holders conducting domestic, flag, or
supplemental operations under 14 CFR part 121 must provide a flight
attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less a scheduled
rest period of at least 9 consecutive hours. The certificate holder may
schedule or reduce the rest period to eight consecutive hours if the
certificate holder provides a subsequent rest period of at least 10
consecutive hours that is scheduled to begin no later than 24 hours
after the beginning of the reduced rest period. In response to the
FAARA 2018 and other circumstances (including that some airlines
schedule flight attendants to be synchronized with those for pilots),
12 certificate holders already schedule flight attendants for 10 hours
of rest. The provision may be reflected in a certificate holder's
collective bargaining agreement with the flight attendant union.
    The FAA's Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS) contains
information on certificate holders conducting operations under part 121
and the number of flight attendants. Table 1 provides a summary by
category of carrier.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ SPAS categories are as follows: Majors: Fleet does not
contain any ``Cargo Only'' configured aircraft; and greater than 25
percent of fleet are aircraft configured with maximum passenger
capacity greater than or equal to 100 seats, and fleet size is
greater than or equal to 400. Nationals: Fleet does not contain any
``Cargo Only'' configured aircraft, and greater than 25 percent of
fleet are aircraft configured with maximum passenger capacity
greater than or equal to 100 seats, and fleet size is less than 400.
Regionals: Fleet does not contain any ``Cargo Only'' configured
aircraft, and greater than or equal to 75 percent of fleet are
aircraft configured with maximum passenger capacity less than 100
seats. Passenger and Cargo Only: Fleet includes ``Passenger
configured'' aircraft and ``Cargo Only'' configured aircraft.

                          Table 1--Universe of Affected Entities and Flight Attendants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average number
                                                                     Number of     Total number      of flight
                            Category                                certificate      of flight    attendants per
                                                                      holders       attendants      certificate
                                                                                holder
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major...........................................................               4          91,420          22,855
National........................................................              13          21,805           1,677
Passenger and Cargo.............................................               5             703             141
Regional........................................................              21          14,196             676
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              43         128,124           2,980
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NVIS = National Vital Information System.
SPAS = Safety Performance Analysis System.
Source: FAA Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS), SPAS NVIS Air Operator--12/05/2019.

    Bureau of Transportation Statistics data indicate that flight
attendants serve hundreds of millions of passengers on close to 10
million flights annually in the United States.\8\ Flight attendants
perform safety and security functions while on duty in addition to
serving customers. Voluntary reports submitted by flight attendants to
the Aviation Safety Reporting System indicate the potential for fatigue
to be associated with poor performance of safety and

security related tasks. For example, in 2017, a flight attendant
reported almost causing the gate agent to deploy a slide, which he/she
attributed to, among other causes, having been fatigued.\9\ Additional
examples of voluntary reports regarding flight attendant fatigue are
included in the RIA. Other reports included poor response to a
passenger incident and feeling pressure to work despite being fatigued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Bureau of Transportation Statistics T-100 Segment (flights)
and Market (passengers) data. Available online at www.BTS.gov.
    \9\ See Aviation Safety Reporting System Database Online
(https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/search/database.html) report 1452656 from
May 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Benefits
    The benefits of the proposed regulation would include reductions in
safety risks, and any improvements in flight attendant health, that may
be associated with the increase in flight attendant minimum rest
periods. Flight attendants must be prepared to respond quickly to
emergencies including evacuations, crash impacts, post-crash or
inflight fires, ditching,\10\ runway over runs, security events, and
similar situations. Commenters on the ANPRM note that the scientific
bases for fatigue impacts on task performance are well understood,
although the specific impact to flight attendant task performance has
not been well-studied. Benefits of increasing the minimum flight
attendant rest period may accrue through reduced safety risks. However,
as discussed in additional detail in the RIA, any reductions in safety
risk are likely to be small since they would also depend on the
frequency which safety-oriented tasks occur, and currently U.S. air
carriers experience very few accidents resulting in death or serious
injury. Additionally, given the potential impact of fatigue on health,
the proposed rule could also result in health benefits for flight
attendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Refers to crash-landing into water an aircraft not designed
for the purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA does not have sufficient data to estimate a baseline level
of safety risk associated with flight attendant fatigue. In addition,
it is also difficult to estimate (and the FAA does not have data on)
the impact of the proposed rule in reducing flight attendant fatigue-
related performance errors (i.e., how outcomes will differ compared to
under the current rest period). Similarly, because multiple factors
affect flight attendant health, it is difficult to identify health
risks specifically attributable to rest period-related fatigue and the
impact of the proposed rest requirement in reducing that risk.
Costs
    The FAA used data that it collects from certificate holders
conducting operations under part 121 and information submitted in
response to the ANPRM, as supplemented or verified through additional
outreach, to estimate the costs that may be associated with the
proposed rule. To better understand the ANPRM responses, the FAA
conducted additional outreach to three major, three national, and three
regional certificate holders in January and February 2020. This effort
assisted in applying the ANPRM comment responses to estimate costs.
    The FAA used this data and information to estimate incremental
costs, including new hires of flight attendants, onboarding, training,
travel, and modifying crew scheduling software. As some of these
certificate holders implemented the proposed rest requirement around
the time the FAARA 2018 was enacted or shortly thereafter, uncertainty
exists regarding whether implementation occurred due to anticipation of
the required rule change or other business reasons independent of
regulatory action. Therefore, the FAA measures the costs of the
proposed rule from two baselines to capture the different levels of
incremental effects attributable to the rule, consistent with the
Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) guidelines: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The OMB's 2003 guidance on regulatory analysis, Circular A-
4, is available online at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a-4/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Existing practices baseline--certificate holder practices
at the time of the proposed rule.
     Pre-statutory baseline--certificate holder practices at
the time of the FAARA 2018.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ OMB Circular A-4 requires agencies to use a pre-statutory
baseline for regulatory analysis of statutory requirements (pp. 15
and 16): ``In some cases, substantial portions of a rule may simply
restate statutory requirements that would be self-implementing, even
in the absence of the regulatory action. In these cases, you [the
agency] should use a pre-statute baseline.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 shows the affected entities by category in each baseline
scenario and the current number of flight attendants.

                 Table 2--Potentially Affected Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Number of
                                            certificate      Number of
                Category                   holders with       flight
                                            incremental     attendants
                                               costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Practices Baseline:
    Major...............................               2          41,217
    National............................              11          19,458
    Passenger and Cargo.................               4             437
    Regional............................              14           6,152
                                         -------------------------------
        Total...........................              31          67,264
Pre-statutory Baseline:
    Major...............................               4          91,420
    National............................              12          21,674
    Passenger and Cargo.................               5             739
    Regional............................              15           6,208
                                         -------------------------------
        Total...........................              36         120,041
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The number of affected certificate holders does not equal the
  universe (total number) of certificate holders under both baselines
  because some carriers have implemented the rest for other reasons
  (e.g., regional carriers scheduling flight attendants with pilots).

    Table 3 provides the estimates of annualized and present value
costs using both baselines. The key factor influencing the magnitude of
the costs is the selection of the relevant baseline for the analysis.
Note that uncertainties

exist regarding the characterization of both baselines, as the FAA does
not have complete information on existing practices or recent changes
that carriers have made as a result of the FAARA 2018 or in
anticipation of the rule. In addition, with respect to hires, it can be
difficult to differentiate impacts due to a requirement to provide 10
hours of rest that cannot be reduced and other factors including growth
or other trends. The outreach effort confirmed that the type of
operations, which are specific to each certificate holder, affect the
impacts.

                   Table 3--Summary of Estimated Costs
                               [Millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Annualized    5-year present
              Discount rate                    cost            value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Practices Baseline:
    7%..................................           $67.5          $277.0
    3%..................................            67.3           308.3
Pre-statutory Baseline:
    7%..................................           117.9           483.5
    3%..................................           117.7           538.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 4 provides a breakout by category of certificate holder (for
the seven percent discount rate scenario). The FAA modeled costs per
certificate holder as a function of the certificate holder's size
(number of flight attendants). Table 5 shows the estimated increases in
flight attendants across categories by baseline scenario. These results
are based on the hiring needs identified by commenters that responded
to the ANPRM. However, the FAA acknowledges that the input values may
not be sufficiently representative of the different certificate holders
in each category.

                           Table 4--Annualized Costs by Category of Certificate Holder
                                          [Millions, 7% discount rate]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average
                                                                     Number of                      annualized
                            Category                                certificate     Annualized       cost per
                                                                      holders          cost         certificate
                                                                                holder
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Practices Baseline:
    Major.......................................................               2           $45.3           $22.7
    National....................................................              11            17.6             1.6
    Passenger and Cargo.........................................               4             0.3             0.1
    Regional....................................................              14             4.2             0.3
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total...................................................              31            67.5             2.2
Pre-statutory Baseline:
    Major.......................................................               4            93.6            23.4
    National....................................................              12            19.6             1.5
    Passenger and Cargo.........................................               5             0.5             0.1
    Regional....................................................              15             4.2             0.2
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total...................................................              36           117.9             2.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Table 5--Estimated Hiring by Category of Certificate Holder
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Number of      Increase in
                Category                    certificate       flight
                                              holder        attendants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Practices Baseline:
    Major...............................               2             377
    National............................              11             149
    Passenger and Cargo.................               4               3
    Regional............................              14              36
                                         -------------------------------
        Total...........................              31             565
Pre-statutory Baseline:
    Major...............................               4             836
    National............................              12             166
    Passenger and Cargo.................               5               4
    Regional............................              15              36
                                         -------------------------------
        Total...........................              36           1,043
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uncertainty
    There are a number of uncertainties in the analysis. The hiring
response by major certificate holders has potentially the largest
impact on costs. The FAA is also uncertain about the extent to which
airlines use flexible scheduling, and requests data and information
from the public regarding how flexible scheduling is used. For example,
reducing the hiring assumption for these certificate holders by half
reduces estimated costs by over 30 percent. A key uncertainty exists
regarding any lingering or lasting changes to the industry following
the COVID-19 public health emergency and the impact on benefits and
costs.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, Public Law 96-354, 94
Stat. 1164 (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat.
857, Mar. 29, 1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L.
111-240, 124 Stat. 2504 Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal agencies to
consider the effects of the regulatory action on small business and
other small entities and to minimize any significant economic impact.
The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses and not-for-
profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are
not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
    The FAA is publishing this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) to aid the public in commenting on the potential impacts to
small entities from this proposal. The FAA invites interested parties
to submit data and information regarding the potential economic impact
that would result from the proposal. The FAA will consider comments
when making a determination or when completing a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Assessment. An IRFA contains the following:
    (1) A description of the reasons why the action by the agency is
being considered;
    (2) A succinct statement of the objective of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule;
    (3) A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
    (4) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
    (5) An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule; and
    (6) A description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and
which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on
small entities.
Reasons the Action Is Being Considered
    On October 5, 2018, Congress enacted the FAARA 2018. Section 335(a)
of the FAARA 2018 requires modification of the flight attendant duty
period limitations and rest requirements to ``ensure that--(A) a flight
attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less is given a
scheduled rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours; and (B) the
rest period is not reduced under any circumstances.'' On September 25,
2019, the FAA published an ANPRM to solicit input from the public on
the regulatory impact of the mandated changes. The proposed rulemaking,
if finalized, would modify the flight attendant duty period limitations
and rest requirements as required by the FAARA 2018.
Objectives of the Proposed Rule
    This proposed rule would modify the flight attendant duty period
limitations and rest requirements in 14 CFR 121.467 consistent with the
requirements of the FAARA 2018. As such, the minimum rest period for a
flight attendant scheduled for a duty period of 14 hours would increase
from at least 9 consecutive hours to at least 10 consecutive hours. The
FAA would also remove the ability of the certificate holder to reduce
the rest period that current regulations allow. This proposed rule
would fulfill the statutory requirement to provide flight attendants
additional rest, which certificate holders would not be permitted to
reduce.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities
    The FAA used the definition of small entities in the RFA for this
analysis. The RFA defines small entities as small businesses, small
governmental jurisdictions, or small organizations. In 5 U.S.C. 601(3),
the RFA defines ``small business'' to have the same meaning as ``small
business concern'' under section 3 of the Small Business Act. The Small
Business Act authorizes the Small Business Administration (SBA) to
define ``small business'' by issuing regulations.
    The SBA established size standards for various types of economic
activities, or industries, under the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS).\13\ These size standards generally
define small businesses based on the number of employees or annual
receipts. Table 6 shows the SBA size standards for certificate holders
as an example. Note that the SBA definition of a small business applies
to the parent company and all affiliates as a single entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Small Business Administration (SBA) Table of Size
Standards. Effective August 12, 2019. https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.

       Table 6--Small Business Size Standards: Air Transportation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            SBA size
          NAICS code                  Description           standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
481111........................  Scheduled Passenger     1,500 employees.
                                 Air Transportation.
481112........................  Scheduled Freight Air   1,500 employees.
                                 Transportation.
481211........................  Nonscheduled Chartered  1,500 employees.
                                 Passenger Air
                                 Transportation.
481212........................  Nonscheduled Chartered  1,500 employees.
                                 Freight Air
                                 Transportation.
481219........................  Other Nonscheduled Air  $16.5 million.
                                 Transportation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certificate holders affected by the proposed requirements for
flight attendant rest are those authorized to conduct operations under
14 CFR part 121. To identify small entities, the FAA first identified
the primary NAICS of the certificate holder or parent company, and then
used data from different sources (e.g., company annual reports, Bureau
of Transportation Statistics) to determine whether the certificate
holder meets the applicable size standard.

Table 7 provides a summary of the estimated number of small entities to
which this proposed rule would apply.

                                   Table 7--Estimated Number of Small Entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of     Number small    Percent small
                            Category                                 entities        entities        entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major...........................................................               4               0               0
National........................................................              13               4              31
Passenger and Cargo.............................................               5               2              40
Regional........................................................              21               4              19
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              43              10              23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
    No new recordkeeping or reporting requirements are associated with
the proposed rule. Small entity compliance with the proposed rule might
entail hiring additional flight attendants, providing initial and
recurring training, travel and per diem costs, and modifying software.
In addition, costs might result from updating procedural manuals.
    Table 8 shows the estimated annualized compliance costs by category
and the number of small entities in each category. Based on average
compliance costs, impacts do not appear disproportionate to small
entities. Also, regional certificate holders, which account for four of
the identified small entities, may be less likely affected by the
proposed rule due to scheduling flight attendants with pilots. To the
extent that small entities provide more unique services or serve
markets with less competition, these entities might be able to pass on
costs in the form of price increases.

         Table 8--Average Cost of Compliance and Small Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Average
                                                            annualized
                                             Number of       cost per
                Category                  small entities    certificate
                                                              holder
                                                          (millions) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major...................................               0           $22.7
National................................               4            $1.6
Passenger and Cargo.....................               2            $0.1
Regional................................               4            $0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on a baseline of existing practices and using a 7% discount
  rate.

All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
    There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed rule.
Significant Alternatives Considered
    The FAA considered conducting a comprehensive review and revision
of the flight attendant duty and rest regulations, similar to revisions
the FAA made in the Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements rule.
77 FR 330 (Jan. 4, 2012). The FAA rejected this alternative because of
the narrow scope of the statutory mandate for rulemaking. Additionally,
the FAA lacks data-based rationale that indicates a comprehensive
update is necessary. Also, increased comprehensive or stringent
requirements could add burden rather than reduce burden on small
entities.
    Section 335(a) contains instruction on specific, prescriptive
amendments to the existing rest requirement. Any lower-cost
alternatives would contravene the statute. Therefore, the FAA did not
identify or consider any lower-cost alternatives to the statutory
mandate.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The
requirements of this proposed rule would not create an obstacle to
foreign commerce because they would apply only to flight attendants
serving in operations conducted by U.S.-certificate holders conducting
operations under part 121.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., 5 CFR 1320.8(d) requires that the FAA provide interested members
of the public and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on
information collection and recordkeeping requests. This action does not
impose new information collection requirements as defined in 14 CFR
part 1320.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State,
local, or tribal government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal government having first provided
the funds to pay those costs. The FAA determined that the proposed rule
to address section 335(a) of the FAARA 2018 would not result in costs
of $155 million or more, adjusted for inflation, to either State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private
sector in any one year.

F. International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable.
The FAA has reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended
Practices and has identified no differences with these proposed
regulations.

G. Environmental Analysis

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

VI. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    The FAA has determined this action is a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 that would be
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The rulemaking
is also a significant regulatory action under DOT Order 2100.6A
``Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures,'' issued by the Department of
Transportation on June 7, 2021.
    Executive Orders 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR
51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), and 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,'' 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), require agencies to regulate in
the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs,'' and
to develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on society.''
Executive Order 13610, ``Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens,''
77 FR 28469 (May 14, 2012), urges agencies to conduct retrospective
analyses of existing rules to examine whether they remain justified and
whether they should be modified or streamlined in light of changed
circumstances, including the rise of new technologies.
    Additionally, Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13610 require
agencies to provide a meaningful opportunity for public participation.
Accordingly, the FAA invites comments on these considerations,
including any cost or benefit figures or factors, alternative
approaches, and relevant scientific, technical and economic data.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999),
requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input by State and
local officials in the development of regulatory policies that may have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' The
Agency has determined that this action would not have a substantial
direct effect on the States, or the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, and,
therefore, would not have Federalism implications.

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

    Consistent with Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,'' and FAA Order 1210.20,
``American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and
Procedures,'' the FAA ensures that Federally Recognized Tribes (Tribes)
are given the opportunity to provide meaningful and timely input
regarding proposed Federal actions that have the potential to uniquely
or significantly affect their respective Tribes. At this point, the FAA
has not identified any unique or significant effects, environmental or
otherwise, on tribes resulting from this proposed rule.

D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation and International Trade Analysis

    Under Executive Order 13609, ``Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation,'' 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012), agencies must consider
whether the impacts associated with significant variations between
domestic and international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may
impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete
internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety,
labor, security, environmental, and other issues, regulatory approaches
developed through international cooperation can provide equivalent
protection to standards developed independently while also minimizing
unnecessary differences.

VII. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The Agency
also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy,
or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit only one time.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The Agency may change this proposal in
light of the comments it receives.

B. Confidential Business Information

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

placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

C. Electronic Access and Filing

    A copy of the ANPRM, NPRM, all comments received, any final rule,
and all background material may be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov using the docket number listed above. A copy of
this proposed rule will be placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval
help and guidelines are available on the website. It is available 24
hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of this document
may also be downloaded from the Office of the Federal Register's
website at https://www.federalregister.gov and the Government
Publishing Office's website at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also
be found at the FAA's Regulations and Policies website at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in
the electronic docket for this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aviation safety, Safety, Transportation.

The Proposed Amendment

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 121 is revised to read as follows:

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

0
2. Amend Sec.  121.467 by revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) to read as
follows:

Sec.  121.467   Flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements: Domestic, flag, and supplemental operations.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) A flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or
less as provided under paragraph (b)(1) of this section must be given a
scheduled rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours. This rest
period must occur between the completion of the scheduled duty period
and the commencement of the subsequent duty period.
    (3) The rest period required under paragraph (b)(2) of this section
may not be reduced to less than 10 consecutive hours.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority provided by 49 U.S.C.
106(f) and 44701(a)(5) on October 20, 2021.
Steve Dickson,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2021-23253 Filed 11-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 21, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14498-14499]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05058]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0043; FRL-9958-99-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
California Mobile Source Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP)
consisting of California Air Resources Board regulations establishing
standards and other requirements relating to the control of emissions
from new on-road and new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines. The
EPA is proposing to approve these regulations because the regulations
meet the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act. Approval of the
regulations as part of the California SIP would make them federally
enforceable.

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by April 20, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2017-0043 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to John
Ungvarsky, Planning Office at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or
edited from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA
may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3963<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA. This proposal addresses California Air
Resources Board regulations establishing standards and other
requirements relating to the control of emissions from new on-road and
new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines. In the Rules and
Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are approving these
regulations in a direct final action without prior proposal because we
believe this SIP revision is not controversial. If we receive adverse
comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct
final rule and address the comments in

subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on a particular rule, we may adopt as final
those/the rule(s) that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: January 18, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-05058 Filed 3-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P