[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9504-9505]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2216-084]

New York Power Authority; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Request for recreation plan amendment.
    b. Project No.: 2216-084.
    c. Dates Filed: July 12 and November 22, 2017.
    d. Applicant: New York Power Authority.
    e. Name of Project: Niagara Power Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Niagara River in Niagara
County, New York. The project does not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Stephen M. Schoenwiesner, Licensing
Manager, New York Power Authority, 123 Main Street, White Plains, NY
10601,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Mary Karwoski,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission
(March 28, 2018).
    All documents may be filed electronically via the internet. See, 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be
filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-2216-084) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: New York Power Authority (licensee)
requests Commission approval for an amendment to its current recreation
plan to remove a two mile section, of which 1.4 miles is inside the
project boundary, of the four-lane Niagara Scenic Parkway (formerly
known as the Robert Moses Parkway) between Main Street and Findlay
Drive; restore the landscape reclaimed along the Niagara Gorge rim;
construct a pedestrian/bicycle trial network along the Niagara Gorge
rim; and reconfigure the Upper Whirlpool Overlook recreation site to
enhance its scenic and recreational value and integrate the existing
recreation site into the network of trails.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or

intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or
protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to
intervene, or protests should relate to project works which are the
subject of the license amendment. Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or
motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener
files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits
of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular
resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that
resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this
application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: February 27, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-04460 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8257-8263]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02991]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 121

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0929; Amdt. No. 121-369]
RIN 2120-AJ17

Prohibition on Personal Use of Electronic Devices on the Flight
Deck

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule will prohibit flightcrew members in operations
under part 121 from using a personal wireless communications device or
laptop computer for personal use while at their duty station on the
flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. This rule, which
conforms FAA regulations with legislation, is intended to ensure that
certain non-essential activities do not contribute to the challenge of
task management on the flight deck or a loss of situational awareness
due to attention to non-essential tasks.

DATES: Effective April 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking
documents and other information related to this final rule, see the
``How To Obtain Additional Information'' section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this final rule, contact Nancy Lauck Claussen, Air Transportation
Division (AFS-200), Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For legal questions concerning this action, contact Nancy Sanchez,
Office of the Chief Counsel, Regulations Division, AGC-200, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 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,
and 49 U.S.C. 44732, which prohibits the personal use of electronic
devices on the flight deck by flightcrew members. Additionally, this
rule fulfills a statutory mandate found in Section 307 of Public Law
112-95, The Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform
Act of 2012.

Table of Contents

I. Overview of Final Rule
II. Background
    A. Related Rule
    B. Statement of the Problem
    C. National Transportation Safety Board Recommendations
    D. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    E. General Overview of Comments
III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
    A. Requirements
    B. Current Air Carrier Programs
    C. Operational Timeframes for Prohibition
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Regulatory Evaluation
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
    C. International Trade Impact Assessment
    D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
    G. Environmental Analysis
V. Executive Order Determinations
    A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563
    B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    C. 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

I. Overview of Final Rule

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization and Reform
Act of 2012 (the Act) was enacted on February 14, 2012. Section 307 of
the Act, Prohibition on Personal Use of Electronic Devices on the
Flight Deck, makes it ``unlawful for a flight crewmember of an aircraft
used to provide air transportation under part 121 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, to use a personal wireless communications device
or laptop computer while at the flight crewmember's duty station on the
flight deck of such an aircraft while the aircraft is being operated.''
The legislation also states that this prohibition does not apply to the
use of a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for
a purpose directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for
emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in
accordance with procedures established by the air carrier and the FAA.
    The FAA is amending part 121 to conform to this legislation. The
FAA is amending Sec.  121.542 to add language to prohibit flightcrew
members operating under part 121 from using a personal wireless
communications device or a laptop computer for personal use while at
their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is being
operated. The amended regulatory language defines what is considered to
be a personal wireless communications device. The regulatory language
also clarifies that the prohibition on use of a personal wireless
communications device or laptop computer does not apply to the use of a
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for a
purpose directly related to the operation of the aircraft, or for
emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in
accordance with procedures established by the air carrier and approved
by the FAA. The amended regulatory language also uses the term ``flight
crewmember'' to conform with other paragraphs in amended Sec.  121.542.
However, the preamble to this final rule, as well as all recent FAA
rulemakings, uses the term ``flightcrew member'' to conform with the
definition contained in Sec.  1.1; therefore, these terms are used
interchangeably.

II. Background

A. Related Rule

    In 1981, the FAA published the Elimination of Duties and Activities
of Flight Crewmembers Not Required for the Safe Operation of Aircraft
Final Rule.\1\ This rule, better known as the ``Sterile Cockpit'' rule,
required air carriers operating under parts 121 and 135, as well as
flightcrew members in those operations, to ensure that the environment
on the flight deck was free from potentially dangerous distractions.
The 1981 final rule states that air carriers shall not require their
flightcrew members to perform non-safety related duties during critical
phases of flight and that flightcrew members shall not conduct non-
safety related activities which could cause distractions on the flight
deck during critical phases of flight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 46 FR 5500 (Jan. 19, 1981).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1981 rule further states that the pilot-in-command (PIC) shall
not permit any activity during a critical phase of flight which would
distract flightcrew members from the performance of their duties. This
in effect extends the sterile cockpit provisions to other crewmembers,
such as flight attendants. The 1981 rule also defines the critical
phases of flight as all ground operations involving taxi, take-off and
landing, and all other flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet,
except cruise flight.
    The personal use of personal wireless communications devices and
laptop computers for non-safety related activities is prohibited by the
broad restrictions in the 1981 ``Sterile Cockpit'' rule during ground
operations involving taxi, take-off and landing, and all other flight
operations conducted below 10,000 feet. This final rule extends the
prohibition on personal use of personal wireless communications devices
and laptop computers to all phases of flight.

B. Statement of the Problem

    Several incidents involving a breakdown of cockpit discipline
prompted Congress to address this issue via legislation. In one
instance, two pilots were using their personal laptop computers during
cruise flight and lost situational awareness, leading to a 150 mile
fly-by of their destination. In another instance, a pilot sent a text
message on her personal cell phone during the taxi phase of the flight
after the aircraft pushed back from the gate and before the take-off
sequence. These incidents illustrate the potential for such devices to
create a hazardous distraction during critical phases of flight.
    This rule will ensure that certain non-essential activities do not
contribute to the challenge of task management on the flight deck and
do not contribute to a loss of situational awareness due to attention
to non-essential activities, as highlighted by these incidents. See 78
FR 2912 (Jan. 15, 2013).

C. National Transportation Safety Board Recommendations

    In its recommendations to the FAA regarding the Colgan accident in
2009, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) concluded that
because of the continuing number of accidents involving a breakdown in
sterile cockpit discipline, collaborative action by the FAA and the
aviation industry to address this issue was warranted. Therefore, the
NTSB recommended (A-10-30) that the FAA require all part 121, 135, and
91 subpart K operators to incorporate explicit guidance to pilots,
including checklist reminders as appropriate, prohibiting the use of
personal portable electronic devices on the flight deck.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/aar1001.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to NTSB recommendation A-10-30, the FAA issued
Information for Operators (InFO) 10003, Cockpit Distractions, on April
26, 2010. The NTSB responded that this action did not fully address the
recommendation because the InFO was advisory only.\3\ With this final
rulemaking, the FAA will amend current Sec.  121.542 to prohibit the
use of personal wireless communications devices and laptop computers by
flightcrew members, for personal use, while the aircraft is being
operated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The NTSB closed recommendation A-10-30 as unacceptable on
June 14, 2012. Summaries of the NTSB and FAA letters on A-10-30 can
be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/SafetyRecs/Private/history.aspx?rec=A-10-030&addressee=FAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 26, 2011, a Eurocopter AS350 B2 helicopter, operating
under part 135, impacted terrain following an engine failure near the
airport in Mosby, Missouri. The helicopter experienced fuel exhaustion
because the pilot departed without ensuring that the helicopter was
adequately fueled. The investigation determined that the pilot engaged
in frequent personal texting, both before and during the accident
flight. The pilot, flight nurse, flight paramedic, and patient were
killed (CEN11FA599). As a result of its investigation, the NTSB issued
the following recommendations:
     Prohibit flight crewmembers in 14 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 135 and 91 subpart K operations from using a portable
electronic device for nonoperational use while at their duty station on
the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. (A-13-7)
     Require all 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121, 135,
and 91 subpart K operators to incorporate into their initial and
recurrent pilot training programs information on the detrimental
effects that distraction due to the nonoperational use of portable
electronic devices can have on performance of safety-critical ground
and flight operations. (A-13-8)
     Require all 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121, 135,
and 91 subpart K operators to review their respective general
operations manuals to ensure that procedures are in place that prohibit
the nonoperational use of portable electronic devices by operational
personnel while in flight and during safety-critical preparatory and
planning activities on the ground in advance of flight. (A-13-9)
    With this final rule, the FAA is establishing an operational
prohibition regarding the personal use of personal wireless
communications devices and laptop computers that responds to these NTSB
recommendations regarding part 121 operations.

D. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On January 15, 2013, the FAA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend part 121 to conform to the FAA Modernization
and Reform Act of 2012. In the NPRM the FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR
121.542 to add language to prohibit flightcrew members operating under
part 121 from using a personal wireless communications device or a
laptop computer for personal use while at their duty station on the
flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. The proposed
regulatory language clarified that the prohibition on use of a personal
wireless communications device or laptop computer did not apply to the
use of a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for
a purpose directly related to the operation of the aircraft, or for
emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in
accordance with procedures established by the air carrier and approved
by the FAA. The comment period for the NPRM closed on March 18, 2013.

E. General Overview of Comments

    The FAA received 63 comments in response to the NPRM. Commenters
included Delta Airlines (Delta), Airline

Pilots Association, International (ALPA), Rockwell Collins, the NTSB,
and individuals. Delta, Rockwell Collins, the NTSB and many individuals
generally supported the rule and stated that it would have a positive
effect on safety. Several of these commenters suggested edits to the
final rule requirements to clarify the proposed requirements, to add
additional limitations to the proposed requirements or to broaden the
scope of the requirements to cover operations under part 135 and part
91 subpart K. ALPA and many individuals opposed the rule. They
generally stated that the rule was unnecessary, unenforceable and may
have a negative effect on safety.

III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule

Expand the Scope of the Final Rule
    The NTSB commented that the FAA should expand the proposed rule to
include part 135 and part 91 subpart K operations. Expanding the final
rule to include part 135 and part 91 subpart K operations is outside
the scope of the final rule, as the NPRM only discussed and solicited
comments on applying this prohibition to part 121 operations.
Additionally, the provisions of the final rule are consistent with the
Congressional mandate to prevent distractions to flightcrew members in
operations under part 121. However, the FAA may address part 135 and
part 91 subpart K operations in future rulemaking.
    One individual commenter noted that the provisions in the final
rule should apply to all required crewmembers on the aircraft,
including flight attendants, and should also apply to aircraft
dispatchers while on duty. Expanding the final rule to include flight
attendants and aircraft dispatchers is outside the scope of the final
rule, as the NPRM only discussed and solicited comments on applying
this prohibition to flightcrew members while at their duty station on
the flight deck. Additionally, the provisions of the rule are
consistent with the Congressional mandate to prevent distractions to
flightcrew members.
Definition of Personal Wireless Communications Device
    Delta commented in support of the proposed rule and noted that they
currently have company policies similar to the proposed regulations.
Delta also suggested that the FAA add language to the final rule to
state that the PIC may allow the use of a personal electronic device by
individuals who are occupying the flight deck jumpseat. Delta also
suggested that the FAA replace the term ``personal wireless
communications device'' with the term ``mobile wireless communications
device.'' Delta noted that the word ``personal'' implies that these
devices are owned by the pilot and wanted it to be clear that the rule
should include any mobile wireless communications device being used for
personal purposes, including company provided devices.
    The FAA clarifies that the prohibition in the final rule only
extends to crewmembers at a flightcrew member duty station; therefore,
the prohibition does not apply to a person occupying the flight deck
jumpseat. Additionally, the provisions of the final rule do not require
an ``ownership'' test regarding the laptop computer or personal
wireless communications device. These devices can be owned by the air
carrier or the flightcrew member. The provisions of the final rule
require a ``use'' test. These devices (regardless of who owns them) may
not be used for personal use (e.g. personal communications, personal
emails, leisure activities, etc.) while the flightcrew member is at his
or her duty station while the aircraft is being operated. In the final
rule, the FAA has amended the regulation to include the statutory
definition for the term ``personal wireless communications devices.''
Increased Restrictions
    One individual commenter suggested that the prohibition on the
personal use of these devices commence when the pilot first enters the
flight deck prior to the flight, instead of at taxi, as proposed in the
NPRM. The FAA has determined that the proposed operational timeframe
for this prohibition, commencing at taxi and ending when the aircraft
is parked at the gate at the end of the flight segment, maintains an
appropriate level of safety because it reflects the current provisions
in the ``sterile cockpit'' rule. The FAA will maintain this requirement
in the final rule.
    One individual pilot generally supported the final rule but offered
an alternative that would be more restrictive than the proposed rule.
This individual recommended that the FAA extend the ``sterile cockpit''
prohibitions to cover the entire flight, including operations above
10,000 feet. Conversely, other pilots noted that for decades, pilots
have stayed mentally engaged and active during long flights with
newspapers, magazines, books, and crosswords. These commenters noted
that these cruise activities enable flightcrew members to address
boredom and fatigue. Additionally, these commenters noted that now
newspapers, magazines, books, and crosswords are replaced by e-readers
and tablets. These commenters reiterated that flightcrew members are
able to manage themselves and their flight activities in a professional
manner. Several commenters also cited safety concerns regarding pilots
who may become bored, lethargic, inattentive and fatigued without the
ability to engage in the personal use of personal electronic devices.
    The FAA notes that activities that promote mental engagement during
operations at cruise altitude have a benefit of keeping a pilot engaged
and alert. However, as discussed in the NPRM, there is a difference in
the potential for certain activities to negatively impact a pilot's
situational awareness.
    The NPRM cited a study \4\ that noted that the high fidelity
attributes of certain displays could be a causal factor that amplified
the likelihood of display induced attentional tunneling of pilots. The
study also noted that ``realistic 3D displays . . . tend to become an
attention sink.'' Additionally, the study notes that ``. . .
attentional tunneling would operate to engage pilots' attention on
these displays more than when situation and guidance information was
presented . . . in a less compelling format.'' It is this potential
safety risk that is addressed by the requirements in the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Wickens, C.D., Alexander, A.L. Attentional tunneling and
task management in synthetic vision displays. The International
Journal of Aviation Psychology, 19(3), 182-199 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One individual commenter suggested that the limitation regarding
the approved operational use of a personal electronic device apply to
only one pilot at a time during cruise flight to ensure that one pilot
is always able to focus on the flight deck displays and is able to
maintain situational awareness. The FAA notes that this proposal only
affects ``personal use'' of personal wireless communications devices
and laptop computers. FAA approved air carrier programs regarding
``approved operational use'' (e.g. electronic flight bags (EFB),
digitized charts or manuals) of personal wireless communications
devices and laptop computers are beyond the scope of this proposal.
Fewer Restrictions
    A pilot commented that the FAA should limit the prohibition on
personal use of these devices to critical phases of flight. The FAA
notes that the provisions of current Sec.  121.542 already

prohibit any activity during a critical phase of flight which could
distract any flightcrew member from the performance of his or her
duties or which could interfere in any way with the proper conduct of
those duties.
    Another pilot commented that flightcrew members should be able to
use any personal electronic device, as long as the purpose is
``aviation related'', such as calling dispatch or maintenance to update
operational or weather information or to receive the latest radar
images to ensure a safe flight path on departure.
    The provisions of the final rule allow those ``aviation related''
activities as long as they are in accordance with FAA approved air
carrier procedures. It is not the FAA's intent to limit the use of
personal wireless communications devices and laptop computers on the
flight deck, as long as those devices support safe operation of the
aircraft. The FAA reiterates that activities outside of an air
carrier's standard operating procedures that may seem innocuous, such
as making phone calls or texting, can create a hazardous distraction
during critical phases of flight. Additionally, as stated in the NPRM,
receiving radar images on personal wireless communications devices can
cause flightcrew members to lose situational awareness when a personal
electronic device used on the flight deck is inconsistent with the type
certified flight deck design philosophy. This inconsistency could
provide distraction, confusion, and ultimately contribute to a loss of
situational awareness.
    Another commenter suggested that the final rule should allow one
pilot to be able to use a portable electronic device for personal use,
as long as the other pilot is not using a portable electronic device
for personal use. The FAA notes that the Act extends the limit to both
pilots at all times ``while at the flight crewmember's duty station on
the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated.''
Current Rules Are Sufficient
    Many individual commenters noted that the current ``sterile
cockpit'' rule should already be sufficient and that the additional
provisions of this rule are not necessary. The FAA notes that this
final rule is responsive to the legislative mandate in Section 307 of
the Act, Prohibition on Personal Use of Electronic Devices on the
Flight Deck, which exceeds the current requirements in Sec.  121.542
(i.e. the ``sterile cockpit'' rule). Section 307 makes it ``unlawful
for a flight crewmember of an aircraft used to provide air
transportation under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations,
to use a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer
while at the flight crewmember's duty station on the flight deck of
such an aircraft while the aircraft is being operated.''
Pilot-In-Command Authority
    ALPA noted that individual airlines must retain the ability to
define the appropriate use of such devices, tailored to their overall
operations. ALPA added that every flight presents a unique set of
challenges that must be addressed by professional flightcrew members.
ALPA further noted that in the event of an inflight emergency or other
abnormal situation, PICs must retain the authority to determine how and
when to use equipment on board the aircraft.
    The FAA notes that the final rule allows air carriers to determine
operational requirements and procedures, subject to approval by the
FAA. Also, as stated by another individual commenter, this regulation
in no way impedes the function of the flightcrew members since the rule
does not apply to the use of a personal wireless communication device
for a purpose that is directly related to the operation of the
aircraft, for emergency and safety-related concerns, in accordance with
FAA approved air carrier procedures. The FAA clarifies, in response to
ALPA's concern, that the provisions of Sec.  91.3, Responsibility and
authority of the pilot in command, remain unchanged. The pilot in
command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final
authority as to, the operation of that aircraft and in an in-flight
emergency requiring immediate action, the PIC may deviate from any rule
of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
Enforcement
    Several individual commenters suggested that all personal wireless
communications devices and laptop computers that are used for approved
operational use should be provided by the air carrier, so the air
carrier could download history, monitor use or block access to certain
material. These commenters noted that this would help to ensure that
the device would be used by the flightcrew member only for approved
operational procedures and would assist in enforcement of the rule.
Several other commenters generally noted that it would be difficult for
the FAA to enforce the provisions of this rule.
    Requiring air carriers to provide all personal wireless
communications devices or laptop computers that are approved for
operational use is not necessary for safety. In addition, this is not
necessary for enforcing the provisions of the final rule.
    The final rule is intended to ensure that certain non-essential
activities do not contribute to the challenge of task management on the
flight deck or a loss of situational awareness due to attention to non-
essential tasks. The safety provisions in the final rule address
``use''. The ``ownership'' of the personal wireless communications
device or laptop computer is not important.
    Additionally, when the FAA published the proposed rule that
established the ``sterile cockpit'' provisions in 1980, the agency
received several similar comments that the provisions of that rule
would be difficult to enforce. The FAA responds to current comments in
the same way the FAA responded to the comments for the ``sterile
cockpit'' final rule (46 FR 5501). In that final rule, the FAA
generally responded that the FAA does not agree that the rule is too
difficult to enforce. The FAA stated that principal operations
inspectors will assure air carrier compliance through review of manuals
and procedures. Individual compliance will be assured through en route
surveillance as in the past. The FAA's position remains the same and
violations of this rule will be pursued similarly as those of any other
rule.
Inhibit Innovation
    Several individual commenters noted that the rule would impede the
use of innovation and technology by prohibiting the use of all
electronic devices on the flight deck. Several commenters were
concerned that this rule would affect innovations in the use of EFB and
use of similar technology on the flight deck. These commenters noted
that it was important to allow air carriers and crewmembers to take
advantage of this new technology, as deemed appropriate, to increase
operational efficiency and safety.
    As stated previously, the FAA encourages the use of new electronic
technologies that as stated by commenters, will allow air carriers to
``. . . . take advantage of this new technology as deemed appropriate
to increase operational efficiency and safety.'' However, due to
potential hazards to safe operation of the aircraft, the FAA carefully
regulates the use of EFB hardware and software by crewmembers through
FAA approval of air carrier EFB programs. The prohibitions in the final
rule only extend to the personal use of such devices when the device,
software, and

procedures are not approved by the FAA.
Prohibited Devices
    Several commenters asked if the limitations in the rule extended to
specific devices, such as iPods, used to listen to music. As stated in
the NPRM, Section 307 of the Act defines ``personal wireless
communications device'' as a device through which personal wireless
services (as defined in Section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the Communications
Act of 1934) are transmitted.\5\ The Communications Act of 1934 states
that personal wireless services means commercial mobile services,
unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange
access service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(C)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In general, wireless telecommunications is the transfer of
information between two or more points that are not physically
connected. In the final rule, the FAA retains the same broad category
of included devices because a list of specific devices would ignore the
reality of evolving technology. This broad category includes, but is
not limited to, devices such as cell phones, smartphones, personal
digital assistants, tablets, e-readers, some (but not all) gaming
systems, iPods and MP3 players, as well as netbooks and notebook
computers.
    Evolving technology makes it difficult to develop an inclusive list
of devices that are addressed by the provisions of the final rule. The
FAA notes that the final rule establishes a clear definition of
personal wireless communications devices. The provisions of the final
rule do not prohibit the use of devices that do not meet the definition
of personal wireless communications devices.
Interference With Aircraft Systems
    Several commenters supported the proposed rule and noted that the
indiscriminate use of personal wireless communications devices and
laptop computers by flightcrew members has the potential to interfere
with communications systems on the airplane. The FAA notes that the
potential for electromagnetic interference on the flight deck is beyond
the scope of this rulemaking. This rulemaking is intended to ensure
that certain non-essential activities do not contribute to the
challenge of task management on the flight deck or a loss of
situational awareness due to attention to non-essential tasks.

A. Requirements

    The requirements in the final rule prohibit the personal use of a
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer while a
flightcrew member is at his or her duty station during all ground
operations involving taxi, takeoff and landing, and all other flight
operations. The final rule does not prohibit the use of personal
wireless communications devices or laptop computers if the purpose is
directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency,
safety-related, or employment-related communications and the use is in
accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.
    The FAA clarifies that ``emergency'' communications are those
related to the safe operation of the aircraft and its occupants, not a
flightcrew member's personal emergency. Additionally, the FAA clarifies
that ``employment-related'' communications are not at the discretion of
the pilot, but are part of FAA approved operational procedures
regarding the use of personal wireless communications devices or laptop
computers. For example, in the previously noted situation with the
pilots who became distracted when using personal laptop computers while
discussing the air carrier's flight scheduling software, the flight
schedules may have been ``employment-related,'' but the personal use of
laptop computers during the discussion was not part of FAA approved
operational procedures and will be prohibited by the final rule.

B. Current Air Carrier Programs

    Several air carriers currently have FAA approved programs or are in
the process of developing programs for FAA approval where laptop
computers and personal wireless communications devices, such as
tablets, are used by flightcrew members for work-related activities
during flight operations. In some cases, air carriers own the laptop
computers and/or personal wireless communications devices used by
flightcrew members. In other cases, flightcrew members own the laptop
computers and/or personal wireless communications devices. The FAA
clarifies that the provisions in the final rule do not affect these FAA
approved programs.

C. Operational Timeframes for Prohibition

    Section 307 of the Act states that it is unlawful to use a device
for personal use while an aircraft is being operated. The meaning of an
``aircraft being operated'' as it pertains to some FAA regulations is
very broad, to include being parked at the gate while passengers are
boarding. The FAA clarifies that for the purposes of this rule, the
meaning of an ``aircraft being operated'' mirrors the definition of
``flight time'' in 14 CFR 1.1. Therefore, the prohibition on the
personal use of laptop computers and personal wireless communications
devices commences at taxi (movement of the aircraft under its own
power) and ends when the aircraft is parked at the gate at the end of
the flight segment.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. 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 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
of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies
to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they
be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this final
rule.
    The Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes
policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of
regulations. If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed
or final rule does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits
that a statement to that effect and the basis for it to be included in
the preamble if a full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits
is not prepared. Such a determination has been made for this final
rule. The reasoning for this determination follows:
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, enacted on February
14, 2012, includes Section 307, Prohibition on Personal Use of
Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck. The FAA is

amending part 121 to conform to this legislation. The final rule will
prohibit flightcrew members in operations under part 121 from using a
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for personal
use while at their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft
is being operated. This final rule will ensure that certain non-
essential activities do not contribute to the challenge of task
management on the flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of
situational awareness due to attention to non-essential activities. The
FAA expects that this final rule reflects current sterile cockpit
operating procedures and therefore does not impose more than a minimum
cost on any regulated entity.
    The FAA has, therefore, determined that this final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' 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 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 RFA. However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, enacted on February
14, 2012, includes Section 307, Prohibition on Personal Use of
Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck. The FAA is amending part 121 to
conform to this legislation. The final rule will prohibit flightcrew
members in operations under part 121 from using a personal wireless
communications device or laptop computer for personal use while at
their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is being
operated. This rule is intended to ensure that certain non-essential
activities do not contribute to the challenge of task management on the
flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of situational awareness
due to attention to non-essential activities. While this final rule
affects small entities, it merely revises existing FAA rules and does
not impose any cost on any regulated entity.
    If an agency determines that a rulemaking will not result in a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
the head of the agency may so certify under section 605(b) of the RFA.
Therefore, as provided in section 605(b) the head of the FAA certifies
that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are
not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the
potential effect of this final rule and has determined that the
objective is to ensure aviation safety thus is not an unnecessary
obstacle.

D. 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 $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) in any one
year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by
the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a ``significant
regulatory action.'' The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value
of $143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. This final rule does not
contain such a mandate.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there will be no new requirement for information collection associated
with this final rule.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these regulations.
    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this action would have
no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563

    See the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' discussion in the ``Regulatory
Notices and Analyses'' section elsewhere in this preamble.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
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, will not have Federalism implications.

C. 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 (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
will not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order
and will not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

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 FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
    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 Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 FAA's dockets by the name
of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).

C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Safety,
Transportation.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 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), 40113, 40119, 41706,
44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722,
44732, 46105; Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 note).

0
2. Amend Sec.  121.542 by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  121.542  Flight crewmember duties.

* * * * *
    (d) During all flight time as defined in 14 CFR 1.1, no flight
crewmember may use, nor may any pilot in command permit the use of, a
personal wireless communications device (as defined in 49 U.S.C.
44732(d)) or laptop computer while at a flight crewmember duty station
unless the purpose is directly related to operation of the aircraft, or
for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications, in
accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.

    Issued under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f),
44701(a) and 44732 in Washington, DC on January 22, 2014.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-02991 Filed 2-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P