[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 24, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18099-18100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9991]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 121
[Docket No. 27264]
RIN 2120-AF96
The Age 60 Rule
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Disposition of comments and notice of agency decisions;
correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document makes a minor correction to the disposition of
comments and notice of agency decisions regarding the ``Age 60 Rule''
published on Wednesday, December 20, 1995 (60 FR 65977).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mardi Ruth Thompson, AGC-200, Regulations Division, Office of the Chief
Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW,
Washington, DC 20591, (202) 267-3073.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 11, 1995, the FAA issued a disposition of comments and
notice of agency decisions, which explained the agency's decision not
to propose to change the Age 60 Rule (14 CFR 121.383(c)). (60 FR 65977;
December 20, 1995).
The Disposition also stated the agency's intention to deny numerous
petitions for exemption from the Age 60 Rule. In describing the
petitions for exemption, the FAA referred to reports prepared by
Richard Golaszewski that petitioners had criticized, and cited reports
made by Mr. Golaszewski in 1983, 1991, and 1993 (60 FR at 65979).
However, the reference to the 1993 report was an editorial error, in
that the 1993 report was not commented on by petitioners. Further, the
1993 report was into prepared for the FAA, and FAA did not have a copy
of or rely on it in making its determinations or preparing the
Disposition.
The sentence citing to the Golaszewski Reports at 60 FR 65979
should read as follows:
They state that studies used by the FAA in the past to justify
the rule are flawed, including the NIH Study and the reports
prepared by Richard Golaszewski
[[Page 18100]]
(Acumenics Research and Technology, Incorporated), The Influence of
Total Flight Time, Recent Flight Time and Age on Pilot Accident
Rates, Final Report (1983) (First Golaszewski Report); and General
Aviation Safety Studies: Preliminary Analysis of Pilot Proficiency
(1991) (Second Golaszewski Report) (section II(b)).
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication on Wednesday, December 20, 1995, of
the Disposition of comments and notice of agency decisions (FR Doc. 95-
30546) is corrected as follows:
1. On page 65979, in the third column, line 28, the word ``and'' is
inserted before the word ``General''.
2. On page 65979, lines 30 through 33, the words ``and his
subsequent work, Additional Analysis of General Aviation Pilot
Proficiency (1993)'' are removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on April 18, 1996.
Donald P. Byrne,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 96-9991 Filed 4-19-96; 10:04 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
