2024-18545. Use of Supplemental Restraint Systems

Table 1—Total Benefits and Costs Over 20 Years

[Millions of USD] *

Provisions		Safety benefits		Costs	Safety benefits		Costs	Safety benefits		Costs
		Low	High		Low	High		Low	High
		7 Percent present value			3 Percent present value			2 Percent present value
91.108—Supplemental restraint systems, including operations with doors opened or removed (assuming an accident occurs in year 10)	Part 135 Part 91	$17.8 9.0	$26.7 13.6	$19.4 2.9	$26.0 19.4	$39.0 29.0	$27.5 4.1	$28.7 23.5	$43.0 35.3	$30.4 4.5
Total		26.8	40.2	22.3	45.4	68.0	31.7	52.2	78.3	34.9
Annualized		2.5	3.8	2.1	3.0	4.6	2.1	3.2	4.8	2.1
* Table values have been rounded. Totals may not add due to rounding.

In 2018, in response to the Liberty Helicopters accident, the FAA issued an Emergency Order of Prohibition, which prohibited the use of supplemental passenger restraint systems (SPRS) that cannot be released quickly in an emergency in doors-off flight operations. The FAA also estimates the cost and benefit of the rule using the Emergency Order of Prohibition as the baseline. The FAA estimates that the undiscounted cost of the rule, above the Emergency Order of Prohibition, is $22.9 million ($11.8 million at 7 percent present value, $16.8 million at 3 percent present value, or $18.9 million at 2 percent present value). When annualized, at a 7 percent, 3 percent, or 2 percent discount rate, the cost is approximately $1.1 million. The costs come entirely from the demonstration by passengers of the ability to release the device. The FAA considers that a passenger demonstrating the ability to release themselves from the device adds to the efficacy of the rule above the Emergency Order of Prohibition. However, the FAA is unable to quantify the incremental safety benefits gained by the passenger demonstration.

1. Who is potentially affected by this rule?

This rule affects all flights with doors opened or removed and all operations with individuals on board who choose to use an SRS, except for operations conducted under part 105, Parachute Operations, or conducted under part 133, Rotorcraft External-Load Operations, and public aircraft operations. The FAA identified the following, from Flight Standards' Web-based Operations Safety System (June 2021), as the population that could be affected:

Table 2—Potential Affected Operators

CFR	Number of operators	Number of rotorcraft	Number of operators	Number of aircraft
	Rotorcraft		Fixed Wing
91	405	1,051	716	1,894
135	472	2,917	1,728	8,411

( print page 67843)

However, based on the number of requests for SRS Letters of Authorization, the FAA narrowed the population to 26 part 91 operators and 40 part 135 operators over the next 20 years.

General Assumptions:

• The present value discount rate of two, three, and seven percent is used as required by the Office of Management and Budget.^[22]

• Period of Analysis: 20 years to capture replacement of an SRS occurring every 10 years.^[23]

• The estimated average number of passengers per flight is between 3 to 5 passengers. The FAA used 4 passengers in the analysis.
• Estimated time to create and update content for enhanced passenger safety briefing: ^[24] 2 hours per operator. Assume updates occur every 10 years to align with the replacement cycle of harnesses and lanyards.

• Estimated pilot time to complete enhanced safety briefing: ^[25] 0.03 hours (2 minutes)

• Estimated time for passenger competency demonstration: ^[26] 0.02 hours (1 minute)

Baseline: There were no requirements for an SRS prior to 2018 when the FAA issued Emergency Order of Prohibition No. FAA-2018-0243. Since the Emergency Order of Prohibition is temporary, the baseline used in this analysis is pre-Emergency Order. However, the Emergency Order requires harnesses and lanyards that fulfill the same requirements as the final rule; therefore, operators already incur the cost of the harness and lanyard. Operators will primarily incur the additional cost of the passenger demonstration and briefing under the rule. This is analyzed as a second baseline. The extension of the Emergency Order of Prohibition was considered as an alternative, and the cost and benefits are estimated in the alternative section below.

2. Benefits of This Rule

The benefits of this rule include preventing future accidents similar to the Liberty Helicopters accident. The NTSB final safety report identified the probable cause of this accident as Liberty Helicopters' use of an SRS system. The SRS caught on and activated the engine fuel shutoff lever, located in the flightdeck, and resulted in the loss of engine power and the subsequent ditching. That same SRS, worn by passengers on that flight, also contributed to the severity of the accident by hindering the passengers' quick egress from the aircraft. This rule will prohibit use of an SRS in the flightdeck, address the inadvertent activation of the fuel shutoff lever, and implement SRS requirements that will reduce the likelihood of passengers being unable to remove an SRS when needed in an emergency.

The Liberty Helicopters accident resulted in five fatalities, one minor injury, and a substantially damaged aircraft. The analysis assumes that two accidents of similar magnitude would occur in the 20-year time horizon, one under part 91 and one under part 135. While the SRS operation requirements, passenger briefing, and passenger demonstration set forth in the rule would have lessened the severity of the accident, the NTSB determined the probable cause of the accident to be the inadvertent activation of the floor-mounted engine fuel shutoff lever by the passenger harness/tether system.^[27] Prohibiting the use of an SRS in the flightdeck will help mitigate the risk factor that initiated the accident. The benefits include avoided casualties and aircraft damage. Multiplying the five casualties by a value of statistical life (VSL) of $11.6 million yields a total of $58.0 million as the social cost of these fatalities.^[28] The pilot also sustained minor injuries at an avoided minor injury rate of $34,800, and the helicopter, an Airbus AS350 B2, suffered substantial damage valued at $210,243.^[29] Adding the value of avoided casualties, including the pilot's injuries, to aircraft damage gives a total potential loss of $58.2 million that enhanced safety measures are expected to avert.

The FAA Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention evaluated how effective the proposed requirements would be at addressing the NTSB urgent safety recommendation and any other factors that may have contributed to the Liberty Helicopters accident. Based on that assessment, the FAA used a range for the effectiveness rate of 0.6 to 0.9.^[30] Multiplying the effectiveness rates by the estimated potential loss of $58.2 million, mentioned above, yields an estimated range of $34.9 to $52.4 million for one averted accident. Assuming an accident occurs every 10 years over a 20-year time horizon ( i.e., an accident in year 10 and year 20 of the analysis period), the present value of benefits ranges from $26.8 million to $40.2 million at a 7 percent discount rate, $45.4 million to $68.0 million at a 3 percent discount rate, and $52.2 to $78.3 million at a 2 percent discount rate.

3. Costs Relative to Pre-Emergency Order of Prohibition

This rule will prohibit flight operations with an SRS unless the SRS meets specific requirements. Although these requirements will be under part 91, they will affect any operation with an SRS except for operations conducted under part 105, Parachute Operations, and operations conducted under part 133, Rotorcraft External-Load Operations. This subsection examines the costs relative to the regulatory environment before the Emergency Order of Prohibition when no rules specifically addressed aircraft operations conducted with the use of SRS.

This rule will require the SRS (which would consist of a harness and lanyard, at a minimum) to have an accessible front or side release mechanism that can be quickly operated with minimal difficulty during an emergency. The rule ( print page 67844) will require the lanyard to be connected to an FAA-approved airframe attachment point or points that are not in the flightdeck and that are rated equal to or greater than the weight of the individual (or the combined weight if there is more than one SRS attached to an attachment point). The SRS lanyard must ensure the torso of the person using the SRS remains inside the aircraft at all times. Additionally, for operations with doors opened or removed, each person will need to occupy an approved seat or berth with a safety belt and, if installed, shoulder harness, properly secured about the individual during all phases of flight; or occupy an approved seat or berth with a safety belt and, if installed, shoulder harness, properly secured about the individual during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing, in accordance with § 91.107 and during other phases of flight, the individual will use an SRS.

This rule will also require operators to provide passengers with an enhanced safety briefing that includes a passenger's satisfactory demonstration of competency to release quickly the SRS with no assistance. The rule also implements certain requirements regarding persons who may seek to participate in such flights. Passengers unable to demonstrate their ability to use, secure, and release their seatbelt/shoulder harness or their ability to release quickly from an SRS; passengers under 15 years of age; individuals seated in the flightdeck; and passengers occupying an approved child restraint system will be prohibited from using the SRS. Furthermore, children may not be held in an adult's lap if the adult uses an SRS or if the aircraft doors are opened or removed. The FAA intends these requirements to ensure the safety of all aircraft occupants on such flights.

The cost of the rule to operators, passengers, and pilots will arise out of purchasing harnesses and lanyards that meet specific requirements as set forth in this rule, a pre-flight safety briefing on the use of the SRS, and passengers demonstrating their ability to remove the SRS in the event of an emergency. The cost to the FAA comes from approving the addition of SRS to part 135 passenger safety briefing cards and for periodic surveillance of parts 91 and 135 SRS operations. The estimated cost of these requirements is $22.3 million at 7 percent present value, $31.7 million at 3 percent present value, and $34.9 million at 2 percent present value, as shown in the table below.

Table 3—Rule Total Cost Over 20 Years *

Requirements	Part 91	Part 135	Total
Harness + Replacement	$172,608	$623,616	$796,224
Lanyard + Replacement	43,152	155,904	199,056
Create Briefing	14,572	19,774	34,346
Passenger Briefing (Pilot + Passenger)	16,840,356	2,139,920	18,980,276
Passenger Demonstration (Pilot + Passenger)	20,342,887	2,584,989	22,927,876
FAA costs	583	898	1,481
Total Cost	37,414,159	5,525,101	42,939,259
Total Cost at 7 Percent Present Value	19,361,893	2,933,645	22,295,537
Total Cost at 3 Percent Present Value	27,541,440	4,109,635	31,651,075
Total Cost at 2 Percent Present Value	30,365,509	4,500,554	34,866,063
* Table values have been rounded. Totals may not add due to rounding.

4. Costs Relative to Post-Emergency Order of Prohibition

After the FAA published the Emergency Order of Prohibition, operators were required to comply with many of the requirements of this rule. This subsection measures the costs that are above and beyond the costs of complying with the Emergency Order of Prohibition.

There are three main differences between this rule and the Emergency Order of Prohibition. First, the Emergency Order of Prohibition does not prohibit passengers using an SRS from being seated in the flightdeck, while this rule will prohibit this seating arrangement. The FAA estimates minimal cost from this prohibition.

Second, the Emergency Order of Prohibition applies only to operations conducted for compensation or hire. This rule will apply to all civil operations except operations under parts 105 and 133. The FAA does not have precise data on operations using an SRS that are not for compensation or hire, and so assumes there would be a negligible number.

Finally, the Emergency Order of Prohibition does not require a passenger demonstration of the passenger's ability to release the SRS. The FAA estimates the undiscounted costs, beyond the Emergency Order of Prohibition, to be $22.9 million ($11.8 million at 7 percent present value, $16.8 million at 3 percent present value, or $18.9 million at 2 percent present value). At any of these three discount rates, the annualized cost is approximately $1.1 million. These costs come entirely from the value of passenger and pilot time spent on the demonstration.

5. Alternatives Considered

The FAA considered proposing the Emergency Order of Prohibition as the rule but applying it to all civil operations. The Emergency Order of Prohibition prohibits the use of an SRS that cannot be released quickly in an emergency during flight operations for compensation or hire with the doors opened or removed. The Emergency Order of Prohibition requires: a supplemental harness that meets specific safety requirements, an application for an LOA to include a link to a video (roughly 8 seconds long) demonstrating the user's ability to release themself from the supplemental harness without assistance, a preflight briefing on the release of the SRS, and FAA review and approval of the application. The table below summarizes the costs of each of these requirements. ( print page 67845)

Table 4—Emergency Order of Prohibition Total Cost Over 20 Years *

Requirements	Part 91	Part 135	Total
Cost of Harness + Application + Video + Safety Briefing	$4,747,142	$1,225,615	$5,972,757
FAA Cost	2,399	4,107	6,506
Total Cost	4,749,541	1,229,722	5,979,263
Total Cost at 7 Percent Present Value	4,394,485	986,054	5,380,539
* Table values have been rounded. Totals may not add due to rounding.

The FAA considered proposing the above requirements in this rule, but after careful review of the NTSB final accident report and the information gathered through the Emergency Order of Prohibition, the FAA determined that it could tailor the requirements to increase the likelihood that passengers would be able to quickly release the supplemental restraint in the event of an emergency. For example, the Emergency Order of Prohibition does not address the use of an SRS in the flightdeck. Additionally, this rule will require operators to conduct an enhanced safety briefing and passengers to complete a demonstration. Passengers in the Liberty Helicopters accident received a briefing on how to release their supplemental restraints but were unable to release them during the accident. Requiring passengers to demonstrate successfully their ability to release the SRS would ensure passengers not only understand how to release themselves from the SRS during an emergency but also increase the likelihood that they would be able to release themselves from the SRS during an emergency. The passenger demonstration requirement will be necessary to achieve the effectiveness estimate of 0.6 to 0.9, as discussed in the main analysis of the rule. However, uncertainty exists regarding the incremental reduction in the effectiveness of a regulatory alternative that would not require passengers to demonstrate proficiency in using the SRS.

Please see the RIA available in the docket for more details.

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 published an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in the proposed rule to aid the public in commenting on the potential impacts to small entities. The FAA considered the public comments in developing the final rule and this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA). A FRFA must contain the following:

(1) A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule;

(2) A statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, a statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;

(3) The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments;

(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is available;

(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the 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;

(6) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected.

1. Need for and Objectives of the Rule

This rule addresses safety issues that contributed to the Liberty Helicopters accident to ensure the safety of similar operations. The operator-provided harness/tether system the passengers used on that flight, while intended as a safety measure when the aircraft was in flight, hindered the passengers' egress from the aircraft. This rule addresses the safety issue by implementing specific requirements for individuals using an SRS or participating in flights with doors opened or removed.

For flights with doors opened or removed, each person will be required to either occupy an approved seat or berth with a safety belt and, if installed, shoulder harness, properly secured about the individual during all phases of flight; or occupy an approved seat or berth with a safety belt and, if installed, shoulder harness, properly secured about the individual during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing, and during other phases of flight, the individual uses an SRS.

For flights using an SRS, this rule will require the harness and lanyard, at a minimum, to have an accessible front or side release mechanism that can be operated quickly with minimal difficulty during an emergency. As proposed, the lanyard must be connected to an FAA-approved airframe attachment point or points that are not in the flightdeck and that are rated equal to or greater than the weight of the occupant (or the combined weight if there is more than one SRS attached to an attachment point). This rule will require the lanyard to ensure the torso of the person using the SRS remains inside the aircraft. Additionally, operators will be required to provide passengers with an enhanced safety briefing, and passengers must demonstrate the capability to release quickly the SRS with no assistance. Passengers under 15 years of age; individuals seated in the flightdeck; passengers occupying an approved child restraint system; or passengers unable to demonstrate their ability to use, secure, and release the safety belt/shoulder harness or their ability to release ( print page 67846) quickly from the SRS will be prohibited from using the SRS.

2. Significant Issues Raised in Public Comments

No comments relating to small entities were raised by the public.

3. Response to SBA Comments

No comments were received from the SBA.

4. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities

This rule will affect flights with doors opened or removed and all operations with individuals on board who choose to use an SRS. A search of the Web-based Operations Safety System (WebOPSS) database, as of June 2021, indicates that the rule will affect 1,121 part 91 operators and 2,200 part 135 operators. These flights include sightseeing, motion picture and television filming, electronic news gathering, power line inspection, game management, and fire suppression, for example. The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines charter nonscheduled passenger air transport (NAICS 481211) with less than 1,500 employees or scenic and sightseeing transportation (NAICS 487990) with less than $8.0 million in revenue as small businesses.^[31] Census data indicates that revenue for the scenic and sightseeing transportation industry (NAICS 4879), which includes airplane and helicopter operations, was roughly $502.5 million for 220 establishments, and for nonscheduled chartered passenger air transportation (NAICS 481211), there are 28,261 employees for 1,604 firms.^[32] Based on census data and the SBA definition of a small business, a substantial number of operators affected by this rule would be considered small businesses.

5. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements

The cost of the rule will include purchasing harnesses and lanyards that meet specific requirements as set forth in this rule, a preflight safety briefing on the use of the SRS, and passengers' satisfactory demonstration of their ability to use, secure, and release their safety belt/shoulder harness and their ability to quickly release their SRS without assistance and with minimal difficulty. The estimated cost for these requirements per year for a part 91 operator is $71,949 and $6,905 for a part 135 operator, as shown in the table below.

Table 5—Estimated Cost per Operator *

Provisions	Part 91 33	Part 135 34
Harness + Replacement	$6,639	$15,590
Lanyard + Replacement	1,660	3,898
Create + Update Briefing	560	494
Passenger Briefing (Pilot + Passenger)	647,706	53,498
Passenger Demonstration (Pilot + Passenger)	782,419	64,625
Total Over 20 Years	1,438,984	138,105
Estimated Yearly Cost Per Operator	71,949	6,905
* Table values have been rounded. Totals may not add due to rounding.

6. Significant Alternatives Considered

The FAA considered proposing to codify the requirements of the Emergency Order of Prohibition applied to all civil operations but determined to propose adding the requirement for operators to brief passengers on the SRS and verify that passengers could release the SRS in an emergency.

The Emergency Order of Prohibition currently prohibits the use of an SRS during flights with doors opened or removed unless it complies with the process referenced in FAA Order 8900.4. FAA Order 8900.4 requires harnesses and lanyards that fulfill the same requirements this rule would require; therefore, operators already incur the cost of the harness and lanyard. Under this rule, operators will primarily incur the additional cost of the enhanced safety briefing. However, the majority of the cost comes from the passenger briefing and the passenger demonstration and is directly tied to the passenger count. Based on the foregoing, this 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), 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 FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it will have only a domestic impact and, therefore, no effect on international trade.

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 (in 1995 dollars) 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 $183.0 million in lieu of $100 million.

This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply. ( print page 67847)

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. According to the 1995 amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

This action contains the following new information collection requirement. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted this information collection requirement to OMB for its review. The FAA notes that when the FAA submitted this information collection associated with the NPRM to OMB for its review, OMB assigned control number 2120-0820. The FAA has submitted information collection 2120-0820 to OMB for final approval to allow the FAA to collect this information.

Summary: This rule will require operators conducting operations using SRS, including during operations with doors opened or removed, to present updated safety information to passengers.

Public Comments: The FAA did not receive any comments on the information collection requirements.

Use: Part 91 and 135 operators must create and conduct an enhanced passenger safety briefing.

Respondents: As of June 2019, the FAA estimates that 21 part 91 operators (based on the number of approved Letter of Authorization holders and the A049 population) and 31 part 135 operators will choose to offer flights with use of an SRS over the next 20 years.

Frequency: Operators who choose to offer flights using an SRS must initially develop an enhanced passenger safety briefing pertaining to the SRS. The FAA also anticipates that operators will need to periodically update their briefings every ten years based on a typical SRS replacement period.

Annual Burden Estimate: The total burden hours are calculated by multiplying the number of enhanced passenger safety briefings and subsequent updates by 2 hours per briefing. As shown in the table below, this sums to 90 hours for part 91 operators and 134 hours for part 135 operators over 3 years.

Table 6—Information Collection Burdens

Year	Number of operators		Time to develop or update briefing (hours per briefing)	Total hour burden
	Part 91	Part 135		Part 91	Part 135
1	21	31	2	42	62
2	0	0	2	0	0
3	0	1	2	0	2
Total				42	64
Average Over 3 Years				14	21

For part 91 operators, the FAA assumes that a pilot, with an hourly wage of $75.90, will be the person developing and updating the content of the briefing. At $75.90, the total cost burden is $3,188 ($2,602 at 7 percent present value) over a 3-year period. For part 135 operators, the Director of Operations, at an hourly wage of $68.66, can be the person responsible for developing the briefing. The total cost burden for part 135 operators over a 3-year period is $4,394 ($3,578 at 7 percent present value) for developing the content of the briefing.

Pilots will also brief passengers on the content of the enhanced passenger briefing prior to each flight. The estimated number of flights per year is multiplied by 2 minutes per briefing for parts 91 and 135 annual burden hours to brief passengers. The total burden hours over 3 years, as shown in the table below, sums to 8,177 hours for part 91 operators and 962 hours for part 135 operators.

Table 7—Total Hour Burden for Enhanced Safety Briefing

Year	Number of flights		Time to present the enhanced safety briefing (hours per briefing)	Total hour burden
	Part 91	Part 135		Part 91	Part 135
1	89,935	10,475	0.03	2,698	314
2	90,845	10,684	0.03	2,725	321
3	91,780	10,897	0.03	2,753	327
Total				8,177	962
Average Over 3 Years				2,726	321

A pilot presenting the briefing is estimated to earn an hourly wage of $75.90. At $75.90, the total cost burden over a 3-year period for part 91 operators is $620,598 ($506,593 at 7 percent present value) and $72,989 ($59,581 at 7 percent present value) for part 135 operators.

F. International Compatibility

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 (SARPs) to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and has identified no conflicts with these regulations.

G. Environmental Analysis

FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically excluded from preparation of an environmental ( print page 67848) assessment or environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act (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 for regulations and involves no extraordinary circumstances.

This rulemaking action provides a framework for civil aircraft operations conducted with SRS, including during operations with doors opened or removed. It does not affect the frequency of aircraft operations in the airspace of the United States. The FAA has reviewed the implementation of the rulemaking action and determined it is categorically excluded from further environmental review. Possible extraordinary circumstances that would preclude the use of a categorical exclusion have been examined, and the FAA has determined that no such circumstances exist. After careful and thorough consideration of the rulemaking action, the FAA finds that it does not require preparation of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA Order 1050.1F.

VI. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The FAA 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.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. The FAA has determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under the executive order and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation

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 will have no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

VIII. Additional Information

A. Electronic Access and Filing

A copy of the NPRM, all comments received, this 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 final 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 on 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]. Commenters must identify the docket or amendment number of this rulemaking.

All documents the FAA considered in developing this final rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in the electronic docket for this rulemaking.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its jurisdiction. 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 https://www.faa.gov/​regulations_​policies/​rulemaking/​sbre_​act/​.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 1

• Air transportation

14 CFR Part 11

• Administrative practice and procedure
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

14 CFR Part 91

• Air carrier
• Aircraft
• Airmen
• Aviation safety
• Charter flights
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

14 CFR Part 135

• Air taxis
• Aircraft
• Airmen
• Aviation safety
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

14 CFR Part 136

• Air transportation
• Aircraft
• Aviation safety
• National parks
• Recreation and recreation areas
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

The Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 1—DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

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

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, 44701.

2. Amend § 1.1 by adding in alphabetical order the definition of “Supplemental restraint system” to read as follows:

§ 1.1

General definitions.

* * * * *

Supplemental restraint system means any device that is not installed on the aircraft pursuant to an FAA approval, used to secure an individual inside an aircraft when that person is not properly secured by an FAA-approved safety belt and, if installed, shoulder harness, or an approved child restraint system. It consists of a harness secured around the torso of the individual using the supplemental restraint system and a lanyard that connects the harness to an FAA-approved airframe attachment point inside the aircraft.

* * * * *

PART 11—GENERAL RULEMAKING PROCEDURES

3. The authority citation for part 11 is revised to read as follows:

( print page 67849) Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101, 40103, 40105, 40109, 40113, 44110, 44502, 44701-44702, 44711, 46102, and 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.

4. Amend § 11.201 in the table in paragraph (b) by revising the entry for part 91 to read as follows:

§ 11.201

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control numbers assigned under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

14 CFR part or section identified and described	Current OMB control number
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
Part 91	2120-0005, 2120-0026, 2120-0027, 2120-0573, 2120-0606, 2120-0620, 2120-0631, 2120-0651, 2120-0820.
*         *         *         *         *         *         *