Temporary Flight Restrictions; Proposed Rule DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

SUMMARY: This document withdraws a proposal to amend the Federal

Aviation Regulations to require the operator of an aircraft used in

conducting authorized news-gathering operations in an area covered by

temporary flight restrictions (TFR) to contact the official in charge

of the on-scene emergency response activities for the purpose of

obtaining information about current and forecasted disaster relief

aircraft activities. The objective of the NPRM was to increase the

level of safety afforded aircraft used in conducting rescue or disaster

relief operations. The FAA has carefully considered all of the comments

received in response to the NPRM and as a result has concluded that

safety in TFR's can be increased through procedural versus regulatory

means. Accordingly, the NPRM is being withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Ellen Crum, Air Traffic Rules Branch, ATP-230, Airspace-Rules and

Aeronautical Information Division, Air Traffic Rules and Procedures

Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW.,

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 24, 1991, the FAA published Notice No. 91-14 (56 FR 34000).

The NPRM proposed amending Sec. 91.137(c)(5) of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (FAR) to require that: (1) All pilots of aircraft carrying

properly accredited media personnel initially contact the official in

charge of on-scene emergency response activities to ascertain the

routes, altitudes, and operating areas in use by disaster relief

aircraft; and (2) the aircraft be operated clear of all disaster relief

aircraft operations identified by the official in charge. Currently,

when TFR's are established for the purpose of providing a safe

environment for the operation of disaster relief aircraft, aircraft

carrying properly accredited newspeople may enter the prescribed area

without prior approval, provided a flight plan has been filed. However,

the aircraft must be operated above the altitude(s) being used by

rescue or disaster relief aircraft. The process a pilot uses to

determine which altitudes are being utilized is not prescribed in the

current regulation.

Discussion of Comments

Thirty-one comments were received in response to the NPRM (the

comment period closed September 23, 1991). Most commenters supported

the goal of the NPRM to promote increased air traffic safety in TFR's;

however, the best means to accomplish this was disputed.

Several commenters recommended that a common disaster frequency be

established for all aircraft. Other commenters expressed concern over

the potential inability of media aircraft to communicate with emergency

ground officials, suggesting that on-scene ground officials be required

to possess an aircraft compatible two-way radio. Suggestions were made

to require pilot monitoring of the frequency while in the disaster

area. Finally, suggestions were made to incorporate this proposed rule

into the Airman's Information Manual rather than add it to the FAR.

The FAA recognizes the potential merit of this proposal and

acknowledges the validity of the express concerns. Since this NPRM was

published, the FAA has been reviewing regulations and procedures

currently utilized for temporary flight restrictions.

In addition to aircraft carrying news media encountering

difficulties in determining the altitude being used by disaster relief

aircraft, other TFR problems have been cited. These problems include

pilots being unable to receive the location of a TFR area in a timely

manner; aircraft on instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plans and

military aircraft on IFR training routes intruding into the TFR; the

large number of aircraft in TFR's implemented for an incident or event

generating a high degree of public interest; and the untimely process

used to put TFR's in place, particularly when they involve critical

situations such as toxic spills. In addition, of the 13 documented

incidents in TFR's, only 2 were confirmed to be aircraft carrying news

media. The other incidents involved general aviation aircraft or

military aircraft that inadvertently penetrated the TFR's. The reason

most often given was lack of information about the existence of the TFR

and the inability to positively identify the TFR location.

Reasons for Withdrawal

Based on the comments received in response to Notice No. 94-14, and

the additional data as stated above, the FAA has determined that there

is inadequate justification to pursue further this regulatory action.

The FAA has determined that additional study of current TFR procedures,

which may include parts of Notice No. 91-14, is necessary. Therefore,

it is in the best interest of all concerned to withdraw Notice No. 91-

14.

The Decision and Withdrawal

Accordingly, the FAA concludes that further rulemaking on Notice

No. 91-14 should not proceed at this time. Therefore, Notice No. 91-14

is withdrawn. This action does not preclude the FAA from considering

similar proposals in the future or commit it to any further or future

course of action on this subject.

The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1301(7), 1303, 1344, 1348, 1352 through

1355, 1401, 1421 through 1431, 1471, 1472, 1502, 1510, 1522, and

2121 through 2125; Articles 12, 29, 31, and 31(a) of the Convention

on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180); 42 U.S.C. 4321 et

seq: E.O. 11514; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (Revised Pub. L. 97-449, January

12, 1983).

Issued in Washington DC on June 8, 1994.

Harold W. Becker,

Acting Director, Air Traffic, Rules and Procedures Service.

[FR Doc. 94-14679 Filed 6-15-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M