ADS-B Final Rule - (75 FR 30160)

Friday,
May 28, 2010

Part III

Department of
Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

14 CFR Part 91
Automatic Dependent Surveillance—
Broadcast (ADS–B) Out Performance
Requirements To Support Air Traffic
Control (ATC) Service; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

PO 00000

Frm 00001

Fmt 4717

Sfmt 4717

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30160

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. FAA–2007–29305; Amdt. No.
91–314]
RIN 2120–AI92

Automatic Dependent Surveillance—
Broadcast (ADS–B) Out Performance
Requirements To Support Air Traffic
Control (ATC) Service
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

AGENCY:

SUMMARY: This final rule amends FAA
regulations by adding equipage
requirements and performance
standards for Automatic Dependent
Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS–B) Out
avionics on aircraft operating in Classes
A, B, and C airspace, as well as certain
other specified classes of airspace
within the U.S. National Airspace
System (NAS). ADS–B Out broadcasts
information about an aircraft through an
onboard transmitter to a ground
receiver. Use of ADS–B Out will move
air traffic control from a radar-based
system to a satellite-derived aircraft
location system. This action facilitates
the use of ADS–B for aircraft
surveillance by FAA and Department of
Defense (DOD) air traffic controllers to
safely and efficiently accommodate
aircraft operations and the expected
increase in demand for air
transportation. This rule also provides
aircraft operators with a platform for
additional flight applications and
services.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 11, 2010. The compliance date
for this final rule is January 1, 2020.
Affected parties, however, do not have
to comply with the information
collection requirement in § 91.225 until
the FAA publishes in the Federal
Register the control number assigned by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for this information collection
requirement. Publication of the control
number notifies the public that OMB
has approved this information
collection requirement under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The
incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of August 11, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this final
rule, contact Vincent Capezzuto,
Surveillance and Broadcast Services,
AJE–6, Air Traffic Organization, Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
385–8637; e-mail
[email protected].
For legal questions concerning this
final rule, contact Lorelei Peter, Office
of the Chief Counsel, AGC–220, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone 202–
267–3134; e-mail [email protected].
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 (49 U.S.C.). 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
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section
40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace,
and Subpart III, Section 44701, General
requirements. Under section 40103, the
FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations on the flight of aircraft
(including regulations on safe altitudes)
for navigating, protecting, and
identifying aircraft, and the efficient use
of the navigable airspace. Under section
44701, the FAA is charged with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce.
This regulation is within the scope of
sections 40103 and 44701 because it
prescribes aircraft performance
requirements to meet advanced
surveillance needs to accommodate
increases in NAS operations. As more
aircraft operate within the U.S. airspace,
improved surveillance performance is
necessary to continue to balance the
growth in air transportation with the
agency’s mandate for a safe and efficient
air transportation system.
Guide to Terms and Acronyms
Frequently Used in This Document
ACI–NA—Airports Council InternationalNorth America
ACSS—Aviation Communication and
Surveillance Systems
ADIZ—Air Defense Identification Zone
ADS–B—Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast
ADS–C—Automatic Dependent SurveillanceContract
ADS–R—Automatic Dependent SurveillanceRebroadcast
AGL—Above Ground Level
AIA—Aerospace Industries Association of
America

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

ALPA—Air Line Pilots Association,
International
AOPA—Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association
ARC—Aviation Rulemaking Committee
ASA—Aircraft Surveillance Applications
ASAS—Aircraft Surveillance Applications
System
ASDE–X—Airport Surface Detection
Equipment, Model X
ASSA—Airport Surface Situational
Awareness
ATC—Air Traffic Control
CAA—Cargo Airline Association
CDTI—Cockpit Display of Traffic Information
CNS—Communication, Navigation, and
Surveillance
EAA—Experimental Aircraft Association
ELT—Emergency Locator Transmitter
ES—Extended Squitter
EUROCAE—European Organisation for Civil
Aviation Equipment
EUROCONTROL—European Organisation for
the Safety of Air Navigation
FAROA—Final Approach Runway
Occupancy Awareness
FedEx—Federal Express
FIS–B—Flight Information Service–Broadcast
FL—Flight Level
GA—General Aviation
GAMA—General Aviation Manufacturers
Association
GNSS—Global Navigation Satellite System
GPS—Global Positioning System
HAI—Helicopter Association International
IATA—International Air Transport
Association
ICAO—International Civil Aviation
Organization
MHz—Megahertz
MOPS—Minimum Operational Performance
Standards
MSL—Mean Sea Level
NACP—Navigation Accuracy Category For
Position
NACV—Navigation Accuracy Category for
Velocity
NAS—National Airspace System
NBAA—National Business Aviation
Association
NextGen—Next Generation Air
Transportation System
NIC—Navigation Integrity Category
NM—Nautical Mile
NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB—National Transportation Safety Board
OPD—Optimized Profile Descent
OMB—Office of Management and Budget
RAA—Regional Airline Association
RAIM—Receiver Autonomous Integrity
Monitoring
RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act
RNP—Required Navigation Performance
SANDIA—Sandia National Laboratories
SARPs—Standards and Recommended
Practices
SCAP—Security Certification and
Accreditation Procedures
SDA—System Design Assurance
SIL—Source Integrity Level
SSR—Secondary Surveillance Radar
TCAS—Traffic Alert and Collision and
Avoidance System
TIS–B—Traffic Information ServiceBroadcast
TMA—Traffic Management Advisor

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TSO—Technical Standard Order
UAT—Universal Access Transceiver
UPS—United Parcel Service
URET—User Request Evaluation Tool
VFR—Visual Flight Rules
WAAS—Wide Area Augmentation System

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
B. ADS–B Aviation Rulemaking Committee
C. Summary of the Final Rule
1. Airspace
2. Datalink Requirements
3. System Performance Requirements
4. Antenna Diversity and Transmit Power
Requirements
5. Latency of the ADS–B Out Message
Elements
6. Conforming Amendments and Editorial
Changes
D. Differences Between the Proposed Rule
and The Final Rule
E. Separation Standards Working Group
II. Discussion of the Final Rule
A. Airspace
1. 2,500 Feet Above Ground Level
Exclusion in Class E Airspace
2. Airspace for Which ADS–B is Required
3. Requests for Deviations From ADS–B
Out Requirements
B. Dual-Link Strategy
1. Altitude To Require the 1090 MHz ES
Datalink
2. Automatic Dependent SurveillanceRebroadcast (ADS–R)
3. 1090 MHz Frequency Congestion
C. Performance Requirements—System
1. Performance Requirements Tailored to
Operator, Airspace, or Procedure
2. Navigation Accuracy Category for
Position (NACP)
3. Navigation Accuracy Category for
Velocity (NACV)
4. Navigation Integrity Category (NIC)
5. Surveillance Integrity Level
6. Source Integrity Level (SIL) and System
Design Assurance (SDA)
7. Secondary Position Sources
D. Performance Requirements—Antenna
Diversity
E. Performance Requirements—Transmit
Power
F. Performance Requirements—Total and
Uncompensated Latency
G. Performance Requirements—Time To
Indicate Accuracy and Integrity Changes
H. Performance Requirements—
Availability
1. Preflight Determination of Availability
2. System Availability
I. Performance Requirements—Continuity
J. Performance Requirements—Traffic
Information Service—Broadcast Integrity
(TIS–B)
K. Broadcast Message Elements
1. NACP/NACV/NIC/SDA/SIL
2. Receiving ATC Services
3. Length and Width of the Aircraft
4. Indication of the Aircraft’s Barometric
Pressure Altitude
5. Indication of the Aircraft’s Velocity
6. Indication if Traffic Alert and Collision
Avoidance System II or Airborne
Collision Avoidance System is Installed
and Operating in a Mode That May
Generate Resolution Advisory Alerts

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

7. For Aircraft With an Operable Traffic
Alert and Collision Avoidance System II
or Airborne Collision Avoidance System,
Indication If a Resolution Advisory Is in
Progress
8. Indication of the Mode 3/A Transponder
Code Specified by ATC (Requires
Flightcrew Entry)
9. Indication of the Aircraft’s Call Sign
That Is Submitted on the Flight Plan, or
the Aircraft’s Registration Number
(Aircraft Call Sign Requires Flight Crew
Entry)
10. Indication if the Flight Crew Has
Identified an Emergency, Radio
Communication Failure, or Unlawful
Interference (Requires Flightcrew Entry)
11. Indication of the Aircraft’s ‘‘IDENT’’ to
ATC (Requires Flightcrew Entry)
12. Indication of the Emitter Category
13. Indication Whether an ADS–B in
Capability Is Installed
14. Indication of the Aircraft’s Geometric
Altitude
L. Ability To Turn Off ADS–B Out
Transmissions
M. Existing Equipment Requirements
1. Transponder Requirement
2. Emergency Locator Transmitter
Requirement
N. Program Implementation
1. Timeline
2. Financial and Operational Incentives
3. Decommissioning Traffic Information
Service-Broadcast (TIS–B)
O. Safety
P. Efficiency
1. Improved Position Reporting
2. Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs)
3. Reduced Aircraft Separation
4. Expanded Surveillance Coverage
Q. ADS–B In
R. ADS–B In Applications
1. Surface Situational Awareness With
Indications and Alerting
2. In-Trail Procedures
3. Interval Management
4. Airport Surface Situational Awareness
and Final Approach Runway Occupancy
Awareness
S. International Harmonization
T. Backup ATC Surveillance
U. Privacy
V. Security
W. Alternatives to ADS–B
X. ADS–B Equipment Scheduled
Maintenance
Y. Specific Design Parameters
Z. Economic Issues
1. ADS–B Out Equipage Cost
2. FAA Cost Savings With ADS–B Out
Compared To Radar
3. Business Case for ADS–B Out and In
4. Improved En Route Conflict Probe
Benefit Performance
5. Capacity Enhancements, Airspace
Efficiency, and Fuel Savings Benefits
6. Deriving Benefits From Capstone
Implementation in Alaska
7. Regional Airline Benefits
8. General Aviation: High Equipage Costs
With Little Benefit
AA. Revisions to Other Regulations
III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
B. International Compatibility

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30161

C. Regulatory Impact Analysis, Regulatory
Flexibility Determination, International
Trade Impact Analysis, and Unfunded
Mandates Assessment
VI. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
VII. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation
in Alaska
VIII. Environmental Analysis
IX. Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
X. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

I. Background
While there is currently a drop in air
travel due to a general economic
downturn, delay and congestion
continue to build in the nation’s busiest
airports and the surrounding airspace.
The FAA must not only address current
congestion, but also be poised to handle
future demand that will surely return as
the nation’s economy improves. The
FAA has been developing the Next
Generation Air Transportation System
(NextGen) for the purpose of changing
the way the National Airspace System
(NAS) operates. NextGen will allow the
NAS to expand to meet future demand
and support the economic viability of
the system. In addition, NextGen will
improve safety and support
environmental initiatives such as
reducing congestion, noise, emissions
and fuel consumption through increased
energy efficiency. for more information
on NextGen, go to http://www.faa.gov/
about/initiatives/nextgen/.
As part of NextGen development, the
FAA has determined that it is essential
to move from ground-based surveillance
and navigation to more dynamic and
accurate airborne-based systems and
procedures if the agency is to enhance
capacity, reduce delay, and improve
environmental performance. Automatic
Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast
(ADS–B) equipment is an advanced
surveillance technology that combines
an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft
avionics, and a ground infrastructure to
create an accurate surveillance interface
between aircraft and ATC. It is a key
component of NextGen that will move
air traffic control (ATC) from a radarbased system to a satellite-derived
aircraft location system. ADS–B is a
performance-based surveillance
technology that is more precise than
radar. ADS–B is expected to provide air
traffic controllers and pilots with more
accurate information to help keep
aircraft safely separated in the sky and
on runways. The technology combines a
positioning capability, aircraft avionics,
and ground infrastructure to enable
more accurate transmission of
information from aircraft to ATC.
ADS–B consists of two different
services: ADS–B Out and ADS–B In.
ADS–B Out, which is the subject of this

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30162

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

rulemaking, periodically broadcasts
information about each aircraft, such as
identification, current position, altitude,
and velocity, through an onboard
transmitter. ADS–B Out provides air
traffic controllers with real-time
position information that is, in most
cases, more accurate than the
information available with current
radar-based systems. With more
accurate information, ATC will be able
to position and separate aircraft with
improved precision and timing.
ADS–B In refers to an appropriately
equipped aircraft’s ability to receive and
display another aircraft’s ADS–B Out
information as well as the ADS–B In
services provided by ground systems,
including Automatic Dependent
Surveillance–Rebroadcast (ADS–R),1
Traffic Information Service–Broadcast
(TIS–B),2 and, if so equipped, Flight
Information Service–Broadcast (FIS–B).3
When displayed in the cockpit, this
information greatly improves the pilot’s
situational awareness in aircraft not
equipped with a traffic alert and
collision avoidance system (TCAS)/
airborne collision avoidance system
(ACAS). Benefits from universal
equipage for ADS–B In currently are not
substantiated, and standards for ADS–B
In air-to-air applications are still in their
infancy. Thus it is premature to require
operators to equip with ADS–B In at this
time. This rule, however, imposes
certain requirements that will support
some ADS–B In applications.
As noted in the preamble of the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
associated with this rule, published in
the Federal Register on October 5, 2007
(72 FR 56947), Congress enacted the
‘‘Century of Aviation Reauthorization
Act’’ in 2003. That Act mandated that
the Secretary of Transportation establish
a Joint Planning and Development
Office (JPDO) to manage NextGenrelated work, including coordinating the
development and use of new
1 ADS–R collects traffic information from each
broadcast link and rebroadcasts it to ADS–B Inequipped operators on the other broadcast link.
This is further explained in section B.2., Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Rebroadcast.
2 TIS–B uses primary and secondary surveillance
radars and multilateration systems to provide
proximate traffic situational awareness, including
position reports from aircraft not equipped with
ADS–B. TIS–B data may not provide as much
information as could be received directly from an
aircraft’s ADS–B Out broadcast, because of the
required data processing. The TIS–B signal is an
advisory service that is not designed for aircraft
surveillance or separation, and cannot be used for
either purpose.
3 With FIS–B, aircraft equipped with 978
megahertz (MHz) Universal Access Transceiver
(UAT) ADS–B In avionics can receive weather
information, notices to airmen, temporary flight
restrictions, and other relevant flight information, at
no additional cost.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

technologies for aircraft in the air traffic
control system. Since 2006, Congress
has appropriated over $500 million to
the FAA for implementing ADS–B and
developing air-to-air capabilities. The
FAA remains committed to
implementing NextGen and adopts this
final rule, with some modifications, as
discussed in further detail below.
A. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The FAA published the NPRM for
ADS–B Out in the Federal Register on
October 5, 2007 (72 FR 56947). The
comment period for the NPRM was
scheduled to close on January 3, 2008.
In response to several commenters, the
FAA subsequently extended the
comment period to March 3, 2008 (72
FR 64966, Nov. 19, 2007). The FAA
received approximately 190 comments
to the docket on the NPRM.
Commenters included air carriers,
manufacturers, associations,
Government agencies, and individuals.
B. ADS–B Aviation Rulemaking
Committee
As part of the rulemaking effort, the
FAA chartered an aviation rulemaking
committee (ARC) on July 15, 2007, to
provide a forum for the U.S. aviation
community to make recommendations
on presenting and structuring an ADS–
B Out mandate, and to consider
additional actions that may be necessary
to implement its recommendations. The
ADS–B ARC submitted its first report,
‘‘Optimizing the Benefits of Automatic
Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast,’’ 4
on October 3, 2007.
The FAA also tasked the ARC to make
specific recommendations concerning
the proposed rule based on the
comments submitted to the docket. The
ARC submitted its second report,
‘‘Recommendations on Federal Aviation
Administration Notice No. 7–15,
Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast (ADS–B) Out Performance
Requirements to Support Air Traffic
Control (ATC) Service; Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking,’’ 5 to the FAA on
September 26, 2008.
To give the public an opportunity to
comment on the recommendations
received from the ARC, the FAA
published a notice in the Federal
Register on October 2, 2008 (73 FR
57270), reopening the comment period
of the ADS–B Out NPRM docket for an
additional 30 days. The purpose of
reopening the comment period was to
4 A copy of this report is available from the Web
site http://www.regulations.gov. To find the report,
enter FAA–2007–29305–0009.1 in the search field.
5 A copy of this report is available from the Web
site http://www.regulations.gov. To find the report,
enter FAA–2007–29305–0221.1 in the search field

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

receive public comments on the ARC
recommendations only. This comment
period closed November 3, 2008, with
the FAA receiving approximately 50
comments to the ARC’s
recommendations. Commenters
included air carriers, manufacturers,
associations, and individuals.
C. Summary of the Final Rule
This final rule will add equipage
requirements and performance
standards for ADS–B Out avionics.
ADS–B Out broadcasts information
about an aircraft through an onboard
transmitter to a ground receiver. Use of
ADS–B Out will move air traffic control
from a radar-based system to a satellitederived aircraft location system. As
discussed more fully in the sections of
this preamble describing equipage
requirements and performance
standards, operators will have two
options for equipage under this rule—
the 1090 megahertz (MHz) extended
squitter 6 (ES) broadcast link or the
Universal Access Transceiver (UAT)
broadcast link. 7 Generally, this
equipment will be required for aircraft
operating in Classes A, B, and C
airspace, certain Class E airspace, and
other specified airspace. See section C.1.
‘‘Airspace’’ below for additional details.
The NPRM proposed performance
requirements for ADS–B Out to be used
for ATC surveillance. In addition,
several aspects of the proposal would be
necessary for future ADS–B In
applications. The comments to the
NPRM and the ARC recommendations
raised significant concerns about the
operational needs and costs of the
proposed performance requirements, as
well as the proposed antenna diversity
requirement.
The FAA specifically proposed higher
ADS–B Out and antenna diversity
requirements than what is needed for
ATC surveillance to enable certain
ADS–B In applications. As discussed in
further detail in this document, the FAA
has reconsidered these elements in view
of the comments and has changed the
implementation plan for ADS–B.
The FAA has concluded that this rule
will require only the performance
requirements necessary for ADS–B Out.
While certain requirements adopted in
this rule will support some ADS–B In
applications, the agency is not adopting
6 An extended squitter is a long message that
Mode S Transponders transmit automatically,
without needing to be interrogated by radar, to
announce the own-ship aircraft’s presence to nearby
ADS–B equipped aircraft or ground based Air
Traffic Control.
7 The 1090 MHz ES broadcast link uses the 1090
MHz frequency. The UAT broadcast link uses the
978 MHz frequency.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the higher performance standards that
would enable all of the initial ADS–B In
applications. The agency is mindful,
and operators are advised, that in
accepting the commenters’ and the
ARC’s positions regarding antenna
diversity and position source accuracy,
compliance with this rule alone may not
enable operators to take full advantage
of certain ADS–B In applications.
Operators may voluntarily choose
equipment that meets the higher
performance standards in order to
enable the use of these applications.
The following table provides an
overview of the costs and benefits of
this final rule.

surface up to 10,000 feet MSL. In
addition, the rule requires that aircraft
meet ADS–B Out performance
requirements to operate in Class E
airspace over the Gulf of Mexico at and
above 3,000 feet MSL within 12 NM of
the coastline of the United States.

2. Datalink Requirements
ADS–B requires a broadcast link for
aircraft surveillance and to support
ADS–B In applications. Operators have
two options for equipage under this
rule— the 1090 MHz ES broadcast link
or the UAT broadcast link. The 1090
MHz ES broadcast link is the
internationally agreed upon link for
ADS–B and is intended to support
ADS–B In applications used by air
SUMMARY OF COSTS AND BENEFITS
carriers and other high-performance
aircraft. The 1090 MHz ES broadcast
3% Discount Rate:
Low Costs ...............................
$2.74 link does not support FIS–B (weather
High Benefits ...........................
5.03 and related flight information) because
the bandwidth limitations of this link
Net Benefits-High Benefit/
cannot transmit the large message
Low Cost ..........................
2.29 structures required by FIS–B. The UAT
broadcast link supports ADS–B In
High Costs ..............................
5.47
applications 9 and FIS–B, which are
Low Benefits ...........................
3.98
important for the general aviation (GA)
community.
Net Benefits-Low Benefits/
This final rule requires aircraft flying
High Costs .......................
(1.49)
at and above 18,000 feet MSL (flight
level (FL) 180) (Class A airspace) to
7% Discount Rate:
have ADS–B Out performance
Low Costs ...............................
2.15
capabilities using the 1090 MHz ES
High Benefits ...........................
2.74
broadcast link. This rule also specifies
that aircraft flying in the designated
Net Benefits-High Benefit/
Low Cost ..........................
0.59 airspace below 18,000 feet MSL may use
either the 1090 MHz ES or UAT
High Costs ..............................
4.11 broadcast link.
Low Benefits ...........................
Net Benefits-Low Benefits/
High Costs .......................

2.09

(2.02)

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

1. Airspace
This final rule prescribes ADS–B Out
performance requirements for all aircraft
operating in Class A, B, and C airspace
within the NAS; above the ceiling and
within the lateral boundaries of a Class
B or Class C airspace area up to 10,000
feet mean sea level (MSL); and Class E
airspace areas at or above 10,000 feet
MSL over the 48 contiguous United
States and the District of Columbia,
excluding the airspace at and below
2,500 feet above the surface.
The rule also requires that aircraft
meet these performance requirements in
the airspace within 30 nautical miles
(NM) of certain identified airports 8 that
are among the nation’s busiest (based on
annual passenger enplanements, annual
airport operations count, and
operational complexity) from the
8 These

airports are listed in appendix D to part

91.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

3. System Performance Requirements
When activated, ADS–B Out
continuously transmits aircraft
information through the 1090 MHz ES
or UAT broadcast link. The accuracy
and integrity of the position information
transmitted by ADS–B avionics are
represented by the navigation accuracy
category for position (NACP), the
navigation accuracy category for
velocity (NACV), the navigation integrity
category (NIC), the system design
assurance (SDA), and the source
integrity level (SIL).
In the proposed rule, the FAA
referenced the accuracy and integrity
requirements to the appropriate NACP,
NACV, NIC, and SIL values defined in
Technical Standard Order (TSO)–
C166a 10 (for operators using the 1090
9 These applications include enhanced visual
acquisition, conflict detection, enhanced visual
approach, Airport Surface Situational Awareness
(ASSA), and Final Approach Runway Occupancy
Awareness (FAROA).
10 Extended Squitter Automatic Dependent
Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS–B) and Traffic
Information Service—Broadcast (TIS–B) Equipment

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30163

MHz ES broadcast link), and TSO–
C154b 11 (for operators using the UAT
broadcast link) as the baseline
requirements for ADS–B Out
equipment. TSO–C166a adopted the
standards in RTCA, Inc.12 (RTCA) DO–
260A.13 TSO–C154b adopted the
standards in RTCA DO–282A.14
After the NPRM was published, the
ADS–B ARC issued numerous
recommendations in response to public
comments on the TSOs referenced in
the proposal. Based on the ARC
recommendations and broad industry
input, RTCA revised DO–260A to
become DO–260B 15 and revised DO–
282A to become DO–282B.16 The new
RTCA revisions include: (1) An
allowance for transmitting a NIC of 7 on
the surface, (2) procedures for correctly
setting the NACV, (3) clarifying the
latency requirements, (4) removing the
vertical component of NACP, NACV,
NIC, and SIL, (5) revising the definition
of SIL to correspond to the definition in
the FAA NPRM, (6) clarifying the
definition of SIL by dividing it into SIL
and SDA message elements, (7) creating
a medium power single antenna class,
and (8) redefining the bit for the ‘‘ADS–
B In capability installed’’ message
element.17 DO–260B and DO–282B are
more mature standards and fully
support domestic and international
ADS–B air traffic control surveillance.
The updated standards do not increase
performance requirements.
The FAA updated the TSOs in
accordance with these new RTCA
standards. In addition, the FAA has
Operating on the Radio Frequency of 1090
Megahertz (MHz).
11 Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS–B)
Equipment Operating on the Frequency of 978
MHz.
12 RTCA, Inc. is a not-for-profit corporation
formed to advance the art and science of aviation
and aviation electronic systems for the benefit of
the public. The organization functions as a Federal
Advisory Committee and develops consensus-based
recommendations on contemporary aviation issues.
The organization’s recommendations are often used
as the basis for government and private sector
decisions as well as the foundation for many FAA
TSOs. For more information, see http://
www.rtca.org.
13 Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for 1090 MHz Extended Squitter Automatic
Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS–B) and
Traffic Information Services—Broadcast (TIS–B).
14 Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast.
15 Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for 1090 MHz Extended Squitter Automatic
Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS–B) and
Traffic Information Services–Broadcast (TIS–B).
16 Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for Universal Access Transceiver Automatic
Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast.
17 A number of these items address issues with
the current TSOs.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

decided that it is necessary to require
the new standards contained in TSO–
C166b 18 (1090 MHz ES) and TSO–
C154c 19 (UAT) as the minimum
performance standards in this final
rule.20 The updated standards
incorporate multiple changes that
address public comments and the ARC’s
recommendations on the proposal. On
September 11, 2009, the FAA
announced in the Federal Register the
availability of draft TSO–C166b and
TSO–C154c for comment (74 FR 46831).
The FAA issued final versions of the
above TSOs on December 2, 2009. The

FAA also added additional language in
§§ 91.225 and 91.227 stating that
equipment with an approved deviation
under § 21.618 also meet the
requirements of the rule.
In addition, this final rule specifies
the performance requirements for
accuracy and integrity (NACP, NACV,
and NIC) in meters and nautical miles
rather than referencing the numerical
values used in DO–260B, DO–282B, or
the NPRM. This change translates the
values but does not alter the actual
performance requirements. The FAA
wants to avoid any misinterpretations of

the performance requirements for this
rule, if in the future, RTCA revises
NACP, NACV, and NIC.
Table 1 summarizes the NACP, NACV,
NIC, and SIL values proposed in the
NPRM and their equivalent
measurements, as noted in DO–260A
and DO–282A. Table 2 summarizes
NACP, NACV, NIC, SDA, and SIL values
as defined in DO–260B and DO–282B.
These two tables contain only the values
applicable to the NPRM and the final
rule. See DO–260B paragraph 2.2.3 or
DO–282B paragraph 2.2.4 for complete
information on all values.

18 Extended Squitter Automatic Dependent
Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS–B) and Traffic
Information Service–Broadcast (TIS–B) Equipment
Operating on the Radio Frequency of 1090
Megahertz (MHz).

19 Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS–B)
Equipment Operating on the Frequency of 978
MHz.

20 Operators with equipment installed that meets
a later version of TSO–C166b or TSO–C154c, as
applicable, are in compliance with this rule.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

ER28MY10.000

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

30164

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

21 In the NPRM, SIL was defined as surveillance
integrity level and represented the maximum
probability of exceeding the NIC containment
radius and a maximum probability of a failure
causing false or misleading data to be transmitted.
In this final rule, SIL is referred to as source
integrity level and defines the probability of
exceeding the NIC containment radius; SDA
represents the probability of transmitting false or
misleading position information.
22 Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) is a
generic term for a satellite navigation system, such
as the Global Positioning System (GPS), that
provides autonomous worldwide geo-spatial
positioning and may include local or regional
augmentations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

complies with the requirements in the
final rule.
4. Antenna Diversity and Transmit
Power Requirements
The aircraft antenna is a major
contributor to ADS–B system link
performance and an important part of
the overall ADS–B Out system. In the
NPRM, the FAA proposed an antenna
diversity requirement that would
support ADS–B In applications, such as
Airport Surface Situational Awareness
(ASSA) and Final Approach Runway
Occupancy Awareness (FAROA).
The FAA has reconsidered the need
for antenna diversity in view of the
comments submitted. The agency has
determined that a single bottommounted antenna is the minimum
requirement for ATC surveillance.
Furthermore, the analysis of ASSA and
FAROA does not conclude that antenna
diversity is required for these
applications. As discussed later, the
FAA decision to require a NACP less
than 0.05 NM signifies that certain
ADS–B In applications, including ASSA
and FAROA, will not be fully
supported.
If future analysis indicates that
antenna diversity is required for ASSA
and FAROA, a higher NACP than that
required in this rule also would be
necessary to support these applications.
The FAA does not adopt antenna
diversity as a requirement for ADS–B
Out under this rule because it is not

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

required to support ATC surveillance.
Operators must note that this rule does
not remove or modify any existing
antenna diversity requirements for
transponders or TCAS/ACAS.
Aircraft must transmit signals at a
certain level of power to ensure ground
stations and ADS–B In-equipped aircraft
and vehicles can receive the transmitted
signals. As proposed, the final rule
requires UAT systems to broadcast at a
16-watt minimum-transmit power, and
1090 MHz ES systems to broadcast at a
125-watt minimum-transmit power.
5. Latency of the ADS–B Out Message
Elements
When using an ADS–B system,
aircraft receive information from a
position source and process it with
onboard avionics. The aircraft’s ADS–B
system then transmits position and
other information to the ground stations
through antenna(s) using either the UAT
or 1090 MHz ES broadcast link.
Generally, latency is the time lag
between the time that position
measurements are taken to determine
the aircraft’s position, and the time that
the position information is transmitted
by the aircraft’s ADS–B transmitter. The
latency requirements in this final rule,
although different from the proposal,
represent a more appropriate way to
address latency. The proposal created
ambiguities that are addressed in these
modifications and are supported by the
commenters. Under this rule, total

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

ER28MY10.001

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

In this final rule, the NACP must be
less than 0.05 NM. The NACV and NIC
values are adopted as proposed. The
NACV must be less than 10 meters per
second. The NIC must be less than 0.2
NM. The SIL parameter from the NPRM
has been divided into two separate
parameters and is discussed in detail
later in this document.21 In this final
rule, the SDA parameter must be less
than or equal to 1x10 ¥5 per hour,
which is equivalent to an SDA of 2, and
the SIL parameter must be less than or
equal to 1x10 ¥7 per hour or per sample,
which is equivalent to a SIL of 3. Global
navigation satellite system (GNSS)
systems 22 will set their SILs based on a
1x10 ¥7 per-hour probability. Operators
must meet these performance
requirements to operate in the airspace
where ADS–B is required. Any ADS–B
position source that meets the specified
performance standards is acceptable and

30165

30166

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

latency cannot exceed 2.0 seconds.
Within those 2.0 seconds,
uncompensated latency cannot exceed
0.6 seconds. Total and uncompensated
latency are explained in further detail in
section II F. ‘‘Performance
Requirements—Total And
Uncompensated Latency.’’
6. Conforming Amendments and
Editorial Changes
Section 91.225 requires ADS–B Out
for operations in Class A, B, and C
airspace. In the NPRM, the FAA

inadvertently left out the proposed
conforming amendments to §§ 91.130,
91.131, and 91.135, which address Class
A, B, and C airspace. This rule amends
these sections to include the ADS–B Out
performance requirements for the
appropriate airspace.
In addition, the regulatory text for
§ 91.225 has been reorganized from the
proposed rule language. The
restructuring of the text should make
this section clearer and more readerfriendly.

Lastly, the proposed regulatory text
has been moved from Appendix H to
new § 91.227.
All substantive changes to this rule
are fully discussed in Section II,
Discussion of the Final Rule.
D. Differences Between the Proposed
Rule and the Final Rule
Table 3 summarizes the substantive
changes between the proposed rule and
this final rule. Editorial changes and
clarifications are explained elsewhere in
this preamble.

TABLE 3.— SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PROPOSED RULE AND THE FINAL RULE
Issue area

The NPRM—

Technical Standard Order ....

Proposed performance standards as defined in TSO–
C166a (1090 MHz ES) or TSO–C154b (UAT).
Proposed requiring all aircraft above FL 240 to transmit
on the 1090 MHz ES broadcast link.

Airspace ...............................

NACP ....................................
NIC .......................................
SIL ........................................
Antenna Diversity .................
Total Latency .......................
Message Elements ..............
An ability to turn off ADS–B
Out.

Requires performance standards as defined in TSO–
C166b (1090 MHz ES) or TSO–C154c (UAT).
Requires all aircraft in Class A airspace (FL 180 and
above) to transmit on the 1090 MHz ES broadcast
link.
Proposed ADS–B performance standards for operations Requires ADS–B performance standards for operations
in all Class E airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL.
in Class E airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL,
excluding the airspace at and below 2,500 feet AGL.
Proposed a NACP ≥ 9, which provides navigation accu- Requires NACP < 0.05 NM.
racy < 30 meters.
(NACP ≥ 8)
Proposed changes in NIC be broadcast within 10 sec- Requires changes in NIC be broadcast within 12 seconds.
onds.
Proposed a SIL of 2 or 3 ................................................ Requires an SDA of 2.
Requires a SIL of 3.
Proposed antenna diversity in all airspace specified in Does not require antenna diversity.
the rule.
Proposed latency in the position source < 0.5 seconds Requires uncompensated latency ≤ 0.6 seconds and
and latency in the ADS–B source < 1 second.
maximum total latency ≤ 2.0 seconds.
Proposed a broadcast message element for ‘‘receiving Does not require a broadcast message element for ‘‘reATC services’’.
ceiving ATC services.’’
Proposed that the pilot be able to turn off ADS–B trans- Does not require the pilot be able to disable or turn off
missions if directed by ATC.
ADS–B transmissions.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

E. Separation Standards Working Group
The FAA established an internal
Surveillance and Broadcast Systems
Separation Standards Working group
(SSWG) to develop methodologies and
define metrics as appropriate that
evaluate the end-to-end performance of
ADS–B and wide area multilateration
surveillance systems. These evaluations
include investigating the integration of
these technologies in conjunction with
legacy surveillance technologies, that is,
separation between target positions that
are derived from ADS–B, radar, and
wide area multilateration on ATC
displays.
This SSWG was tasked to perform: (1)
Analyses of performance using system
models and simulations, including the
identification of key performance
drivers and the development of test
scenarios; (2) preliminary evaluations
with prototype system components to
enable verification and validation of the
models and as early evidence of system
performance; and (3) analyses of test
results, operational testing and

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

The final rule—

Jkt 220001

dedicated separation standards flight
tests for each key-site with fully
functional end-to-end systems. Also
included is a test period for each system
where performance data is collected on
aircraft operating in the surveillance
service volume.
The SSWG analyses and evaluations
are the basis for most of the performance
requirements specified in this rule.23
II. Discussion of the Final Rule
Below is a more detailed discussion of
the final rule relative to the comments
received on the proposal:
A. Airspace
1. 2,500 Feet Above Ground Level
Exclusion in Class E Airspace
The NPRM proposed that aircraft
meet ADS–B Out performance
requirements to operate in Class E
airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL
23 The SSWG findings are available from the Web
site http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number
for this rulemaking is FAA –2007–29305.

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

over the 48 contiguous states and the
District of Columbia.
Several commenters, including the
DOD and the Experimental Aircraft
Association (EAA), stated that the
proposed ceiling of 10,000 feet MSL for
aircraft without ADS–B would be a
major hardship and safety issue for
aircraft operators flying in mountainous
terrain. Commenters and the ARC
suggested that the final rule exclude
Class E airspace at and below 2,500 feet
above ground level (AGL), similar to the
exclusion in § 91.215, ATC Transponder
and Altitude Reporting Equipment and
Use.
The FAA recognizes the benefit of
excluding this airspace in the rule,
particularly for visual flight rules (VFR)
pilots flying in mountainous areas. This
modification addresses airspace that is
not affected by the agency’s efforts to
maximize NAS efficiency and capacity.
Excluding this airspace from the rule
minimizes any unnecessary financial
and operational burdens being placed
on aircraft operators who fly in
mountainous areas that encroach on

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Class E airspace at and above 10,000 feet
MSL, but choose not to equip for the
ADS–B Out performance standards in
this rule. Consequently, the final rule
does not require ADS–B performance
standards for operations 2,500 feet AGL
and below in Class E airspace at and
above 10,000 feet MSL.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

2. Airspace for Which ADS–B Is
Required
The NPRM proposed requiring ADS–
B performance standards for operations
in most classes of airspace where
operators currently are required to carry
a transponder.
Numerous commenters recommended
that the FAA limit ADS–B performance
requirements to aircraft operating in
Class A airspace only, or Class A and B
airspace only. Several commenters
questioned the proposed ADS–B
performance requirements in Class E
airspace above 10,000 feet MSL. Many
of these commenters made varying
requests to the FAA concerning the
proposed altitude for which ADS–B Out
would be required, including 12,000
feet MSL, 15,000 feet MSL, FL 180, and
FL 250. The United States Parachute
Association noted that skydiving
operations are typically conducted
above 10,000 feet MSL and sometimes
conducted in Class A, B, and C airspace.
ADS–B cannot be used for ATC
surveillance if all aircraft are not
appropriately equipped. Moreover, it is
unreasonable to set up a regulatory
framework and performance standards
that are based on using two primary
systems for surveillance; nor is it
feasible to fund and maintain two such
systems. The airspace requirements
specified in this rule for ADS–B Out
meet ATC surveillance needs.
Class B and C airspace have the
highest volume of air carrier and GA
traffic. They also experience the most
complex transitions of aircraft from the
en route environment to the terminal
area. With the intricate nature of the
airspace, current regulations dictate
more stringent operational requirements
to operate within Class B and C airspace
areas.
In addition, ATC must have
surveillance data for all aircraft
operating in these areas to ensure
appropriate situational awareness and to
maximize the use of the NAS. ADS–B
Out will enhance surveillance in
controlled airspace areas where
secondary surveillance radar (SSR)
currently exists.
One commenter stated that the FAA
should expand the airspace in which
ADS–B is required and specifically
recommended including Air Defense

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

Identification Zones (ADIZ) 24 and
Offshore Control Area Extensions.
This rule applies to aircraft operating
within U.S. airspace, which extends 12
NM from the U.S. coast. (The airspace
also includes the Washington, DC,
Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA),
referred to as an ‘‘ADIZ’’ prior to 2009.)
Most of the airspace in the ADIZ falls
outside the 12 NM boundaries.
3. Requests for Deviations From ADS–B
Out Requirements
This rule requires operators to
broadcast ADS–B Out information when
operating in specified airspace. If an
aircraft is not capable of meeting the
performance requirements, the operator
may request a deviation from the ATC
facility responsible for that airspace.
However, as noted in the NPRM, ATC
authorizations may contain conditions
necessary to provide the appropriate
level of safety for all operators in the
airspace. ATC may not be able to grant
authorizations in all cases for a variety
of reasons, including workload, runway
configurations, air traffic flows, and
weather conditions.
B. Dual-Link Strategy
The NPRM proposed a dual-link
strategy for ADS–B Out broadcasts.
Under the proposal, aircraft operating
above FL 240 would be required to use
the 1090 MHz ES broadcast link.
Aircraft operating below FL 240 and in
airspace where ADS–B Out performance
requirements were proposed could use
either the 1090 MHz ES or UAT
broadcast link.
Many commenters suggested that a
single-link system would reduce
operational complexity. The
commenters noted that the installation
and maintenance costs of a dual-link
system exceed those of a single-link
system. Some of the commenters
proposed a single-link solution but
disagreed over which link should be
chosen. Commenters supporting a
single-link UAT system noted that 1090
MHz ES does not support FIS–B and is
at risk for frequency congestion in a
future air traffic management
environment. Commenters supporting a
single-link 1090 MHz ES system
explained that UAT is not
internationally interoperable and
opposed a system that requires
international operators to equip with
both links.
Boeing noted that most of the NAS
system delays are associated with
24 An Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is
an area of airspace over land or water in which the
ready identification, location, and control of civil
aircraft is required in the interest of national
security.

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30167

arrivals and departures. Therefore,
Boeing recommended that the airborne
surveillance functions should provide
benefits at all altitudes and on the
ground. Ultimately, Boeing commented
that a single 1090 MHz ES broadcast
link would advance future ADS–B In
applications at low altitudes.
In mandating ADS–B, the FAA is
mindful that some members of the
international air transport community
and the GA community have already
purchased ADS–B Out equipment,
which use either the 1090 MHz ES or
UAT broadcast link. The FAA finds that
a dual-link system is necessary for the
United States to meet the operational
needs of all NAS operators. Moreover, if
the FAA were to require one segment of
the aviation community to equip to
meet the needs of another segment of
the community, this would present
additional costs for some operators to
equip.
1. Altitude To Require the 1090 MHz ES
Datalink
Under the proposal, aircraft operating
above FL 240 would be required to use
the 1090 MHz ES broadcast link.
Operators using only the UAT broadcast
link would be limited to operations
below FL 240.
The Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) recommended that
the FAA require operators to use 1090
MHz ES above 18,000 feet MSL to be
consistent with the Class A airspace
lower boundary (rather than introduce a
new subclassification of established
airspace). In addition, several GA
commenters requested limiting ADS–B
performance requirements to only Class
A airspace. The EAA and some
individuals stated that UAT would work
just as well as 1090 MHz ES above FL
240 and that aircraft should be
permitted to use exclusively UAT for
operations above FL 240.
The final rule specifies FL 180 (the
lower boundary of Class A airspace) as
the ceiling for operating an aircraft
equipped only with UAT. Using 1090
MHz ES at or above FL 180 provides a
clear operational boundary for
controllers and pilots, and does not
create conditions of mixed equipage for
existing or future applications. The FAA
recognizes that this modification will
affect certain operators that want to
operate above FL 180 and equip only
with UAT. However, the agency
concludes that requiring 1090 MHz ES
performance standards for operations in
all of Class A airspace is not only
reasonable for surveillance, but also
establishes a baseline for ADS–B In.
The requirement to broadcast 1090
MHz ES at and above FL 180 does not

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30168

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

preclude UAT reception of FIS–B
services up to FL 240 for aircraft with
a dual-link reception capability.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

2. Automatic Dependent SurveillanceRebroadcast (ADS–R)
Under a dual-link strategy, the FAA
will use ADS–R to allow ADS–B Inequipped aircraft using one type of
broadcast link to receive messages about
aircraft transmitting on the other
broadcast link.
Various commenters, including the
Air Transport Association of America,
Inc. (ATA), Airservices Australia, the
Australia Civil Aviation Safety
Authority, the Aircraft Owners and
Pilots Association (AOPA), Boeing,
British Airways, and the International
Air Transport Association (IATA),
expressed concern about a dual-link
system. Some of these commenters
asserted that the need for ADS–R
introduces additional system-wide
latency into the ADS–B system and
poses a single point of failure for the
degradation or loss of surveillance data.
In their view, this could limit potential
separation and efficiency improvements
and affect the air-to-air surveillance
element of future ADS–B In
applications. In addition, some
commenters expressed concern about
the additional risk of faults or failures
that could result from translating,
merging, and rebroadcasting data from
the 1090 and 978 MHz frequencies.
Some commenters, including Boeing,
contended that ADS–R may not have
sufficient growth capability to support
future ADS–B In air-to-air applications.
Such applications include merging and
spacing, self separation, or using ADS–
B data to supplement or replace TCAS
because of potential of latency or loop
delays. Rockwell-Collins stated that
ADS–R should be able to support many
ADS–B In air-to-air applications,
including closely spaced parallel
approaches and enhanced visual
approach. It recommended developing
ADS–R to support more demanding
aircraft surveillance applications
(ASA).25
Several commenters, including
AOPA, asserted that the dual-link
system presents a safety hazard because
aircraft equipped with different links
cannot ‘‘see’’ each other on ADS–B In
displays in areas without ADS–R
coverage. The commenters suggested
providing ADS–R at all public airports
where a mix of both systems will be
encountered.
25 ASA comprises a number of flight-deck-based
aircraft surveillance and separation assurance
capabilities that may directly provide flight crews
with surveillance information and alerts.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

The FAA is deploying ADS–R in all
areas where ADS–B ATC surveillance
exists.26 ADS–R collects traffic
information broadcast on the 978 MHz
UAT broadcast link and rebroadcasts
the information to 1090 MHz ES users.
Similarly, ADS–R collects traffic
information provided on the 1090 MHz
ES broadcast link and rebroadcasts the
information to UAT users. ADS–R
permits aircraft equipped with either
1090 MHz ES or UAT to take advantage
of ADS–B In applications.
The FAA disagrees with the
comments suggesting that ADS–R
introduces safety issues because of the
added latencies attributed to ADS–R
processing. ATC automation systems do
not require or use ADS–R to provide
surveillance. The added latency in the
rebroadcast of the original ADS–B
message are measurably small and do
not degrade the reported NACP, NACV,
and NIC values. The ARC agreed in its
report that the latency in ADS–R
processing does not degrade the
reporting of the position quality
parameters.27 Latency attributed to
ADS–R does not compromise the safety
of the initial ADS–B In applications.
The intended functions of ADS–B, as
identified in the NPRM, are not
compromised by the latency introduced
with rebroadcasting the messages.
However, future ADS–B In applications
necessarily may be limited becauseof
the latency associated with ADS–R.28
The FAA has a strong interest in
providing the option for operators to
equip with UAT, so they may benefit
from FIS–B service. In making the
decision to use a dual-link strategy, the
FAA acknowledged and weighed the
fact that potential benefits of future
applications may not be fully realized
based on this decision. In situations
where an airport is not within the
planned ADS–B coverage area, the
airport will not have ADS–R coverage.
Consequently, an aircraft with ADS–B
In will not have the benefit of ADS–R,
and ADS–B In will not provide
awareness of aircraft that are
broadcasting on a different broadcast
link.
If an aircraft leaves the ADS–B
coverage area, there will be an
indication to the pilot that the aircraft
is no longer within range of ADS–R
26 The service coverage volume for ADS–B In
applications is explained in greater detail at
http://www.adsb.gov.
27 ADS–B ARC Task II Report to the FAA
Appendix N, ADS–R Latency and Reliability
Expectations (September 26, 2008), available on the
Web site, http:///www.regulations.gov, FAA–2007–
29305–0221.1.
28 To date, the requirements for using ADS–B for
advanced iterations of merging and spacing, and
self separation have yet to be defined.

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

service. In this case, the pilot needs to
maintain separation in the same manner
done today, which is relying on visual
scanning and directions from ATC. The
FAA will ensure that the dual-link
strategy does not impact safety as future
applications are developed.
3. 1090 MHz Frequency Congestion
Boeing, Federal Express (FedEx), and
IATA suggested that the FAA assess
future 1090 MHz frequency congestion.
The ARC supported the dual-link
strategy, but recommended that the FAA
study the necessary mitigations of 1090
MHz frequency congestion. The ARC
specifically recommended that these
mitigations ensure 1090 MHz ES is
interoperable with ACAS and SSR,
while providing sufficient air-to-air
range to support NextGen ADS–B In
applications.
Congestion on the 1090 MHz
frequency is a risk shared by TCAS/
ACAS and SSR systems using the Mode
S transponder. The FAA conducted a
study to assess 1090 MHz frequency
congestion in the future air traffic
environment.29 The FAA is analyzing
alternatives and will enact the necessary
mitigations to reduce the 1090 MHz
frequency congestion risk for ADS–B,
TCAS, and SSR, while enabling ranges
appropriate for many ADS–B In
applications through 2035.
C. Performance Requirements—System
While some commenters supported
the proposed performance requirements,
numerous organizations and individuals
commented that the performance
requirements generally were too
stringent, unnecessary, and would entail
an undue economic burden on
operators.
1. Performance Requirements Tailored
to Operator, Airspace, or Procedure
The NPRM proposed specific
performance requirements for ADS–B
Out. Several commenters, including the
Aerospace Industries Association of
America (AIA), Boeing, the DOD, EAA,
Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, and the
ARC, asked the FAA to tailor the ADS–
B performance requirements based on
specific application requirements or
airspace.
Lockheed Martin and the DOD noted
that some military aircraft may not meet
the proposed equipage requirements
and would need accommodations to
operate in ADS–B Out-designated
airspace. One commenter was
concerned that the DOD was exempt
from the proposed requirements.
29 A copy of this report is available from the Web
site http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number
for this rulemaking is FAA–2007–29305.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
The FAA has determined that it is not
operationally feasible to assign different
performance requirements dependent
on the nature of the operation. It would
not be effective to require both pilots
and controllers to verify specific
performance parameters before any
given operation or change of airspace.
Therefore, the FAA is specifying
minimum performance requirements for
all ADS–B Out-equipped aircraft to
operate in certain designated airspace.
No special allowance is made in this
rule to relieve the military from the
same performance requirements as the
civilian aviation community. The FAA
recognizes that the DOD and other
Federal agencies are NAS users, and
need access to all areas of the NAS
today and in the future. This rule
provides procedures for an aircraft that
does not meet the ADS–B Out
performance requirements, i.e., to obtain
an ATC authorized deviation to operate
in the airspace for which ADS–B is
required. The FAA will collaborate with
the appropriate U.S. Government
departments or agencies (including but
not limited to DOD, and the Department
of Homeland Security) to develop
Memorandums of Agreement to
accommodate their National defense
mission requirements while supporting
the needs of all other NAS users.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

2. Navigation Accuracy Category for
Position (NACP)
The NPRM proposed requiring a
NACP greater than or equal to 9. This is
equivalent to horizontal position
accuracy of less than 30 meters and
vertical position accuracy of less than
45 meters. A NACP of less than 30
meters horizontal would support ATC
surveillance, ASSA, FAROA, and other
future ADS–B In applications.
Airbus, ATA, Aviation
Communication and Surveillance
Systems (ACSS), Boeing, RockwellCollins, United Airlines, and United
Parcel Service (UPS) questioned the
necessity of a NACP greater than or
equal to 9. The ARC recommended that
the FAA institute NACP requirements
based on domains of airspace defined by
different types of operations, with
minimum NACP values ranging from 5
through 9.30 The ARC also
recommended that when a NACP greater
than or equal to 9 is necessary, operators
should only be required to equip with
a position source that could meet a
NACP greater than or equal to 9 for 95
percent of an hour and meet a NACP
30 ADS–B ARC Task II Report to the FAA 6
(September 26, 2008), available on the Web site,
http://www.regulations.gov, FAA–2007–29305–
0221.1.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

greater than or equal to 8 for 99.9
percent of an hour.
Boeing commented that there is no
need for vertical accuracy because
neither ATC nor any of the initial ADS–
B In applications require it. The ARC
recommended that the FAA not apply
the vertical position accuracy
requirement associated with a NACP of
9 for surface operations. The ARC also
recommended that the FAA modify the
definition of a NACP of 9 in DO–260A
and DO–282A. This modification would
remove the vertical accuracy
requirement if the aircraft is on the
surface.
The FAA reviewed these comments
and the necessary requirements for the
ADS–B Out and ADS–B In applications
that are contemplated today. A NACP of
less than 0.05 NM is required for ATC
surveillance. A NACP of less than 30
meters is required only for ASSA and
FAROA. Because surface surveillance
benefits enabled by ADS–B will only be
fully available where Airport Surface
Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE–
X) systems,31 and ADS–R and TIS–B are
in use, the FAA has reconsidered the
universal requirement of a NACP of less
than 30 meters.
While the higher NACP would
support a limited number of ADS–B In
applications, it could also increase
costs 32 to all operators required to meet
the ADS–B performance standards.
Therefore, this final rule reduces the
position accuracy reporting requirement
and adopts a NACP of less than 0.05
NM. This NACP requirement applies to
all aircraft operating in the airspace
identified in this rule.
In addition, the FAA considered the
comments regarding the vertical
accuracy component of NACP. As there
are no ATC separation services
requirements for vertical accuracy or
integrity, the FAA has removed the
vertical accuracy and integrity
requirement from NACP, NACV, NIC,
and SIL in TSO–C154c and TSO–C166b.
3. Navigation Accuracy Category for
Velocity (NACV)
The NPRM proposed requiring a
NACV greater than or equal to 1, which
is equivalent to velocity accuracy of less
than 10 meters per second.
The European Organisation for the
Safety of Air Navigation
31 ASDE–X is a traffic management system for the
airport surface that provides seamless coverage and
aircraft identification to air traffic controllers. The
system uses a combination of surface movement
radar and transponder multilateration sensors to
display aircraft position.
32 ADS–B ARC Report to the FAA Appendix P,
Programmatic Decision Analysis (September 26,
2008), available at http://www.regulations.gov,
FAA–2007–29305–0221.1.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30169

(EUROCONTROL) commented that a
NACV of 1 is not sufficient for ATC
services or advanced ADS–B In
applications. The ARC recommended
that NACV should not be required.
Different air navigation service
providers may need different
performance requirements depending
on the airspace in which they
implement ADS–B separation services.
The FAA reviewed this requirement and
concludes that a NACV is required for
separation services in the United States.
The agency modeled and calculated the
NACV requirements for aircraft
separation, using assumptions unique to
the U.S. environment. Based on this
analysis, the FAA determined that a
horizontal velocity accuracy of less than
10 meters per second, as proposed in
the NPRM, is required for ATC
surveillance within the NAS.33
Therefore, this requirement is adopted
as proposed.
4. Navigation Integrity Category (NIC)
The NPRM proposed requiring a NIC
greater than or equal to 7, which
provides navigation integrity of less
than 0.2 NM. Boeing questioned the
necessity of this requirement. The ARC
recommended that the FAA adopt NIC
requirements based on airspace, with
minimum NIC values ranging from 0 to
7.
The FAA reviewed this requirement
and determined that a NIC of less than
0.2 NM is necessary for ATC separation
services, particularly in the approach
environment. Similar to the NACP, it is
not practical to assign different NIC
values based on types of airspace.
Therefore, this rule requires a NIC of
less than 0.2 NM.
5. Surveillance Integrity Level
The FAA’s proposal for surveillance
integrity level stated that the
surveillance integrity level is based on
both the design assurance level of the
ADS–B Out avionics and the position
source. Several commenters, including
Rockwell-Collins, pointed out that the
proposed definition was inconsistent
with the surveillance integrity level
definition provided in DO–260A.
Commenters stated that DO–260A
Change 2 defined surveillance integrity
level as including only the position
source. The ARC recommended that the
FAA use the definition of surveillance
integrity level found in RTCA DO–
33 A copy of the Separation Standards Working
Group report is available from the Web site http://
www.regulations.gov. The docket number for this
rulemaking is FAA–2007–29305.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30170

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

289,34 which also limited the design
assurance to the position source.
The FAA asserts that the design
assurance of the ADS–B system needs to
represent the complete system, and not
a single piece of that system, to provide
air traffic separation services. The FAA
agrees that the inconsistency between
the proposed rule and the RTCA
standard is unworkable; however, RTCA
has updated the design assurance
requirements in DO–260B and DO–282B
to include the entire ADS–B avionics
system, rather than just the position
source. The ADS–B system includes
ADS–B transmission equipment, ADS–B
processing equipment, position source,
and any other equipment that processes
the position data transmitted by the
ADS–B system. The DO–260B change is
consistent with the rule.
6. Source Integrity Level (SIL) and
System Design Assurance (SDA)
In DO–260A (TSO–C166a) and DO–
282A (TSO–C154b), SIL was defined as
surveillance integrity level and
represented two separate components:
(1) The maximum probability of
exceeding the NIC containment radius
and (2) a maximum probability of a
failure causing false or misleading data
to be transmitted. DO–260B (TSO–
C166b) and DO–282B (TSO–C154c)
separate these two components into two
distinct parameters. SIL is now referred
to as source integrity level and defines
the maximum probability of exceeding
the NIC containment radius; SDA now
defines the maximum probability of a
failure causing false or misleading data
to be transmitted.
The FAA proposed a SIL value of 2 or
3. A SIL of 2, as stated in TSO–C166a
and TSO–C154b, represented: (1) A
maximum probability of exceeding the
NIC containment radius of 1x10¥5 per
hour or per sample; and (2) a maximum
probability of a failure causing false or
misleading data to be transmitted of
1x10¥5 per hour.
A SIL of 3 represented: (1) A
maximum probability of exceeding the
NIC containment radius of 1x10¥7 per
hour or per sample and (2) a maximum
probability of a failure causing false or
misleading data to be transmitted of
1x10¥7 per hour.
The FAA proposed these two values
for SIL because its separation standards
modeling determined that the
probability of exceeding the NIC
containment radius must be less than
1x10¥7 per hour or per sample and the
probability of a failure causing false or
Aviation System Performance
Standards (MASPS) for Aircraft Surveillance
Applications (ASA).

misleading data must be less than
1x10¥5 per hour. The FAA’s TSOs and
the corresponding RTCA documents did
not allow for this combination.
Therefore, in developing and issuing
the NPRM, the FAA assumed that most
operators, in upgrading their equipment
for ADS–B, would equip with a global
positioning system (GPS) 35 that would
provide a NIC containment radius of
1x10¥7 per hour (a SIL of 3). However,
to require the associated maximum
probability of failure causing false or
misleading data to be transmitted at
1x10¥7 per hour was not only
unreasonable but also unnecessary.
Therefore, the FAA proposed that a SIL
of 2 was also acceptable.
With the separate SIL and SDA values
available under DO–260B and DO–
282B, the rule requires a maximum
probability of exceeding the NIC
containment radius of 1x10¥7 per hour
or per sample (which equates to a SIL
of 3), and a maximum probability of
1x10¥5 per hour of a failure causing
false or misleading data to be
transmitted (which equates to an SDA of
2).
Changing the proposed probability of
exceeding the NIC containment radius
from 1x10¥5 per hour or per sample to
1x10¥7 per hour or per sample should
not impact NAS users. This is because
currently available ADS–B Out systems
using GNSS will provide an integrity
metric based on 1x10¥7 per hour.
7. Secondary Position Sources
The General Aviation Manufacturers
Association (GAMA), IATA, and
Rockwell-Collins commented that the
final rule should specify separate
performance requirements for secondary
position sources in the event that their
primary position source is unavailable.
The FAA disagrees that a separate set
of requirements is necessary for
secondary position sources because the
rule does not require a secondary
source. The NACP, NACV, NIC, SDA and
SIL requirements in this rule apply
regardless of the position source in use.
D. Performance Requirements—
Antenna Diversity
The NPRM proposed that aircraft
meet optimum system performance by
equipping with both a top and a bottom
antenna to support ADS–B In
applications.
Several commenters, including
AOPA, did not support this aspect of
the proposal because antenna diversity
significantly increases the cost of ADS–
B. AOPA also noted that historical

34 Minimum

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

35 GPS is a U.S. satellite-based radio navigation
system that provides a global-positioning service.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

TCAS and transponder use does not
indicate that dual antennas are
necessary.
Airservices Australia and the
Australia Civil Aviation Safety
Authority noted that Australia is not
requiring antenna diversity for GA
aircraft. The ARC recommended
allowing non-diversity antenna
installations for VFR aircraft flying
through Class B and C airspace and
below 15,000 feet MSL (1090 MHz ES)
or below 18,000 feet MSL (UAT), but
not landing at a primary airport. The
ARC also recommended that the FAA
undertake further studies to assess and
validate the need for antenna diversity
in low-altitude airspace.
The FAA proposed dual antennas to
support ADS–B Out and ADS–B In airto-air applications. For ATC
surveillance, only a single bottommounted antenna is necessary. The
commenters and the ARC identified this
element of the proposal as requiring
significant costs for the GA operators.36
The FAA has reconsidered its initial
strategy for launching the ADS–B
requirements and is adopting the
performance standards necessary for
ATC surveillance. Therefore, this rule
does not require antenna diversity for
ADS–B to operate in any airspace. This
change does not alter or affect antenna
diversity requirements for other aircraft
systems, such as transponders or TCAS
II.
Operators should be aware that a dual
antenna installation could provide
additional benefits that are not included
in the scope of this rule. Airport surface
situational awareness or alerting
applications may be compromised by a
single-antenna installation. Operators
who equip with a single antenna may
not be able to accrue all available
benefits from some or all future ADS–
B In applications.
While requirements for these
applications have not yet been fully
defined, modeling performed by both
the ARC and the FAA has indicated that
a single antenna may not be able to
perform adequately for surface
applications. If the FAA, for example,
issues a future mandate requiring
surface performance capability,
operators of single-antenna-equipped
aircraft may need to upgrade the
avionics installed on their aircraft.
Operators should also be aware that
single-antenna installations are not as
capable as dual-antenna installations of
receiving ADS–B messages in an
36 ADS–B ARC Task II Report to the FAA
Appendix T, Antenna Diversity Comments on Cost,
(September 26, 2008), available at http://
www.regulations.gov, FAA–2007–29305–0221.1.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
environment with a highly congested
spectrum. Because of increasing
congestion on the 1090 MHz frequency
over time, single-antenna installations
of ADS–B may not be able to achieve the
same range for ADS–B In applications as
aircraft with two antennas.
This limitation on the upper bound of
ADS–B In application range for singleantenna installations does not impact
any of the application benefits cited in
this rule. The FAA is actively pursuing
strategies to mitigate spectrum
congestion concerns of the 1090 MHz
frequency. However, operators
employing the 1090 MHz ES broadcast
link should be aware that future air-toair applications that require longer
range reception may require dual
antennas or a UAT system.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

E. Performance Requirements—
Transmit Power
The NPRM proposed that aircraft
equipped with UAT would have a
minimum 16-watt transmit power
performance and aircraft equipped with
1090 MHz ES would have a minimum
125-watt transmit power performance.
Some commenters, particularly AOPA,
argued that the proposal was not
warranted and imposed unnecessary
expense. The ARC commented that
using the existing power level without
antenna diversity may provide the
performance needed to make broader
use of non-diversity antenna
installations.
The FAA has determined that
reducing the transmit power
requirement would significantly impact
the ground infrastructure. The FAA will
rely on a series of approximately 800
ground stations to provide ATC
separation services throughout the
United States. The ground stations will
be placed 150 to 200 miles apart and
will require the minimum aircraft
output power specified in the rule to
ensure coverage. Lowering the aircraft
output power requirements, as
suggested by the commenters, would
require the FAA to expand and redesign
the ADS–B ground infrastructure.
Consequently, the power levels remain
unchanged in the final rule.
F. Performance Requirements—Total
and Uncompensated Latency
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to
define latency as the time information
enters the aircraft through the aircraft
antenna(s) until the time it is
transmitted from the aircraft. The FAA
further proposed that the navigation
sensor should process information
received by the aircraft’s antenna(s) and
forward this information to the ADS–B
broadcast link avionics in less than 0.5

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

seconds. The processed information
then would be transmitted in the ADS–
B message from the ADS–B Out
broadcast link avionics in less than 1.0
second from the time it was received
from the navigation sensor.
Several commenters, including
Airbus, Boeing, EUROCONTROL,
GAMA, and Honeywell, commented
that the latency requirements are not
well defined, are too stringent, and are
not consistent with other standards.37
United Airlines and UPS recommended
that the FAA specify the accuracy of
position information at the time of
transmission. Boeing and Honeywell
recommended that the FAA specify
latency, based on the time of
applicability of the position source.
The ARC stated that the FAA should:
(1) Specify latency requirements at the
aircraft level, not the equipment level;
(2) specify the maximum
uncompensated latency to minimize or
eliminate installation wiring changes of
existing ADS–B Out implementations,
while meeting ATC surveillance
requirements; (3) specify total latency
and uncompensated latency; and (4)
reference latency to the time of
applicability of the position provided by
the position sensor, rather than the time
of measurement.
The FAA adopts three of the four ARC
recommendations. First, the FAA agrees
that latency must be defined at the
aircraft level and not the equipment
level. Second, the latency requirements
are set at the maximum value that will
allow ATC surveillance. Although the
latency requirements will drive wiring
changes in some aircraft, the
requirements will minimize the number
of aircraft affected to the maximum
extent possible. Third, the FAA has
defined the latency requirements as
total latency and uncompensated
latency. The FAA does not agree with
the fourth recommendation to measure
latency at the time of applicability. To
do so would place latency requirements
only on part of the overall system and
specifically exclude the position source
latency. Since the entire system’s
latency, including the position source,
must be limited to ensure accuracy of
the transmitted position the rule
requires latency to be measured from
the position source time of
measurement and not the time of
applicability.
This rule specifies two separate
latency requirements: Total latency and
37 The commenters specifically referenced the
RTCA Airborne Surveillance Applications
Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards
and DO–303 Safety ‘‘Safety, Performance and
Inoperability Requirements Document of the ADS–
B Non-Radar-Airspace (NRA) Application.’’

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30171

uncompensated latency. Total latency is
defined as the time between when
measurements are taken to determine
the aircraft’s geometric position
(latitude, longitude, and geometric
altitude) and when the ADS–B
transmitter broadcasts the aircraft’s
position. Under this rule, the total
latency cannot exceed 2.0 seconds.
Latency is compensated to account for
the movement of the aircraft while the
unit is processing the position
information. The avionics usually
compensate latency based on velocity
but may also compensate based on
acceleration.
Uncompensated latency is defined as
the time the avionics does not
compensate for latency. Under this rule,
within the 2.0 second total latency
allocation, a maximum of 0.6 seconds
may be uncompensated latency. The
avionics must compensate for any
latency above 0.6 seconds up to the
maximum of 2.0 seconds by
extrapolating the position to the time of
transmission.
Aircraft velocity, as well as position
accuracy and integrity metrics (NACP,
NACV, NIC, SDA, and SIL), must be
transmitted with their associated
position measurement, but are not
required to be compensated.
G. Performance Requirements—Time To
Indicate Accuracy and Integrity
Changes
The NPRM proposed that changes in
NIC and NACP must be broadcast within
10 seconds. This proposed requirement
would bind the latency of the NIC and
NACP, however this requirement would
also bind the maximum amount of time
an integrity fault can exist without an
indication, as an integrity fault is
indicated by changing the NIC and
NACP to zero.
The ARC, GAMA, and RockwellCollins commented that 10.0 seconds is
not enough time to indicate a change in
the NIC. They specifically noted that
GNSS position sources use the entire
10-second allocation, which does not
allow time for the ADS–B equipment to
actually transmit the change. RockwellCollins, GAMA, and the ARC
recommended instead that changes in
NIC and SIL be broadcast within 12.1
seconds.
Position sources typically provide an
accuracy and integrity metric with each
position that is output. To allow GNSSbased position sources time to detect
and eliminate possible satellite faults,
GNSS systems allow the integrity metric
associated with a position to actually lag
behind the output of the position. TSO–
C145/146 and TSO–C196 GNSS systems
have up to 8.0 seconds to alert to an

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30172

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

integrity fault. TSO–C129 systems do
not have an overarching integrity fault
time-to-alert requirement, but they do
have navigation mode specific integrity
fault time-to-alert requirements.
Specifically, TSO–C129 systems must
indicate an integrity fault within 10
seconds in terminal and approach
modes.
The requirement to indicate a change
in NIC applies to the time between
when a fault-free NIC is transmitted
with a faulted position and when the
NIC is updated to indicate the fault.
Thus, the clock to indicate the change
in NIC does not start at the onset of the
fault, but rather at the broadcast of the
faulted position from the ADS–B
system. Thus, the total time to update
the NIC is based on the cumulative
effect of—(1) the position source fault
detection and exclusion time, and (2)
the worst-case asynchronous
transmission difference between when
the fault-free NIC with faulted position
is transmitted and when the faulted NIC
is transmitted.
The FAA reviewed the separation
standards work to determine if a 12.0
second delay in the broadcast of an
integrity fault would impact separation
standards. The FAA found that no
existing terminal and en route
surveillance standards would be
impacted with a 12.0 second delay, and
thus the rule requires that changes in
NIC be broadcast within 12.0 seconds.
The ARC, GAMA, and RockwellCollins also commented that changes in
NACP, NACV, and SIL should be
broadcast within 3.1 seconds versus
10.0 seconds. The FAA determined that
there is no basis to tighten the
requirement. Therefore, the 10.0 second
requirement applies to indicating
changes in NACP, NACV, SDA, and SIL.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

H. Performance Requirements—
Availability
The FAA did not propose any
availability 38 requirements for this rule.
The proposed rule generated multiple
comments concerning statements in the
preamble regarding availability and
whether the FAA should require
operators to accomplish a preflight
38 RTCA DO–229, Minimum Operational
Performance Standards for Global Positioning
System/Wide Area Augmentation System Airborne
Equipment, defines the availability of a navigation
system as the ability of the system to provide the
required function and performance at the initiation
of the intended operation. Availability is an
indication of the ability of the system to provide
usable service with the specified coverage area.
Signal availability is the percentage of time that
navigational signals transmitted from external
sources are available for use. Availability is a
function of both the physical characteristics of the
environment and the technical capabilities of the
transmitter facilities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

determination of GNSS availability.
Other commenters focused on a
perceived requirement for operators to
equip with avionics that had a system
availability equivalent to Wide Area
Augmentation System (WAAS) 39.
1. Preflight Determination of
Availability
The proposal preamble explained that
operators must verify ADS–B Out
availability before flight as part of their
pre-flight responsibilities. This is
similar to the requirement for preflight
determination of availability for certain
Required Navigation Performance
(RNP) 40 operations.
ATA argued that the process to
determine availability could be time
consuming for operators and that the
FAA should provide further
justification. Boeing stated that the
NPRM did not include an availability
requirement; therefore, the FAA should
correct its statement in the NPRM
preamble advising operators to make
this part of their preflight actions.
The ARC recommended that the FAA
provide preflight prediction systems
that assess the ability of typical
positioning sources to meet the position
accuracy and integrity requirements.
This rule requires operators to meet
the adopted minimum position accuracy
and integrity performance requirements
to operate in the airspace described in
the rule. To facilitate compliance with
the rule and assist pilots for the flight
planning, the FAA will provide a
preflight availability prediction service
by 2013. Therefore, prior to departure,
operators should verify that the
predicted performance requirements
will be met for the duration of the flight.
This service will determine whether
GNSS equipment is capable of meeting
§ 91.227 position accuracy and integrity
requirements for operating in the
airspace defined in this rule. Operators
may also use their own preflight
availability prediction tools, provided
the predictions correspond to the
performance of their equipment. The
FAA advises operators to consult
manufacturers’ information on specific
avionics and prediction services.
2. System Availability
Numerous commenters, including the
DOD, contended that the proposal
39 WAAS

is a U.S. wide-coverage augmentation
system to GPS that calculates integrity and
correction data on the ground and uses
geostationary satellites to broadcast the data to GPS/
SBAS (Satellite-Based Augmentation System (nonU.S.)) users.
40 Required Navigation Performance (RNP) is a
statement of the total aircraft navigation
performance necessary for operation within a
defined airspace.

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

required WAAS (or implied that the
positioning service used by the aircraft
have an availability equivalent to
WAAS.)
As stated in the NPRM, operators may
equip with any position source.
Although WAAS is not required, at this
time it is the only positioning service
that provides the equivalent availability
to radar (99.9 percent availability). The
FAA expects that future position
sources such as GNSS using the L5 GPS
signal, GPS using Galileo signals, and
GPS tightly integrated with inertial
navigation systems will also provide
99.9 percent availability. Operators who
equip with other position sources, such
as non-augmented GPS, may experience
outages that limit their access to the
airspace defined in this rule.
If an aircraft’s avionics meet the
requirements of this rule but
unexpected GPS degradations during
flight inhibit the position source from
providing adequate accuracy (within
0.05 NM) and integrity (within 0.2 NM),
ATC will be alerted via the aircraft’s
broadcasted data and services will be
provided to that aircraft using the
backup strategy. An aircraft that is not
equipped to meet the requirements of
this rule will not have access to the
airspace for which ADS–B is required.
The FAA notes that preflight availability
verification eliminates any need for the
system to meet a specified availability
requirement upon installation.
I. Performance Requirements—
Continuity
The FAA did not propose a
continuity 41 requirement in the NPRM.
Several commenters, including Airbus,
GAMA, Rockwell-Collins, and the ARC,
suggested that the FAA add a continuity
requirement. These commenters argued
that such a requirement would ensure
that an aircraft could continue
providing the ADS–B information
throughout a flight.
Aircraft are to meet the performance
requirements for the duration of the
operation, not just a portion of the
flight. The FAA’s preflight availability
prediction service will help pilots
ensure that the aircraft can continue
transmitting ADS–B information
throughout their planned flight, based
on expected operations. Unexpected
41 DO–229 defines the continuity of the system as
the ability of the total system (comprising all
elements necessary to maintain aircraft position
within the defined airspace) to perform its function
without interruption during the intended operation.
More specifically, continuity is the probability that
the specified system performance will be
maintained for the duration of a phase of operation
(presuming that the system was available at the
beginning of that phase of operation), and predicted
to exist throughout the operation.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
failures will be accommodated, as
described in the discussion on
availability; therefore, there is no need
for a separate continuity requirement.
J. Performance Requirements—Traffic
Information Service—Broadcast
Integrity (TIS–B)
The NPRM did not propose any
changes to the standards for TIS–B.
Boeing stated that the FAA’s plans to
implement TIS–B with a SIL of 0 would
severely limit its utility for ADS–B In
applications. Boeing recommended that
the FAA change TIS–B to provide a SIL
of 2 or greater, to be consistent with the
SIL proposed for ADS–B Out.
Honeywell commented that a TIS–B
integrity level should be established for
value-added, near-term applications.
The ARC did not specifically comment
on the TIS–B SIL, but did recommend
that the FAA include a discussion of the
FIS–B and TIS–B benefits in the
preamble to the ADS–B Out final rule.
The TIS–B system is expected to
support four of the five initial ADS–B In
applications. The FAA acknowledges
that future ADS–B In applications may
require improved representation of the
position integrity metrics. With the SIL
and SDA changes incorporated in DO–
260B and DO–282B and possible
changes to future versions of DO–317,
the FAA plans, outside of this
rulemaking effort, to evaluate the
usefulness of the broadcast of integrity
parameters from TIS–B.
K. Broadcast Message Elements
1. NACP/NACV/NIC/SDA/SIL

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

The NPRM did not specifically
propose NACP, NACV, NIC, or SIL as
broadcast message elements in section 4
of appendix H to part 91, Minimum
Broadcast Message Element Set for
ADS–B Out. These requirements were
specified in section 3 of appendix H to
part 91, ADS–B Out Performance
Requirements for NIC, NAC, and SIL.
Honeywell noted that NACP, NACV,
NIC, and SIL are required message
elements in DO–260A.
To resolve any questions, the FAA has
repeated the indications for these
elements in § 91.227(d)(16) through (19).
In addition, and consistent with TSO–
C166b and TSO–C154c, SIL and SDA
are listed as separate values.
2. Receiving ATC Services
The NPRM proposed requiring the
message element ‘‘Receiving ATC
Services.’’ Several commenters,
including ACSS, Airbus, Boeing,
EUROCONTROL, United Airlines, and
UPS, commented that this message
element is unnecessary and poorly

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

defined. UPS and United Airlines
suggested that the FAA use the ground
automation system to accomplish the
function of this message element. Some
commenters also contended that this
message element could require an
additional user interface, which is not
available on current equipment.
The ARC recommended that the FAA
clarify the definition of this message
element and explain how it can be
implemented without pilot entry. The
ARC also requested that the FAA
research whether both ‘‘Receiving ATC
Services’’ and ‘‘Mode 3/A Code’’ are
necessary.
The FAA concludes that ‘‘Receiving
ATC Services’’ is not necessary for ATC
surveillance because this information
can be directly inferred from the Mode
3/A code. Furthermore, this message
element could increase costs for an
additional user interface. Therefore, this
rule does not include ‘‘Receiving ATC
Services’’ as a required broadcast
message element.
3. Length and Width of the Aircraft
The NPRM proposed requiring a
message element to broadcast the length
and width of the aircraft.
Airbus and EUROCONTROL
commented that length and width
information is not necessary for
surveillance or airborne ADS–B Out
applications. Airbus and an individual
commenter noted that length and width
information should be quantified
relative to the aircraft position reference
point or to a known offset.
GAMA and Rockwell-Collins noted
that the TSOs allow some aircraft to
continuously transmit ‘‘in-air’’ because
these aircraft do not have a means to
determine their air/ground status.
Rockwell-Collins commented that the
rule should require all aircraft to assess
their air/ground status and broadcast the
appropriate set of messages for that
status. The ARC recommended that the
FAA address this issue in the preamble
to the final rule.
The FAA notes that TSO–C154c and
TSO–C166b allow the operator to
determine whether to transmit the
aircraft’s latitude and longitude
referenced to the GPS antenna location
or the ADS–B position reference point.
The ADS–B position reference point is
the center of a box, based on the aircraft
length and width. With the position
offset to the ADS–B reference point, the
ADS–B is able to report the position of
the edges of the aircraft. This rule does
not require operators to apply the
position offset because ATC
surveillance does not require a position
offset.

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30173

The FAA concludes that the
requirement to transmit aircraft length
and width is necessary because this
message element will be used as an
input for ASDE–X systems and allows
the FAA to decommission ASDE–3
radars 42 that interface with ASDE–X, as
well as the surface movement radar
systems that are at certain ASDE–X sites
without ASDE–3. The length-width
code will be preset when ADS–B
equipment, meeting the standards in
TSO–C154c or TSO–C166b, is installed
in the aircraft.
ADS–B equipment transmits an
airborne position message when the
aircraft is airborne, and a surface
position message when the aircraft is on
the ground. Aircraft automatically
determine airborne or ground status and
transmit the appropriate message. For
aircraft that are unable to determine
their air-ground status automatically,
the RTCA standards and TSOs allow the
aircraft to continuously transmit the
airborne position message. However, the
length width code is a required message
element in this rule, and is only
transmitted in the surface position
message. Thus, to comply with the rule,
the aircraft must automatically
determine its air-ground status and
transmit the surface position message
which includes the length width code
when on the ground.
4. Indication of the Aircraft’s Barometric
Pressure Altitude
The NPRM proposed a broadcast
message that would report the aircraft’s
barometric pressure altitude. Several
commenters, including the ARC,
GAMA, Rockwell-Collins, Sandia
National Laboratories (SANDIA), and
UPS, identified an inconsistency
regarding the barometric altitude
message element between the proposed
rule’s preamble and regulatory text.
The FAA agrees that the NPRM
preamble was not completely clear and
should have better reflected the
proposed regulatory text. The proposed
regulatory text stated that the pressure
altitude reported for ADS–B Out and
Mode C/S transponder is derived from
the same source for aircraft equipped
with both a transponder and ADS–B
Out. The FAA confirms that the
barometric altitude reported from the
aircraft’s transponder and ADS–B Out
must be derived from the same source.
In addition, the FAA is striking the
January 1, 2020 compliance date from
proposed § 91.217(b). If an operator
chooses to use ADS–B before January 1,
42 ASDE–3 is an airport radar that shows to tower
controllers the location of aircraft on the surface.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30174

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

2020, the operator must meet the
provisions of that section.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

5. Indication of the Aircraft’s Velocity
The NPRM proposed a message
element that would provide ATC with
information about the aircraft’s velocity
and direction. However, the NPRM
preamble mistakenly referred to velocity
as airspeed. Several commenters,
including Airbus, the ARC, RockwellCollins, SANDIA, and UPS,
recommended that the message element
reflect velocity instead of airspeed.
Rockwell-Collins noted that velocity
could be derived from other sources,
including an inertial navigation system.
ACSS, United Airlines, and UPS
recommended that the FAA require the
velocity source for ADS–B
transmissions to be the most accurate
velocity source on the aircraft. The ARC
recommended that the issue of velocity
source be referred to RTCA.
This message element will provide
ATC with the aircraft’s velocity, as well
as a clearly stated direction and
description of the rate at which an
aircraft changes its position. The
velocity must be transmitted with a
NACV of less than 10 meters per second.
Any velocity source that meets these
requirements will comply with this rule.
The FAA referred the question on
velocity source to RTCA for further
review, as the ARC recommended.
RTCA determined that the velocity
source must be the same source that
provides the aircraft’s position, and
included this requirement in DO–260B
and DO–282B.
6. Indication If Traffic Alert and
Collision Avoidance System II or
Airborne Collision Avoidance System Is
Installed and Operating in a Mode That
May Generate Resolution Advisory
Alerts
The NPRM proposed requiring a
message element that would (1) identify
to ATC whether the aircraft is equipped
with TCAS II or ACAS and (2) identify
whether the equipment is operating in
a mode that could generate resolution
advisory alerts. Airbus asked for more
information on why this message
element is required. EUROCONTROL
commented that this message element
should be internationally harmonized
before the FAA adopts this requirement.
UPS asked whether this message should
be indicated if the TCAS II is operated
in the traffic advisory mode. The ARC
sought to retain this message element,
but asked the FAA to clarify its
intended use in the final rule.
The TCAS installed and operating in
a mode that can generate a resolution
advisory message will be used by the

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

FAA to monitor in-service performance
to address NAS inefficiencies and take
appropriate corrective actions. This
information may also be used to support
future ADS–B In applications. This
message element was harmonized with
the international community in the
development of DO–260B and ED–
102A.43
7. For Aircraft With an Operable Traffic
Alert and Collision Avoidance System II
or Airborne Collision Avoidance
System, Indication If a Resolution
Advisory Is in Progress
The NPRM proposed a message
element to indicate that a resolution
advisory is in progress. EUROCONTROL
recommended that the FAA
internationally harmonize this message
element before adopting the
requirement. Airbus noted that this
element may be achieved with DO–
260A.
Similar to the discussion in II.K.6.
above, the message that a TCAS
resolution advisory is in progress will
be used by the FAA to monitor inservice performance to address NAS
inefficiencies and take appropriate
corrective actions. This information may
also be used to support future ADS–B In
applications. This message element was
harmonized with the international
community in the development of DO–
260B and ED–102A.
8. Indication of the Mode 3/A
Transponder Code Specified by ATC
(Requires Flightcrew Entry)
The NPRM proposed a message
element to transmit the aircraft’s
assigned Mode 3/A transponder code.
Several commenters, including ACSS,
Boeing, SANDIA, and UPS, argued that
this message element should not be
necessary with ADS–B surveillance, and
suggested deleting the requirement.
GAMA expressed concern that different
codes in the Mode 3/A transponder and
the ADS–B could result in an indication
of a traffic conflict. GAMA specifically
recommended a one code entry or
revising the automation to resolve
conflicting information. Airbus and the
ARC supported this message element
requirement and the ARC requested
more information on its intended use.
The FAA has determined that the
same ATC-assigned Mode 3/A code
must be transmitted by both the
transponder and the ADS–B Out
message. If the code transmitted by
ADS–B differs from the Mode 3/A code
transmitted by the transponder, it could
result in duplicative codes or inaccurate
43 EUROCAE MOPS for 1090 MHz Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B).

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

reporting of aircraft position. If the
aircraft’s avionics are not capable of
allowing a single point of entry for the
transponder and ADS–B Out Mode 3/A
code, the pilot must ensure that
conflicting codes are not transmitted to
ATC.
ATC uses the Mode 3/A code to
identify aircraft that are under
surveillance and possibly under ATC
direction. This identifier is necessary to
issue directions to specific aircraft about
nearby air traffic. The Mode 3/A code
and the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) 24-bit address are
duplicative for some functions. This
duplication is necessary because many
current ATC automation systems are not
yet capable of using the ICAO 24-bit
address. Therefore, the FAA retains this
message element in the rule.
9. Indication of the Aircraft’s Call Sign
That Is Submitted on the Flight Plan, or
the Aircraft’s Registration Number
(Aircraft Call Sign Requires Flightcrew
Entry)
The NPRM proposed a requirement
for this message element to indicate
either the aircraft’s call sign (as
submitted on its flight plan), or the
aircraft’s registration number. An
individual commenter disagreed with
the required broadcast message element
for aircraft identity and noted that it
uses unnecessary bandwidth.
This message element correlates flight
plan information with the data that ATC
views on the radar display, and
facilitates ATC communication with the
aircraft. This message element also will
support certain ADS–B In applications
such as enhanced visual approach.
In the final rule, the regulatory text is
amended to provide that an operator
does not need to populate the call sign/
aircraft registration field for a UAT
equipped aircraft if he or she has not
filed a flight plan, is not requesting ATC
services, and is using a UAT selfassigned temporary 24-bit address.
Although the FAA does not prohibit the
anonymity feature, operators using the
anonymity feature will not be eligible to
receive ATC services, may not be able
to benefit from enhanced ADS–B search
and rescue capabilities, and may impact
ADS–B In situational awareness
benefits.
10. Indication If the Flightcrew Has
Identified an Emergency, Radio
Communication Failure, or Unlawful
Interference (Requires Flightcrew Entry)
The NPRM proposed this message
element to alert ATC that an aircraft is
experiencing emergency conditions.
Airbus asked the FAA to clarify which
emergency/priority codes are required.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
The ARC recommended that the FAA
explain in the final rule the emergency
status requirement and describe how it
will be used.
This message element alerts ATC that
the aircraft is experiencing emergency
conditions and indicates the type of
emergency. Both TSO–C154c and TSO–
C166b identify six unique emergency
codes. All emergency codes may be
transmitted. Under this rule, only
emergency, radio communication
failure, and unlawful interference are
required. This information will alert
ATC to potential danger to the aircraft
so it can take appropriate action.
Message elements for minimum fuel,
downed aircraft, and medical
emergency are not required by this
rule.44 ADS–B equipment may
automatically set these required
emergency conditions based on the
Mode 3/A code.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

11. Indication of the Aircraft’s ‘‘IDENT’’
to ATC (Requires Flightcrew Entry)
The NPRM proposed this message
element to help controllers quickly
identify a specific aircraft. United
Airlines and UPS commented that they
believe controllers use the ‘‘IDENT’’
function to attain aircraft identification
information. They noted that future
identification systems should include
aircraft information; therefore, they
believed this element is not necessary.
FreeFlight commented that ‘‘IDENT’’
should be retained. The ARC
recommended that the FAA clarify how
the ‘‘IDENT’’ requirement will be used.
The ‘‘IDENT’’ function is used
regularly in current ATC operations to
help controllers quickly identify a
specific aircraft. The ‘‘IDENT’’ feature
also allows ATC to quickly identify
aircraft that have entered incorrect flight
identification or Mode 3/A codes. The
FAA is adopting this message element
in this rule.
12. Indication of the Emitter Category
The NPRM proposed requiring a
message element for an aircraft’s emitter
category.
EUROCONTROL questioned the
business case behind this requirement.
UPS asked that the FAA better define
the emitter categorizations in the final
rule.
This message element is necessary for
ATC separation services and wake
turbulence separation requirements.
TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c provide a
44 Mode

A codes 7700, 7600, and 7500 currently
are reserved for these emergencies. See Annex 10
to the Convention on International Civil Aviation
Aeronautical Telecommunications, Volume 4,
Surveillance and Collision Avoidance Systems, 4th
Edition, July 2007.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

list and description of the different
emitter categories. Emitter category is
set during installation of the ADS–B
avionics in the aircraft and will not
change over time.
13. Indication Whether an ADS–B In
Capability Is Installed
The NPRM proposed this message
element to indicate to ATC whether a
cockpit display of traffic information
(CDTI) 45 is installed and operational.
Several commenters, including Boeing,
EUROCONTROL, and SANDIA,
commented that this message element
was poorly defined, difficult and
expensive to implement, and of little
value to ADS–B In applications and
ATC surveillance. UPS asked whether a
message is required when a CDTI is
installed but not operating. The ARC
recommended that the FAA clarify the
use of this data element.
RTCA updated the definition of this
message element in DO–260B and DO–
282B. The FAA adopted these updates
in TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c. This
message element now indicates which
aircraft are capable of receiving ADS–B
In services and therefore require TIS–B
and ADS–R transmissions from the
ground. Under the new definition, this
message element now indicates whether
an ADS–B In capability is installed in
the aircraft, but does not require a report
of operational status.
14. Indication of the Aircraft’s
Geometric Altitude
The NPRM proposed a message
element indicating the aircraft’s
geometric altitude.
Several commenters, including
Airbus, Boeing, Dassault, the European
Business Aviation Association (EBAA),
EUROCONTROL, Honeywell, and
Rockwell-Collins, commented on the
proposed requirement. Most of the
commenters questioned this message
element and stated that neither ATC
surveillance nor ADS–B In require
geometric altitude. Dassault, EBAA,
EUROCONTROL, and Honeywell
supported this message element. The
ARC recommended that the FAA justify
the need for this message element.
Geometric altitude is the height of the
aircraft above the World Geodetic
System 84 ellipsoid, which is a
scientific approximation of the earth’s
surface. This message element will be
used within the ADS–B ground system
45 CDTI is a generic display that provides a flight
crew with traffic surveillance information about
other aircraft, surface vehicles, and obstacles,
including their identification, position, and other
message set parameters. CDTI information would
commonly be displayed on a Multifunction Display
(MFD).

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30175

to confirm accuracy and identify
discrepancies between geometric
altitude and barometric altitude.
Additionally, the FAA will integrate
this comparison function into a
continuing airworthiness monitoring
function.
L. Ability To Turn Off ADS–B Out
Transmissions
The NPRM proposed requiring a pilot
to turn off ADS–B equipment if directed
by ATC, for example, if the ADS–B unit
was broadcasting erroneous
information.
The ARC, Boeing, United Airlines,
and UPS recommended eliminating the
requirement to turn off ADS–B Out
transmissions. A few commenters,
including British Airways, were
concerned that being able to turn off
ADS–B Out, while keeping the
transponder on, could require
additional design changes and increase
costs because most existing equipment
is not capable of operating in this
manner. Boeing stated that eliminating
erroneous ADS–B transmissions could
be accomplished by turning the
transponder off or having a capability
within the ground system to allow the
controller to manually remove selected
targets. Rockwell-Collins recommended
that the FAA require the ADS–B
equipment to detect failures and disable
ADS–B Out transmissions of erroneous
data.
The FAA modified the ground
automation system to be able to exclude
incorrect ADS–B data. With this
enhancement to the automation, the
aircraft does not need to have a
capability for a pilot to disable ADS–B
transmissions. Therefore, the final rule
does not require the pilot to be able to
turn off ADS–B Out transmissions.
M. Existing Equipment Requirements
1. Transponder Requirement
The NPRM specified that the proposal
for ADS–B equipage would not alter
existing transponder regulations.
Several organizations and individuals,
including AOPA, opposed adding ADS–
B Out performance requirements
without removing the transponder
requirement. ATA and Boeing requested
that the FAA make a commitment to
remove transponders. Several
organizations and individuals further
commented that the FAA should pursue
an ADS–B based collision-avoidance
system and reconsider the backup
strategy, which is based on secondary
surveillance systems. ALPA supported
the FAA’s plan to retain transponders.
The ARC made multiple
recommendations associated with

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30176

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

transponder removal: (1) The ADS–B
implementation strategy should include
the removal of transponders from lowaltitude aircraft without an ACAS; (2)
the FAA should commit to a strategy for
achieving transponder removal from
low-altitude domestic aircraft; and (3)
the FAA should study whether ACAS
can be modified to use ADS–B as the
primary surveillance data for collision
avoidance, as well as what ACAS
upgrades are required to support
NextGen.
Removing the transponder
requirement would involve substantial
changes to the ADS–B backup strategy
and TCAS II/ACAS, which are outside
the scope of this rulemaking.
Transponders will still be required
when the backup surveillance strategy
using SSR is necessary and to interact
with TCAS- and ACAS-equipped
aircraft. Separate from this rulemaking,
the FAA may consider (in coordination
with the appropriate surveillance and
NextGen planning organizations),
whether transponders could eventually
be removed and, if so, what steps are
necessary to accomplish this.
2. Emergency Locator Transmitter
Requirement
The NPRM did not propose any
changes to the emergency locator
transmitter (ELT) 46 requirements.
Several commenters, including ATA
and the National Business Aviation
Association (NBAA), argued that ADS–
B should be used instead of an ELT, and
that ELT requirements could be
included in this rule. AOPA also
recommended a long-term strategy to
include ELT removal, and stated that
ADS–B could enhance current searchand-rescue procedures to increase the
number of successful rescues.
The ARC recommended that the FAA
explore whether an ADS–B tracking
service also could be used for search
and rescue to aid in crash locating. The
ARC also recommended that the FAA
conduct a study considering an ADS–Bbased search-and-rescue solution that
would enable removal of 121.5 MHz
ELTs for certain domestic operations.
The FAA has determined that the
ADS–B system currently cannot replace
the ELT function. The ADS–B system is
not required to be crashworthy and,
thus, may not be operable or able to
transmit following an aircraft accident.
Additionally, current search-and-rescue
technology is not compatible with ADS–
B operations because ELTs broadcast on
121.5 or 406 MHz (not 1090 or 978
46 An ELT is an electronic battery-operated
transmitter developed as a means of locating
downed aircraft.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

MHz). The FAA recognizes the value of
a ground application that could allow
for timely and accurate flight tracking of
downed aircraft and is evaluating this
capability separate from this
rulemaking.
The FAA considered the ARC
recommendation to evaluate the
feasibility of replacing the ELT with the
ADS–B system. However, the FAA has
determined that ADS–B is not a feasible
replacement for the ELT, as discussed
above; therefore, the FAA does not plan
to undertake such a study at this time.
N. Program Implementation
1. Timeline
The FAA proposed that all aircraft
operating in the airspace areas specified
in the rule meet the performance
requirements by January 1, 2020.
The majority of commenters
recommended various options for the
implementation of ADS–B, including
the discontinuation of secondary and/or
primary radar systems once ADS–B is
operational NAS-wide. Some
commenters, including AIA and AOPA,
requested that the FAA provide certain
basic levels of ADS–B service for several
years before the ADS–B compliance
date.
Several commenters, including ALPA
and the National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB), suggested that the
compliance date or service provision of
ADS–B occur sooner than 2020, to
obtain benefits more quickly. United
Airlines recommended a 2015
compliance date for operations above FL
240. The Cargo Airline Association
(CAA) recommended lower performance
requirements for a 2015 compliance
date. Several commenters, including the
Aircraft Electronics Association, FedEx,
and the National Air Carriers
Association, suggested extending or
adding flexibility to the 2020
compliance date.
Numerous commenters, including
ATA, Boeing, IATA, and RockwellCollins, suggested a two-phased
implementation strategy. The first phase
would use existing equipment, avionics
standards, and capabilities, which
would allow industry and the FAA to
demonstrate, validate, and evaluate
ADS–B applications. After operational
experience in the first phase was
sufficient to generate the appropriate
standards, the second phase would
establish a mandate for ADS–B Out
performance standards. Some
commenters suggested that the second
phase be a combined ADS–B In and
ADS–B Out rule.
The ARC endorsed the proposed 2020
compliance date, but recommended that

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

the FAA allow operators to use existing
equipage to accrue early benefits.
Specifically, the ARC recommended
that the FAA: (1) Take advantage of
existing 1090 MHz ES-equipped aircraft
and allow their operation in the Gulf of
Mexico for non-radar airspace and (2)
transition to a fully functional ADS–B
Out capability enabled by DO–260B,47
to allow access to the additional
applications and services for ADS–B In.
The ARC also recommended that the
FAA adopt the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) Acceptable
Means of Compliance 20–24 (permitting
the use of early DO–260 avionics for
separation) in non-radar airspace, with
appropriate measures to ensure ADS–B
integrity.
After reviewing all the comments, the
FAA finds that a 2020 compliance date
remains appropriate because NAS users
need time to equip to the requirements
of the rule. Most air carriers can use
regularly scheduled maintenance to
install or upgrade their equipment. The
FAA also expects that this timeframe
will provide sufficient operational
experience to make ADS–B the primary
source for surveillance in 2020.
FIS–B and TIS–B services are already
available in several areas of the country
for ADS–B In-equipped aircraft and will
continue as an integral part of the
implementation of the ADS–B ground
infrastructure. NAS-wide ground
infrastructure implementation is
scheduled to be complete in 2013,
which would provide operators with at
least 7 years of operational experience
with these services before the ADS–B
compliance date of 2020.
The FAA examined whether it is
operationally feasible and economically
beneficial to use DO–260 avionics in
radar and non-radar airspace before
2020. From an operational perspective,
the FAA found that the existing DO–260
equipment does not meet the
surveillance needs for ATC in the
United States for various reasons: (1)
DO–260 avionics do not independently
report the accuracy and integrity
metrics; (2) DO–260 avionics allow the
integrity metric to be populated with
accuracy information during integrity
outages, which is unacceptable for
aircraft separation services; (3) DO–260
avionics do not include a message
element for Mode 3/A code, which is
necessary for aircraft surveillance; and
(4) the majority of existing DO–260
installations were accomplished on a
noninterference basis under the
transponder approval guidelines. (This
certification verifies that the equipment
47 The ARC recommended DO–260A Change 3,
which is DO–260B.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

is safe onboard the aircraft, but does not
issue any approval that would permit its
use for ADS–B operations.)
Therefore, the FAA concluded that
without upgrades to the equipment, the
use of DO–260 avionics will not meet
the surveillance needs in the NAS.
Furthermore, without appropriate
integrity monitoring, DO–260 avionics
cannot be used for separation of aircraft.
Its utility would be limited to
potentially reducing separation in nonradar areas, or increasing efficiency in
radar airspace through more timely
updates of information.
Further analysis addressed whether
existing DO–260 avionics could be
beneficial to provide separation services
in the Gulf of Mexico, or to provide
efficiency benefits through improved
performance of User Request Evaluation
Tool (URET) 48 and Traffic Management
Advisor (TMA).
To use DO–260 avionics in the Gulf
of Mexico, the FAA estimated it would
incur approximately $4 million in costs
to upgrade the automation; would need
to provide additional ground stations
and receiver autonomous integrity
monitoring (RAIM) predictions; would
need to develop procedures; and would
need to address aircraft certification
issues.49 Comparatively, the FAA
concluded that benefits from this action
would only recover approximately 70
percent of the costs.
The costs associated with using
existing DO–260 avionics relative to
improved performance of URET and
TMA were estimated at $31 million and
the estimated benefit in performance
was $72 million. While this analysis
indicated that the benefits of improved
URET and TMA performance outweigh
the costs of accommodating DO–260
equipped aircraft,50 the FAA found that
it raised some policy concerns.
First, the FAA does not expect to have
the full NAS-wide ADS–B infrastructure
completed for this effort until 2013. As
the ADS–B rule would go into effect in
2020, any benefits accrued through the
use of DO–260 avionics would only be
available for approximately 7 years.
Operators would be required to make a
second investment in avionics to
comply with the rule in 2020.
Second, a collection of broadcast
samples indicated that there is a wide
48 URET is an air traffic control tool that assists
controllers with timely detection and resolution of
predicted air traffic problems.
49 A copy of the DO–260 Business Case Analysis
is available from the Web site http://
www.regulations.gov. The docket number for this
rulemaking is FAA–2007–29305.
50 The analysis concluded that it was not costbeneficial to use DO–260 avionics in the Gulf of
Mexico prior to 2020.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

variety of equipage among current DO–
260 users. Although approximately
7,500 aircraft in the United States
transmit some ADS–B data that would
conform to DO–260, only about 1,500
aircraft transmit enough data to be
useful for 5 NM separation in the Gulf
of Mexico and input into ATC decision
support tools (URET and TMA).51 Many
DO–260 operators would require some
upgrade costs to bring their existing
systems into compliance with a unified
standard; these would be in addition to
the costs incurred for taking aircraft out
of service for certification. Although the
user costs were not thoroughly assessed
by the ARC, the FAA estimated the costs
at $15,000 per aircraft.52
Given the above, the FAA could not
justify the proliferation of avionics for
the short-term that would not be
compliant with the final rule in 2020.
Therefore, the agency concluded that
the public interest was not best served
by using DO–260 avionics for ADS–B
applications in radar and non-radar
airspace before 2020.
2. Financial and Operational Incentives
Numerous commenters, including
AIA, the ARC, and NBAA,
recommended a variety of financial and
operational incentives to make ADS–B
more cost-beneficial for the end user.
Some commenters specifically
recommended that the FAA offer
additional incentives for operators who
adopt early. NBAA recommended
accelerated operational benefits to
encourage early installation of ADS–B
equipment. Several commenters stated
that without operational incentives,
aircraft operators with legacy equipment
will delay upgrades until the mandated
compliance date.
AOPA and the Helicopter Association
International (HAI) recommended
several operational improvements and
safety enhancements for ADS–B,
including: (1) Flight following and radar
services at lower altitudes, (2) terminal
ATC services at GA airports,
(3) automatic instrument flight plan
closure, (4) instrument flight rules (IFR)
low altitude direct routing, (5) enhanced
flight service information, and
(6) improved real time weather. HAI
also recommended that the FAA install
ground stations near hospitals and
trauma centers to maximize benefits for
51 A copy of the Honeywell Technology Solutions
Inc. DO–260 study is available from the Web site
http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number for
this rulemaking is FAA–2007–29305.
52 The DO–260 Business Case Analysis assumed
the cost of $15,000 to upgrade an aircraft equipped
with DO–260 only. The cost does not include all
costs to meet the rule. The cost was used for the
DO–260 Business Case Analysis and not used in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis.

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30177

the emergency medical services
community and encourage ADS–B
equipage.
ATA, CAA, the National Air
Transportation Association, NBAA, and
UPS recommended specific operational
incentives for early equipage, including:
(1) Implementing ADS–B in under-used
areas of the NAS, (2) providing
preferential access to congested
airspace, (3) deploying the necessary
ADS–B infrastructure for traffic crossing
the Gulf of Mexico, and (4) providing
services for on-demand operators at
small community airports.
Some commenters, including AOPA,
HAI, and CAA, recommended financial
incentives or tax credits for ADS–B
equipage.
The following activities are scheduled
to be complete by 2013:
• Ground infrastructure coverage
needed for the mandated airspace,53
• ADS–B interface to automation
systems,
• Guidelines for equipment
certification,
• Operations Specifications approval,
• Approval to use ADS–B to meet
established separation standards,
• ATC operational procedures for
non-radar airspace that has ADS–B
coverage, and
• FAA controller training and
procedures.
The ADS–B program is currently
funded and designed to provide services
in parts of Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico,
and areas in the NAS where radar
coverage currently exists. Additionally,
actual ADS–B coverage may exceed the
defined radar coverage at lower
altitudes in some areas. The FAA cannot
assess, however, the extent of this
coverage or its potential use for the
ADS–B service until the ADS–B
implementation is complete in 2013.
The FAA acknowledges that the ADS–
B system could be improved by
expanding the surveillance coverage of
ADS–B to non-radar airspace. The
improved accuracy and update rate
afforded by ADS–B provides the ability
to improve future NAS operations. As
the number of projected flight
operations continues to increase,
efficiency improvements to the NAS are
critical to addressing new demands.
Therefore, the FAA will continue to
explore opportunities to use the ADS–
B infrastructure to provide additional
coverage in non-radar areas. The FAA
also notes that ADS–B implementation
will not affect flight following services
in effect today.
53 The planned ADS–B service coverage is
explained in greater detail at http://www.adsb.
gov/.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

30178

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

The FAA is actively pursuing
agreements with airlines, avionics
manufacturers, airports, and other NAS
users to encourage early equipage of
ADS–B. These agreements incorporate a
variety of items, including: (1) The
possibility of developing preferred
routes and cost sharing for avionics in
testing new applications, and (2) early
equipage and experience with advanced
ADS–B applications that are not
available to non-equipped aircraft.
The FAA currently has several
agreements with airlines and state
entities specifying that the FAA may
enable benefits in exchange for early
ADS–B equipage. Additionally, the
FAA, HAI, and oil platform owners have
an agreement for the Gulf of Mexico by
which the FAA is providing
communication, navigation, and
surveillance for ADS–B-equipped
helicopter operators.
The FAA and UPS have an agreement
for testing and developing merging and
spacing, CDTI/Multi Function Display
Assisted Visual Separation (CAVS), and
surface situational awareness
applications in an environment that
provides measurable benefits.
Additionally, the FAA is working with
Honeywell and ACSS to accelerate
ASSA, FAROA, and surface indication
and alerting applications.
The FAA is working with US Airways
to develop a work plan for
implementing ADS–B/NextGen
technologies and procedures in parts of
the East Coast as a prelude to national
implementation. In addition, the FAA
has an agreement with United Airlines
to expedite oceanic in-trail procedures
development. The FAA is also working
with NetJets on several NextGen
initiatives for performance-based
navigation, communication, and
surveillance applications.
The FAA has established an ADS–B
compatible Wide Area Multilateration
system in the mountainous areas of
Colorado pursuant to an agreement with
the Colorado Department of
Transportation. The FAA continues to
examine different areas of the country to
determine opportunities for surveillance
service expansion and is continuing to
work with various state aviation offices.
In addition, the FAA continues to
examine opportunities to provide ADS–
B services in areas that would benefit
from increased surveillance. The FAA
does not currently have a list of airports
that are targets for ADS–B expansion.
However, the FAA has started to
identify areas that would benefit most
from ADS–B services. The FAA
encourages cities, states, airports, and
private interests (such as hospitals and

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

trauma centers) to help determine
surveillance needs and opportunities.
ADS–B can provide surveillance at
lower altitudes than radar. Moreover,
ADS–B infrastructure is more easily
deployed than most radar in remote and
hard-to-reach areas. The flexibility
associated with implementing ADS–B
can facilitate service by helicopters to
certain communities. Deployment of
ADS–B systems on medical, police, or
tourist helicopters could provide a level
of asset tracking and search-and-rescue
capability that would be difficult to
replicate with existing surveillance
systems. The FAA has already
developed agreements with HAI to
support operations in the Gulf of
Mexico. The FAA is open to
implementing similar agreements as
opportunities for ADS–B service
expansion present themselves.
While this rule does not mandate
ADS–B equipage in all airspace
classifications, the FAA is analyzing
whether ADS–B services can be
expanded to provide improved safety
and capacity enhancements for low
altitude flight operations and airports
underlying non-mandated airspace. The
FAA will work with users to identify
new candidate airports for these
services. This activity will continue
throughout the initial implementation
period and post 2013 when the
nationwide ADS–B infrastructure is
expected to be available NAS-wide.
The extent to which ADS–B can
contribute to operations in special use
airspace is still being studied; however,
the FAA is committed to examining any
proposals for the use of ADS–B outside
of the scope of implementation
described in this rule.
3. Decommissioning Traffic Information
Service–Broadcast (TIS–B)
In the NPRM preamble, the FAA
noted that once all aircraft are equipped
with ADS–B Out, ADS–R will provide
the complete traffic picture and the FAA
will decommission TIS–B.
A few commenters, including the
DOD, questioned the assumption that all
aircraft would be equipped for ADS–B
Out. Rockwell-Collins recommended
retaining TIS–B after the ADS–B
mandate takes effect, because it
provides a critical support for ADS–B
airborne applications.
The original purpose of TIS–B was to
provide proximate traffic information to
ADS–B In-equipped aircraft about
targets that were not equipped with
ADS–B. When this rule takes effect in
2020 aircraft operating in the airspace
subject to this rule must be equipped
with ADS–B, thus theoretically
eliminating the need for the TIS–B

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

service. However, the FAA realizes that
TIS–B may still have value after 2020 as
a backup traffic service for ADS–B In
aircraft during GNSS outages or when
an individual target’s ADS–B system is
inoperative. Thus, the FAA, outside of
this rulemaking effort, will evaluate the
benefits of continuing TIS–B past the
2020 rule compliance date.
O. Safety
Several commenters, including
AOPA, the ARC, and Boeing, suggested
that the FAA expand the ADS–B service
volume and ensure that TIS–B, FIS–B,
and ADS–R are included in the ADS–B
expanded coverage area.
Some commenters believed that
reducing primary radars would reduce
safety. These commenters noted that
primary radar is important to track
aircraft without ADS–B. They also
recommended that the FAA continue
requiring transport category aircraft to
equip with Mode S transponders and
TCAS II as an independent collision
avoidance system. Some commenters
argued that the complexity of the
ADS–B system poses a collision risk.
Other commenters noted that ADS–B
In cockpit displays can be confusing
and distracting, which may cause a pilot
to lose situational awareness. They
added that the FAA should evaluate the
CDTI to understand the additional
monitoring responsibility and workload
placed on the flightcrew. One
individual contended that ADS–B will
increase a pilot’s dependence on cockpit
equipment and reduce the pilot’s
tendency to look outside the aircraft.
Another individual commenter asked
for data to prove that ADS–B will not be
susceptible to own-ship ghosting or
target duplication. (‘‘Own-ship ghosting’’
is a term that is used to describe a traffic
display showing one’s own aircraft as an
actual target. Ensuring targets that are
transmitting ADS–B are not also
transmitted as TIS–B targets helps
reduce the chances of seeing one’s own
aircraft as a target on the display.)
The final rule does not eliminate the
requirement for transponders, TCAS, or
primary radars. The FAA notes that any
aircraft required to have TCAS II or
ACAS, or that voluntarily has TCAS II
or ACAS installed, must also be
equipped with a Mode S transponder.
This generally includes all aircraft
operated under 14 CFR parts 121, 125,
and 129, and certain aircraft operated
under 14 CFR part 135.
Mode S transponders transmit both
aircraft altitude and aircraft
identification information. Both Mode
A/C transponders and Mode S
transponders require interrogation to
provide information. ADS–B In Conflict

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Detection does not replace the functions
of TCAS II or ACAS; however, future
versions of hybrid surveillance systems
may use passive ADS–B messages to
reduce unnecessary interrogations and,
thus, reduce 1090 MHz spectrum
congestion.
As stated in the NPRM, the FAA is
maintaining its current network of
primary radars. However, the FAA
expects to reduce a large percentage of
its secondary radars as a result of this
rule. Both primary surveillance radar
and SSR will continue to be used for
surveillance during the transition period
of ADS–B avionics equipage.
The benefits of certain ADS–B In
applications cannot be fully realized in
areas where there is no ADS–B
coverage; however, the lack of ADS–B
surveillance or ADS–R does not present
a safety risk. When an aircraft is outside
of the ADS–B coverage area, the ADS–
R/TIS–B system will inform the pilot
that the traffic picture is not complete.
In all areas, regardless of ADS–B
coverage, pilots will use the same
procedures they have today to maintain
safe separation of aircraft. TIS–B and
FIS–B services are advisory and cannot
be used to maneuver an aircraft without
ATC clearance. The FAA will
investigate ADS–B service expansion as
part of the ADS–B NAS-wide
implementation.
With regard to the comment regarding
own-ship ghosting, the ADS–B system
minimizes the chance of target
duplication because it will not transmit
TIS–B data on a target that is
broadcasting ADS–B. This is because
ADS–R is designed to relay information
about aircraft transmitting on a different
broadcast link, and TIS–B is designed to
relay information only about aircraft not
broadcasting ADS–B messages.
This rulemaking only mandates ADS–
B Out, which does not involve any
requirements for a cockpit display.
Before any mandate of ADS–B In, the
FAA will conduct extensive safety
analysis and training. The current ADS–
B Out rule does not eliminate or reduce
the requirement under § 91.113 for
pilots to see and avoid other aircraft.
P. Efficiency
In the NPRM preamble, the FAA
stated that ADS–B will enhance ATC
surveillance, which will increase
airspace efficiency and capacity to meet
the predicted demand for ATC services.
Several commenters, including the
Airports Council International—North
America (ACI–NA), Boeing, and FedEx,
commented on the anticipated
efficiency improvements stated in the
NPRM. Some commenters contended
that the proposed rule did not prove

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

that a decrease in en route separation of
aircraft will decrease delays or increase
airspace capacity. Two commenters
argued that the FAA has not
demonstrated that system choke points
can handle the increased capacity if en
route separation is reduced.
Other commenters, including the
National Air Traffic Controllers
Association, argued that reducing
separation will not mitigate commercial
traffic delays caused by an inadequate
number of runways, weather, hub-andspoke operations, or airline scheduling
practices. Era Corporation
recommended that the FAA improve the
infrastructure at small airports to relieve
congestion. Boeing stated that ADS–B
alone will not lead to the advances
required by NextGen.
The FAA has consistently stated that
ADS–B will not produce a complete
NextGen air traffic management
solution, but rather will set the initial
steps to achieving a NextGen solution.
The airport infrastructure is a crucial
component of the NAS. Efficiency and
capacity of the NAS can be positively
affected by improving the efficiency of
individual flights and improving the
quality of input to air traffic controllers.
ADS–B can help maximize the use of
existing airport infrastructure. The
ability to transmit ADS–B Out messages
can increase the efficiency of the NAS
in radar airspace by providing accurate
updates at a faster rate than many
existing surveillance systems. This
increased update rate permits ATC to
merge and sequence aircraft more
effectively into existing airport choke
points, which should mitigate, rather
than increase, congestion and delay.
This rule’s regulatory evaluation does
not include any benefits that are
dependent on, or attributable to, other
NextGen systems outside the scope of
this rulemaking.
The FAA expects that ADS–B Out
will enable the establishment of more
direct routes outside airspace subject to
this rule, which would use less fuel,
emit less carbon dioxide and nitrogen
oxide, and increase NAS efficiency. The
FAA is currently developing specific
ADS–B routes for certain areas that have
the potential for significant benefits
(airspace off the shore of the east coast
and over the Gulf of Mexico). The FAA
expects that other opportunities for
routes enabled by ADS–B will emerge as
the ground infrastructure is
implemented NAS-wide.

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30179

1. Improved Position Reporting
According to operational
evaluations,54 ADS–B provides
improved accuracy over radar in most
air traffic scenarios. While some
terminal radars can provide increased
accuracy the closer the aircraft is to the
receiver, ADS–B provides consistent
position accuracy regardless of the
aircraft’s range from a receiver. ADS–B
also provides more timely information
updates than conventional radar. Unlike
radar, the accuracy and integrity of
ADS–B Out is uniform and consistent
throughout the service areas. Therefore,
ATC’s ability to accurately identify and
locate aircraft that are further away from
the air traffic control facilities will be
better than radar.
ADS–B does not scan an environment
in the same way as radar; therefore,
ADS–B does not provide unnecessary
returns based on weather or other
obstructions, which can impede the
effectiveness of primary radars.
ADS–B provides consistent,
frequently updated position reporting
and additional aircraft information for
ATC decision-support tools, which
increases ATC confidence in aircraft
position. This will allow ATC to apply
existing separation standards more
exactly and without the need for ATC to
correct for possible radar inaccuracies.
The regulatory evaluation provides
more discussion on the benefits of
improved surveillance information.
2. Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs)
The FAA plans to use the information
broadcast by ADS–B to better sequence
aircraft approaching the terminal area
with the development of a Merging and
Spacing application. This ground-based
system sends precise suggested speed
instructions to en route aircraft. These
exact-speed instructions should allow
aircraft to arrive at extended terminal
area merge points at times that are much
more precise than currently feasible.
As part of the Merging and Spacing
application, the FAA is developing both
a ground tool and aircraft requirements
that can be used to optimize aircraft
spacing. In addition to other airspace
efficiencies, this tool will enable a fuelsaving procedure called Optimized
Profile Descent (OPD), previously
referred to as Continuous Descent
Arrivals (CDAs).
OPDs are a type of terminal arrival
procedure, specifically designed to keep
an aircraft at, or near idle power during
54 Surveillance and Broadcast Services Systems
Engineering Separation Standards Working Group,
Final Report on Operational Evaluation of 5 NM
ADS–B to Radar Separation Services in Alaska,
November 30, 2006.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30180

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

the entire arrival until the final
approach fix.55 These procedures
increase flight efficiencies while
reducing noise, fuel consumption, and
emissions. OPDs eliminate step-down
altitudes and the associated inefficient
power adjustments. OPDs depend on
minimal aircraft vectoring to maintain
the arrival pattern. Therefore, aircraft
must be accurately metered with ADS–
B-enabled spacing and sequencing tools
prior to and during descent and
approach.
Below a certain level of demand,
controllers can authorize OPDs using
current onboard equipment and
procedures. As the terminal demand
increases, it becomes progressively more
difficult for controllers to allow OPDs
because of interference with other traffic
flows in the airspace. As demand
approaches capacity, the tradeoff
between total airport throughput (and
delays) and individual flight profile
efficiency (that is, OPDs) would most
likely prohibit OPDs for very high traffic
density situations. This situation will be
aggravated over time as air traffic
resumes growth and terminal airspace
constraints increase.
Many airports start to exhibit
significant delays when demand reaches
approximately 70 percent of capacity.
The proposed FAA spacing tool, using
more accurate ADS–B position
information, would enable OPDs in
medium-density terminal airspace when
the demand approaches the point where
delays would be encountered. The FAA
believes that ADS–B Out can expand
use of OPDs into medium levels of
traffic density (40 percent to 70
percent), which may not be possible
without ADS–B Out. Accomplishing
OPDs at this level of traffic density
would have important environmental
and energy benefits with no increase in
congestion or delay.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

3. Reduced Aircraft Separation
In non-radar airspace, ADS–B Out
allows ATC to apply radar-like
separation standards in areas where
ATC currently applies non-radar,
procedural separation. In some cases,
routes laterally separated without radar
by as much as 90 NM are now separated
with ADS–B at only 20 NM.
Longitudinal separation of typically 10
minutes (80 NM) can be reduced to 5
NM.
Boeing commented that the accuracy
and integrity values proposed in the
NPRM will not support reduced en
55 The final approach fix identifies the beginning
of the final approach segment, and is the fix from
which the final instrument flight rule (IFR)
approach to an airport is executed.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

route separation standards. ADS–B
position accuracy supports current
surveillance standards. Experience with
the mature system may allow reductions
at a future time. The FAA plans to
expand 3 NM separation to locations in
the NAS that currently only permit 5
NM separation. Currently, the FAA is
modeling several scenarios to determine
if ADS–B can support 3 NM en route
separation based on a target level of
safety. The FAA will not move forward
with reduced separation until all safety
and operational analyses have been
completed and ADS–B has been
certified to perform this service.
4. Expanded Surveillance Coverage
In the future, there may also be an
opportunity for ATC to use ADS–B Out
data for surveillance in areas of the NAS
below the floor or outside the lateral
coverage of existing radar surveillance.
The FAA does not yet know where in
the NAS this extra coverage might be
available. This information will likely
not be available until ADS–B
surveillance has already been
implemented in a service area. As the
FAA identifies areas with additional
coverage, the FAA will investigate how
this additional coverage could be used.
Q. ADS–B In
Many commenters, including ACSS,
ALPA, CAA, Lockheed Martin, the
NTSB, and UPS, commented that the
majority of the ADS–B benefits will be
derived from ADS–B In. Numerous
commenters asserted that ADS–B Out
alone would not be cost-beneficial or
provide them with any added benefits
compared to their operations today.
Some commenters noted that ADS–B In,
however, would provide necessary
services to the cockpit. Many of these
commenters asserted that ADS–B In
should be mandated as well. However,
AOPA specifically recommended that
ADS–B In be voluntary because it is
cost-prohibitive for most GA owners.
British Airways also questioned the
business case for ADS–B In.
Many commenters, including the
DOD, ACI–NA, and AIA, pointed out
that the capabilities and functions of
ADS–B Out alone will not provide the
full range of benefits available from
ADS–B. To improve the overall system,
they recommended developing
standards for ADS–B Out in unison with
standards for ADS–B In. GAMA and
IATA recommended that the FAA work
to define the requirements for ADS–B In
to encourage ADS–B equipage. ATA
specifically asked the FAA to define
ADS–B In standards by 2010. IATA
noted that many operators will delay
upgrades until there is a single, defined

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

ADS–B package with avionics and
procedures to support NextGen and the
Single European Sky Air Traffic
Management (ATM) Research Program.
The ARC recommended that the FAA,
in partnership with industry, define a
strategy for ADS–B In by 2012 and
ensure that the strategy is compatible
with ADS–B Out avionics. The ARC also
recommended that the FAA describe
how to proceed with ADS–B In beyond
the voluntary equipage concept
discussed in the NPRM.
A few commenters, including NBAA,
praised the benefits of ADS–B and
recommended that the FAA resolve
ADS–B In display requirements,
including human factors. The NTSB
stated that ADS–B would significantly
improve situational awareness for
pilots, especially during ground
operations. GAMA recommended that
the FAA not limit display options in the
final rule.
The FAA fully recognizes that
ADS–B In and other future air-to-air
applications are functions that could
provide substantial benefits to aircraft
operators and the NAS. While
additional benefits can be accrued using
ADS–B In functions, requirements for
an ADS–B In system are not sufficiently
defined to implement them at this time.
ADS–B Out is necessary to establish
an air transportation infrastructure that
is consistent with the NextGen plan and
will change the way the NAS operates.
Further, the economic evaluation of the
ADS–B Out proposal found the system
to be cost-beneficial if ADS–B Out
avionics costs are at the low end of the
estimated cost range and if the benefits
are at the high end of the estimated
benefits range.
Given the value of ADS–B In services
to individual operators and the benefits
to future NAS operations, the
requirements adopted for ADS–B Out
also support certain ADS–B In
applications.56 The FAA has modified
several aspects of the proposed rule to
minimize the cost impact to operators of
the requirements driven by ADS–B In.
The requirements in this final rule also
establish a stable infrastructure for
current and future applications of
ADS–B In.
The FAA concurs with the ARC’s
recommendation to define a strategy for
ADS–B In equipage by 2012 and is
working with industry to develop a
strategy for future ADS–B In
applications. By 2012, the requirements
and benefits of ADS–B In applications
should be well enough defined for the
56 These applications include Enhanced visual
acquisition, conflict detection, and enhanced visual
approach.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
FAA to specify a set of performance
requirements that would be tied to a
well-defined bundle of applications.
Furthermore, RTCA has completed
the DO–317, Minimum Operational
Performance Standards (MOPS) for
Aircraft Surveillance Applications
System (ASAS), 57 and the FAA is
currently developing a TSO to utilize
this RTCA standard.

4. Airport Surface Situational
Awareness and Final Approach Runway
Occupancy Awareness
ASSA and FAROA increase
situational awareness of potential
airport ground conflicts at several of the
nation’s busiest airports. However, the
reduced NACP requirement in this rule,
while sufficient for ADS–B Out, is not
sufficient for all aircraft to use in ASSA
and FAROA.

R. ADS–B in Applications
Multiple commenters, including
SANDIA, asked for more information
about potential ADS–B In applications.
This information is provided below.
1. Surface Situational Awareness With
Indications and Alerting
This application is being designed to
provide information regarding potential
traffic conflicts on or near the airport
surface to the flightcrew. The ADS–B In
cockpit display would indicate the
relevant runway occupancy status.
Depending on the severity of the
conflict, the system would alert the
flight crew with visual and/or audible
alerts.
2. In-Trail Procedures
This application is being designed to
facilitate aircraft conducting oceanic intrail flight level changes using a reduced
separation standard. This application
should improve the use of oceanic
airspace, increase efficiency, reduce fuel
consumption, and increase safety by
helping flightcrews avoid turbulent
flight levels. With this application, ATC
will continue to provide procedural
non-radar separation services. However,
the FAA is exploring whether
controllers would be able to allow flight
level changes where aircraft are
separated by only 15 NM during climb
or descent, instead of 100 NM in use
today.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

3. Interval Management
This application is intended to
improve current merging and spacing
capabilities to ensure more consistent
aircraft spacing, and potentially increase
airspace capacity. With this application,
controllers would issue a different set of
instructions to pilots, for example, to
maintain a given time or distance from
the preceding aircraft. The flight crews
will then use ADS–B In information to
adjust their airspeeds or flight paths to
maintain the instructed separation.
57 ASAS provides the platform for the processing
and display of ADS–B In applications.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

S. International Harmonization
Several commenters stated that the
ADS–B program technical standards and
requirements in the NPRM may be
exclusive of, and not harmonized with,
ICAO and international efforts under
way in Europe, Australia, and Canada.
Several individual commenters and
AOPA questioned the interoperability of
UAT in international airspace,
including Canada and Mexico. They
also questioned the applicability of UAT
through ICAO Standards and
Recommended Practices (SARPs). The
ARC recommended that the FAA
advocate national policies that
explicitly allow for the use of non-U.S.
positioning sources (for example,
Galileo) as part of the infrastructure to
meet aviation performance
requirements.
The FAA fully supports the need for
international regulators to focus on a
global interoperability of ADS–B
through the continuing development of
standards for equipment, applications,
flight procedures, and operating rules.
The RTCA standards for DO–260B and
DO–282B (referenced in TSO–C166b
and TSO–C154c) were developed with
close international cooperation. The
FAA supports the RTCA/European
Organization for Civil Aviation
Equipment (EUROCAE) Requirements
Focus Group, which is internationally
coordinating ADS–B In. Additionally,
the FAA actively meets with
EUROCONTROL, the Australian Civil
Aviation Safety Authority, and
Transport Canada to internationally
coordinate ADS–B regulation.
The FAA has structured the ADS–B
Out program on performance
requirements and not a specific
navigation or positioning source. The
FAA is proposing harmonized
requirements for aircraft separation to
ICAO, with the support of Australia,
Canada, and EUROCONTROL. The
United States is working with other
GNSS providers to ensure system
interoperability, improve performance,
and reduce costs for integrated receiver
equipment. This rule does not prohibit
the use of international GNSS; any

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30181

navigation source that meets the
requirements complies with this rule.
The performance standards for the
UAT were developed by RTCA through
international cooperation and
coordination. The standards were
published in DO–282B, (MOPS for UAT
ADS–B). Additionally, DO–282B was
developed in accordance with Annex 10
to the convention of international civil
aviation. As such, individual states are
allowed to invoke these standards as
their own requirements.
T. Backup ATC Surveillance
In the NPRM, the FAA described an
ADS–B backup strategy that included a
reduced network of SSRs to support
high-density terminal airspace, all en
route airspace above 18,000 feet MSL,
and medium-density terminal airspace
above certain altitudes. In the proposal,
the FAA noted that it intends to retain
all primary surveillance radar as a
means to mitigate single-aircraft
avionics failures.
Several aviation associations, air
carriers, pilots, and various other
organizations commented on the
proposed backup strategy. The
commenters suggested several potential
alternatives including Automatic
Dependent Surveillance—Contract
(ADS–C), long range navigation
(LORAN), enhanced long range
navigation (eLORAN), fusion, and
multilateration.
Some commenters, including UPS
and United Airlines, recommended that
the FAA develop a backup system that
not only backs up surveillance, but also
works in a fusion process to increase the
accuracy, integrity, and availability of
the primary surveillance system. Boeing
recommended that during RAIM
outages, ADS–B could broadcast
position data derived from a flight
management system or an inertial
navigation system. Other commenters
questioned whether there was a robust
and fully independent airborne- or
ground-based backup timing system in
the event of GPS timing signal loss. The
DOD contended that the backup must be
able to support planned GPS electronic
testing and solar flare activity.
Several commenters opposed having
one interdependent service for both
navigation and surveillance. They
believed that this combination of
navigation and surveillance could be
detrimental when a pilot experiences a
GPS outage while operating in
instrument meteorological conditions.
The ARC recommended that the FAA,
in coordination with other Government
agencies, develop an integrated
communication navigation and

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

30182

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

surveillance (CNS) strategy to address
GNSS interference and outages.
Various entities also questioned the
procedures that would be in place for
aircraft operating with a NACP value of
less than 9. One individual asked how
the system will accommodate aircraft
without ADS–B, if an entire broadcast
link is inoperable.
The FAA will provide ATC separation
services for aircraft meeting the
minimum ADS–B-required performance
parameters (NACP, NACV, NIC, SDA,
and SIL) for airspace subject to this rule.
If, during flight, an individual aircraft
does not meet the minimum ADS–Brequired performance parameters, then
ATC may provide separation services
using the backup (for example, radar
where available and procedural
separation elsewhere). This transition
will be seamless because secondary
surveillance data will be one of several
surveillance sources fused into the
display used by ATC.
The ADS–B ground automation
combines or ‘‘fuses’’ all available
surveillance information from ADS–B
with primary surveillance radar and
SSR. This provides a complete or
‘‘fused’’ picture of all the traffic
operating in a given area. Multi-sensor
fusion allows the automation to
combine data from various sensors, and
use the most accurate measurements. In
most cases, a Kalman Filter Tracker
optimizes the accuracy of track
estimates from multiple sensors. In
addition to improved aircraft position
accuracy, data fusion uses all the
updates from multiple sensors, which
increases the overall update rate. The
FAA currently uses practical trackers for
data fusion with the CommonAutomated Radar Terminal System and
the Standard Terminal Automation
Replacement System.
If the ADS–B ground infrastructure or
a particular broadcast link is out of
service, or a sufficient number of aircraft
cannot meet the minimum required
performance for a given airspace and
controller workload is adversely
impacted, ATC will use the backup
system to provide ATC separation
services for all aircraft in that airspace.
Transition to the backup strategy will
not impact the ability of ATC to provide
separation services to the operator.
The FAA completed the Surveillance/
Positioning Backup Strategy
Alternatives Analysis 58 on January 8,
2007. This study included a
comprehensive analysis of various
58 It is important to recognize that this is a
performance-based rule and does not require GNSS.
For the purpose of the backup strategy evaluation
the FAA assumed that users would equip with a
GNSS as their position source.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

strategies for mitigating the impact of
the loss of GPS on ADS–B surveillance.
The analysis identified a reduced
network of SSRs as the recommended
backup for ADS–B. This strategy retains
all existing en route SSRs (150) and
approximately 50 percent of SSRs in
high-density terminal areas (40).
The FAA assessed numerous
technologies as part of this analysis,
including: Multilateration; eLORAN;
distance measuring equipment (DME);
DME/inertial reference units; satellitebased augmentation systems; groundbased augmentation systems; and
various combinations and
implementations of these technologies.
The FAA determined the backup
strategy based on the most effective
tradeoff between performance, schedule,
and cost factors among airborne and
ground segments of the NAS
architecture.
This backup strategy will support
continued use of the separation
standards in effect today. However, for
select areas experiencing degraded
surveillance coverage during an outage,
ATC may increase aircraft separation as
operationally required.59 The FAA
concludes that these operational
capabilities are sufficient, given that
loss of required position information is
expected to be a rare event.
In meeting the performance standards
adopted by this rule, an aircraft’s
navigation and surveillance functions
may be dependent on the same position
source. Using GNSS technology for
ADS–B provides for improved
performance (i.e., increased update rate,
increased accuracy at long range, and
cleaner surveillance picture to ATC)
over other surveillance systems and
allows for a more flexible ground
infrastructure.
The risks posed by this dependency
have been accepted because the
navigation and surveillance functions
have independent backup systems. In
evaluating the options, the FAA
specifically considered the scenario in
which the satellite positioning source
failed. As a result, the FAA determined
that an effective backup system could
not also be satellite-based. The FAA
further determined that these backup
capabilities ensure sufficient navigation
and surveillance capabilities during a
positioning source outage and maintain
appropriate levels of safety.
59 The standard for reverting to backup
surveillance is also discussed in H.2, System
Availability.

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

U. Privacy
The NPRM proposed requiring a
message element to transmit the
aircraft’s assigned 24-bit ICAO address.
Many commenters, including AOPA
and Rockwell-Collins, strongly argued
against ADS–B Out broadcasts of
identifiable data, including aircraft tail
number and operator name. These
commenters argued that the information
could be used to continuously watch all
aircraft and ultimately could be used by
the FAA for enforcement or assessing
user fees. Certain commenters argued in
favor of retaining the anonymous mode
for VFR operations because aircraft
identification is only required for ATC
purposes.
Commenters suggested several
alternatives: (1) Use UAT’s privacy
message function (which allows the
pilot to select ‘‘VFR’’ mode) to have the
UAT system randomly select a 24-bit
ICAO address; (2) require manufacturers
to design ADS–B systems that archive
data onboard, and advise pilots to
archive the data so there is an
independent data source that
corroborates government data; and (3)
design a system host configuration
protocol to assign transponder codes
through a unique address when the
UAT or 1090 MHz ES is turned on. They
contended that this would allow a
network to eliminate system duplicity
and guarantee anonymity to the pilot of
the aircraft (therefore, the 24-bit Mode S
identifiers would no longer be needed).
The ARC made three
recommendations regarding privacy: (1)
The FAA should treat the 24-bit ICAO
code assignments as information
covered under privacy laws, so they are
available only to authorized personnel
or released by the holder; (2) the FAA
should use the anonymity feature of
UAT and develop an equivalent
anonymity feature for 1090 MHz ES that
would apply to VFR operations not
using ATC services; and (3) the FAA
should accommodate assignment of the
24-bit ICAO codes so that they do not
easily correlate to an aircraft tail number
and they permit aircraft call signs to be
something other than the aircraft
registration number when receiving
ATC services.
The FAA reviewed all the comments
regarding privacy and notes that most of
the commenters specifically addressed
VFR operations. The FAA notes that
there is no right to privacy when
operating in the NAS. The FAA
specifically designates airspace for
which the identification of aircraft is
necessary, so that the agency can
effectively separate aircraft. The
transponder rule specifies that an

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

aircraft operating in airspace designated
in § 91.215 must have ATC transponder
equipment installed that meets the
performance requirements of TSO–
C74b, TSO–C74c, or TSO–C112.
Many GA aircraft are equipped with
Mode C, which has the capability to
squawk 1200 and meets the
requirements of § 91.215, without
specifically identifying the aircraft.
Most of these commenters are seeking
similar treatment under ADS–B so that
ATC can track the aircraft without
specifically identifying the aircraft.
TSO–C154c includes a feature to
temporarily and randomly assign a 24bit address for UAT-equipped aircraft.
This rule does not prohibit the use of
this feature. UAT-equipped aircraft
conducting VFR operations that have
not filed a flight plan and are not
requesting ATC services may use this
feature. Although the FAA does not
prohibit the anonymity feature,
operators using the anonymity feature
will not be eligible to receive ATC
services and will not be able to benefit
from enhanced ADS–B search and
rescue capabilities. TSO–C166b does
not include a feature to accommodate
anonymous 24-bit addresses. Should
safety or efficiency of the NAS so
require, the FAA could initiate
rulemaking to prohibit an operator from
using the anonymity feature.
Additionally, if the FAA, in
coordination with the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), determines
that the anonymity feature is an
unacceptable risk to security, the FAA
could initiate rulemaking to prohibit an
operator from using the anonymity
feature.
This rule does not implement any
type of user fee. Subsequent agency
rulemaking would be necessary to
establish such fees. Furthermore, this
rule does not affect the process for the
FAA assigning the 24-bit ICAO codes.
The FAA has not determined that
archiving data onboard the aircraft is
necessary for ATC surveillance.
However, this rule does not preclude
manufacturers from designing
equipment with this function.
V. Security
Various commenters, including the
DOD, commented on the security
aspects of the ADS–B system. They
contended that, as ADS–B will
broadcast the location and identity of
users, malicious parties could monitor
transmissions from the aircraft and ATC
to obtain information to target and harm
the aircraft. Another commenter stated
that the ADS–B information could be
used by an unmanned aircraft to target
passenger aircraft. Some commenters

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

alleged that security safeguards are
needed for ADS–B to protect aircraft
from terrorist attacks.
Other commenters argued that an
aircraft’s ADS–B transmissions or GPS
position/timing signals could be subject
to inadvertent or intentional
interruption or loss of the GPS timing
signal. Several commenters
recommended a planned oversight
feature (for example, requiring ADS–B
ground receivers to be licensed) to
ensure that only authorized personnel
access the data collected, and that the
data is only accessed for authorized
purposes. The DOD recommended that
the FAA work with DHS and the DOD
to determine ADS–B risks and
appropriate countermeasures.
The FAA conducted several analyses
on the security aspects of ADS–B. These
analyses include the information system
for collecting data, transmitting and
storing data, as well as risk assessments
on the vulnerability of ADS–B broadcast
messages. All FAA information,
including ADS–B transmissions
received by the FAA, that is collected,
processed, transmitted, stored, or
disseminated in its general support
systems and applications is subject to
certification and accreditation, under
National Institutes of Standards and
Technology (NIST) information
technology standards. It is a continuing
process that protects the confidentiality,
integrity, and availability of the
information.
The FAA’s Security Certification and
Accreditation Procedures (SCAP) were
developed in accordance with Federal
law, including: (1) The Federal
Information Security Management Act
of 2002, (2) OMB Circular A–130
(Management of Federal Information
Resources), (3) Federal Information
Processing Standards 199, and (4) NIST
Special Publications (SP) 800–37 (Guide
for the Security Certification and
Accreditation of Federal Information
Systems), NIST SP 800–53
(Recommended Security Controls for
Federal Information Systems), and NIST
SP 800–53A (Guide for Assessing the
Security Controls in Federal Information
Systems).
The FAA completed the SCAP for the
ADS–B system originally in September
2008. The FAA completed a new SCAP
in October 2009 as a result of changes
made to the ADS–B system. This
process ensures that ADS–B does not
introduce new security weaknesses. It
also ensures that the hardware and
software composing the ADS–B system
meets rigid and well-documented
standards for infrastructure security.
ADS–B meets all qualifications and
mandates of this process. As part of the

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30183

SCAP, the system is tested annually for
security compliance, and every 3 years
the system goes through an entirely new
SCAP. In addition, the FAA specifically
assessed the vulnerability risk of ADS–
B broadcast messages being used to
target air carrier aircraft. This
assessment contains Sensitive Security
Information that is controlled under 49
CFR parts 1 and 1520, and its content
is otherwise protected from public
disclosure. While the agency cannot
comment on the data in this study, it
can confirm, for the purpose of
responding to the comments in this
rulemaking proceeding, that using ADS–
B data does not subject an aircraft to any
increased risk compared to the risk that
is experienced today. As part of this
process, the FAA forwarded the
assessment to its interagency partners,
including the DOD, the Transportation
Security Administration, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, the United
States Secret Service, and other
appropriate agencies for review. These
entities evaluated the modeling
approach, analysis, and risk outcome.
They did not identify any reason to
invalidate the analysis which
determined that ADS–B data does not
increase an aircraft’s vulnerability. The
FAA commits to annual updates of this
assessment to monitor any changes in
the underlying assumptions in the risk
analysis, and to monitor new threat
information that becomes available.
The FAA concludes that ADS–B
transmissions would be no more
susceptible to spoofing (that is,
intentionally broadcasting a false target)
or intentional jamming than that
experienced with SSR transmissions
(Mode A, C, and S) today. Spoofing of
false targets and intentional jamming
very rarely occur with the surveillance
systems in place today.
The ADS–B transmission signals from
aircraft will be fused with surveillance
data from both primary and secondary
radars before it is displayed for ATC.
The controllers, therefore, are receiving
and viewing a composite of aircraft data
from multiple surveillance systems. The
FAA does not expect spoofing and
jamming to occur during the transition
to using this fused data for surveillance.
This is because the automation will
reveal the discrepancy between a
spoofed or jammed ADS–B target and
the target reported by radar and SSR
position reports. Fusion also provides
for a smooth transition to backup
surveillance if an ADS–B system is
experiencing interference. Furthermore,
encryption of any ADS–B data would
unnecessarily limit its use
internationally.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30184

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

The FAA also concludes that
additional certification and
accreditation of ground equipment will
not be necessary because of the strict
SCAP provision certifying that crucial
information and equipment are not
available to unauthorized individuals.
The FAA finds no basis at this point
that ADS–B Out provides any greater
security risks to air navigation systems
to the United States. The FAA continues
to meet regularly with DOD and DHS
representatives regarding the use of
ADS–B information and national
security issues.
W. Alternatives To ADS–B
The NPRM compared: (1) Radar as it
exists today, (2) multilateration, and (3)
ADS–B. In the NPRM, the FAA’s
alternatives analysis found radar to be
the most cost-effective solution;
however, radar would neither be
effective in supporting air traffic growth
over time nor provide the necessary
technical capabilities to support the
NextGen concept of operations.
Several commenters indicated that the
existing radar system is sufficient for
operations. Some commenters suggested
expanding the radar infrastructure or
implementing an alternative reporting
system using commercial off-the-shelf
technologies that have a means to
encode and transmit GPS position data.
Other commenters believed that
multilateration could provide similar
benefits to ADS–B at a potentially lower
cost. Boeing requested that the FAA
provide an analysis explaining its
conclusion that multilateration would
not provide the same level of benefits as
ADS–B. ATA specifically stated that
they do not believe multilateration is a
viable alternative; however, it can
provide highly accurate position reports
for surface ADS–B In applications.
Several commenters objected to the
prohibitive cost of upgrading the
avionics with ADS–B because there are
commercial products currently available
that provide real time weather and
traffic information.
The agency has determined that the
improved accuracy and update rate
afforded by ADS–B is a critical segment
of the NextGen infrastructure and
capabilities that offer the opportunity to
make the system more efficient.
Specifically, enhanced surveillance data
via ADS–B will improve the
performance of ATC decision-support
tools (URET and TMA) which rely on
surveillance data to make predictions.
The end result will be fewer, more
efficient reroutes to avoid potential
conflicts, as well as improved metering
into the terminal area. This will allow
increased and more efficient use of

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

OPDs, which have lower energy and
emissions profiles. Unlike radar and
multilateration, ADS–B provides more
detailed flight information (for example,
update rate, velocity, and heading) that
supports ground-based merging and
spacing tools. These tools use this
information to determine optimal tracks
for ATC arrival planning.
FIS–B and TIS–B provide the uplink
of weather and traffic information to the
cockpit. Equipping with the necessary
ADS–B In avionics (receiver and display
components) is voluntary for operators
and is not required by the ADS–B rule.
The FAA analyzed alternative sources
for weather and traffic information.
Individually, these alternative sources
may be less costly than the ADS–B
solution. However, the FAA’s analysis
showed that the bundling of
surveillance, weather, and traffic
information is cost-effective for users
who have not already invested in
alternative capabilities. The FAA
compared the costs and benefits of
ADS–B, multilateration, and radar, as
well as the cost savings for bundling
services. A report (‘‘Exhibit 300,
Attachment 2, Business Case Analysis
Report for Future Surveillance, JRC
Phase 2a’’) is available in the docket for
this rulemaking.
In sum, none of the alternatives offers
the range of capabilities nor supports
the NextGen concept of operations as
well as ADS–B.
X. ADS–B Equipment Scheduled
Maintenance
The NPRM did not propose any
additional continuing airworthiness
requirements associated with the
installation of ADS–B avionics
equipment. A few commenters
questioned the FAA’s plan for
continued airworthiness inspections for
ADS–B equipment.
This final rule does not add any
continuing airworthiness inspection
requirements. Transponder-based ADS–
B systems will still be required to meet
the requirements of § 91.413. However,
ADS–B systems, without a transponder,
do not have any new inspection
requirements. The FAA will use the
ground automation system to
continuously monitor ADS–B
functionality, which accomplishes the
purposes of a recurrent inspection.
Y. Specific Design Parameters
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed
performance standards for ADS–B Out,
but did not specify any specific design
parameters.
Several commenters, including the
EAA, and the United States Parachute
Association, recommended specific

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

design parameters for ADS–B avionics,
including size, weight, and power
consumption.
The FAA again notes that this is a
performance-based rule and does not
mandate a particular system or design
specifications (including size, weight, or
power consumption). A performancebased rule provides industry with the
opportunity to use innovative
approaches in designing ADS–B
avionics to meet the needs of their
customers.
Z. Economic Issues
The FAA updated the cost and benefit
estimates in the final regulatory impact
analysis for this rule. For a summary of
the final regulatory impact analysis, see
Section III. The full final regulatory
impact analysis may be found in the
docket for this rulemaking. The
following section discusses comments
the FAA received on the proposal’s
regulatory evaluation. Where
appropriate, the discussion includes
information on the updated costs and
benefits for this final rule.
1. ADS–B Out Equipage Cost
The FAA estimated that costs for the
proposed rule would be between $2.3
billion and $8.5 billion. The FAA also
considered that industry would start to
incur equipage costs in 2012, ranging
from $1.27 billion to $7.46 billion. In
the final rule, the FAA estimates total
costs to range from $3.3 billion to $7.0
billion, and industry equipage costs to
range from $2.5 billion to $6.2 billion.
Several commenters, including ATA,
Boeing, British Airways, Delta Airlines,
EAA, Honeywell, NBAA, and the
Regional Airline Association (RAA),
questioned specific cost estimates in the
proposal’s economic analysis or asked
for more information about the cost and
benefit estimates. Most of the
commenters believed that equipage
costs for ADS–B Out would exceed the
estimates provided in the proposal.
Several commenters, including
AOPA, EAA, Embraer, and the United
States Parachute Association, stated that
the cost to equip with ADS–B Out was
too high. Commenters pointed out that,
given the value of most GA aircraft, the
cost of equipage could represent a
significant percentage of, or possibly
exceed, the current value of the aircraft.
Some commenters noted that costs of
this magnitude could make recreational
or business flying cost-prohibitive.
Some commenters, including FedEx,
noted that equipage costs will be
significantly higher for aircraft not
currently equipped with a certified
GPS/WAAS position source.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

For the proposed rule, the FAA
contacted manufacturers, industry
associations, and ADS–B Out suppliers
to estimate ADS–B equipage and
maintenance costs by aircraft model.
The proposal included industry
estimates for the cost of installation,
maintenance, additional weight, and the
addition of ADS–B Out equipment to
meet the performance mandate. The
proposal’s regulatory impact analysis
also assumed that all active airframes in
service would be retrofitted by 2020.
The FAA expects that the increased
demand for the ADS–B Out equipment
required by this performance-based rule
will result in a more competitive
market, such that the prices may
decrease in the coming years for certain
aircraft groups. The FAA also
anticipates that any investment in ADS–
B Out equipage will increase the
residual value of that aircraft and will
allow easier access to the regulated
airspace.
The FAA agrees that equipping
aircraft with ADS–B Out will cost more
for those aircraft that are not equipped
with a position source capable of
providing the necessary accuracy and
integrity. To capture this cost in the
proposal, the FAA requested that
industry categorize large category
turbojet airplanes by classic, neo-classic,
modern, and new production classes, as
well as the existing level of airplane
equipage for each class. However, due to
the confidentiality of cost data, the
regulatory evaluation does not present
ADS–B-supplier level data details. The
FAA fully acknowledges that the
general aviation community will incur
significant costs from this rule.
However, this must be balanced against
the foundation this capability provides
in moving toward the NextGen
infrastructure and benefits from its
overall usage.
2. FAA Cost Savings With ADS–B Out
Compared to Radar
The FAA considered the following
three systems for future NAS
surveillance: (1) Radar, (2)
multilateration, and (3) ADS–B. The
FAA explained in the proposal that
radar was the lowest cost option. Based
on forecasts at the time of the NPRM,
the FAA did not expect that radar could
accommodate the projected increase in
traffic.
Several commenters, including EAA
and RAA, stated that the ADS–B
program would result in a cost savings
to the FAA because it would have less
radar to maintain, operate, and replace.
Most of the commenters claimed that
the ADS–B program would shift costs
from the FAA to aircraft operators.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

The ADS–B program is not expected
to result in a cost savings to the FAA
from 2009 through 2035. As ADS–B
becomes operational, the FAA plans to
decommission some SSR. While this
will reduce the operational costs of
maintaining radar, the FAA will incur
additional costs for ADS–B ground
stations. This results in a net increase in
cost for the FAA.
3. Business Case for ADS–B Out and In
In the NPRM, the FAA estimated that
the total costs of ADS–B Out and In
(excluding avionics for ADS–B In),
relative to the radar baseline, would
range from $2.8 billion to $9.0 billion.
The FAA further estimated that ADS–B
Out and In would yield $13.8 billion in
total benefits.
The FAA concluded that ADS–B Out
and In would be cost beneficial at a
present value of 7 percent, if: The
avionics costs for ADS–B Out are low
($670 million at a 7 percent present
value) and the avionics costs for ADS–
B In do not exceed $1.85 billion at a 7
percent present value.
As stated in the NPRM, ADS–B Out
and In would be cost beneficial at a 3
percent present value if: (1) The
avionics costs for ADS–B Out are low
($950 million at a 3 percent present
value) and the avionics costs for ADS–
B In do not exceed $5.3 billion at a 3
percent present value or (2) the avionics
costs for ADS–B Out are high ($5.35
billion at a 3 percent present value) and
the avionics costs for ADS–B In do not
exceed $870 million.
Boeing asked for further clarification
of scenarios in which ADS–B may not
be cost beneficial. Specifically, Boeing
referred to the 3 percent present value
estimate in the NPRM with high
avionics costs. Boeing noted that it does
not believe ADS–B In avionics costs will
be less than ADS–B Out avionics costs.
Boeing also asked for the cost beneficial
values of ADS–B Out and In at a 7
percent present value if avionics costs
are high.
Boeing suggested that the FAA
conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis
for the ADS–B program, including
accurate cost estimates for ADS–B In.
Boeing further recommended that if the
FAA cannot determine the costs
associated with ADS–B In, the FAA
should not include these costs and
benefits in the economic analysis.
Boeing also questioned why the FAA
estimated the benefits for ADS–B Out
and In at $13.9 billion in the proposal,
while the FAA estimated the ADS–B
Out and In benefits at $18.5 billion in
the ‘‘Surveillance and Broadcast

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30185

Services Benefits Basis of Estimates’’ 60
(SBS BOE) report.
The FAA agrees with Boeing that if
the costs of ADS–B Out avionics are at
the high end of our estimates and if
ADS–B In avionics are more expensive
than ADS–B Out avionics, then the costs
estimated for ADS–B Out and In will
exceed the quantified benefits, given the
assumptions in the economic
evaluation. The FAA also notes that at
a 7 percent present value with the
assumptions in the economic evaluation
(i.e., if industry costs for ADS–B Out
avionics are at the high end of the
range), then ADS–B Out and In will not
be cost-beneficial. The FAA does not
agree that the estimates in the regulatory
impact analysis need to be consistent
with the estimates in the SBS BOE
report. The economic analysis quantifies
the potential benefits that the FAA
expects to result from adoption of the
rule. The economic analysis does not
include benefits that could be realized
without the rule.
Specifically, the regulatory impact
analysis did not include benefits from
ADS–B in Alaska or for low altitude
operations in the Gulf of Mexico
because these benefits would occur
without the rule. The regulatory
evaluation also did not include benefits
related to controlled flight into terrain
because terrain avoidance warning
systems currently provide these
benefits. Other benefits that the FAA
did not consider in the proposal, but are
in the SBS BOE, include: An estimate of
the reduction in FAA subscription
charges because of value added services
and a reduction in costs to obtain
weather information.
In addition, the regulatory impact
analysis did not specifically include a
benefit for radar system replacement
cost avoidance. Rather, the FAA
compared the total cost of continuing
full radar surveillance (the baseline) to
the cost of providing surveillance with
ADS–B. This included the costs of
gradually discontinuing some radar and
continuing some radar as a backup. The
lower costs of radar (what is referred to
as ‘‘surveillance cost avoidance’’ in the
SBS BOE) were captured in the cost
comparison of radar under the baseline
and radar under the ADS–B Out
scenario (the rule).
The draft regulatory impact analysis
released with the NPRM included a
cost-benefit analysis of ADS–B Out
alone, as well as for the scenarios for
ADS–B Out and In. For the final rule,
60 This report was published in August 2007. A
copy of this report is available from the Web site
http://www.regulations.gov. To find the report,
enter FAA–2007–29305–0013.1 in the search box.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30186

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

the FAA also queried industry for
equipage costs for ADS–B Out and In.
Although the FAA initially attempted to
capture the benefits for ADS–B In, upon
further consideration the agency has
determined that the performance
requirements are not sufficiently
developed to conduct a meaningful
analysis. The FAA has not included
ADS–B In costs and benefits in the final
regulatory impact analysis.
4. Improved En Route Conflict Probe
Benefit Performance
In the NPRM, the FAA estimated the
benefit for en route conflict probe at
$3.3 billion.61 To calculate this savings,
the FAA estimated the reduction in ATC
vectors resulting from improved en
route conflict probe. Then, the FAA
attributed this time savings to direct
aircraft operating costs and the
passenger value of time.
Several commenters questioned the
improved en route conflict probe benefit
estimates. The commenters noted that
the amount of time saved per passenger
was low, compared to other delays in
the overall travel environment (for
example, late arrivals at the airport and
waiting for baggage). They
recommended that the FAA delete the
passenger value of time from its benefit
estimate.
The FAA does not agree that the
passenger value of time should be
removed from its benefit estimate and
therefore includes it in the final
regulatory impact analysis. There has
been significant discussion about
whether small increments of time
should be valued at lower rates than
larger increments. The present state of
theoretical and empirical knowledge
does not appear to support valuing
small increments of time less than larger
ones.62
5. Capacity Enhancements, Airspace
Efficiency, and Fuel Saving Benefits
In the NPRM, the FAA estimated that
between 2017 and 2035, ADS–B would

allow for more efficient handling of
potential en route conflicts. In the
NPRM, the FAA estimated this would
save 410 million gallons of fuel and
eliminate 4 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide emissions. The FAA also
noted in the initial regulatory impact
analysis that, during this same time
period, continuous descent approaches
(now referred to as OPDs), would allow
for a 10 billion pound fuel savings and
a 14 million ton reduction in carbon
dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the
FAA noted that optimal routing over the
Gulf of Mexico would eliminate 300,000
metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions
between 2012 and 2035. In the final
regulatory impact analysis, the FAA
estimated a net reduction in carbon
dioxide emissions attributable to the
rule and calculated a monetary value to
this net reduction. See the full
regulatory impact analysis for details.
A few commenters, including RAA,
questioned the cost savings associated
with more efficient flights using ADS–
B. Some of these commenters also asked
the FAA to remove the discussion on
reduced carbon dioxide emissions
because the efficiency and fuel saving
claims have not been validated.
RAA noted that the FAA has
considerable experience justifying rules
that enhance safety, but suggested that
the FAA is not experienced in justifying
rules based on increased airspace
capacity and fuel savings. RAA asked
the FAA to validate whether the
reduced vertical separation minimum
(RVSM) program reduced fuel
consumption, as estimated in the RVSM
regulatory evaluation. RAA also noted
that the benefit analysis should quantify
the benefits that ADS–B would provide
over current descent procedures enabled
without ADS–B.
GAMA and an individual commenter
noted the environmental impact of
airspace modernization. GAMA
encouraged the FAA to provide
additional details and quantify the

benefit from fuel savings that the FAA
expects ADS–B surveillance will
provide.
In the proposal’s benefit analysis, the
FAA quantified the benefits that ADS–
B alone will provide over current,
recognized OPD procedures. The agency
agrees that the efficiency benefits are, in
part, conceptual, and with new
technologies, conceptual efficiency
benefits analysis is the only option.
While outside the scope of this
rulemaking, as noted by a commenter,
the RVSM program offers an example of
how airspace redesign and new
technological capabilities can result in
significant efficiency and operational
(fuel savings) gains.
6. Deriving Benefits From Capstone
Implementation in Alaska
In the NPRM, the FAA explained that
ADS–B has been demonstrated and used
in Alaska for terrain and traffic
awareness, and that it had a noticeable
effect on safety. Several commenters
argued that Capstone is an insufficient
basis to assume benefits from ADS–B
equipage. The commenters noted that
Capstone is a strong component of the
justification for the system; they added
that a major component of Capstone is
the addition of terrain information and
warnings. Commenters also noted that
the flight environment in southeast
Alaska is unlike any in the lower 48
states.
The FAA understands that the
conditions in Alaska do not translate to
the continental United States. While the
regulatory impact analysis does not
include any benefits from Capstone, the
rulemaking action does highlight the
potential benefits derived from more
accurate and timely positioning
information from ADS–B.
7. Regional Airline Benefits
In the NPRM, the FAA quantified the
benefits as shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4—ESTIMATED BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE NPRM REGULATORY EVALUATION
Benefit 2007
M$

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Benefit area
Total Benefits ...............................................................................................................................
Gulf of Mexico:
High Altitude Operations ......................................................................................................
More Efficient En Route Separation Delay Savings ............................................................
Additional Flights Accommodated Optimal and More Direct Routing ..................................
Improved En Route Conflict Probe Performance ........................................................................
More Efficient Metering Based on Improved TMA Accuracy ......................................................
Increased Ability to Perform Continuous Descent Approaches ..................................................
61 This translates to $840 million at a 7 percent
present value or $1.8 billion at a 3 percent present
value.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

Discounted at
3%

Discounted at
7%

$9,948.5

$5,484.3

$2,657.7

2,067.2
1,810.6
256.6
3,258.1
1,746.6
2,876.7

1,104.4
946.1
158.4
1,774.0
944.9
1,661.0

509.9
421.3
88.6
840.1
441.1
866.6

62 Economic Values For FAA Investment and
Regulatory Decisions, A Guide, Final Report
Revised Oct. 3, 2007, GRA Incorporated.

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
RAA expressed concern that regional
operators do not have equal access to
large airports; therefore, they will not
achieve the same benefits as larger air
carriers. RAA specifically noted that the
FAA has not committed to a measurable
reduction in aircraft-to-aircraft
separation standards. They believed that
without reduced separation standards,
the benefits would be localized and
would not apply to regional airlines.
RAA also noted that regional aircraft
typically do not carry life rafts and,
therefore, they cannot conduct extended
over-water operations. As a result, they
will not benefit from more efficient
aircraft separation over the Gulf of
Mexico.
The FAA agrees that regional
operators who cannot operate over the
Gulf of Mexico will not attain this
separation benefit. However, the FAA
did not estimate benefits specifically for
regional carriers. The agency expects
regional airlines to benefit from ADS–B
Out even without reduced aircraft-toaircraft separation standards. This is
because other benefits, including
improved en route conflict probe
performance, apply to all aircraft in
Class A airspace, including regional
airlines.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

8. General Aviation: High Equipage
Costs With Little Benefit
In the proposal, the FAA estimated
that the total cost to equip GA aircraft
from 2012 through 2035 would range
from $1.2 billion to about $4.5 billion
with a mid-point average of nearly $2.9
billion.63 Although the FAA did not
specifically estimate GA benefits in the
NPRM, the agency now estimates that
GA could receive up to $200 million in
ADS–B Out benefits.
Numerous commenters, including
AOPA and EAA, expressed concern that
the proposed rule would require GA
operators to add costly equipment to
their aircraft, while providing these
operators with few benefits. GAMA
noted that many of the benefits for GA
operators exist with ADS–B In. Several
of the commenters noted that GA
aircraft do not substantially contribute
to delays or congestion in the NAS.
They further stated that if ADS–B
lessens traffic delays, it will benefit the
airlines rather than the GA community.
AOPA recommended that the FAA work
with key stakeholders to identify a
strategy that either removes low-altitude
airspace users from the proposal or
greatly improves the benefits for them.
63 The FAA also calculated this midpoint to be
$2.1 billion at a 3 percent present value or $1.5
billion at a 7 percent present value.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

The FAA considered three options to
resolve the GA cost benefit comments.
First, the FAA considered modifying
performance requirements to reduce
equipage costs. Second, the FAA
evaluated options to provide additional
benefits to GA operators. Third, the
FAA explored tailoring the rule such
that fewer GA operators would be
affected.
For the first option, the FAA
determined that opportunities do exist
for reducing the equipage costs for GA
operators. In the rule, the FAA bases the
performance requirements solely on
ATC separation services; whereas in the
proposal, the performance requirements
were based on ATC separation services
and five initial ADS–B In applications.
This change eliminated the need for
ADS–B antenna diversity because the
ATC separation services can operate
effectively without it and the ADS–B
Out benefits can be achieved. Multiple
commenters and the ARC felt that
removing antenna diversity would help
make the rule cheaper to implement for
light general aviation operators.
For the second option, using
comments received by the GA
community, the FAA has identified
opportunities to provide additional
benefits to GA operators by expanding
ADS–B services throughout the NAS to
areas not currently serviced. Thus,
outside of this rulemaking effort, the
FAA intends to explore the costs and
benefits for the following ADS–B
enabled service expansions:
(a) Expanding low altitude
surveillance coverage, both in areas
receiving increased collateral coverage
from the initial ADS–B ground station
infrastructure and in areas that could
benefit from additional ground station
coverage.
(b) Providing radar-like terminal ATC
services at airports not currently served.
(c) Providing an automated
mechanism for the closure of IFR flight
plans based on the new technologies
ability to detect an aircraft’s arrival at its
destination airport.
(d) Making enhancements to current
search and rescue technology and
procedures that will assist rescue
personnel in determining the last
known location of aircraft that are
reported missing.
(e) Providing Flight Service Stations
(FSSs) with ADS–B positional display
information and assisting in the
development of automation systems that
will allow for more tailored in flight
service functions.
For the third option, the FAA looked
at tailoring the ADS–B airspace such
that the number of general aviation
aircraft needing to equip would be

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30187

minimized. Specifically the FAA
considered limiting the rule to only
Class A and B airspace. Although ADS–
B surveillance is not as critical to the
NexGen goals in lower density airspace,
such as Class E airspace above 10,000
feet and Class C airspace, ADS–B
equipage for all aircraft in these areas is
essential to gaining the overall stated
ADS–B benefits, realizing savings
associated with radar
decommissioning,64 the expansion of
potential future benefits discussed
above, and moving towards the NextGen
concept of operations. Thus, the
airspace subject to this rule remains
unchanged.
AA. Revisions To Other Regulations
Several commenters, including ACI–
NA, ACSS, ATA, United Airlines, and
UPS, recommended changes to other
regulations. Specifically, they
recommended that the FAA update
subpart F of 14 CFR part 25 to include
ADS–B requirements. ACI–NA
recommended that the FAA amend 14
CFR part 139 to require airport surface
vehicles to equip with ADS–B to
prevent runway incursions. Airbus
recommended that the FAA update
advisory circular (AC) 120–86, Aircraft
Surveillance Systems and Applications.
This rule only amends the operating
regulations in part 91. At this point, the
FAA has not identified any ADS–B Out
requirements for parts 23, 25, 27, and
29. The FAA will issue the appropriate
aircraft installation and operational
guidance material consistent with the
requirements of this rule upon issuance
or shortly thereafter. The FAA is
discussing with airports and the Federal
Communications Commission whether
ADS–B would benefit airport ground
vehicles.
III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of
the new (or amended) information
collection requirement(s) in this final
rule to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for its review. OMB
assigned the number 2120–0728 in
advance, but has not yet approved the
collection. Affected parties do not have
to comply with the information
collection requirements until the FAA
publishes in the Federal Register notice
of the approval of the control number
64 The costs of radar will be about $1 billion less
with ADS–B Out, although the total ground costs
of ADS–B Out with the cost to sustain and
decommission select radar will exceed the cost of
continuing radar without implementing ADS–B.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30188

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

assigned by OMB for these information
requirements. Approval of the control
number notifies the public that OMB
has approved these information
collection requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The FAA received comments on the
proposed performance requirements for
ADS–B Out aircraft equipment. Those
comments are discussed in section II,
Discussion of the Final Rule, elsewhere
in this preamble. However, the agency
received no comments specifically on
the burden associated with collecting
aircraft transmissions from the ADS–B
Out equipment required by this rule.
A description of the annual burden is
shown below.
Use: This final rule will support the
information needs of the FAA by
requiring avionics equipment that
continuously transmits aircraft
information to be received by the FAA,
via automation, for use in providing air
traffic surveillance services.
Respondents: The average number of
aircraft that will be equipped annually
for the first 3 years—577. The number
of aircraft (general aviation, regional,
and majors) that will be equipped by
2035: 247,317.
Frequency: ADS–B equipment will
continuously transmit aircraft
information in ‘‘real time’’ to FAA
ground receivers. The information is
collected electronically, without input
by a human operator. Old information is
overwritten on a continuous basis.
Annual Burden Estimate: Base-case
start-up cost for an ADS–B Outcompliant transponder: $4,371.09
million (in 2009 dollars).
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 OMB control number.
B. International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to
conform to ICAO SARPs to the
maximum extent practicable. ATA,
British Airways, and EUROCONTROL
recommended that the FAA harmonize
this rule with the appropriate ICAO
SARPs. Considering that the long-term
global capabilities of ADS–B are not yet
fully defined, ICAO SARPs will
continue to evolve to reflect developing
ADS–B applications. In addition,
current ICAO SARPs for the 1090 MHz
ES and UAT ADS–B links will be
updated to reflect harmonized changes
to both RTCA and EUROCAE minimum
performance standards, as appropriate,
for ADS–B Out operations. The FAA has
reviewed the existing ICAO

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

requirements 65 as related to ADS–B Out
operations and has identified no
differences with these regulations. The
FAA also will continue to work with the
international community to ensure
harmonization.
C. Regulatory Impact Analysis,
Regulatory Flexibility Determination,
International Trade Impact Assessment,
and Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order 12866 directs that
each Federal agency 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 (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, this 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 a base year of 1995).
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this final rule. The
FAA suggests that readers seeking
greater detail read the full regulatory
impact analysis, a copy of which has
been placed in the docket for this
rulemaking.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA
has determined that this final rule: (1)
Has benefits that justify its costs; (2) is
an economically ‘‘significant regulatory
65 ICAO references: Procedures for Air Navigation
Services—Air Traffic Management, Doc 4444,
Amendment 4, (24/11/05) Procedures for Air
Navigation Services—Air Traffic Management; Doc
9694, ICAO Manual of Air Traffic Services Data
Link Applications; Annex 2, Rules of the Air;
Annex 4, Aeronautical Charts; Annex 6 Part II,
Operation of Aircraft; Annex 11, Air Traffic
Services; Annex 15, Aeronautical Information
Services; Doc 9689, Manual for Determination of
Separation Minima; Circular 311, SASP Circular—
ADS–B Comparative Assessment; Circular 278,
National Plan for CNS/ATM Systems Guidance
Material; Annex 10 Vol. IV, Amendment 82,
Aeronautical Telecommunications; Doc 9871,
Technical Provisions for Mode S Services and
Extended Squitter.

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866; (3) is
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4)
will have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities; (5) will not create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States; and (6) will impose an
unfunded mandate on the private sector
but not on state, local, or tribal
governments. These analyses are
summarized below.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
The FAA reviewed the following three
alternatives for surveillance and found
Alternative 2 (the rule) to be the
preferred alternative:
1. Baseline radar—Maintain the
current radar based surveillance system
and replace radar facilities when they
wear out;
2. ADS–B—Aircraft operators equip to
meet performance requirements
required by the rule and the FAA
provides surveillance services based on
downlinked aircraft information.
3. Multilateration—The FAA provides
surveillance using multilateration.
Key Assumptions
• All costs and benefits are
denominated in 2009 dollars.
• The final rule will be published in
2010 and have a compliance date of
2020.
• Present value rates are 3% and 7%.
• Period of analysis: 2009–2035.
Benefits of the Final Rule
The benefits of the final rule include
the dollar value of savings in fuel, time,
net reduction in CO2 emissions, and the
consumer surplus associated with the
additional flights accommodated
because of the rule. The estimated
quantified benefits of the rule range
from $6.8 billion ($2.1 billion at 7%
present value) to $8.5 billion ($2.7
billion at 7% present value).
Costs of the Final Rule
The estimated incremental costs of
the final rule range from a low of $3.3
billion ($2.2 billion at 7% present value)
to a high of $7.0 billion ($4.1 billion at
7% present value). These include costs
to the government, as well as to the
aviation industry and other users of the
NAS, to deploy ADS–B, and are
incremental to maintaining surveillance
via current technology (radar). The
aviation industry would begin incurring
costs for avionics equipage in 2012 and
would incur total costs ranging from
$2.5 billion ($1.4 billion at 7% present
value) to $6.2 billion ($3.3 billion at 7%
present value) with an estimated

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
midpoint of $4.4 billion ($2.3 billion at
7% present value) from 2012 to 2035.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Regulatory Flexibility Determination
and Analysis
Introduction and Purpose of this
Analysis
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-forprofit 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 the rule will
have such an impact, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis
as described in the RFA. Section 603 of
the RFA requires agencies to prepare
and make available for public comment
a final regulatory flexibility analysis
(FRFA) describing the impact of final
rules on small entities. As the FAA
Administrator, I certify that this rule
will have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The purpose of this analysis is
to provide the reasoning underlying this
FAA determination.
Section 603(b) of the RFA specifies
the content of a FRFA.
Each FRFA must contain:
• A description of the reasons why
action by the agency is being
considered;
• A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
final rule;
• A description and an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the
rule will apply;
• A description of the projected
reporting, record keeping and other
compliance requirements of the final
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;
• An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
which may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the final rule;

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

• A description of any significant
alternatives to the final rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and minimize any
significant economic impact of the final
rule on small entities.
• A summary of significant issues
raised by public comments in response
to the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis and how the agency resolved
those comments.
Reasons Why the Final Rule is Being
Promulgated
Public Law 108–176, referred to as
‘‘The Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act,’’ was enacted
December 12, 2003 (Pub. L. 108–176).
This law set forth requirements and
objectives for transforming the air
transportation system to progress further
into the 21st century. Section 709 of this
statute required the Secretary of
Transportation to establish in the FAA
a Joint Planning and Development
Office (JPDO) to manage work related to
NextGen. Among its statutorily defined
responsibilities, the JPDO coordinates
the development and use of new
technologies to ensure that, when
available, they may be used to the
fullest potential in aircraft and in the air
traffic control system.
The FAA, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA), and
the Departments of Commerce, Defense,
and Homeland Security have launched
an effort to align their resources to
develop and further NextGen. The goals
of NextGen, as stated in section 709,
that are addressed by this final rule
include: (1) Improving the level of
safety, security, efficiency, quality, and
affordability of the NAS and aviation
services; (2) Taking advantage of data
from emerging ground- and space-based
communications, navigation, and
surveillance technologies; (3) Being
scalable to accommodate and encourage
substantial growth in domestic and
international transportation and
anticipate and accommodate continuing
technology upgrades and advances; and
(4) Accommodating a wide range of
aircraft operations, including airlines,
air taxis, helicopters, GA, and
unmanned aerial vehicles.
The JPDO was also charged to create
and carry out an integrated plan for
NextGen. The NextGen Integrated Plan,
transmitted to Congress on December
12, 2004, ensures that the NextGen
system meets the air transportation
safety, security, mobility, efficiency and
capacity needs beyond those currently
included in the FAA’s Operational
Evolution Plan (OEP).
As described in the NextGen
Integrated Plan, the current approach to

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

30189

air transportation (i.e., ground based
radars tracking congested flyways and
passing information among the control
centers for the duration of flights) is
becoming operationally obsolete. The
current system is increasingly
inefficient, and despite decreases in air
traffic, still subject to significant delays.
Resumption of growth will only
aggravate congestion and delays, given
the capabilities of the present system.
The current method of handling air
traffic flow will not be able to adapt to
the volumes, density, and approach to
managing air traffic in the future. The
need for significant improvements
towards operational efficiency and
reduced environmental impacts, as well
as resumed growth, will create
significant challenges. Moreover, the
diversity of aircraft is forecast to grow
as the use of unmanned aircraft systems
and very light jets are developed for
special operations.
The FAA believes that ADS–B
technology is a key component in
achieving many of the goals set forth in
the NextGen Integrated Plan. This final
rule is a major step toward strategically
‘‘establishing an agile air traffic system
that accommodates future requirements
and readily responds to shifts in
demand from all users,’’ by embracing a
new approach to surveillance that can
lead to greater and more efficient
airspace use. ADS–B technology not
only assists in the transition to a system
with less dependence on ground
infrastructure and facilities, but also
creates capabilities for precision and
accuracy, which in turn will make the
system more operationally and
environmentally efficient.
Statement of the Legal Basis and
Objectives
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106, Federal Aviation
Administration, 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
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section
40103, Sovereignty and Use of Airspace,
and Subpart III, Section 44701, General
Requirements. Under section 40103, the
FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations on: (1) The flight of aircraft,
including regulations on safe altitudes;
(2) the navigation, protection, and
identification of aircraft; and (3) the safe
and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. Under section 44701, the FAA
is charged with promoting safe flight of

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30190

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

civil aircraft in air commerce by
prescribing regulations for practices,
methods, and procedures the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce.
This final rule is within the scope of
sections 40103 and 44701 because it
promulgates aircraft performance
requirements to meet advanced
surveillance needs that will
accommodate projected increases in
operations within the NAS. As more
aircraft operate within the U.S. airspace,
improved surveillance performance is
necessary to continue balancing air
transportation growth with the agency’s
mandate for a safe and efficient air
transportation system.
Projected Reporting, Record Keeping
and Other Requirements
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of
the new information collection
requirements in this final rule to the
Office of Management and Budget for its
review. See discussion in Section III
elsewhere in this preamble.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Overlapping, Duplicative, or
Conflicting Federal Rules
The FAA is not aware that the final
rule will overlap, duplicate or conflict
with existing Federal rules.
Significant Issues Raised by Public
Comments to the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis
In the NPRM, the FAA addressed the
impact of the proposed rule on smallbusiness part 91, 121, and 135 operators
with less than 1,500 employees. The
proposal noted that a substantial
number of small entities would be
significantly affected by the proposed
rule.
One individual commented and
challenged the assumption that only
small businesses directly involved in
aviation would be affected. The
commenter explained that many
businesses use aircraft indirectly in
their operations and that higher aircraft
equipage costs will affect overall
business costs. The commenter believed
that one half of all non-turbine GA
aircraft are involved in small business
activity.
Publicly available data regarding
internal company financial statistics for
GA operators is limited. Therefore, the
FAA estimated the financial impact by
obtaining a sample population of GA
operators from (1) the U.S. DOT Form
41 filings, (2) World Aviation Directory,
and (3) ReferenceUSA. The FAA
applied this sample to U.S. Census
Bureau data on the Small Business

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

Administration Web site. This was done
to develop an estimate of the total
number of small businesses affected by
the proposed rule.
The FAA agrees that GA operators use
airplanes for indirect business use and
has determined that this final rule will
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small businesses.
Estimated Number of Small Firms
Potentially Impacted
Under the RFA, the FAA must
determine whether a rule significantly
affects a substantial number of small
entities. This determination is typically
based on small entity size and cost
thresholds that vary depending on the
affected industry.
Using the size standards from the
Small Business Administration for Air
Transportation and Aircraft
Manufacturing, the FAA defined
companies as small entities if they have
fewer than 1,500 employees.
The FAA considered the economic
impact on small-business part 91, 121,
and 135 operators. Many of the GA
aircraft that are operating under part 91
are not for hire or flown for profit, so the
FAA does not include these operators in
its small business impact analysis.
This final rule will become effective
in 2020. Although the FAA forecasts
traffic and air carrier fleets to 2040, our
forecasts are of a generic nature and do
not forecast the number of small
entities. These forecasts also do not
estimate whether an operator will still
be in business or will be a small
business entity. Therefore the FAA uses
current U.S. operator’s revenues and
applies the industry-provided costs to
determine if this final rule will have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entity operators.
The FAA obtained a list of part 91,
121 and 135 U.S. operators from the
FAA Flight Standards Service. Using
information provided by the U.S. DOT
Form 41 filings, World Aviation
Directory, and ReferenceUSA, the FAA
eliminated operators that are subsidiary
businesses of larger businesses and
businesses with more than 1,500
employees from the list of small entities.
In many cases, the employment and
annual revenue data are not public, so
the FAA did not include these
companies in its analysis. For the
remaining businesses, the FAA obtained
company revenue and employment from
the above three sources.
The methodology discussed above
resulted in a list of 34 U.S. part 91, 121
and 135 operators, with less than 1,500
employees, who operate 341 airplanes.
Due to the sparse amount of publicly
available data on internal company

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

financial statistics for small entities, it
was not feasible to estimate the total
population of small entities affected by
this final rule. The total population of
U.S. part 91, 121 and 135 operators,
with less than 1,500 employees, has the
potential to be large. We used this
sample set of small business operators
to develop percentage estimates to apply
to the U.S. Census Bureau data to
estimate the population.
These 34 U.S. small entity operators
are a representative sample. The sample
was used to assess the cost impact on
the total population of small businesses
who operate aircraft affected by this
final rulemaking. This representative
sample was then applied to the U.S.
Census Bureau data on the Small
Business Administration’s Web site to
develop an estimate of the total number
of affected small business entities.
The U.S. Census Bureau data lists
small entities in the air transportation
industry that employ less than 500
employees. Other small businesses may
own aircraft and may not be included in
the U.S. Census Bureau air
transportation industry category.
Therefore our estimate of the number of
small entities affected by this final rule
will likely be understated. The estimate
of the total number of affected small
entities is developed below.
Cost and Affordability for Small
Entities
To assess the cost impact to small
business part 91, 121 and 135 operators,
the FAA contacted manufacturers,
industry associations, and ADS–B
equipage providers to estimate ADS–B
equipage costs. The FAA requested
estimates of airborne installation costs,
by aircraft model, for the output
parameters listed in the ‘‘Equipment
Specifications’’ section of the Regulatory
Impact Analysis.
To satisfy the manufacturers’ request
to keep individual aircraft pricing
confidential, the FAA calculated low,
baseline, and high range of costs by
equipment class. The baseline estimate
equals the average of the low and high
industry cost estimates. The dollar value
ranges consist of a wide variety of
avionics within each aircraft group. The
aircraft architecture within each
equipment group can vary, causing
different carriage, labor, and wiring
requirements for the installation of
ADS–B. Volume discounting, versus
single line purchasing, also affects the
dollar value ranges. On the low end, the
dollar value may represent a software
upgrade or original equipment
manufacturer (OEM) option change. On
the high end, the dollar value may
represent a new installation of upgraded

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

avionic systems necessary to assure
accuracy, reliability and safety. The
FAA used the estimated baseline dollar
value cost by equipment class in
determining the impact to small
business entities.
The FAA estimated each operator’s
total compliance cost as follows:
Multiplying the baseline dollar value
cost (by equipment class) by the number
of aircraft each small business operator
currently has in its fleet. The FAA
summed these costs by equipment class
and group. The FAA then measured the
economic impact on small entities by
dividing the estimated baseline dollar
value compliance cost for their fleet by
the small entity’s annual revenue.
Each equipment group operated by a
small entity may have to comply with
different requirements in the final rule,
depending on the state of the aircraft’s
avionics. In the ‘‘ADS–B Out Equipage
Cost Estimate’’ section of the Regulatory
Impact Analysis, the FAA details its
methodology to estimate operators’ total
compliance cost by equipment group.
For small entity operators in the
sample population of 34 small aviation
entities, the ADS–B cost is estimated to
be: (1) Greater than 2% of annual
revenues for about 35% of the operators;
and (2) greater than 1% of annual
revenues for about 54% of the operators.
Applying these percentages to the air
transportation industry category of the
2006 U.S. Census Bureau data, the
ADS–B cost is estimated to be: (1)
Greater than 2% of annual revenues for
at least 1,015 small entities; and (2)
greater than 1% of annual revenues for
at least 1,562 small entity operators.
As a result of the above analysis, the
FAA has determined that a substantial
number of small entities will be
significantly affected by the rule. Every
small entity that operates an aircraft in
the airspace defined by this final rule
will be required to install ADS–B out
equipage and therefore will be affected
by this rulemaking.
Business Closure Analysis
For commercial operators, the ratio of
costs to annual revenue shows that 7 of
34 small business air operator firms
would have ratios in excess of 5%.
Since many of the other commercial
small business air operator firms do not
make their annual revenue publicly
available, it is difficult to assess the
financial impact of this final rule on
their business. To fully assess whether
this final rule could force a small entity
into bankruptcy requires more financial
information than is publicly available.
In the NPRM, the FAA requested
comment and supporting justification,
from small entities, to assist the FAA in

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

determining the degree of hardship the
final rule will have on these entities.
Comments were also requested on
feasible alternative methods of
compliance. The FAA did not receive
any comments specific to this request.
Competitive Analysis

Disproportionality Analysis
The disproportionately higher impact
of the final rule on the fleets of small
operators results in disproportionately
higher costs to small operators. Due to
the potential of fleet discounts, large
operators may be able to negotiate better
pricing from outside sources for
inspections, installation, and ADS–B
hardware purchases.

Frm 00033

Fmt 4701

Based on the percent of potentially
affected current airplanes over the
analysis period, small U.S. business
operators may bear a disproportionate
impact from the final rule.
Analysis of Alternatives
Alternative One

The aviation industry is an extremely
competitive industry with slim profit
margins. The number of operators who
entered the industry and have stopped
operations because of mergers,
acquisitions, or bankruptcy litters the
history of the aviation industry.
The FAA analyzed five years of
operating profits for the affected smallentity operators listed above, and was
able to determine the operating profit
for 18 of the 34 small business entities.
The FAA discovered that the average
operating profit for 33% of these 18
affected operators was negative. Only
four of the 18 affected operators had
average annual operating profits that
exceeded $10,000,000.
In this competitive industry, cost
increases imposed by this regulation
will be hard to recover by raising prices,
especially by those operators showing
an average five-year negative operating
profit. Further, large operators may be
able to negotiate better pricing from
outside firms for inspections and
repairs, so small operators may need to
raise their prices more than large
operators. These factors make it difficult
for small operators to recover their
compliance costs by raising prices. If
small operators cannot recover all the
additional costs imposed by this
regulation, market shares could shift to
the large operators.
Small operators successfully compete
in the aviation industry by providing
unique services and controlling costs.
The extent to which affected small
entities operate in niche markets will
affect their ability to pass on costs.
Currently small operators are much
more profitable than established major
scheduled carriers. This final rule will
offset some of the advantages of lower
capital costs of older aircraft.
Overall, in terms of competition, this
rulemaking reduces small operators’
ability to compete.

PO 00000

30191

Sfmt 4700

The status quo alternative has
compliance costs to continue the
operation and commissioning of radar
sites. The FAA rejected this status quo
alternative because it is becoming
operationally obsolete to use groundbased radars to track congested airways
and pass information among control
centers for the duration of flights. The
current system is not able to upgrade to
the NextGen capabilities, nor
accommodate the estimated increases in
air traffic, which would result in
mounting delays or limitations in
service for many areas.
Alternative Two
Alternative Two would employ a
technology called multilateration.
Multilateration is a separate type of
secondary surveillance system that is
not radar-based and has limited
deployment in the U.S. At a minimum,
multilateration requires at least four
ground stations to deliver the same
volume of coverage and integrity of
information as ADS–B, because of the
need to ‘‘triangulate’’ the aircraft’s
position.
Multilateration is a process that
determines aircraft position by using the
difference in time of arrival of a signal
from an aircraft at a series of receivers
on the ground. Multilateration meets the
need for accurate surveillance and is
less costly than ADS–B (however, more
costly than radar), but cannot achieve
the same level of benefits as ADS–B,
such as system capacity and
environmental improvements.
Multilateration would provide the same
benefits as radar, but the FAA estimates
that the cost of providing
multilateration (including the cost to
sustain radar until multilateration is
operational), would exceed the cost to
continue full radar surveillance.
Alternative Three
Alternative Three would provide
relief by having the FAA provide an
exemption to small air carriers from all
requirements of this rule. This
alternative would mean that small air
carriers would rely on the status quo
ground-based radars to track their flights
and pass information among control
centers for the duration of the flights.
As discussed previously, ADS–B Out
cannot be used effectively as the

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

30192

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

primary surveillance system if certain
categories of airspace users are subject
to separate surveillance systems. The
small air carriers operate in the same
airspace as the larger carriers and
general aviation. Such an exemption
would require two primary surveillance
systems, which adds the cost of an
additional surveillance system without
improving the existing benefits. Thus,
this alternative is not considered to be
acceptable.
Alternative Four
Alternative Four exempts smallpiston engine GA operators from the
requirements of this final rule. This
final rule provides minimal benefits to
small-piston engine GA operators, while
adding significant costs by mandating
these operators to retrofit and equip
about 150,000 small piston engine GA
airplanes with ADS–B Out. Even though
the FAA determined that the percentage
of small piston engine GA airplanes
operating at the top Operational
Evolution Plan 35 airports is less than
5%, the number of GA operations
within a 30-nautical-mile radius of these
airports is significant. This alternative
was not considered acceptable because
ADS–B equipage for all aircraft
operating in the airspace subject to this
rule is essential to gaining the overall
stated ADS–B benefits, realizing savings
associated with radar decommissioning,
and the expansion of potential future
benefits.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

Alternative Five
This alternative is the final ADS–B
rule. ADS–B does not employ different
classes of receiving equipment or
provide different information based on
its location. Therefore, controllers will
not have to account for transitions
between surveillance solutions as an
aircraft moves closer to or farther away
from an airport. To address congestion
and delay, fuel consumption, emissions,
and future demand for air travel without
significant delays or denial of service,
the FAA found ADS–B to be the most
cost-effective solution to maintain a
viable air transportation system. ADS–B
provides a wider range of services to
aircraft users and could enable
applications that are not available with
multilateration or radar.
International Trade Impact Analysis
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.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

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 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 impose the same
unit costs on domestic and international
entities and thus has a neutral trade
impact.
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
$136.1 million in lieu of $100 million.
This rule is not expected to impose
significant costs on small governmental
jurisdictions such as State, local, or
tribal governments. However, the rule
will result in an unfunded mandate on
the private sector because it will result
in expenditures in excess of the $136.1
million annual threshold. The FAA
considered two alternatives to the rule,
as described above, and four alternatives
in the regulatory flexibility analysis
described above.
VI. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule
under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
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,
does not have federalism implications.
VII. Regulations Affecting Intrastate
Aviation in Alaska
Section 1205 of the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3213) requires the FAA, when
modifying its regulations in a manner
affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to
consider the extent to which Alaska is
not served by transportation modes

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

other than aviation, and to establish
appropriate regulatory distinctions. The
FAA did not receive any comments on
whether the proposed rule should apply
differently to intrastate aviation in
Alaska. The FAA has determined, based
on the administrative record of this
rulemaking, that there is no need to
make any regulatory distinctions
applicable to intrastate aviation in
Alaska.
VIII. 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 that this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312f and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
IX. Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use
The FAA has analyzed this final rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The
FAA has determined that it is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 13211. This is because,
while it is a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866
and DOT’s Regulatory Policies and
Procedures, it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. In fact,
adoption of this final rule offers the
potential to produce reductions in
energy use in the NAS.
X. Availability of Rulemaking
Documents
You can get an electronic copy of
rulemaking documents using the
Internet by—
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov;
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at http://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
You can also get a copy by sending a
request to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by
calling (202) 267–9680. Be sure to
identify the amendment number or
docket number of this rulemaking.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our 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.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
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. If
you are a small entity and you have a
question regarding this document, you
may contact your local FAA official, or
the person listed under the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the
beginning of the preamble. You can find
out more about SBREFA on the Internet
at http://www.faa.gov/
regulations_policies/rulemaking/
sbre_act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Aircraft, Airmen, Air traffic control,
Aviation safety, Incorporation by
Reference, Reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends chapter I of 14 CFR as follows:

■

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
FLIGHT RULES
1. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103,
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704,
44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717,
44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506–
46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles
12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 stat. 1180).

2. Amend § 91.1 by revising paragraph
(b) to read as follows:

■

§ 91.1

Applicability.

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

*

*
*
*
*
(b) Each person operating an aircraft
in the airspace overlying the waters
between 3 and 12 nautical miles from
the coast of the United States must
comply with §§ 91.1 through 91.21;
§§ 91.101 through 91.143; §§ 91.151
through 91.159; §§ 91.167 through
91.193; § 91.203; § 91.205; §§ 91.209
through 91.217; § 91.221, § 91.225;

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

30193

§§ 91.303 through 91.319; §§ 91.323
through 91.327; § 91.605; § 91.609;
§§ 91.703 through 91.715; and § 91.903.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 91.130 by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:

aircraft equipped with both a
transponder and ADS–B Out.
■ 7. Add § 91.225 to read as follows:

§ 91.130

(a) After January 1, 2020, and unless
otherwise authorized by ATC, no person
may operate an aircraft in Class A
airspace unless the aircraft has
equipment installed that—
(1) Meets the requirements in TSO–
C166b, Extended Squitter Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
(ADS–B) and Traffic Information
Service-Broadcast (TIS–B) Equipment
Operating on the Radio Frequency of
1090 Megahertz (MHz); and
(2) Meets the requirements of
§ 91.227.
(b) After January 1, 2020, and unless
otherwise authorized by ATC, no person
may operate an aircraft below 18,000
feet MSL and in airspace described in
paragraph (d) of this section unless the
aircraft has equipment installed that—
(1) Meets the requirements in—
(i) TSO–C166b; or
(ii) TSO–C154c, Universal Access
Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
(ADS–B) Equipment Operating on the
Frequency of 978 MHz;
(2) Meets the requirements of
§ 91.227.
(c) Operators with equipment
installed with an approved deviation
under § 21.618 of this chapter also are
in compliance with this section.
(d) After January 1, 2020, and unless
otherwise authorized by ATC, no person
may operate an aircraft in the following
airspace unless the aircraft has
equipment installed that meets the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this
section:
(1) Class B and Class C airspace areas;
(2) Except as provided for in
paragraph (e) of this section, within 30
nautical miles of an airport listed in
appendix D, section 1 to this part from
the surface upward to 10,000 feet MSL;
(3) Above the ceiling and within the
lateral boundaries of a Class B or Class
C airspace area designated for an airport
upward to 10,000 feet MSL;
(4) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section, Class E airspace
within the 48 contiguous states and the
District of Columbia at and above 10,000
feet MSL, excluding the airspace at and
below 2,500 feet above the surface; and
(5) Class E airspace at and above 3,000
feet MSL over the Gulf of Mexico from
the coastline of the United States out to
12 nautical miles.
(e) The requirements of paragraph (b)
of this section do not apply to any

Operations in Class C airspace.

*

*
*
*
*
(d) Equipment requirements. Unless
otherwise authorized by the ATC having
jurisdiction over the Class C airspace
area, no person may operate an aircraft
within a Class C airspace area
designated for an airport unless that
aircraft is equipped with the applicable
equipment specified in § 91.215, and
after January 1, 2020, § 91.225.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 91.131 by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
§ 91.131

Operations in Class B airspace.

*

*
*
*
*
(d) Other equipment requirements. No
person may operate an aircraft in a Class
B airspace area unless the aircraft is
equipped with—
(1) The applicable operating
transponder and automatic altitude
reporting equipment specified in
§ 91.215 (a), except as provided in
§ 91.215 (e), and
(2) After January 1, 2020, the
applicable Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast Out equipment
specified in § 91.225.
■ 5. Amend § 91.135 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 91.135

Operations in Class A airspace.

*

*
*
*
*
(c) Equipment requirements. Unless
otherwise authorized by ATC, no person
may operate an aircraft within Class A
airspace unless that aircraft is equipped
with the applicable equipment specified
in § 91.215, and after January 1, 2020,
§ 91.225.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 91.217 by redesignating
paragraphs (a) through (c) as paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(3), redesignating the
introductory text as paragraph (a)
introductory text, and by adding
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 91.217 Data correspondence between
automatically reported pressure altitude
data and the pilot’s altitude reference.

*

*
*
*
*
(b) No person may operate any
automatic pressure altitude reporting
equipment associated with a radar
beacon transponder or with ADS–B Out
equipment unless the pressure altitude
reported for ADS–B Out and Mode C/S
is derived from the same source for

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

§ 91.225 Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) Out
equipment and use.

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

30194

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

aircraft that was not originally
certificated with an electrical system, or
that has not subsequently been certified
with such a system installed, including
balloons and gliders. These aircraft may
conduct operations without ADS–B Out
in the airspace specified in paragraphs
(d)(2) and (d)(4) of this section.
Operations authorized by this section
must be conducted—
(1) Outside any Class B or Class C
airspace area; and
(2) Below the altitude of the ceiling of
a Class B or Class C airspace area
designated for an airport, or 10,000 feet
MSL, whichever is lower.
(f) Each person operating an aircraft
equipped with ADS–B Out must operate
this equipment in the transmit mode at
all times.
(g) Requests for ATC authorized
deviations from the requirements of this
section must be made to the ATC
facility having jurisdiction over the
concerned airspace within the time
periods specified as follows:
(1) For operation of an aircraft with an
inoperative ADS–B Out, to the airport of
ultimate destination, including any
intermediate stops, or to proceed to a
place where suitable repairs can be
made or both, the request may be made
at any time.
(2) For operation of an aircraft that is
not equipped with ADS–B Out, the
request must be made at least 1 hour
before the proposed operation.
(h) The standards required in this
section are incorporated by reference
with the approval of the Director of the
Office of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All
approved materials are available for
inspection at the FAA’s Office of
Rulemaking (ARM–1), 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202–
267–9677), or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. This
material is also available from the
sources indicated in paragraphs (h)(1)
and (h)(2) of this section.
(1) Copies of Technical Standard
Order (TSO)–C166b, Extended Squitter
Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast (ADS–B) and Traffic
Information Service-Broadcast (TIS–B)
Equipment Operating on the Radio
Frequency of 1090 Megahertz (MHz)
(December 2, 2009) and TSO–C154c,
Universal Access Transceiver (UAT)
Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast (ADS–B) Equipment
Operating on the Frequency of 978 MHz

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

(December 2, 2009) may be obtained
from the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Subsequent Distribution
Office, DOT Warehouse M30, Ardmore
East Business Center, 3341 Q 75th
Avenue, Landover, MD 20785;
telephone (301) 322–5377. Copies of
TSO –C166B and TSO–C154c are also
available on the FAA’s Web site, at
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/
design_approvals/tso/. Select the link
‘‘Search Technical Standard Orders.’’
(2) Copies of Section 2, Equipment
Performance Requirements and Test
Procedures, of RTCA DO–260B,
Minimum Operational Performance
Standards for 1090 MHz Extended
Squitter Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) and
Traffic Information Services-Broadcast
(TIS–B), December 2, 2009 (referenced
in TSO–C166b) and Section 2,
Equipment Performance Requirements
and Test Procedures, of RTCA DO–
282B, Minimum Operational
Performance Standards for Universal
Access Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
(ADS–B), December 2, 2009 (referenced
in TSO C–154c) may be obtained from
RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite
805, Washington, DC 20036–5133,
telephone 202–833–9339. Copies of
RTCA DO–260B and RTCA DO–282B
are also available on RTCA Inc.’s Web
site, at http://www.rtca.org/onlinecart/
allproducts.cfm.
■

8. Add § 91.227 to read as follows:

§ 91.227 Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) Out
equipment performance requirements.

(a) Definitions. For the purposes of
this section:
ADS–B Out is a function of an
aircraft’s onboard avionics that
periodically broadcasts the aircraft’s
state vector (3-dimensional position and
3-dimensional velocity) and other
required information as described in
this section.
Navigation Accuracy Category for
Position (NACP) specifies the accuracy
of a reported aircraft’s position, as
defined in TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c.
Navigation Accuracy Category for
Velocity (NACV) specifies the accuracy
of a reported aircraft’s velocity, as
defined in TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c.
Navigation Integrity Category (NIC)
specifies an integrity containment
radius around an aircraft’s reported
position, as defined in TSO–C166b and
TSO–C154c.
Position Source refers to the
equipment installed onboard an aircraft
used to process and provide aircraft
position (for example, latitude,
longitude, and velocity) information.

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Source Integrity Level (SIL) indicates
the probability of the reported
horizontal position exceeding the
containment radius defined by the NIC
on a per sample or per hour basis, as
defined in TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c.
System Design Assurance (SDA)
indicates the probability of an aircraft
malfunction causing false or misleading
information to be transmitted, as
defined in TSO–C166b and TSO–C154c.
Total latency is the total time between
when the position is measured and
when the position is transmitted by the
aircraft.
Uncompensated latency is the time
for which the aircraft does not
compensate for latency.
(b) 1090 MHz ES and UAT Broadcast
Links and Power Requirements—
(1) Aircraft operating in Class A
airspace must have equipment installed
that meets the antenna and power
output requirements of Class A1, A1S,
A2, A3, B1S, or B1 equipment as
defined in TSO–C166b, Extended
Squitter Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) and
Traffic Information Service-Broadcast
(TIS–B) Equipment Operating on the
Radio Frequency of 1090 Megahertz
(MHz).
(2) Aircraft operating in airspace
designated for ADS–B Out, but outside
of Class A airspace, must have
equipment installed that meets the
antenna and output power requirements
of either:
(i) Class A1, A1S, A2, A3, B1S, or B1
as defined in TSO–C166b; or
(ii) Class A1H, A1S, A2, A3, B1S, or
B1 equipment as defined in TSO–C154c,
Universal Access Transceiver (UAT)
Automatic Dependent Surveillance–
Broadcast (ADS–B) Equipment
Operating on the Frequency of 978
MHz.
(c) ADS–B Out Performance
Requirements for NAC P, NACV, NIC,
SDA, and SIL—
(1) For aircraft broadcasting ADS–B
Out as required under § 91.225 (a) and
(b)—
(i) The aircraft’s NACP must be less
than 0.05 nautical miles;
(ii) The aircraft’s NACV must be less
than 10 meters per second;
(iii) The aircraft’s NIC must be less
than 0.2 nautical miles;
(iv) The aircraft’s SDA must be 2; and
(v) The aircraft’s SIL must be 3.
(2) Changes in NACP, NACV, SDA,
and SIL must be broadcast within 10
seconds.
(3) Changes in NIC must be broadcast
within 12 seconds.
(d) Minimum Broadcast Message
Element Set for ADS–B Out. Each
aircraft must broadcast the following

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES3

information, as defined in TSO–C166b
or TSO–C154c. The pilot must enter
information for message elements listed
in paragraphs (d)(7) through (d)(10) of
this section during the appropriate
phase of flight.
(1) The length and width of the
aircraft;
(2) An indication of the aircraft’s
latitude and longitude;
(3) An indication of the aircraft’s
barometric pressure altitude;
(4) An indication of the aircraft’s
velocity;
(5) An indication if TCAS II or ACAS
is installed and operating in a mode that
can generate resolution advisory alerts;
(6) If an operable TCAS II or ACAS is
installed, an indication if a resolution
advisory is in effect;
(7) An indication of the Mode 3/A
transponder code specified by ATC;
(8) An indication of the aircraft’s call
sign that is submitted on the flight plan,
or the aircraft’s registration number,
except when the pilot has not filed a
flight plan, has not requested ATC
services, and is using a TSO–C154c selfassigned temporary 24-bit address;
(9) An indication if the flightcrew has
identified an emergency, radio
communication failure, or unlawful
interference;
(10) An indication of the aircraft’s
‘‘IDENT’’ to ATC;
(11) An indication of the aircraft
assigned ICAO 24-bit address, except
when the pilot has not filed a flight
plan, has not requested ATC services,
and is using a TSO–C154c self-assigned
temporary 24-bit address;
(12) An indication of the aircraft’s
emitter category;
(13) An indication of whether an
ADS–B In capability is installed;
(14) An indication of the aircraft’s
geometric altitude;
(15) An indication of the Navigation
Accuracy Category for Position (NACP);
(16) An indication of the Navigation
Accuracy Category for Velocity (NACV);
(17) An indication of the Navigation
Integrity Category (NIC);
(18) An indication of the System
Design Assurance (SDA); and
(19) An indication of the Source
Integrity Level (SIL).
(e) ADS–B Latency Requirements—

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:17 May 27, 2010

Jkt 220001

(1) The aircraft must transmit its
geometric position no later than 2.0
seconds from the time of measurement
of the position to the time of
transmission.
(2) Within the 2.0 total latency
allocation, a maximum of 0.6 seconds
can be uncompensated latency. The
aircraft must compensate for any latency
above 0.6 seconds up to the maximum
2.0 seconds total by extrapolating the
geometric position to the time of
message transmission.
(3) The aircraft must transmit its
position and velocity at least once per
second while airborne or while moving
on the airport surface.
(4) The aircraft must transmit its
position at least once every 5 seconds
while stationary on the airport surface.
(f) Equipment with an approved
deviation. Operators with equipment
installed with an approved deviation
under § 21.618 of this chapter also are
in compliance with this section.
(g) Incorporation by Reference. The
standards required in this section are
incorporated by reference with the
approval of the Director of the Office of
the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved
materials are available for inspection at
the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking (ARM–
1), 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202–
267–9677), or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. This
material is also available from the
sources indicated in paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2) of this section.
(1) Copies of Technical Standard
Order (TSO)–C166b, Extended Squitter
Automatic Dependent Surveillance–
Broadcast (ADS–B) and Traffic
Information Service–Broadcast (TIS–B)
Equipment Operating on the Radio
Frequency of 1090 Megahertz (MHz)
(December 2, 2009) and TSO–C154c,
Universal Access Transceiver (UAT)
Automatic Dependent Surveillance–
Broadcast (ADS–B) Equipment
Operating on the Frequency of 978 MHz
(December 2, 2009) may be obtained

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 9990

30195

from the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Subsequent Distribution
Office, DOT Warehouse M30, Ardmore
East Business Center, 3341 Q 75th
Avenue, Landover, MD 20785;
telephone (301) 322–5377. Copies of
TSO –C166B and TSO–C154c are also
available on the FAA’s Web site, at
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/
design_approvals/tso/. Select the link
‘‘Search Technical Standard Orders.’’
(2) Copies of Section 2, Equipment
Performance Requirements and Test
Procedures, of RTCA DO–260B,
Minimum Operational Performance
Standards for 1090 MHz Extended
Squitter Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) and
Traffic Information Services-Broadcast
(TIS–B), December 2, 2009 (referenced
in TSO–C166b) and Section 2,
Equipment Performance Requirements
and Test Procedures, of RTCA DO–
282B, Minimum Operational
Performance Standards for Universal
Access Transceiver (UAT) Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
(ADS–B), December 2, 2009 (referenced
in TSO C–154c) may be obtained from
RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite
805, Washington, DC 20036–5133,
telephone 202–833–9339. Copies of
RTCA DO–260B and RTCA DO–282B
are also available on RTCA Inc.’s Web
site, at http://www.rtca.org/onlinecart/
allproducts.cfm.
9. Amend appendix D to part 91 by
revising section 1 introductory text to
read as follows:
APPENDIX D TO PART 91—
AIRPORTS/LOCATIONS: SPECIAL
OPERATING RESTRICTIONS
Section 1. Locations at which the
requirements of § 91.215(b)(2) and
§ 91.225(d)(2) apply. The requirements of
§§ 91.215(b)(2) and 91.225(d)(2) apply below
10,000 feet above the surface within a 30nautical-mile radius of each location in the
following list.

*

*

*

*

*

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 21,
2010.
J. Randolph Babbitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–12645 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

E:\FR\FM\28MYR3.SGM

28MYR3