home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!bu.edu!transfer.stratus.com!sw.stratus.com!cdt
- From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
- Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
- Subject: (Long) Text of FAA Change Proposal
- Message-ID: <1eramrINN312@transfer.stratus.com>
- Date: 23 Nov 92 19:16:43 GMT
- References: <1ejjhsINN4er@transfer.stratus.com> <1992Nov21.003126.9062@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
- Lines: 631
- NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com
-
- In article <1992Nov21.003126.9062@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
-
- > I was interested in the FAA's published proposed rule change. It would
- > be nice if you could retrieve that for us who do not access CompuServe.
-
- (Foreword:)
-
- November 17, 1992
-
- In May 1985 the National Association of Rocketry (NAR) and the
- Hobby Industries of America (HIA) proposed the following two
- changes to the Federal Air Regulations (FAR Part 101):
-
- 1. Change the model rocket liftoff weight from 1 lb
- (453 gm) to 3.3 lb (1500 gm).
- 2. Change the model rocket propellant mass from 4 oz
- (113 gm) to 4.4 oz (125 gm).
-
- This proposal was made after an extensive technical study by the
- NAR. On September 10th after a seven year delay, the Federal
- Aviation Administration (FAA) published its Notice of Proposed
- Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register Vo. 57, No. 176, at p.
- 41628.
-
- In summary the FAA's NPRM proposes the following:
-
- 1. Introduction of a "large model rocket" category for
- models which weigh more than 1 lb at liftoff but not
- more than 3.3 lb, and have between 4 oz and 4.4 oz of
- propellant.
-
- a. "Large model rockets" flown outside five miles
- from an airport require notification of the
- nearest FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) facility.
- b. "Large model rockets" flown inside five miles of
- an airport require notification of the nearest FAA
- ATC and the airport manager.
-
- The NAR has prepared a response to the FAA's NPRM. It is the
- position of the National Association of Rocketry that the May
- 1985 proposal stands on its own merit. Studies commissioned by
- both the FAA and NAR indicate that there is no increased hazard
- to aircraft with the heavier models.
-
- Notification is not required for model rockets. It is the NAR's
- position that notification should not be required for "large
- model rockets." In fact, the NAR feels there is no reason to
- have a "large model rocket" category.
-
- Public response to the FAA NPRM is due on or before December 9,
- 1992, and should be sent to the following address:
-
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Office of Chief Counsel
- Attention: Rules Docket AGC-10
- Docket No. 26965
- 800 Independence Avenue S.W.
- Washington, D.C. 20591
-
- The NAR hopes you will carefully evaluate its official position
- on the FAA NPRM. The NAR hopes you will support and endorse this
- position in writing. You are encouraged to provide a written
- response to the FAA at the above address.
-
- To be the most effective it is important that all written
- responses arrive at the FAA on or about December 8, 1992. The
- NAR will file its official position on that date, and the
- coincident support from you will increase the effectiveness of
- this position.
-
- Thanks!
-
-
- J. Patrick Miller, President
- National Association of Rocketry
-
-
- --------------------------------------------------
-
- This file includes the text of the FAA NPRM issued in response to the NAR's
- proposal of 1985. This file was prepared by optical character recognition;
- and although an effort was made to correct errors introduced in the OCR
- process, there is no guarantee that no other errors remain.
-
- IT IS NOW TIME for modelers to respond to the FAA in support of the
- NAR's position, as outlined in the above letter.
-
- Printed copies of this document may be obtained by calling the toll-free
- number 1-800-FAA-SURE and asking for a copy of Docket #26965.
-
- -------------------------------------
-
- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
- Federal Aviation Administration
- 14 CFR Part 1O1
- [Docket No. 26965 ; Notice No. 92-12]
- RIN: 2120-AB75
-
- Model Rocket Operations
-
- AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) DOT.
-
- ACTION: Notice of proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
-
- SUMMARY: This notice proposes to reduce the restrictions on the
- operation of model rockets that use not more than 125 grams (4.4
- ounces) of propellant; that are made of paper, wood, or breakable
- plastic; that contain no substantial metal parts; and that weigh
- not more than 1,500 grams (53 ounces). The FAA believes that
- this amendment will foster an important aeronautical education
- activity while retaining appropriate safety precautions.
- DATES: Comments must be received on or before [90 days after
- publication]. {Actual date is December 9, 1992}
-
- ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposal may be mailed or delivered
- in duplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of
- Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10), Docket
- No. [26965], 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
- Comments may be examined in the Rules Docket weekdays, except
- Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
-
- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Joseph C. White, Air
- Traffic Rules Branch, ATP-230, Federal Aviation Administration
- 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone
- (202) 267-8783.
-
- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
-
- Comments Invited
-
- Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
- rulemaking by submitting necessary written data, views, or
- arguments. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting
- the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in
- developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal.
- Communications should identify the regulatory docket or notice
- number and be submitted in duplicate to the address listed above.
- Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their
- comments on the notice must submit with those comments a
- self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement
- is made: "Comments to Docket No. [26965]." The postcard will be
- date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All
- communications received on or before the specified closing date
- for comments will be considered by the Administrator before
- taking further rulemaking action. The proposals contained in
- this notice may be changed in light of comments received. All
- comments submitted will be available, both before and after the
- closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive
- public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking
- will be filed in the docket.
-
- Availability of NPRM's
-
- Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
- to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public Affairs,
- Attention: Public Information Center, APA-430, 800 Independence
- Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-3484.
- Communications must identify the notice number of this NPRM.
- Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
- notices should also request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A
- "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System," which
- describes the application procedures.
-
- Background
-
- On September 12, 1984, the FAA announced in the Federal
- Register (49 FR 35789) a Regulatory Review Program for Part l01
- of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) and invited comments
- and recommendations as part of this review. Comments received
- during the Regulatory Review addressed the following areas of
- concern: (1) balloon operations, including moored vs. tethered
- balloon requirements, lighting requirements and operations in the
- proximity of airports; and (2) model rocket operations. Comments
- on model rockets concerned proximity of operators to airports,
- increased gross weight, and propellant standards. Response to
- the announcement of the review program was very limited, except
- for those issues regarding the operation of model rockets. This
- notice addresses only those issues related to the operation of
- unmanned (model) rockets.
-
- National Association of Rocketry
-
- On May 24, 1985, the National Association of Rocketry (NAR),
- an affiliate of the National Aeronautic Association, representing
- thousands of model rocket consumers, and the Hobby Industry
- Association (HIA), representing the manufacturers of model rocket
- kits, motors, and accessories, petitioned the FAA to consider
- rulemaking action to amend FAR Ss 101.1, Applicability. The
- petitioners seek to raise the upper weight limit on excepted
- model rockets from 16 ounces to 1,500 grams (approximately 53
- ounces) and the allowable propellant mass from 4 ounces to 125
- grams (approximately 4.4 ounces). According to the petitioners,
- these changes are based on studies conducted by the NAR and are
- recommended to help keep model rocketry in the U.S. abreast of
- advancements made in this educational aerospace hobby/sport.
-
- Section of the FAR Affected
-
- Section 101.1, in pertinent part, establishes the
- applicability of Part 101 to the operation of any unmanned
- rockets using more than 4 ounces of propellant or having a total
- weight of more than 16 ounces, including the propellant.
-
- A summary of the petitioners' request was published in the
- Federal Register on March 19, 1986 (51 FR 9458) for public
- comment. The only comment received was from one of the
- petitioners, who supported the petition.
-
- Supporting Information
-
- The petitioner stated that from 1959 to 1962, when the
- current Part 1O1 was being drafted, the NAR played a major role
- in suggesting the present limits on propellant and gross weight
- for exclusion from Part 101, Applicability. At that time, model
- rocketry was strictly an American hobby/sport. The Federation
- Aeronautical International first established its "Sporting Code
- for Space Models" in 1964. Considering the construction
- techniques, materials, and design principles of model rockets
- that existed in the 1959-1962 time period, the NAR considered
- 4 ounces of propellant and 16 ounces of gross weight to be the
- maximum values likely to be achieved in the model rocketry hobby
- in the foreseeable future. The FAA accepted these limits which
- formed the basis for the current FAR Ss 101.1.
-
- The petitioner further stated that the state of the art in
- model rocketry has progressed to the point where larger, heavier,
- and more powerful model rockets are both feasible and safe due to
- improved propellants, materials, and safety procedures. NAR
- stated that it had conducted an intensive and inclusive study of
- potential safety hazards of model rockets having increased gross
- weights. The study was undertaken by a special committee of the
- NAR that was established in 1983 and staffed by model rocketeers,
- aeronautical engineers, National Aeronautics and Space
- Administration sounding rocket experts, rocket propellant
- specialists, doctors of medicine, licensed pilots, and computer
- engineers. The study purports to validate the conclusion that no
- degradation of aviation safety will result from the proposed
- increase in propellant and rocket weights.
-
- The study included an evaluation of the effects of
- crosswinds on the launching of model rockets. It concluded that
- heavier rockets would be less susceptible to tip-over or course
- derogation from wind than the lighter rockets.
-
- The study also included an investigation regarding the
- potential of an incident between a 1,500-gram model rocket and an
- aircraft in flight. NAR's researchers assumed that any probable
- hazards to aircraft would fall in the following two areas:
- (l) airframe penetration during high-speed powered flight of
- models; and (2) foreign object damage, similar to that posed by a
- bird, during the model's low-speed drifting return to the ground
- under a miniature parachute or other recovery device.
-
- Potential for damaging an aircraft in flight
-
- The study concluded that the probability of a model rocket
- causing foreign object damage to an aircraft in flight during the
- model's slow descent to the ground, via a recovery device,
- depends on how much the model weighs, how high it flies, and how
- long it takes to return to the ground. The increase of allowable
- propellant, coupled with more powerful, modern model rocket
- motors when used with a very light rocket (less than one pound)
- could cause an increase in the maximum achievable altitude of
- only 20 percent (to 7,200 feet for a single-stage rocket and to
- 10,000 feet for a two-stage rocket). This could allow a model
- rocket to stay aloft under its recovery device for up to 10
- minutes. The probability of an aircraft encountering such a
- rocket was estimated (by the NAR special committee) to be 1 in
- 48 million flights of these high performance model rockets. When
- a maximum of 125 grams of propellant is used with a l,500-gram
- model rocket, the maximum achievable altitude is much less --
- approximately 2,400 feet. In addition, impact with an aircraft
- during the upward powered flight of a 1,500-gram model rocket
- might cause airframe damage comparable to the impact of large
- hailstones.
-
- The worst possible collision scenario that could occur would
- be during the model's slow descent phase, if it were to be
- ingested by a turbine engine. NAR noted that, since current
- regulations require aircraft turbine engines to remain
- controllable following ingestion of tire treads and 4-pound
- birds, turbine engines also should be able to continue operating
- after ingesting gravel or 1.5-pound birds. According to the
- petitioner, low density, non-metallic, high performance model
- rockets weighing up to 1,500 grams would not pose greater damage
- potential than these.
-
- To confirm the results obtained by computer analyses,
- literature searches, statistical analyses, and historical data,
- the petitioner conducted actual flight tests at a site 5 miles
- north of an airport. Sixteen high-powered, high-weight model
- rockets were launched. All models were tracked using the
- FAA-approved two station altitude/azimuth theodolite system.
- Comparisons were made between high-powered model rockets weighing
- up to 1,500 grams with 125 grams of propellant, and those
- currently excluded from regulation by the FAR. These flight
- tests confirmed the other analyses and data; however, these tests
- did not include verification of the potential for the occurrence
- of an impact with an aircraft in flight or the resulting
- consequences of such an occurrence.
-
- The final report of the NAR Committee was presented to the
- NAR Board of Trustees in February 1985. The board accepted the
- committee's report and the recommendation that NAR-permissible
- model rocket gross weights be increased to 1,500 grams and
- propellant weights to 125 grams. The report also was accepted by
- the Model Rocket Division of the HIA. The recommendations were
- forwarded to the National Fire Protection Association's (NFPA)
- committee on pyrotechnics, for their consideration in revising
- NFPA 1122 Code for Unmanned Rockets. This is a voluntary
- standard that is widely accepted by state legislatures and public
- safety officials having rulemaking powers.
-
- FAA Analysis
-
- The FAA has reviewed the NAR study as well as other
- pertinent data. The FAA also notes that the NAR estimates that
- there have been approximately 250,000 launches of model rockets
- since the inception of the sport and that the National
- Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) reports that there have been
- no midair collisions between model rockets and aircraft in
- flight. The FAA considers that it is to the public's benefit to
- foster interest in aeronautics and that model rocketry provides a
- valuable means for hobbyists to pursue that interest. The FAA
- further believes that the educational value of this activity is
- enhanced by remaining abreast of the state of the art technology.
-
- The FAA commissioned a study of its own to evaluate the
- potential for a hazard to aviation safety resulting from the
- operations of model rockets.
-
- The March 1991 final report included an analysis of the
- likelihood for damage to an aircraft in flight if impacted by a
- model rocket, as well as a conclusion of the probability of such
- an occurrence. The researchers, the Galaxy Scientific
- Corporation, of Mays Landing, NJ, made the following conclusions:
-
- Model rockets have the capability to reach the
- theoretical speed of 600 knots and the altitude of
- 4,000 feet based on the calculations performed in the
- report.
-
- Searches of FAA and NTSB data bases from 1984 to 1989
- indicate that the probability of collision between
- model rockets and aircraft is remote.
-
- The two most vulnerable types of aircraft are general
- aviation aircraft and rotorcraft, due to lower
- operational altitude and velocity and different
- structural design conditions.
-
- The results of structural analysis show that model
- rockets under present and proposed rules have the
- capability to damage aircraft, assuming that a
- collision occurs.
-
- Some operational limits for model rockets should be
- specified, (i.e., do not operate model rockets in
- controlled airspace or within 5 miles of the boundary
- of any airport). This notice would limit the
- operations of model rockets at least 5 nautical miles
- from the airports and further reduce the chance of
- collision between a model rocket and an aircraft.
-
- The study, in its entirety, has been placed in the docket
- for public inspection.
-
- Conclusions
-
- The FAA must balance considerations of advancing the study
- of and interest in aeronautics resulting from model rocket
- activities with concern for the protection of aircraft in flight.
- The Agency also must balance the remote likelihood of a collision
- between a model rocket and an aircraft and the consequences of
- such an occurrence. The FAA has concluded that the outstanding
- safety record of model rocketry to date is due, in part, to the
- establishment and compliance with voluntary standards such as the
- NAR's Model Rocket Safety Code. That code provides, in part
- for a launch safety officer to terminate activity when aircraft
- are observed entering the area where model rockets are being
- launched. The FAA also believes that if the size and mass of
- model rockets are increased, there is an increase in the
- potential for harm to an aircraft in flight should a collision
- occur. It is therefore essential to ensure that persons
- operating larger model rockets observe such safety precautions.
- The FAA has determined that it is in the public interest to
- accommodate the advancement of model rocketry with regulations
- that also will provide an adequate level of assurance that such
- rockets will not jeopardize the safety of aircraft in flight.
-
- The Proposal
-
- The FAA proposes to add Ss 101.22 to Part 1O1 of the FAR
- to allow the operation of model rockets with up to 125 grams
- (approximately 4.4 ounces) of propellant and a maximum gross
- weight of 1,500 grams (approximately 53 ounces), including
- propellant, as long as certain precautions are taken. As is now
- the case, model rocketeers still would be prohibited from
- launching rockets into, or through, clouds, from flying near
- aircraft in flight, or from being hazardous to people or
- property. The prohibition against operating such model rockets in
- controlled airspace, within 5 miles of an airport, within 1,500
- feet of any non-participant, or between sunset and sunrise,
- however, will not apply provided the person operating the model
- rocket complies with the provisions of Ss 101-25, which the FAA is
- proposing to modify in this NPRM, requiring that model rocketeers
- provide pertinent information about the operation to the nearest
- FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) facility. The FAA has determined
- that organizations that previously were excluded from the
- requirements regarding spectator proximity or night operations
- have demonstrated a very effective safety record. The FAA
- believes that reestablishing the threshold at not more than 125
- grams (approximately 4.4 ounces) of propellant and not more than
- 1500 grams (approximately 53 ounces) of total rocket weight, does
- not warrant spectator restraint or operational time prohibitions.
-
- The FAA is proposing to make an editorial change to Ss 101-25
- to clarify the intent of the existing language dealing with ..
- notification of an intended operation. The current language
- requires FAA notification "within 24 to 48 hours" of an intended
- operation. A literal interpretation of the requirement would
- allow a proponent to notify the FAA anytime preceding the actual
- time of the operation and up to 48 hours prior to the operation.
- Such interpretation is not the original intent of the
- requirement. The intent is for the FAA to receive notification
- at least 24 hours prior to the operation but no more than 48
- hours prior to the operation. The 24-hour prior notification is
- the minimum necessary for the FAA and airport management, as
- appropriate, to advise pilots planning to operate in the area
- where unmanned rocket operations are planned. The maximum 48-
- hour notification is the optimum amount of time that a proponent
- would have finalized his/her intended operation. Therefore, the
- FAA believes it minimizes the revisions to advisories given to
- pilots concerning a planned unmanned rocket operation.
- Accordingly, the language in the rule would be changed to reflect
- the original intent of the rule.
-
- Regulatory Evaluation Summary
-
- Introduction
-
- This section summarizes the full regulatory evaluation that
- provides more detailed estimates of the economic consequences of
- this regulatory action. This summary and the full evaluation
- quantify, to the extent practicable, anticipated benefits and
- estimated costs to the private sector, consumers, and Federal,
- State, and local governments.
-
- Executive Order 12291, dated February 17, 1981, directs
- Federal agencies to promulgate new regulations or modify existing
- regulations only if potential benefits to society outweigh
- potential costs for each regulatory change. The order also
- requires the preparation of a Regulatory Impact Analysis of all
- Rmajor" rules except those responding to emergency situations or
- other narrowly defined exigencies. A "major" rule is one that is
- controversial or likely to result in an annual effect on the
- economy of $100 million or more, a major increase in consumer
- costs, or a significant adverse effect on competition.
-
- The FAA has determined that this rule is not "major" as
- defined in the Executive Order; therefore, a full regulatory
- analysis, which includes the identification and evaluation of
- cost-reducing alternatives to this rule, has not been prepared.
- Instead, the agency has prepared a more concise document, termed
- a regulatory evaluation, that analyzes only this rule without
- identifying alternatives. In addition to a summary of the
- regulatory evaluation, this section also contains a summary of
- the regulatory flexibility determination required by the 1980
- Regulatory Flexibility Act (P.L. 96-354) and an international
- trade impact assessment. If more economic information is desired
- than is contained in this summary, the reader is referred to the
- full regulatory evaluation contained in the docket.
-
- Benefits
-
- The proposed rule likely would provide benefits. The FAA .
- has determined that the proposed regulations will accommodate the
- advancement of model rocketry and simultaneously provide an
- adequate level of assurance that such rockets will not jeopardize
- the safety of aircraft in flight.
-
- Costs
-
- The proposed rule for unmanned rockets consists of
- provisions that specify the requirements for operating certain
- model rockets (rockets using not more that 125 grams of
- propellant; made of paper, wood, or breakable plastic; containing
- no substantial metal parts, and weighing not more than 1,500
- grams including propellant). The proposed rule is designed to
- accommodate the advancement of model rocketry with regulations
- that also will provide an adequate level of assurance so that
- such rockets will not jeopardize the safety of aircraft in
- flight.
-
- The FAA estimates that the proposed changes in the NPRM
- would have no cost impact to users of model rockets. In fact,
- the proposed changes might produce a cost savings. The savings
- associated with these changes, however, are considered negligible
- and unquantifiable.
-
- This provision may impose minor costs on the FAA. Persons
- operating model rockets would have to provide the information
- required in existing Ss 101.25 to the airport manager and to the
- FAA ATC facility that is nearest the place of the intended
- operation. The FAA would incur costs associated with receiving,
- recording, and evaluating the material that has been received.
- The FAA believes that these costs would be minor.
-
- Conclusions
-
- Based on the fact that there are little or no compliance
- costs coupled with the potential benefits, the FAA concludes that
- the proposed rule would be cost-beneficial.
-
- International Trade Impact Analysis
-
- The proposed amendments would apply to users of model
- rockets in the United States only. There would be no economic
- impact resulting from any of the proposed amendments and the FAA
- has determined that these regulations would not have an impact on
- international trade, if promulgated.
-
- Regulatory Flexibility Determination
-
- The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 was enacted by
- Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
- disproportionately burdened by government regulations. The RFA
- requires agencies to review rules that may have "a significant
- cost impact on a substantial number of small entities."
-
- With regard to this regulatory evaluation, there would be no
- cost associated with any of the proposed amendments. The FAA has
- determined that the proposed amendments contained in this NPRM
- would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
- number of small entities.
-
- Federalism Implications
-
- The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial
- direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the
- national government and the States, or on the distribution of
- power and responsibilities among the various levels of
- government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 12612,
- it is determined that such a regulation does not have federalism
- implications warranting the preparation of a Federalism
- Assessment.
-
- Conclusion
-
- For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and based on the
- findings in the Regulatory Flexibility Determination and the
- International Trade Impact Analysis, the FAA has determined that
- this proposed regulation is not major under Executive Order
- 12291. In addition, the FAA certifies that this proposal, if
- adopted, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
- negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the
- criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This proposal is not
- considered significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and
- Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979). An initial
- regulatory evaluation of the proposal, including a Regulatory
- Flexibility Determination and Trade Impact Analysis, has been
- placed in the docket. A copy may be obtained by contacting the
- person identified under "FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. "
-
- List of Subjects In 14 CPR 101
-
- Moored balloons; Kites; Unmanned free balloons; Unmanned rockets.
-
- THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT
-
- In consideration of the foregoing, the FAA proposes to amend Part
- l01 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, as follows:
-
- l. The authority citation for Part 101 continues to read as
- follows:
-
- Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1348, 1354, 1372, 1421, 1442, 1443,
- 1472, 1510, and 1522.; E.O. 11514; 49 U.S.C. 106(g).
-
- SUBPART C - UNMANNED ROCKETS
-
- 2. Section 101.22 is added to read as follows:
-
- Ss 101.22 Special provisions for large model rockets.
-
- Persons operating model rockets that use not more than 125
- grams of propellant; that are made of paper, wood. or breakable
- plastic; that contain no substantial metal parts, and that weigh
- not more than 1,500 grams, including the propellant, need not
- comply with subparagraphs 101-23 (b), (c), (g), and (h) provided:
-
- (a) that person complies with all provisions of Ss 101-25;
- and
-
- (b) the operation is not conducted within 5 nautical miles
- of an airport runway or other landing area unless the information
- required in Ss 101.25 is also provided to the manager of that
- airport.
-
- 3. Section 101.25 is amended by revising the introductory text
- and paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) to read as follows:
-
- Section 101.25 Notice requirements
-
- No person may operate an unmanned rocket unless that person gives
- the following information to the FAA ATC facility nearest to the
- place of intended operation no less than 24 hours prior to and no
- more than 48 hours prior to beginning the operation:
-
- (a) The names and addresses of the operators, except when
- there are multiple participants at a single event, a single name
- may be designated for all operations in the event;
-
- (b) The estimated number of rockets to be operated;
-
- (c) The estimated size and the estimated weight of each
- rocket; and
-
- (d) The estimated highest altitude or flight level to which
- each rocket will be operated.
-
- Issued in Washington, DC, on September 2, 1992
-
- L. Lane Speck
- Director, Air Traffic
- Rules and Procedures Service
-
- --
-
- cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com --If you believe that I speak for my company,
- OR cdt@vos.stratus.com write today for my special Investors' Packet...
-