Final Rule Leads To Confusion, Possible Unintended Violations
For Pilots
A new rule by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) usurps the FAA’s authority to regulate
airspace and could leave pilots unintentionally violating a
restricted zone that does not appear on any current aeronautical
charts, according to two of the nation's largest pilot advocacy
groups. In response, the EAA and AOPA have jointly sent a letter to
the two federal agencies urging no enforcement action will be taken
until proper coordination and education with the aviation community
is completed.
NOAA’s new rule, which amends overflight regulations for
the Channel Islands, Monterey Bay, Gulf of the Farallones, and
Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuaries off the coast of northern
California, is not officially an airspace restriction according to
NOAA and FAA. However, EAA and AOPA maintain that NOAA established
the overflight rule in violation of federal law, which states that
FAA is the sole U.S. airspace authority.
In their letter, EAA and AOPA maintain the NOAA action
“sets a hazardous precedent for other government agencies to
follow” because it allows those agencies to establish flight
rules without coordination with FAA through its usual rulemaking
procedures. “The NOAA rule does not align with the existing
charted sanctuary boundaries, nor does it mirror FAA’s
guidance found in the FAA Advisory Circular 91-36D, Visual Flight
Rules in the Vicinity of Sensitive Areas,” wrote EAA and AOPA
in their letter, which was signed by Sean Elliott, EAA’s vice
president of advocacy and safety, and Heidi Williams, AOPA vice
president of air traffic services and modernization.
EAA and AOPA also note that NOAA has provided no resources to
educate the aviation community about the change and will rely on
the FAA to do so. NOAA had adequate time to coordinate its efforts
with the FAA to ensure compliance by aviators. NOAA also did not
share the boundaries of the sanctuary with EAA and AOPA when
requested to do so. As written, the NOAA rule imposes the same
operational restrictions and civil penalties as FAA-issued
restrictions.
“Pilots are now facing fines of up to $100,000 for violating
a regulation where details of the boundaries have been withheld
graphically until a later date when the agencies can
collaborate,” the EAA/AOPA letter noted.
“AOPA and EAA remain committed to educating and ensuring
members adopt ‘flying friendly’ procedures over any
noise sensitive areas,” the letter continued. However, flight
safety concerns must take priority and agencies without
jurisdiction over flight safety – such as NOAA – should
not impose restrictions that are not in alignment with the FAA, the
agency tasked with flight safety and airspace regulation.