Warning! Low-level flight over west coast marine sanctuaries prohibited

[Pilawt]

NOAA has issued a "Final Rule" that it has taken over the airspace above the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, and certain coastal sanctuaries in California, and we better stay out. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-26/pdf/2012-1593.pdf

Fines for violations, by the way, can go up to $100,000. That's from NOAA; there's no risk of FAA enforcement action because no FAA regulations are involved.

"Highlights" of this rule:

-- The regulations for the Monterey Bay and Olympic Coast sanctuaries prohibit overflights below a certain level within designated zones— 1000 feet in Monterey Bay and 2000 feet in Olympic Coast, as noted above— without requiring a specific showing that marine mammals or seabirds have been disturbed.

-- The regulations for each sanctuary now establish a rebuttable presumption that flying motorized aircraft below the existing minimum altitudes within any of the existing zones results in the disturbance of marine mammals or seabirds. This means that if a pilot were observed flying below the established altitude within a designated zone, it would be presumed that marine mammals or seabirds had been disturbed and that a violation of sanctuary regulations had been committed. This presumption of disturbance could be overcome by contrary evidence that disturbance did not, in fact, occur (e.g., evidence that no marine mammals or seabirds were present in the area at the time of the low overflight).

-- The FAA, in a letter concerning this rulemaking to the Aircraft Operators and Pilots Association (AOPA), stated that it does not view NOAA’s rulemaking action as an airspace regulation nor as an infringement on the FAA’s stated authority.

-- Comment: The final rule for the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary should exempt flight operations for the purposes of taking off and landing at Copalis, Quillayute, or Sekiu airports. Response: NOAA agrees that exemptions for flight operations to and from Copalis airport may be necessary because the proximity of the airport to the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary makes it difficult for pilots to comply with sanctuary regulations when merely flying in and out of the airport. However, since such a change in ONMS regulations is beyond the scope of this action, NOAA will consider this in a separate rulemaking action, subject to review and comment. NOAA disagrees, however, that exemptions are necessary for Quillayute or Sekiu airports because both airports are far enough inland that no exemption is necessary. The configuration and location of Quilayute Airport (KUIL) does not require general aviation aircraft to descend below 2,000 feet above ground level (AGL) over the ocean during downwind or straight-in approach to this airport’s only open runway, Runway 04/22 (RWY 04/22). Sekiu Airport (11S) is located on the Strait of Juan de Fuca and is over 10 nautical miles from the boundary of Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.

This "response" by NOAA is incredible:

Comment: The Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary regulation would create a safety concern. Cloud ceilings are typically at 2000 to 2500 feet in this sanctuary. FAA requires pilots to remain 500 feet below clouds to maintain safe flight, but doing so would routinely violate NOAA’s regulation. Response: This rule does not change the applicable long-standing minimum altitudes that are codified in the regulations for the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary and the national marine sanctuaries off California. These existing regulations have not created a safety issue of this nature in the 18 years since OCNMS was designated. Nonetheless, if weather conditions are such that maintaining visual flight rules (VFR) cannot be achieved while avoiding the flight ceiling, rather than violating the overflight regulations the pilot could instead choose to do any of the following: (1) Avoid flying over sanctuary waters by flying inland; (2) fly instrument flight rules (IFR) through the clouds; or (3) fly above the clouds.

AOPA posted this (http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/article...-a-gamble.html):

AOPA has alerted and been asking the FAA and NOAA for a graphic that depicts the current boundaries of the sanctuaries detailed in the rule. The real kicker is that pilots have no idea that the sanctuary boundaries depicted on the current chart and those detailed in the NOAA final rule do not match.

Be careful out there.

[John Hodges]

I wonder if any science supports the conclusion that overflight disturbs animal life, or it is just speculation.