The debate over how low balloons should be allowed to fly has been reignited with the recent petition to amend §91.119, minimum safe altitudes, of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
Proponents and opponents of changing the FARs to allow balloons to fly lower have been hotly debating for more than a decade. Much of the momentum to change the regulation has stemmed from balloonists being cited by the FAA for low flying. An unsuccessful defense has lead to pilot certificate suspensions from 30-365 days. The argument in favor of changing the standard for balloons has centered on the regulations being written for fixed wing aircraft, the necessity to use air currents in the boundary layer for navigation, and lower is safer for balloons.
Those who have opposed any changes to the current requirements fear that allowing balloons to fly lower will create landowner relation problems, the result of which will be restrictive laws enacted in local municipalities. Those laws could have the potential of eliminating ballooning in certain areas of the country.
The latest debate arose when, in November of last year, a petition was filed with the Federal Aviation Administration to add a new paragraph to FAR §91.119, minimum safe altitudes. The petitioner, Lyle Alexander, a balloon pilot and FAA employee at the Scottsdale, Arizona, Flight Standards District Office, asks that balloons be allowed to operate below minimum altitudes when the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the ground. Specifically the petition (Docket #28443) seeks to add a new paragraph to the existing regulation as follows:
"Balloons may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) and (c) of this section if the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface."
The Balloon Federation of America has said that it is monitoring the progress of this petition. The organization is also soliciting comments from the balloon community on whether lowering the minimum altitude requirements for balloons is a good idea. Executive Director, Wally Miller, in an interview in Balloon Life last month, said, "That is something that balloonists want and something that we are going to fight for."
Interestingly, it was the BFA that petitioned the FAA, June 3, 1986, to amend §91.119 allowing free balloons to operate at less than the minimum safe altitudes prescribed in paragraphs (b) and (c), provided that the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface.
The BFA, in its 1986 petition, requested an additional subparagraph (e) be added to read:
"(e) Free balloons may be operated at less than the minimums specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section if the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface."
Thomas A.F. Sheppard, as President, signed the petition.
By letter dated May 4, 1990, Jacques W. Soukup, the then president, resubmitted a revised version of the original petition for rulemaking relative to the additional subparagraph (e) to read:
"(e) Free balloons may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section:
"(1) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, at an altitude of 500 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 500 feet of the balloon.
"(2) Over other than congested areas, at an altitude of 200 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the balloon may not be operated closer than 200 feet to any person, vessel or structure."
In a letter dated April 18, 1991, Thomas Accardi, Acting Director of Flight Standards Service, denied the Balloon Federation of America’s petition. Until this April very few people were aware that the petition had been denied. The BFA never informed its members by publishing this information in any of its periodicals.
In light of the recent discussions regarding balloons being allowed to fly at lower minimum altitudes Tom Sheppard posted to the balloon mailing list over the Internet the text of denial of the BFA’s petition.
To access how the FAA might react to the petition to amend §91.119 and whether the amended language is necessary to conduct balloon flight, Balloon Life is reprinting excerpts from two documents. The first is the denial of the BFA’s 1986 petition. The second is the National Transportation Safety Board’s decision regarding Administrator v. Prior.
In the latter article the NTSB explained in unusual detail how it arrived at its decision, citing prior precedent cases and explaining why it took the actions it did.
This NTSB case is important in that it provides a guidance to how the FAA applies §91.119 and §91.13 to balloon operations involving low flight and landing sites. In view of the petition to lower minimum altitudes, the case offers an insight into arguments against the amendment which will have to be overcome.
Likewise, the former article presents the Administrator’s position and reasoning. To affect any change, the arguments will have to overcome the rationale used in 1991. Mr. Accardi, then acting Director, today holds the title of Director of Flight Standards Service.