Proposed Rule2026-22782
Flight Abort Burden Reducing Clarification on End of Flight Safety Limits
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentFederal Aviation Administration
Abstract
FAA proposes to amend its commercial space launch and reentry licensing regulations to streamline the licensing process and reduce regulatory burden for license applicants. Specifically, FAA proposes to clarify the conditions under which a vehicle operator is not required to abort a flight.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 215 (Monday, November 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 215 (Monday, November 9, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70817-70821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-22782]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 450
[Docket No.: FAA-2026-9943; Notice No. 26-21]
RIN 2120-AM37
Flight Abort Burden Reducing Clarification on End of Flight
Safety Limits
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FAA proposes to amend its commercial space launch and reentry
licensing regulations to streamline the licensing process and reduce
regulatory burden for license applicants. Specifically, FAA proposes to
clarify the conditions under which a vehicle operator is not required
to abort a flight.
[[Page 70818]]
DATES: Send comments on or before December 9, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2026-9943
using any of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> and
follow the online instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
<bullet> Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations; U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, 5th
Floor (W58-213), Washington, DC 20590-0001.
<bullet> Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W58-213 of the West Building, 5th Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
<bullet> Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at (202) 493-2251.
Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to inform its rulemaking process better. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
<a href="http://www.dot.gov/privacy">www.dot.gov/privacy</a>.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> at any time. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W58-213 of
the West Building 5th Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa E. Cacciatore, Office of
Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 880-1489;
email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#da96b3a9bbf49ff499bbb9b9b3bbaeb5a8bf9abcbbbbf4bdb5ac"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="521e3b21337c177c113331313b33263d2037123433337c353d24">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
In accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 14335 ``Enabling
Competition in the Commercial Space Industry,'' FAA proposes to amend
its commercial space launch and reentry regulations at 14 CFR part 450
to further streamline the commercial licensing process. Currently, 14
CFR 450.108(e) provides that a vehicle operator using flight abort as a
hazard control strategy is not required to initiate flight abort to
protect against high consequence events once certain conditions are
met. The proposed rule would clarify that the exception in paragraph
(e) applies only to a phase of flight in which the conditions are
present.
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended and codified at
51 U.S.C. 50901-50924, authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to
oversee, license, and regulate commercial launch and reentry
activities, and the operation of launch and reentry sites within the
United States (U.S.) or as carried out by U.S. citizens. Section 50905
directs the Secretary to exercise this responsibility consistent with
public health and safety, safety of property, and the national security
and foreign policy interests of the United States. In addition, section
50903 requires the Secretary to encourage, facilitate, and promote
commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector. As
codified in 49 CFR 1.83(b), the Secretary has delegated authority to
the FAA Administrator to carry out these functions.
III. Background
FAA has established commercial space regulations governing
licensing of launch and reentry in 14 CFR chapter III. On December 10,
2020, FAA issued a final rule consolidating all substantive launch and
reentry licensing regulations into a new part 450 (85 FR 79566) that
went into effect on March 10, 2021.
On August 13, 2025, the President issued E.O. 14335, ``Enabling
Competition in the Commercial Space Industry,'' requiring the Secretary
of Transportation to ``reevaluate, amend, or rescind'' the part 450
regulations for the purpose of further streamlining the commercial
licensing process. This proposed rule is being published in furtherance
of this E.O.
Section 450.101(c) provides that an operator may use flight abort
as a hazard control strategy to protect against a high consequence
event in uncontrolled areas. Flight abort accomplishes a controlled
ending to vehicle flight, such as through explosive destruct. Section
450.108 provides requirements for flight abort, including requirements
for flight safety limits. Flight safety limits, in this context, define
the criteria under which a vehicle operator must initiate flight abort.
For some mission scenarios, at some point in flight, flight abort
can no longer mitigate risk, and applicants may wish to turn off the
flight abort system to prevent accidental initiation of the abort
system. This possibility is addressed by Sec. 450.108(e), which states
that a flight does not need to be aborted to protect against high
consequence events beginning immediately after critical vehicle
parameters are validated, if the vehicle is able to achieve a useful
mission, and if, for the remainder of flight: (1) flight abort would
not materially decrease the risk from a high consequence event; and (2)
there are no key flight safety events.
To meet the first condition that flight abort would not materially
decrease the risk of a high consequence event for the remainder of
flight, an operator should perform a comparison of the risk (i.e.,
expected casualties (E<INF>C</INF>)) with and without flight abort from
failure modes that produce conditional expected casualties
(CE<INF>C</INF>) greater than 0.01. If flight abort would not reduce
E<INF>C</INF> associated with each failure mode materially, then this
condition is met. To meet the second condition, an operator must
demonstrate that the remainder of flight does not include any ``key
flight safety event,'' which is defined in 14 CFR 401.7 to mean ``a
flight activity that has an increased likelihood of causing a failure
compared with other portions of flight.'' However, even if these
conditions are satisfied for the remainder of flight, an operator is
only permitted to switch off the flight abort system if, during flight,
the operator is able to validate ``critical vehicle parameters,''
meaning parameters that demonstrate the vehicle is capable of
completing safe flight through the upcoming phase of flight where
population is exposed to hazardous debris effects from reasonably
foreseeable failure modes.
IV. Discussion of the Proposal
The proposed rule maintains the essential requirements and
structure of Sec. 450.108(e), with two minor revisions. First, the
proposed rule would change the title of Sec. 450.108(e) from ``End of
flight abort'' to ``End of flight safety limits'' to match the
intention of the paragraph more closely. Paragraph (e) does not require
an operator to turn off flight abort capability or eliminate flight
abort as a hazard control strategy, as unintentionally suggested by the
current title, but rather describes conditions under which an operator
is not required to set flight safety limits to protect against high
consequence events in uncontrolled areas during some subsequent phases
of flight.
Second, the proposed rule would also scope paragraph (e) to apply
only to a phase of flight rather than ``the remainder of flight,'' as
the paragraph currently states. Current paragraph (e) was drafted with
the understanding that most operators would only turn off the flight
abort capability at the end of a
[[Page 70819]]
flight, such as the phase immediately before orbital insertion.
However, FAA anticipates that operators may seek to turn off flight
abort capability during one phase of flight and turn it back on during
a subsequent phase. As such, this revision would provide additional
flexibility to operators while preserving public safety by explicitly
accommodating this practice. This proposal, therefore, would amend
paragraph (e) to say that a flight does not need to be aborted for the
remainder of a phase of flight if the specified conditions are present
during that phase.
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
E.O. 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and E.O. 13563
(``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') require agencies to
regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on
society.'' The Office of Management and Budget has determined this
proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
The proposed rule would change the title of Sec. 450.108(e) from
``End of flight abort'' to ``End of flight safety limits'' to match the
intention of the paragraph more closely. Paragraph (e) does not require
an operator to turn off flight abort capability or eliminate flight
abort as an option during any subsequent phase of flight, as suggested
by the current title, but rather describes conditions under which an
operator is not required to set flight safety limits to protect against
high consequence events in uncontrolled areas during a specified phase
of flight. In addition, the proposed rule would amend Sec. 450.108(e)
so that the section only applies to a phase of flight rather than ``the
remainder of flight,'' as the paragraph currently states. This proposed
rule would not impose incremental costs. However, there may be minimal
cost savings. FAA estimates that the change would save FAA time in
providing guidance per licensee. The proposed rule would provide
operators the additional flexibility to turn off flight abort
capability during one phase of flight and turn it back on during a
subsequent phase of flight. In addition, FAA estimates that the change
would also save licensees time in seeking and receiving guidance. FAA
requests public comments on these assumptions.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612),
agencies must prepare and make available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the
rulemaking on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small government jurisdictions). No regulatory
flexibility analysis is required, however, if the head of an agency
certifies that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. FAA has concluded and
hereby certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; therefore,
an analysis is not included.
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
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. 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 as 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, they be the basis for U.S. standards.
FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and
determined that it would not create unnecessary obstacles to the
foreign commerce of the United States.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State,
local, or Tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs
without the Federal Government having first provided the funds to pay
those costs. FAA determined the proposed rule would not result in the
expenditure of $193,000,000 or more ($100,000,000 adjusted for
inflation using the most current Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product) by State, local, or Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector, in any one year.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection
burdens imposed on the public. FAA has determined there would be no new
requirement for information collection associated with this proposed
rule.
F. International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. FAA has
determined there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that
correspond to these proposed regulations.
G. Environmental Analysis
The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this
notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.). FAA has determined
this rule is categorically excluded pursuant to FAA Order 1050.1G.
Categorical exclusions are categories of actions FAA has determined
normally do not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment and therefore do not require either an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). In analyzing
the applicability of a categorical exclusion, FAA must also consider
whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would warrant the
preparation of an EA or EIS. This proposed rulemaking, which would
clarify the conditions under which a vehicle operator is not required
to abort a flight, is categorically excluded pursuant to FAA Order
1050.1G, Appendix B, Paragraph B-2.6(f), which categorically excludes
issuance of regulatory documents. FAA does not anticipate any
environmental impacts, and there are no extraordinary circumstances
present in connection with this rulemaking.
VI. E.O. Determinations
A. E.O. 13132, Federalism
FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of E.O. 13132, Federalism. FAA has determined this action
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the
relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the
[[Page 70820]]
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, and, therefore, would not have federalism implications.
B. E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Consistent with E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments,\1\ and FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian
and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and Procedures,\2\ FAA
ensures Federally Recognized Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity
to provide meaningful and timely input regarding proposed Federal
actions that have the potential to affect uniquely or significantly
their respective Tribes. At this point, FAA has not identified any
unique or significant effects, environmental or otherwise, on Tribes
resulting from this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 65 FR 67249 (November 6, 2000).
\2\ FAA Order No. 1210.20 (January 28, 2004), available at:
<a href="http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf">www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. E.O. 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
FAA analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). FAA has determined it would not be
a ``significant energy action'' under the E.O. and would not be likely
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy.
D. E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation
E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation,
promotes international regulatory cooperation to (1) meet shared
challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental,
and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or (2) prevent unnecessary
differences in regulatory requirements. FAA has analyzed this action
under the policies and agency responsibilities of E.O. 13609 and has
determined this action would have no effect on international regulatory
cooperation.
E. E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be an
E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.
VII. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
FAA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments, data, or views. FAA also invites comments
relating to the economic, environmental, or federalism impacts that
might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should submit only one time if comments are filed electronically, or
commenters should send only one copy of written comments if comments
are filed in writing.
FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rule. Before acting on this proposal, FAA will
consider all comments it receives on or before the closing date for
comments. FAA will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
FAA may change this proposal in light of the comments it receives.
B. Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important you clearly
designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your
submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' FAA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be
sent to the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document. Any commentary FAA receives that is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.
C. Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of this NPRM, all comments received, any final rule, and all
background material may be viewed online at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> using
the docket number listed above. Electronic retrieval help and
guidelines are available on the website. It is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of this document may also
be downloaded from the Office of the Federal Register's website at
<a href="http://www.federalregister.gov">www.federalregister.gov</a> and the Government Publishing Office's website
at <a href="http://www.govinfo.gov">www.govinfo.gov</a>. A copy may also be found at FAA's Regulations and
Policies website at <a href="http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies">www.faa.gov/regulations_policies</a>.
Copies may also be obtained 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) 267-9677.
Requesters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
All documents FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in
the electronic docket for this rulemaking.
D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, Mar. 29, 1996) requires FAA to comply
with small entity requests for information or advice about compliance
with statutes and regulations within its jurisdiction. A small entity
with questions regarding this document may contact its local FAA
official or the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
heading at the beginning of the preamble. To find out more about SBREFA
on the internet, visit <a href="http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/">www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/</a>.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 450
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Environmental protection,
Investigations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
The Proposed Amendments
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend chapter III of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 450--LAUNCH AND REENTRY LICENSE REQUIREMENTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 450 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. Chapter 509.
[[Page 70821]]
0
2. Revise Sec. 450.108(e) to read as follows:
Sec. 450.108 Flight abort.
* * * * *
(e) End of flight safety limits. A flight does not need to be
aborted to protect against high consequence events in uncontrolled
areas for the remainder of a phase of flight beginning immediately
after critical vehicle parameters are validated, if the vehicle is able
to achieve a useful mission and the following conditions are met for
the remainder of the phase:
* * * * *
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 51
U.S.C. chapter 509 in Washington, DC.
Anh Minh Ngoc Nguyen,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Commercial Space
Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2026-22782 Filed 11-6-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 9, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.