31886 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

§ 4274.304 Prior loans. 

Any loan made under this program 

prior to September 2, 2014 may submit 

to the Agency a written request for an 

irrevocable election to have the loan 

serviced in accordance with this 

subpart. 

■ 9. Section 4274.331 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 4274.331 Loan limits. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) The intermediary is promptly 

relending all collections from loans 

made from its IRP revolving fund in 

excess of what is needed for required 

debt service, reasonable administrative 

costs approved by the Agency, and a 

reasonable reserve for debt service and 

uncollectible accounts. The 

intermediary provides documentation to 

demonstrate that funds available for 

relending do not exceed the greater of 

$150,000 or the total amount of loans 

closed during a calendar quarter on 

average, over the last 12 months. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Section 4274.332 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(4) to 

read as follows: 

§ 4274.332 Post award requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) The intermediary must submit an 

annual budget of proposed 

administrative costs for Agency 

approval. The annual budget should 

itemize cash income and cash out-flow. 

Projected cash income should consist of, 

but is not limited to, collection of 

principal repayment, interest 

repayment, interest earnings on 

deposits, fees, and other income. 

Projected cash out-flow should consist 

of, but is not limited to, principal and 

interest payments, reserve for bad debt, 

and an itemization of administrative 

costs to operate the IRP revolving fund. 

Proceeds received from the collection of 

principal repayment cannot be used for 

administrative expenses. The amount 

removed from the IRP revolving fund for 

administrative costs in any year must be 

reasonable, must not exceed the actual 

cost of operating the IRP revolving fund, 

including loan servicing and providing 

technical assistance, and must not 

exceed the amount approved by the 

Agency in the intermediary’s annual 

budget. 

* * * * * 

(4) Any cash in the IRP revolving fund 

from any source that is not needed for 

debt service, approved administrative 

costs, or reasonable reserves must be 

available for additional loans to ultimate 

recipients. Funds may not be used for 

any investments in securities or 

certificates of deposit of over 30-day 

duration without the concurrence of 

Rural Development. If funds in excess of 

$250,000 have been unused to make 

loans to ultimate recipients for 6 months 

or more, those funds will be returned to 

Rural Development unless Rural 

Development provides an exception to 

the intermediary. Any exception would 

be based on evidence satisfactory to 

Rural Development that every effort is 

being made by the intermediary to 

utilize the IRP funding in conformance 

with program objectives. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Section 4274.338 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(9) and adding 

paragraph (b)(10) to read as follows: 

§ 4274.338 Loan agreements between the 

Agency and the Intermediary. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(9) If any part of the loan has not been 

used in accordance with the 

intermediary’s work plan by a date 3 

years from the date of the loan 

agreement, the Agency may cancel the 

approval of any funds not yet delivered 

to the intermediary and the 

intermediary will return, as an extra 

payment on the loan, any funds 

delivered to the intermediary that have 

not been used by the intermediary in 

accordance with the work plan. The 

Agency, at its sole discretion, may allow 

the intermediary additional time to use 

the loan funds. Regular loan payments 

will be based on the amount of funds 

actually drawn by the intermediary. 

(10) For IRP intermediaries, IRP funds 

in excess of $250,000 that have not been 

used to make loans to ultimate 

recipients for 6 months or more will be 

returned to Rural Development unless 

Rural Development provides an 

exception to the intermediary. Any 

exception would be based on evidence 

satisfactory to Rural Development that 

every effort is being made by the 

intermediary to utilize the IRP funding 

in conformance with program 

objectives. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Section 4274.361 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 4274.361 Requests to make loans to 

ultimate recipients. 

(a) An intermediary may use revolved 

funds to make loans to ultimate 

recipients in accordance with 

§ 4274.314(b) without obtaining prior 

Agency concurrence. Prior Agency 

concurrence is required when an 

intermediary proposes to use Agency 

IRP loan funds to make a loan to an 

ultimate recipient. 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 20, 2014. 

Douglas J. O’Brien. 

Deputy Under Secretary, Rural Development. 

Dated: May 15, 2014. 

Michael T. Scuse, 

Under Secretary, Farm and Foreign 

Agricultural Services. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12632 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0329; Notice No. 25– 

14–03–SC] 

Special Conditions: Bombardier 

Aerospace, Models BD–500–1A10 and 

BD–500–1A11 Series Airplanes; Tire 

Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed special 

conditions. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes special 

conditions for the Bombardier 

Aerospace Models BD–500–1A10 and 

BD–500–1A11 series airplanes. These 

airplanes will have a novel or unusual 

design feature associated with the use of 

carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) 

for most of the wing fuel tank structure, 

which, when impacted by tire debris, 

may resist penetration or rupture 

differently from aluminum wing skins. 

The applicable airworthiness 

regulations do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for this 

design feature. These proposed special 

conditions contain the additional safety 

standards that the Administrator 

considers necessary to establish a level 

of safety equivalent to that established 

by the existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before July 18, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2014–0329 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 31887 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov/, 

including any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot. 

gov/. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov/at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Margaret Langsted, FAA, Propulsion 

and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM– 

112, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington, 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2677; 

facsimile 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. 

We will consider all comments we 

receive on or before the closing date for 

comments. We may change these special 

conditions based on the comments we 

receive. 

Background 

On December 10, 2009, Bombardier 

Aerospace applied for a type certificate 

for their new Models BD–500–1A10 and 

BD–500–1A11 series airplanes (hereafter 

collectively referred to as ‘‘CSeries’’). 

The CSeries airplanes are swept-wing 

monoplanes with an aluminum alloy 

fuselage sized for 5-abreast seating. 

Passenger capacity is designated as 110 

for the Model BD–500–1A10 and 125 for 

the Model BD–500–1A11. Maximum 

takeoff weight is 131,000 pounds for the 

Model BD–500–1A10 and 144,000 

pounds for the Model BD–500–1A11. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, 

Bombardier Aerospace must show that 

the CSeries airplanes meet the 

applicable provisions of part 25, as 

amended by Amendments 25–1 through 

25–129 thereto. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for the CSeries airplanes because of a 

novel or unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the model for which they 

are issued. Should the type certificate 

for that model be amended later to 

include any other model that 

incorporates the same or similar novel 

or unusual design feature, the special 

conditions would also apply to the other 

model under § 21.101. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, the CSeries airplanes must 

comply with the fuel vent and exhaust 

emission requirements of 14 CFR part 

34 and the noise certification 

requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the 

FAA must issue a finding of regulatory 

adequacy under § 611 of Public Law 92– 

574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’ 

The FAA issues special conditions, as 

defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance 

with § 11.38, and they become part of 

the type-certification basis under 

§ 21.17(a)(2). 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The CSeries airplanes will incorporate 

the following novel or unusual design 

features: The use of carbon fiber 

reinforced plastic (CFRP) for most of the 

wing fuel tank structure. The ability of 

aluminum wing skins to resist 

penetration or rupture when impacted 

by tire debris is understood from 

extensive experience, but the ability of 

CFRP construction to resist these 

hazards has not been established. There 

are no existing regulations that 

adequately establish a level of safety 

with respect to the performance of the 

composite materials used in the 

construction of wing fuel tanks. It 

requires the consideration of fuel tank 

penetration, fuel leaks, discrete source 

damage tolerance, and the effects of 

shock waves generated by tire debris 

impact. 

Discussion 

Accidents have resulted from 

uncontrolled fires caused by fuel leaks 

following penetration or rupture of the 

lower wing by fragments of tires or from 

uncontained engine failure. The 

Concorde accident in 2000 is the most 

notable example. That accident 

demonstrated an unanticipated failure 

mode in an airplane with an unusual 

transport airplane configuration. Impact 

to the lower wing surface by tire debris 

induced pressure waves within the fuel 

tank that resulted in fuel leakage and 

fire. Regulatory authorities subsequently 

required modifications to the Concorde 

to improve impact resistance of the 

lower wing or means to retain fuel if the 

primary fuel retention means is 

damaged. 

In another incident, a Boeing Model 

747 tire burst during an aborted takeoff 

from Honolulu, Hawaii. That tire debris 

penetrated a fuel tank access cover, 

causing substantial fuel leakage. 

Passengers were evacuated down the 

emergency chutes into pools of fuel that 

fortunately had not ignited. 

These accidents highlight deficiencies 

in the existing regulations pertaining to 

fuel retention following impact of the 

fuel tanks by tire fragments. Following 

a 1985 Boeing Model 737 accident in 

Manchester, England, in which a fuel 

tank access panel was penetrated by 

engine debris, the FAA amended 14 

CFR 25.963 to require fuel tank access 

panels that are resistant to both tire and 

engine debris (engine debris is 

addressed elsewhere). This regulation, 

§ 25.963(e), only addressed the fuel tank 

access covers since service experience at 

the time showed that the lower wing 

skin of a conventional, subsonic 

airplane provided adequate inherent 

capability to resist tire and engine 

debris threats. More specifically, that 

regulation requires showing by analysis 

or tests that the access covers ‘‘. . . 

minimize penetration and deformation 

by tire fragments, low energy engine 

debris, or other likely debris.’’ Advisory 

Circular (AC) 25.963–1, Fuel Tank 

Access Covers, describes the region of 

the wing that is vulnerable to impact 

damage from these sources and provides 

a method to substantiate that the rule 

has been met for tire fragments. No 

specific requirements were established 

for the contiguous wing areas into 

which the access covers are installed, 

because of the inherent ability of 

conventional aluminum wing skins to 

resist penetration by tire debris. AC 

25.963–1 specifically notes, ‘‘The access 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31888 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

covers, however, need not be more 

impact resistant than the contiguous 

tank structure,’’ highlighting the 

assumption that the wing structure is 

more capable of resisting tire impact 

debris than fuel tank access covers. 

In order to maintain the level of safety 

envisioned by 14 CFR 25.963(e), these 

special conditions propose a standard 

for resistance to potential tire debris 

impacts to the contiguous wing surfaces 

and require consideration of possible 

secondary effects of a tire impact, such 

as the induced pressure wave that was 

a factor in the Concorde accident. It 

takes into account that new construction 

methods and materials will not 

necessarily yield debris resistance that 

has historically been shown as 

adequate. The proposed standard is 

based on the defined tire impact areas 

and tire fragment characteristics. 

In addition, despite practical design 

considerations, some uncommon debris 

larger than that defined in paragraph 2 

may cause a fuel leak within the defined 

area, so paragraph 3 of these proposed 

special conditions also takes into 

consideration possible leakage paths. 

Fuel tank surfaces of typical transport 

airplanes have thick aluminum 

construction in the tire debris impact 

areas that is tolerant to tire debris larger 

than that defined in paragraph 2 of these 

special conditions. Consideration of 

leaks caused by larger tire fragments is 

needed to ensure that an adequate level 

of safety is provided. 

These proposed special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the BD– 

500–1A10 and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries) 

airplanes. Should Bombardier 

Aerospace apply at a later date for a 

change to the type certificate to include 

another model incorporating the same 

novel or unusual design feature, the 

special conditions would apply to that 

model as well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

series of airplanes. It is not a rule of 

general applicability. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, 44704. 

The Proposed Special Conditions 

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) proposes the 

following special conditions as part of 

the type certification basis for 

Bombardier Aerospace BD–500–1A10 

and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries) airplanes. 

Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks 

1. Impacts by tire debris to any fuel 

tank or fuel system component located 

within 30 degrees to either side of wheel 

rotational planes may not result in 

penetration or otherwise induce fuel 

tank deformation, rupture (for example, 

through propagation of pressure waves), 

or cracking sufficient to allow a 

hazardous fuel leak. A hazardous fuel 

leak results if debris impact to a fuel 

tank surface causes a— 

a. Running leak, 

b. Dripping leak, or 

c. Leak that, 15 minutes after wiping 

dry, results in a wetted airplane surface 

exceeding 6 inches in length or 

diameter. 

The leak must be evaluated under 

maximum fuel head pressure. 

2. Compliance with paragraph 1 must 

be shown by analysis or tests assuming 

all of the following: 

a. The tire debris fragment size is 1 

percent of the tire mass. 

b. The tire debris fragment is 

propelled at a tangential speed that 

could be attained by a tire tread at the 

airplane flight manual airplane 

rotational speed (VR at maximum gross 

weight). 

c. The tire debris fragment load is 

distributed over an area on the fuel tank 

surface equal to 11⁄2 percent of the total 

tire tread area. 

3. Fuel leaks caused by impact from 

tire debris larger than that specified in 

paragraph 2, from any portion of a fuel 

tank or fuel system component located 

within the tire debris impact area 

defined in paragraph 1, may not result 

in hazardous quantities of fuel entering 

any of the following areas of the 

airplane: 

a. Engine inlet, 

b. Auxiliary power unit inlet, or 

c. Cabin air inlet. 

This must be shown by test or 

analysis, or a combination of both, for 

each approved engine forward thrust 

condition and each approved reverse 

thrust condition. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 

2014. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12691 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0338; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–CE–010–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Piper 

Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA–31–350 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of an engine fire 

caused by a leak in the fuel pump inlet 

hose. This proposed AD would require 

inspecting the fuel hose assembly and 

the turbocharger support assembly for 

proper clearance between them, 

inspecting each assembly for any sign of 

damage, and making any necessary 

repairs or replacements. We are 

proposing this AD to correct the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 18, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Piper 

Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero 

Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 

567–4361; fax: (772) 978–6573; Internet: 

www.piper.com/home/pages/

Publications.cfm. You may review 

copies of the referenced service 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS