### 31946 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices

property is subject to FAA’s NEPA

determination.

The following is a brief overview of the request:

The Authority requests the release of a portion of airport property totaling 260 acres, which is no longer needed for aeronautical purposes. Of the total 260 acres, 248 acres are part of Parcel H–1, and 12 acres are part of Parcel X–2. These parcels are located in Allen Township, and were originally included as part of larger property purchased with federal funds over multiple AIP
grants.

The 260 acres requested for nonaeronautical use, are to be released to the Rockefeller Group Development Corporation (Rockefeller Group), 500 International Drive North, Suite 345, Mt. Olive, NJ 07828. The property is located in the northwest corner of existing airport property. Rockefeller Group is proposing to sell the 260 acre property

to FedEx Ground for the construction of a ground transportation facility. The undeveloped property is located in Allen Township at the intersection of

Willowbrook Road and Race Street. As shown on the Airport Layout Plan, the airport property does not serve an aeronautical purpose and is not needed for current or future airport development. The property was part of an inverse condemnation judgment against the Authority. The proceeds from the Fair Market Value (FMV) sale of the 260 acres of property will be used to pay off the judgment and the remaining balance will be placed into an identifiable interest bearing account to be used for eligible airport development purposes, as outlined in FAA Order 5190.6B, Airport Compliance Manual.

Any person may inspect the request by appointment at the FAA office address listed above. Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed

release. All comments will be considered by the FAA to the extent practicable.

Issued in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, May

28, 2015.
Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office.

[FR Doc. 2015–13501 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Transport Airplane and**  **Engine Issues; New Task**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of new task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC).

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) a new task to provide recommendations regarding the incorporation of airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards into Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 and development of associated advisory material. The issue is during the development of current airworthiness standards and regulatory guidance, the
FAA assumed that airframe structure for transport airplanes would be constructed predominantly of metal, using skin-stringer-frame architecture. Therefore, certain requirements either
do not address all of the issues associated with nonmetallic materials,
or have criteria that are based on experience with traditionally-configured large metallic airplanes. With respect tocrashworthiness, there is no airframelevel standard for crashworthiness. Many of the factors that influence airframe performance under crash
conditions on terrain also influence airframe performance under ditching
conditions. Past studies and investigations have included
recommendations for review of certain regulatory requirements and guidance material to identify opportunities for improving survivability during a ditching event; consideration of these
recommendations is included in this tasking.

This notice informs the public of the new ARAC activity and solicits membership for the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ian Won, Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA

98055, ian.y.won@faa.gov, phone number 425–227–2145, facsimile
number 425–227–1232.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
ARAC Acceptance of Task

As a result of the March 19, 2015 ARAC meeting, the FAA has assigned and ARAC has accepted this task and will establish the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group, Transport Airplane and Engine Issues. The working group will serve as staff to the ARAC and provide advice and recommendations on the assigned
task. The ARAC will review and approve the recommendation report and
will submit it to the FAA.

Background

The FAA established the ARAC to provide information, advice, and
recommendations on aviation related issues that could result in rulemaking to the FAA Administrator, through the
Associate Administrator of Aviation Safety.

The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group will provide advice and
recommendations to the ARAC on
airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards to incorporate into part 25 and any associated advisory
material.

The requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.561 apply equally to structure constructed
from either metallic or nonmetallic materials, and regardless of the design architecture and airplane size. Guidance material is mainly contained in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 25–17A. While not explicitly stated in part 25, during the development of current airworthiness standards and published advisory circulars, the FAA assumed that airplane airframes would be constructed predominantly of metal, using skin-stringer-frame architecture. Therefore, some of the requirements
either do not address all of the issues associated with nonmetallic materials,
or have criteria that are based on experience with traditionally-configured large metallic airplanes. With respect tocrashworthiness, there is no airframelevel standard for crashworthiness. The FAA promulgated standards for occupant protection at the seat installation level, with the presumption that the airframe provides an acceptable
level of crashworthiness. Thus when an applicant proposes to use unconventional fuselage structure (materials, design, or both), the FAA has written special conditions to ensure the level of crash protection is equivalent tothat provided by a traditionallyconfigured metallic airplane. These special conditions have been comparative in nature, and do not establish performance standards that areindependent of traditional metallic skinstringer-frame architecture for airframe
crashworthiness.

Crashworthiness Factors: Many
factors influence the crashworthiness of an airframe, including materials of


### 31947 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices

construction, geometry, structural philosophy, and fuselage size (fuselage diameter). The key elements of crashworthy airframe design are managing energy absorption and maintaining structural integrity. For the most part, energy absorption is managed through plastic deformation and controlled failures of the lower fuselage structure. Maintaining the integrity of
the structure is a balance between keeping loads within human tolerance levels, retaining items of mass, preserving a survivable volume and maintaining access to exits. Existing airworthiness requirements mainly focus on the safety of flight, and not crashworthiness, consequently when deviating from the traditional methods of construction an adequate level of safety cannot be assured.

Increased Use of Composites: In June 2009, the FAA Transport Airplane Directorate requested comments through
the Federal Register (74 FR 26919) on
whether there was a need for future rulemaking to address manufacturers’ extensive use of composite materials in airplane construction. Several candidate
technical areas were noted in the request, including fire safety, crashworthiness, lightning protection, fuel tank safety and damage tolerance. All responses that the FAA received
indicated that crashworthiness in particular needs improved guidance and possible rulemaking.

Ditching: The FAA conducted severalinvestigations on ditching and waterrelated impacts in the 1980s and 1990s. In conjunction with Transport Canada and the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority (UK CAA), the FAA recently investigated ditching/water-related impacts and ditching certification. One of the findings of these investigations is that current practices may not provide an adequate level of safety for the most likely ditching scenarios. From this research, a ditching event can be categorized as a specific type of emergency landing. Many of the factors ( e.g., airframe energy absorption characteristics, structural deformation, etc.) that influence airframe performance under crash conditions on
terrain also influence airframe performance under ditching conditions. Flight crew procedures, airplane configuration, safety equipment, and passenger preparedness also have a significant influence on survivability during a ditching event. Findings from these investigations include
recommendations for review of certain regulatory requirements and guidance
material related to the aforementioned factors to identify opportunities for improving survivability during a ditching event.

The Task

The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group is tasked to:

1. Specifically advise and make
written recommendations on what
airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards to incorporate into 14 CFR part 25 and any associated advisory material.

2. Evaluate §§ 25.561, 25.562, 25.563,

25.785, 25.787, 25.789, 25.801, 25.807, 25.1411, 25.1415, and associated regulatory guidance material ( e.g., ACs and policy memorandums) to determine what aspects need to be revised to maintain the current level of safety. Evaluate Special Conditions Nos.
25–321–SC, 25–362–SC, 25–528–SC, 25–537–SC, as a basis for future requirements. The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group will specifically review the following factors in making its
recommendations:

a. Fuselage size effects as discussed in FAA report DOT/FAA/CT–TN90/23;

b. Safety benefit considerations as identified in CAA Paper 96011 (and any subsequent revisions);

c. Other non-traditional airplane level configurations or structural configurations ( e.g., non-skin, stringer, frame construction).

3. Make recommendations, using the information in FAA reports DOT/FAA/ TC–14/8 (draft), DOT/FAA/AR–95/54, DOT/FAA/CT–92/04, DOT/FAA/CT– 84/3, FAA policy memorandum PS– ANM100–1982–00124, and any other pertinent information that may be
available on:

a. Assumptions used in establishing the airplane configuration for ditching, both planned and unplanned;

b. Validation of assumptions used for establishing airplane flight performance for planned and unplanned ditching
scenarios;

c. Procedures to be used to execute a successful ditching;

d. Minimum equipment needed to address the likely ditching scenarios.

4. Consider the performance of existing-conventional metallic airframe structure in crash conditions (with consideration to size effects) when developing recommendations for
airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards, such that conventionally configured airplanes fabricated with typical metallic materials and design details can be shown to meet the proposed regulations without extensive investigation or
documentation. 5. Based on the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group recommendations, perform the following:

a. Estimate what regulated parties will do differently as a result of the proposed regulation and how much it would cost;

b. Estimate the improvement (if any) in survivability of future accidents from this proposed regulation (cite evidence in the historical record as support if possible);

c. Estimate any other benefits ( e.g., reduced administrative burden) or costs that would result from implementation
of the recommendations.

6. Develop a report containing
recommendations on whether to incorporate airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards into 14 CFR part 25, the recommended requirements, and any associated advisory material.

7. Develop a report containing recommendations on the findings and results of the tasks explained above.

a. The report should document both majority and dissenting positions on the findings and the rationale for each position.

b. Any disagreements should be documented, including the rationale for each position and the reason for the disagreement.

8. Consider EASA requirements, accepted means of compliance (AMC) and guidance material (GM) for harmonization to the extent possible.

9. The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group may be reinstated to assist the ARAC by responding to the FAA’s questions or concerns after the recommendation report has been
submitted.

Schedule

The recommendation report must be
submitted to the FAA for review and acceptance no later than 24 months after publication of this notice.

Working Group Activity

The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group must comply with the procedures adopted by the ARAC. As part of the procedures, the working group must:

1. Conduct a review and analysis of the assigned tasks and any other related
materials or documents.

2. Draft and submit a work plan for completion of the task, including the rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration by the Transport Airplane and Engine Subcommittee.

3. Provide a status report at each Transport Airplane and Engine Subcommittee meeting.


### 31948 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices

4. Draft and submit the recommendation report based on the review and analysis of the assigned
tasks.

5. Present the recommendation report at the Transport Airplane and Engine Subcommittee meeting.

Participation in the Working Group

The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group will be comprised of technical experts having an interest in the assigned task. A working group member need not be a member representative of
the ARAC. The FAA would like a wide range of members to ensure all aspects
of the tasks are considered in development of the recommendations. The provisions of the August 13, 2014 Office of Management and Budget guidance, ‘‘Revised Guidance on Appointment of Lobbyists to Federal Advisory Committees, Boards, and Commissions’’ (79 FR 47482), continues the ban on registered lobbyists participating on Agency Boards and Commissions if participating in their ‘‘individual capacity.’’ The revised guidance now allows registered lobbyists to participate on Agency
Boards and Commissions in a ‘‘representative capacity’’ for the ‘‘express purpose of providing a
committee with the views of a nongovernmental entity, a recognizable group of persons or nongovernmental entities (an industry, sector, labor unions, or environmental groups, etc.) or state or local government.’’ ( For further information see Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA) as amended, 2 U.S.C. 1603, 1604, and 1605.)

If you wish to become a member of the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group, write the person listed under the caption **FOR**

**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** expressing that desire. Describe your
interest in the task and state the expertise you would bring to the working group. The FAA must receive all requests by July 6, 2015. The ARAC and the FAA will review the requests and advise you whether or not your request is approved.

If you are chosen for membership on the working group, you must actively participate in the working group by attending all meetings, and providing written comments when requested to do
so. You must devote the resources necessary to support the working group in meeting any assigned deadlines. You must keep your management chain and those you may represent advised of working group activities and decisions to ensure the proposed technical solutions do not conflict with the position of those you represent. Once the working group has begun deliberations, members will not be
added or substituted without the approval of the ARAC Chair, the FAA, including the Designated Federal Officer, and the Working Group Chair.

The Secretary of Transportation
determined the formation and use of the ARAC is necessary and in the public
interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.

ARAC meetings are open to the public. However, meetings of the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group are not open to the public, except to the extent
individuals with an interest and expertise are selected to participate. The FAA will make no public announcement of working group meetings.

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 28,

2015. Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 2015–13542 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Highway Administration**

**Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in California** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE).

**SUMMARY :**  The FHWA, on behalf of Caltrans, is issuing this notice to announce actions taken by Caltrans that are final within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). The actions relate to a proposed highway project, San Diego Freeway (I–405) Improvement Project from State Route (SR) 73 to Interstate 605 (I–605). Work is proposed as
follows:

—From Post Mile (PM) 9.3 to Post Mile

24.2 in Orange County and Post Mile 0.0 to Post Mile 1.2; 12–ORA–22 p.m. R0.7/R3.8/12–ORA–22 p.m. R0.5/ R0.7; 12–ORA–73 p.m. R27.2/R27.8/ 12–ORA–605 p.m. 3.5/R1.6; 07–LA– 605 p.m. R0.0/R1.2 in the Counties of Orange and Los Angeles, State of
California. Those actions grant licenses, permits, and approvals for the project.

**DATES :**  By this notice, the FHWA, on behalf of Caltrans, is advising the public of final agency actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(I)(1). A claim seeking judicial review of the Federal agency actions on the highway project will be
barred unless the claim is filed on or before November 2, 2015. If the Federal law that authorizes judicial review of a claim provides a time period of less than 150 days for filing such claim, then that shorter time period still applies.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Smita Deshpande, Branch Chief, California Department of Transportation District 12, Division of Environmental Analysis, 3347 Michelson Drive, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92612, during
normal business hours from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Telephone number (949) 724– 2800, email: smita.deshpande@ dot.ca.gov

.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Effective July 1, 2007, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) assigned, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) assumed environmental responsibilities for this project pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. Notice is hereby given that Caltrans has taken final agency actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(I)(1) by issuing licenses, permits, and approvals for the I–405 Improvement Project in the State of California. The project’s Selected
Alternative includes the addition of one
GP lane in each direction on I–405 from Euclid Street to the I–605 interchange, plus the addition of a tolled Express
Lane in each direction of I–405 from SR–73 to SR–22 East. The tolled Express Lane and the existing HOV lanes would be managed jointly as a tolled Express Facility with two lanes in each direction
from SR–73 to I–605. Access to the SR– 73 Express Lane Facility would be via
construction of the new direct connector to SR–73 south of the I–405 junction. Auxiliary lanes would be added at various locations. The project may be implemented in phases and/or segments and procured under one or more contracts, including the option of using design/bid/build, design-build or public/private contract authority. The project is planned to be constructed in 54 months. The project is intended to reduce congestion, enhance operations, increase mobility, improve trip reliability, maximize throughput, optimize operations, and minimize environmental impacts and ROW acquisition. It will more effectively serve existing and future travel demand within Orange County and between Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The