Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 194 / Thursday October 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 51759 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program benefits. The State agency must 

also obtain from these vendors 

documentation (such as tax documents 

or other verifiable documentation) to 

support the amount of food sales 

claimed by the vendor. After evaluating 

the documentation received from the 

vendor, the State agency must calculate 

WIC redemptions as a percent of total 

food sales and classify the vendor as 

meeting or not meeting the above-50- 

percent criterion. State agencies may 

use additional methods, if approved by 

FNS. 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Routine collection of vendor shelf 

prices at least every six months 

following authorization to monitor 

vendor compliance with paragraphs 

(g)(4)(i)(C), (g)(4)(ii)(C), and (g)(4)(iii) of 

this section and to ensure State agency 

policies and procedures dependent on 

shelf price data are efficient and 

effective. FNS may grant an exemption 

from this shelf price collection 

requirement if the State agency 

demonstrates to FNSs’ satisfaction that 

an alternative methodology for 

monitoring vendor compliance with 

paragraphs (g)(4)(i)(C), (g)(4)(ii)(C), and 

(g)(4)(iii) of this section is efficient and 

effective and other State agency policies 

and procedures are not dependent on 

frequent collection of shelf price data. 

Such exemption would remain in effect 

until the State agency no longer meets 

the conditions on which the exemption 

was based, until FNS revokes the 

exemption, or for three years, whichever 

occurs first; 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 246.18: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A); 

■ b. Paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(A) is amended 

by revising ‘‘(§ 246.12(g)(3)(iii) and 

(g)(3)(iv))’’ to read ‘‘(§ 246.12(g)(3)(ii) 

and (g)(3)(iii))’’; 

■ c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(B) 

through (a)(1)(ii)(J) as paragraphs 

(a)(1)(ii)(D) through (a)(1)(ii)(L), and add 

new paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(B) and 

(a)(1)(ii)(C). 

■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph 

(a)(1)(ii)(F), revise ‘‘§ 246.12(g)(7)’’ to 

read ‘‘§ 246.12(g)(8)’’; 

■ e. Revise paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(A) and 

(a)(1)(iii)(B). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 246.18 Administrative review of State 

agency actions. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) Denial of authorization based on 

the application of the vendor selection 

criteria for minimum variety and 

quantity of authorized supplemental 

foods (§ 246.12(g)(3)(i)), or on a 

determination that the vendor is 

attempting to circumvent a sanction 

(§ 246.12(g)(6)); 

* * * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Denial of authorization based on 

the application of the vendor selection 

criteria for competitive price 

(§ 246.12(g)(4)); 

(C) The application of the State 

agency’s vendor peer group criteria and 

the criteria used to identify vendors that 

are above-50-percent vendors or 

comparable to above-50-percent 

vendors; 

* * * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(A) The validity or appropriateness of 

the State agency’s vendor limiting 

criteria (§ 246.12(g)(2)) or vendor 

selection criteria for minimum variety 

and quantity of supplemental foods, 

business integrity, and current 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program disqualification or civil money 

penalty for hardship (§ 246.12(g)(3)); 

(B) The validity or appropriateness of 

the State agency’s selection criteria for 

competitive price (§ 246.12(g)(4)), 

including, but not limited to, vendor 

peer group criteria and the criteria used 

to identify vendors that are above-50- 

percent vendors or comparable to above50-percent vendors; 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 30, 2009. 

Kevin W. Concannon, 

Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and 

Consumer Services. 

[FR Doc. E9–24143 Filed 10–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. NM403; Special Conditions No. 

25–385–SC] 

Special Conditions: Boeing Model 747– 

8/–8F Airplanes, Structural Design 

Requirements for Four-Post Main 

Landing Gear System 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Boeing Model 747–8/–8F 

airplane. This airplane will have novel 

or unusual design features associated 

with a four-post main landing gear 

system. The applicable airworthiness 

regulations do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for this 

design feature. These 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: Effective Date: November 9, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Freisthler, FAA, Airframe & Cabin 

Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1119; 

facsimile (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 4, 2005, The Boeing 

Company, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, WA 

98124, applied for an amendment to 

Type Certificate Number A20WE to 

include the new Model 747–8 passenger 

airplane and the new Model 747–8F 

freighter airplane. The Model 747–8 and 

the Model 747–8F are derivatives of the 

747–400 and the 747–400F, 

respectively. Both the Model 747–8 and 

the Model 747–8F are four-engine jet 

transport airplanes that will have a 

maximum takeoff weight of 970,000 

pounds and new General Electric GEnx– 

2B67 engines. The Model 747–8 will 

have two flight crew and the capacity to 

carry 660 passengers. The Model 747– 

8F will have two flight crew and a zero 

passenger capacity, although Boeing has 

submitted a petition for exemption to 

allow the carriage of supernumeraries. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of 14 CFR 

21.101, Boeing must show that the 

Model 747–8 and 747–8F (hereafter 

referred as 747–8/–8F) meet the 

applicable provisions of part 25, as 

amended by Amendments 25–1 through 

25–117, except for earlier amendments 

as agreed upon by the FAA. These 

regulations will be incorporated into 

Type Certificate No. A20WE after type 

certification approval of the 747–8/–8F. 

In addition, the certification basis 

includes other regulations, special 

conditions and exemptions that are not 

relevant to these special conditions. 

Type Certificate No. A20WE will be 

updated to include a complete 

description of the certification basis for 

these model airplanes. 

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 747–8/–8F because of a novel or 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
51760 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 194 / Thursday October 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, the 747–8/–8F 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. 

Special conditions, as defined in 14 

CFR 11.19, are issued under § 11.38, and 

become part of the type certification 

basis under § 21.101. 

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, or should any 

other model already included on the 

same type certificate be modified to 

incorporate the same or similar novel or 

unusual design feature, the special 

conditions would also apply to the other 

model under § 21.101. 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The Boeing Model 747–8/–8F airplane 

will incorporate the following novel or 

unusual design features: A four-post 

main landing gear system with two wing 

main landing gears and two body main 

landing gears. 

Discussion 

The Boeing Model 747–8/–8F airplane 

will retain the landing gear arrangement 

which is unique to the 747 family of 

airplanes. The conventional 

arrangement for the main landing gear 

of transport category airplanes is twounderwing posts. The 747 was the first 

to introduce a four-post main landing 

gear arrangement, two underwing posts 

supplemented by two body posts. This 

arrangement was adopted to 

accommodate the then unprecedented 

increased weight and size of the Model 

747 airplane. 

Existing regulations are written to 

address the conventional landing gear 

configuration commonly found on 

transport category airplanes. This being 

the case, they are not appropriate to 

address the unique features of the 

Boeing 747 design. The increased 

number of posts alters the load 

distribution between the gear units 

during landing and ground handling 

conditions addressed by the regulations. 

This arrangement also loads the 

airframe differently than conventional 

landing gear designs. The FAA 

determined that, while the general 

conditions addressed by §§ 25.473 and 

25.479 through 25.485 were still 

applicable, specific details contained in 

these regulations may not be directly 

relatable to the four-post arrangement. 

In 1968 the FAA issued Special 

Condition A–4 to address the ground 

load requirements for the main landing 

gear system for Boeing Model 747–100 

series airplanes. That special condition 

provided clarification on the 

applicability of §§ 25.473 and 25.479 

through 25.485 to the Model 747 

airplane. In 1971 Special Condition A– 

4 was amended to address Boeing 

Model 747 airplanes with the landing 

gear load evener system deleted or made 

inoperable. 

The FAA has determined that Special 

Condition A–4 is applicable to the 747– 

8/–8F series airplanes, provided that all 

the applicable part 25 regulations cited 

in Special Condition A–4 (recorded as 

an enclosure to FAA Letter WE–120/ 

8110 (CT3488WE–D) to the Boeing 

Company, dated May 12, 1971) are 

upgraded to the latest amendment level 

(i.e., 25–117). Furthermore, as several of 

these regulations have been updated or 

consolidated, and acceptable methods of 

compliance have been described for 

some of these regulations via advisory 

circular (AC), new special conditions 

are needed to clarify the applicable 

requirements. By updating these special 

conditions, we are ensuring that the 

Boeing design provides an equivalent 

level of safety to conventional landing 

gear meeting these regulations. 

Discussion of Comments 

Notice of proposed special conditions 

No. 25–09–05–SC for the Boeing Model 

747–8/–8F airplanes was published in 

the Federal Register on April 27, 2009 

(74 FR 19023). Airbus, an original 

equipment manufacturer, provided 

several specific comments. 

Airbus suggested that certain special 

conditions be revised to follow the 

intent of rule changes and guidance 

recommended by the Aviation 

Rulemaking Advisory Committee 

(ARAC). This committee, comprised of 

representatives from industry and the 

regulatory authorities, developed 

recommendations that would revise 

many of the ground load requirements 

in 14 CFR 25. 

While the FAA agrees with the ARAC 

recommendations, those 

recommendations have not yet been 

adopted into 14 CFR 25. Therefore, 

evaluation of the ARAC 

recommendations is not required per 

§ 21.101, Designation of applicable 

regulations (the Changed Product Rule). 

Furthermore, the FAA does not believe 

that there is any safety concern that 

requires application of the ARAC 

recommendations. On past programs, 

the FAA has only applied parts of the 

ARAC recommendations, either by 

equivalent safety findings or by special 

conditions, and only when requested by 

an applicant. Even in those cases, the 

updated requirements have not been 

used in their entirety. 

As previously indicated, the proposed 

special condition was derived from the 

original 747 special condition and was 

updated to the latest amendment level. 

The service history of the 747 landing 

gear design indicates that the original 

special condition provides adequate 

design requirements. Furthermore, the 

landing gear design has not been 

significantly changed for the 747–8/–8F. 

Finally, the proposed special condition 

is an improvement on the original as it 

takes into account numerous updates to 

the rules and guidance material it 

references. 

Airbus proposed the following 

specific changes: 

1. The special conditions require 

consideration of the effects of runway 

crown for ground handling conditions, 

as defined in § 25.511(b)(4). Airbus 

suggested that these effects should also 

be considered for landing conditions as 

specified in the ARAC 

recommendations. 

FAA Response: While the ARAC 

recommendations represent an 

improvement in design standards, we 

do not believe consideration of runway 

crown is necessary. Furthermore, the 

FAA has not mandated this requirement 

on any other program. 

2. The special conditions include the 

following: ‘‘The level landing criteria of 

§ 25.479 are directly applicable. The 

four main landing gear units must be 

assumed to contact the ground with the 

airplane longitudinal axis in a 

horizontal attitude.’’ Airbus suggested 

that the second sentence is in conflict 

with the first, and that the conditions 

specified in the ARAC 

recommendations should be used. 

FAA Response: The second sentence 

is intended to clarify how § 25.479 is 

applied to the 747 design, which is not 

envisaged by the current requirement. 

The FAA has not mandated the level 

landing requirement from the ARAC 

recommendations on any other program. 

3. The special conditions include: 

‘‘The criteria of § 25.495 (ground turning 

loads) are directly applicable.’’ Airbus 

suggests it is not correct to state that 

these criteria are directly applicable and 

that it would be more appropriate to 

apply the rational analysis described in 

the ARAC recommendations. 

FAA Response: We believe that 

application of this requirement can be 

directly applied, as has been done on 

previous 747 designs, and that such 

application is sufficiently conservative. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 194 / Thursday October 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 51761 

4. With regard to the shock absorption 

test requirements of § 25.723, Airbus 

suggested that the test conditions be 

expanded as specified in the ARAC 

recommendations. 

FAA Response: We do not believe that 

using the latest ARAC recommendations 

is necessary, nor has this requirement 

been mandated on any other program to 

date. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the Boeing 

Model 747–8/–8F airplanes. Should 

Boeing apply at a later date for a change 

to the type certificate to include another 

model incorporating the same novel or 

unusual design features, these special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well under the provisions of § 21.101. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features of the Boeing 

Model 747–8/–8F 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 Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the following special conditions are 

issued as part of the type certification 

basis for the Boeing Model 747–8/–8F 

airplanes. 

The requirements of §§ 25.471, 

25.473, and 25.479 through 25.485 

apply as follows: 

1. General. The general design criteria 

of § 25.471 are directly applicable. The 

basic landing gear dimensional data 

must be expanded to include the 

additional main landing gear units. 

2. Ground Load Conditions and 

Assumptions. The criteria specified in 

§ 25.473 are applicable for the design 

landing conditions except as noted in 

paragraph 6 of these special conditions. 

3. Landing Gear Arrangement. The 

multiple oleo main landing gear 

configuration does not meet the 

‘‘conventional arrangement’’ criterion of 

§ 25.477, with respect to the application 

of paragraphs 4 through 7 of this special 

condition. Nevertheless, the landing 

impact design conditions must meet the 

intent of §§ 25.473 through 25.485. 

4. Level Landing Conditions. The level 

landing criteria of § 25.479 are directly 

applicable. The four main landing gear 

units must be assumed to contact the 

ground with the airplane longitudinal 

axis in a horizontal attitude. 

5. Tail-Down Landing Conditions. The 

airplane must be assumed to contact the 

ground in any tail down attitude 

between level and the maximum tail 

down attitude allowing clearance with 

the ground of each part of the airplane 

other than the main landing gear 

wheels. The airplane forward velocity 

component must be the most critical 

value from VL1 to 1.25 VL2 where VL1

and VL2 are defined in § 25.481. Each 

main landing gear unit must be 

designed for its most critical 

combination of vertical load and drag 

load. All other criteria in § 25.481, not 

superseded by the above criteria shall be 

directly applicable. The distribution of 

loads between the gear units for the 

effects of critical combinations of spinup and spring-back loadings on the 

main landing gear units must be 

considered for the gear units and their 

supporting structure. 

6. One-Wheel Landing Conditions. 

Unless the airplane and landing gears 

are designed for equivalent or more 

critical conditions, the airplane will be 

assumed to land in a level pitch attitude 

at design landing weight with a descent 

velocity of 7 fps at the maximum roll 

angle attainable within the geometric 

limitations of the airplane with the 

contact velocities and gear landing 

conditions of §§ 25.479(a), (c) and (d). 

Note: This condition need not be coupled 

with either a 6 fps landing at maximum take 

off weight or a 12 fps reserve energy drop 

test. 

7. Side Load Conditions. On the main 

landing gear units, side loads of 80% of 

the vertical reaction (on one side) acting 

inward and 60% of the vertical reaction 

(on the other side) acting outward must 

be combined with one-half of the 

maximum vertical ground reactions 

obtained in the level landing, tail-down 

landing, or rolled attitude landing 

conditions. These loads shall be 

assumed applied at the ground contact 

point and to be resisted by the inertia of 

the airplane. Drag loads may be 

assumed to be zero. 

8. Rebound Landing Condition. The 

criteria of § 25.487 are directly 

applicable. 

9. Ground Handling Conditions. The 

criteria of § 25.489 are directly 

applicable. The effects of runway crown 

as defined in § 25.511(b)(4) shall be 

considered in distributing the loads to 

the individual main landing gear units. 

The ground reactions must be 

distributed to the individual landing 

gear units in a rational or conservative 

manner, accounting for airframe 

flexibility and shock strut and tire 

stiffness. 

10. Take-Off Run. The criteria of 

§ 25.491 are directly applicable. 

Compliance may be shown in 

accordance with Advisory Circular (AC) 

25.491–1. 

11. Braked Roll Conditions. The 

criteria of §§ 25.493(b), (c), and (d) shall 

be directly applicable. The formula in 

§ 25.493(e) is not applicable to the B747 

due to the 4-post gear arrangement. 

12. Turning. The criteria of § 25.495 

are directly applicable. 

13. Nose-Wheel Yaw. The criteria of 

§ 25.499 are directly applicable. The 

criteria are interpreted to apply braking 

to all main landing gear wheels on one 

side of the airplane centerline. 

14. Pivoting. The criteria of § 25.503 

are applied individually to each wing 

main landing gear unit. In addition, all 

main landing gear units must be 

designed for the scrubbing and/or 

torsion loads induced by pivoting about 

the most critical point consistent with 

the available main gear braking on one 

side of the airplane and the available 

thrust and torque on the airplane. 

Maximum static engine thrust must be 

considered only on the engines on the 

opposite side of the airplane centerline 

from the pivot point. 

15. Reversed Braking. The criteria of 

§ 25.507 are directly applicable, except 

that the phrase ‘‘three point’’ is 

expanded to include ‘‘five point.’’ 

16. Towing Loads. The criteria of 

§ 25.509 are directly applicable. 

17. Fatigue Evaluation of Landing 

Gear. The criteria of § 25.573 at 

Amendment 25–0 are directly 

applicable to main landing gear units. 

18. Shock Absorption Tests. The 

criteria of § 25.723 are directly 

applicable. Compliance may be shown 

in accordance with AC 25.723–1. 

19. Substantiation of the design 

criteria must include a dynamic taxi and 

landing analysis. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 29, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–24339 Filed 10–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES