15112 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Notice of Intent To Rule on Request To 

Release Airport Property at the SeattleTacoma International Airport, Seattle, 

Washington 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Request to Release 

Airport Property. 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and 

invite public comment on the release of 

land at the Seattle-Tacoma International 

Airport under the provisions of Section 

125 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation 

Investment Reform Act for the 21st 

Century (AIR 21), now 49 U.S.C. 

47107(h)(2). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on this 

application may be mailed or delivered 

to the FAA at the following address: Ms. 

Carol Suomi, Manager, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Northwest Mountain 

Region, Airports Division, Seattle 

Airports District Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Suite 250, Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356. 

In addition, one copy of any 

comments submitted to the FAA must 

be mailed or delivered to Mr. Allan 

Royal, Port of Seattle Real Estate 

Development, at the following address: 

Mr. Allan Royal, Port of Seattle Real 

Estate Development, P.O. Box 68727, 

Seattle, Washington 98168. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Peter Doyle, Project Manager, Federal 

Aviation Administration, Northwest 

Mountain Region, Seattle Airports 

District Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Suite 250, Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356. 

The request to release property may 

be reviewed, by appointment, in person 

at this same location. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

invites public comment on the request 

to release property at the SeattleTacoma International Airport under the 

provisions of the AIR 21 (49 U.S.C. 

47107(h)(2)). 

On February 22, 2013, the FAA 

determined that the request to release 

property at Seattle-Tacoma International 

Airport submitted by the airport meets 

the procedural requirements of the 

Federal Aviation Administration. The 

FAA may approve the request, in whole 

or in part, no later than April 8, 2013. 

The following is a brief overview of 

the request: 

The Seattle-Tacoma International 

Airport is proposing the release of 

approximately 15,628 square feet of 

airport property to the City of SeaTac. 

This property is located on International 

Blvd. and 160th Street in the City of 

SeaTac, and is required for road 

improvements to mitigate traffic 

generated by the Rental Car Facility 

constructed on airport property. This 

mitigation measure is required by the 

environmental analysis to reduce the 

likely significant adverse environmental 

traffic impacts to a nonsignificant level. 

The value of the property is a 

component of the overall cost of the 

Rental Car Facility project. 

Any person may inspect, by 

appointment, the request in person at 

the FAA office listed above under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In 

addition, any person may, upon 

appointment and request, inspect the 

application, notice and other documents 

germane to the application in person at 

the Seattle-Tacoma International 

Airport, 17801 International Blvd., 

Seattle, Washington 98158. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

22, 2013. 

Carol Suomi, 

Manager, Seattle Airports District Office. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05453 Filed 3–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Aviation 

Rulemaking Advisory Committee; 

Transport Airplane Performance and 

Handling Characteristics—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 ARAC a 

new task to prioritize potential topic 

areas for development of new or revised 

requirements and guidance material for 

airplane performance and handling 

characteristics in new transport category 

airplanes. The output of this task is 

intended to support FAA planning for 

subsequent ARAC taskings in these 

topic areas. This notice is to inform the 

public of this ARAC activity. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe 

Jacobsen, Airplane & Flight Crew 

Interface Branch, ANM–111, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 1601 Lind Ave. SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227–2011, facsimile 

(425) 227– 1149; email 

joe.jacobsen@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The FAA established ARAC to 

provide advice and recommendations to 

the FAA Administrator on the FAA’s 

rulemaking activities with respect to 

aviation-related issues. This includes 

obtaining advice and recommendations 

on the FAA’s commitments to 

harmonize FAA regulations with its 

partners in Europe, Canada, and Brazil; 

in this instance, on airplane 

performance and handling 

characteristics standards. ARAC will 

address this task under the Transport 

Airplane and Engine (TAE) 

Subcommittee, and will reestablish the 

Flight Test Harmonization Working 

Group (FTHWG) to assist in completion 

of this task. 

The FAA has established regulations 

and policy in the areas of airplane 

performance and handling 

characteristics. However, existing 

standards do not adequately address 

airplane designs using fly-by-wire 

technology. Additionally, there are a 

number of issues, such as several items 

in the areas of takeoff and landing 

performance and flying qualities that 

may not be adequately addressed by the 

existing airworthiness requirements and 

guidance material. Finally, there are 

cases where guidance information 

provided by the airworthiness 

authorities is not harmonized, 

sometimes leading to different 

compliance findings. 

The Task 

The FAA tasked ARAC to consider 

several areas within the airplane 

performance and handling qualities 

requirements of the 14 CFR part 25 

airworthiness standards and guidance 

for possible revision. The task includes 

prioritizing the list of topic areas 

provided in this notice based on 

prioritization criteria established by the 

FTHWG. The prioritization criteria 

should consider harmonization of 

regulatory requirements and associated 

guidance material for airworthiness 

certification of airplane designs. 

Recommendations may result in 

subsequent ARAC taskings for standards 

recommendations in follow-on phases. 

ARAC may also recommend additional 

topics in the general area of airplane 

performance and handling qualities that 

are not on the list provided in this 

notice 

The working group will provide a 

draft report to ARAC recommending 

focus areas and work plans to address 

those areas the FTHWG identified as 

high priorities for airworthiness 

standards development relative to new 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Notices 15113 

airplane designs. This report will 

provide the rationale for the priority 

recommended as well as identify those 

items for which coordination with other 

working groups or experts outside the 

FTHWG may be needed. The report will 

also include a proposed schedule for 

accomplishment of the plan, including 

whether multiple topics can be worked 

simultaneously. If there is disagreement 

within the working group, those items 

should be documented, including the 

rationale from each party and the 

reasons for the disagreement. The 

following subject areas should be 

considered: 

1. Fly-by-wire (FBW) Flight Controls. 

Regulatory requirements and associated 

guidance material for airworthiness 

certification of airplane designs using 

FBW technology to obviate 

longstanding, repetitively used FBW 

special conditions. Specific areas 

include: 

a. Applicability/adaptation of 

Amendment 25–121 airplane 

performance and handling 

characteristics in icing conditions 

requirements 

b. Design maneuver requirements,* 

c. Design dive speed,* 

d. Side stick controls,* 

e. Flight envelope protection, and * 

f. Interaction of airplane systems and 

structure.* 

* Note: These items should be considered 

for coordination with other working groups. 

2. Takeoff and Landing Performance. 

Regulatory requirements and associated 

guidance material for airworthiness 

certification in the following areas listed 

below. (Note: This topic area excludes 

items addressed by the Takeoff and 

Landing Performance Assessment 

Aviation Rulemaking Committee.) 

a. Flight test methods used to 

determine maximum tailwind and 

crosswind capability. Additionally, for 

crosswind testing, better define 

intended operational use of 

demonstrated maximum steady and 

gusting crosswind performance. 

b. Wet runway stopping performance. 

Recent landing overruns on wet 

runways have raised questions 

regarding current wet runway stopping 

performance requirements and methods. 

Analyses indicate that the braking 

coefficient of friction in each case was 

significantly lower than expected for a 

wet runway (i.e., lower than the level 

specified in FAA regulations). 

Consideration should also be given to 

the scheduling of landing performance 

on wet porous friction course and 

grooved runway surfaces. 

Recommendations may include the 

need for additional data gathering, 

analysis, and possible rulemaking. 

c. Go-around performance, 

specifically height lost in executing a 

go-around. While airplanes may be able 

to demonstrate the climb gradient 

capability prescribed in 14 CFR/ 

European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) Certification Specification (CS) 

25.121, it may not be able to achieve it 

quickly enough, particularly when 

executing a go-around close to the 

ground. 

d. Performance standards and 

guidance regarding landing in abnormal 

configurations. 

e. Guidance regarding the function 

and use of the amber band on airspeed 

tapes. Manufacturers’ philosophies 

differ regarding the meaning of the 

amber band in an airspeed tape display, 

as do U.S. and European regulatory 

authorities’ policies regarding 

acceptance of target airspeeds within 

the amber band. 

f. Guidance on piloting procedures 

used to evaluate airplane tail clearance 

during certification flight tests for 

takeoff performance. 

g. Landing distance performance for 

autoland and landing distance 

performance using heads-up-displays 

(HUD). Use of autoland or HUD may 

invalidate landing distance performance 

determined for compliance to 14 CFR/ 

CS 25.125. 

h. Steep approach landing 

performance. Current airplane 

certification standards are not 

harmonized among the U.S., Canadian, 

Brazilian, and European airworthiness 

authorities. 

i. Narrow runway operations. Current 

airplane certification standards do not 

identify minimum runway widths for 

which the standards apply. 

j. Reduced and derated takeoff thrust 

procedures. Updates to existing 

guidance material may be appropriate to 

limit the number of derates permitted 

for a specific airframe/engine 

combination. 

k. Guidance material for pressure 

error measurement during takeoff until 

out of ground effect to ensure proper 

data reduction for calculation of takeoff 

distance performance. 

l. Guidance material addressing the 

adverse effects on stall speed in ground 

effect. 

3. Handling Characteristics. 

Regulatory requirements and associated 

guidance material for airworthiness 

certification in the following areas: 

a. Guidance material for assessing 

handling qualities. Advisory Circular 

25–7C, ‘‘Flight Test Guide for 

Certification of Transport Category 

Airplanes,’’ provides an FAA Handling 

Quality Rating Method (HQRM) that is 

intended to provide a systematic way of 

determining appropriate minimum 

handling qualities requirements and 

evaluating those handling qualities for 

failure conditions affecting an airplane’s 

flying qualities. The FAA handling 

quality rating system is not universally 

accepted within industry, nor is it 

accepted by EASA. 

b. Guidance for assessing 

susceptibility to pilot-induced 

oscillations/airplane-pilot coupling 

(PIO/APC). Guidance provided in AC 

25–7C for evaluating PIO/APC is also 

not well accepted by airplane 

manufacturers, is not harmonized with 

EASA, and has been superseded to some 

extent in recent certification programs. 

Modified guidance is needed to both 

simplify and standardize the methods 

for evaluating an airplane’s 

susceptibility to PIO/APC. 

Schedule 

The required completion date for the 

recommendation report is 9 months 

after the FAA publishes the task in the 

Federal Register. After receiving the 

report, the FAA will consider the 

recommendations and determine 

subsequent development tasks. The 

FAA expects to publish additional 

ARAC taskings for follow on phases to 

develop recommendations for the 

selected standards and guidance. 

ARAC Acceptance of Task 

ARAC accepted the task and assigned 

it to the FTHWG under the TAE 

Subcommittee. The working group 

serves as staff to ARAC and assists in 

the analysis of assigned tasks. ARAC 

must review and approve the working 

group’s recommendations. If ARAC 

accepts the working group’s 

recommendations, it will forward them 

to the FAA. 

Working Group Activity 

The FTHWG must comply with the 

procedures adopted by ARAC. As part 

of the procedures, the working group 

must: 

1. Develop a prioritized list of subject 

areas (as provided in this notice or 

added by the FTHWG) to focus 

subsequent efforts and standards 

development in follow-on phases for 

consideration by ARAC. 

2. Based on the priorities from item 1 

above, recommend a work plan and 

phasing for completion of each 

prioritized task for review and approval 

by ARAC. 

3. Provide a status report at each 

meeting of ARAC. 

4. Provide a final recommendation 

report to ARAC for review and approval. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

15114 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Notices 

1See 65 FR 30680 (May 12, 2000). 

2See 65 FR 30690. 

3See 71 FR 51768. 

Participation in the Working Group 

The FTHWG is composed of technical 

experts having expertise in the subject 

matter and an interest in the assigned 

task. A working group member need not 

be a representative or a member of 

ARAC. 

If you have expertise in the subject 

matter and wish to become a member of 

the working group, write to 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. We must receive 

all requests by April 5, 2013. 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 represent 

your aviation community segment and 

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 that 

the proposed technical solutions do not 

conflict with your sponsoring 

organization’s position when the subject 

being negotiated is presented to ARAC 

for approval. Once the working group 

has begun deliberations, members will 

not be added or substituted without the 

approval of the FAA and the Working 

Group Co-Chairs. 

The Secretary of Transportation 

determined that the formation and use 

of ARAC is necessary and in the public 

interest in connection with the 

performance of duties imposed on the 

FAA by law. ARAC and the TAE 

Subcommittee meetings are open to the 

public. Meetings of the Flight Test 

Harmonization Working Group will not 

be 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 March 1, 

2013. 

Lirio Liu, 

Designated Federal Officer, Aviation 

Rulemaking Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05230 Filed 3–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0086] 

Group Lotus plc; Grant of Petition for 

a Temporary Exemption From an 

Advanced Air Bag Requirement of 

FMVSS No. 208 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of grant of a petition for 

a temporary exemption from a provision 

of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant 

Crash Protection. 

SUMMARY: This notice grants the petition 

of Group Lotus plc (Lotus) for a 

temporary exemption of the front 

passenger position of its Evora model 

from one advanced air bag requirement 

of FMVSS No. 208, i.e., the higher 

maximum speed (56 km/h (35 mph)) 

belted test requirement using 5th 

percentile adult female dummies. The 

agency finds that achieving compliance 

with that requirement would cause 

substantial economic hardship to Lotus 

and that the company has tried to 

comply with the requirement in good 

faith. 

DATES: The exemption remains in effect 

until March 8, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Jasinski, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, NCC–112, National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 4th 

Floor, Room W41–326, Washington, DC 

20590. Telephone: (202) 366–2992; Fax: 

(202) 366–3820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Advanced Air Bag Requirements and 

Small Volume Manufacturers 

In 2000, NHTSA published a final 

rule upgrading the requirements for air 

bags in passenger cars and light trucks, 

requiring what are commonly known as 

‘‘advanced air bags.’’ 1 The upgrade was 

designed to meet the twin goals of 

improving protection for occupants of 

all sizes, belted and unbelted, in 

moderate-to-high-speed crashes, and of 

minimizing the risks posed by air bags 

to infants, children, and other 

occupants, especially in low-speed 

crashes. Prior to this rule, crash tests 

under FMVSS No. 208 used only one 

size dummy, a 50th percentile adult 

male dummy. However, the advanced 

air bag rule specified the use of both 

50th percentile adult male and 5th 

percentile adult female dummies for the 

standard’s crash tests. 

The requirements for the vehicle 

performance in an unbelted 32 km/h (20 

mph) to 40 km/h (25 mph) rigid barrier 

crash test and the belted rigid barrier 

crash test with a maximum test speed of 

48 km/h (30 mph) for both the 50th 

percentile male dummy and the 5th 

percentile female dummy were phased 

in, beginning with the 2004 model year. 

Small volume manufacturers were not 

subject to these advanced air bag 

requirements until the end of the phasein period, which was September 1, 

2006. 

A second phase-in period required 

vehicles to be certified as meeting the 

belted rigid barrier test requirements at 

speeds up to 56 km/h (35 mph) using 

the 50th percentile adult male dummy. 

This requirement was phased in, 

beginning with the 2008 model year. 

Small volume manufacturers were not 

subject to this requirement until the end 

of the phase-in period, which was 

September 1, 2010. 

The 2000 final rule did not include a 

higher speed belted rigid barrier test for 

a 5th percentile adult female dummy. 

Instead, NHTSA initiated testing to 

examine the practicability of such a 

requirement.2

On August 31, 2006, NHTSA 

published a final rule that increased the 

maximum test speed for the belted rigid 

barrier test using the 5th percentile 

adult female test dummy from 

48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35 mph).3

This new requirement was phased in, 

beginning with the 2010 model year. 

Small manufacturers were not subject to 

this requirement until the completion of 

the phase in period, which was 

September 1, 2012. 

In recent years, NHTSA has addressed 

a number of petitions for exemption 

from some of the initial advanced air 

bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208. 

The majority of these requests came 

from small manufacturers, each of 

which petitioned on the basis that 

achieving compliance would cause it 

substantial economic hardship and that 

it has tried in good faith to comply with 

the standard. In recognition of the more 

limited resources and capabilities of 

small manufacturers, authority to grant 

exemptions based on substantial 

economic hardship and good faith 

efforts was given the agency in 1972 to 

enable it to give those manufacturers 

additional time to comply with the 

Federal safety standards. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES