### 68108 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

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 by the closing date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we
receive.
Type Certification Basis

Under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, Dassault must show that the Model Falcon 900EX airplane meets the applicable provisions of 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–129.

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 Model Falcon 900EX airplane because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under § 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 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 Model Falcon 900EX airplane must comply with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of14 CFR part 34, and the noisecertification requirements of 14 CFR part 36. The FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under section 611 of Public Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’

The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, under § 11.38,and they become part of the typecertification basis under § 21.17(a)(2).
Novel or Unusual Design Features

The Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplane will incorporate the following novel or unusual design feature:

The digital systems architecture for the Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplane is composed of several connected networks. This network architecture is used for a diverse set of functions, providing data connectivity between systems, including:

1. Airplane control, communication, display, monitoring and navigation systems,

2. Operator business and administrative support systems, 3. Passenger entertainment systems, and

4. Access by systems external to the airplane.

Discussion

The Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplane network architecture and configuration may allow increased connectivity to, and access from, external network sources, and operator operations and maintenance networks to the airplane control domain and operator-information-services domain. The airplane-control domain and operator-information-services domain perform functions required for the safe operation and maintenance of the airplane. Previously, these domains had very limited connectivity with external network sources. The network architecture and configuration mayallow the exploitation of networksecurity vulnerabilities resulting in intentional or unintentional destruction, disruption, degradation, or exploitation of data, systems, and networks critical to the safety and maintenance of the airplane.

The existing regulations and guidance material did not anticipate these types of airplane system architectures. Furthermore, 14 CFR regulations and current system-safety assessment policy and techniques do not address potential security vulnerabilities, which could be exploited by unauthorized access to airplane networks, data buses, and servers. Therefore, these special conditions are to ensure that unauthorized wired or wireless electronic connections do not compromise the security (i.e., confidentiality, integrity, and availability) of airplane systems.

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.
Applicability

As discussed above, these special conditions apply to the Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplane. Should Dassault apply later 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 the Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplane. 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 specialconditions are issued as part of the typecertification basis for Dassault Model Falcon 900EX airplanes.

1. The applicant must ensure airplane electronic system-security protection from access by unauthorized sources external to the airplane, including those possibly caused by maintenance activity.

2. The applicant must ensure that electronic system-security threats are identified and assessed, and that effective electronic system-security protection strategies are implemented to protect the airplane from all adverse impacts on safety, functionality, and continued airworthiness.

3. The applicant must establish appropriate procedures to allow the operator to ensure that continued airworthiness of the airplane ismaintained, including all post-typecertification modifications that may have an impact on the approved electronic system-security safeguards.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 5, 2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–26819 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0337; Directorate Identifier 2013–SW–029–AD; Amendment**  **39–18008; AD 2014–22–03]**

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Various Restricted Category Helicopters** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–14– 11 for Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. (AFE), Rotorcraft Development


### 68109 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Corporation (RDC), and San Joaquin Helicopters (SJH) Model OH–58A, OH– 58A+, and OH–58C helicopters. AD 2012–14–11 required inspecting the main rotor mast (mast) for a crack. This new AD expands the mast inspection area, changes the inspection to a repetitive inspection, and removes the reporting requirement. The actions in this AD are intended to prevent failure of the mast and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

**DATES :**  This AD is effective December 19, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  For Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. service information identified in this AD, contact Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc., 2081 South Wildcat Way, Porterville, CA 93257; telephone (559) 781–8604; fax (559) 781–9271; email afe@arrowfalcon.com.

For Rotorcraft Development Corporation service information, contact Rotorcraft Development Corporation, PO Box 430, 1004 Eastside Highway, Corvallis, MT 59828; telephone (406) 961–4100; fax (406) 961–4101; or at http://www.rotorcraftdevelopment.com.

For United States Army service information, contact Commander, U. S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, ATTN: AMSAM–MMA–NP, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898–5000, telephone (256) 876–4044; or at https:// www.logsa.army.mil/etmpdf/files/ 030000/035016.pdf.

You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA–2014–0337; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  John Cecil, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone (562) 627–5228; email john.cecil@faa.gov; or Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, Denver Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 26805 East 68th Ave., Room 214, Denver, CO 80249; telephone (303) 342–1086; email roger.caldwell@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to remove AD 2012–14–11, Amendment 39–17125 (77 FR 42971, July 23, 2012) and add a new AD. AD 2012–14–11 applied to AFE, RDC, and SJH Model OH–58A, OH–58A+, and OH–58C helicopters and required overhauling the mast and performing magnetic particle, fluorescent penetrant, and visual inspections for a crack, pitting, or corrosion in the threaded area of the mast and associated parts. AD 2012–14–11 also required replacing the mast and reporting the results of the inspections if any crack, pitting, or corrosion was found. AD 2012–14–11 was prompted by two mast failures caused by fatigue cracking and was intended to prevent failure of the mast and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31233) and proposed retaining the mast inspection and overhaul requirements of AD 2012–14–11, while changing the compliance time for the inspection from within 30 days to within 90 days, repeating the inspection every 1,200 hours TIS or 3 years, expanding the inspection area, and removing the reporting requirement.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM (79 FR 31233, June 2, 2014).

FAA’s Determination

We have reviewed the relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Related Service Information

AFE issued Alert Service Bulletin (ASB): 2012–58–01, Revision 1, dated February 20, 2012 (ASB 2012–58–01), which specifies overhauling and inspecting the mast for any cracks, pitting, or corrosion by following the procedures in the United States Army Aviation Unit and Intermediate Maintenance Manual TM55–1520–228– 23. ASB 2012–58–01 further specifies replacing any mast with a crack, pitting, or corrosion beyond surface rust that is removed with a wire brush or steel wool in the threaded portion of the mast.

RDC has issued ASB No. OH–58–13– 01, dated January 30, 2013, which describes additional procedures for inspecting the mast and establishes an overhaul interval of 1,200 hours TIS or 3 years, whichever occurs first.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

The service information does not apply to SJH helicopters. Those helicopters are included in this AD because they have the same mast design and are operated similarly to the AFE and RDC fleets.
Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 80 helicopters of U.S. Registry and that operators will incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. At an average labor rate of $85 per hour, inspecting the mast requires about 20 work hours, for a total cost of $1,700 per helicopter, and a total cost to the U.S. operator fleet of $136,000. Replacing a cracked main rotor mast requires about 20 work hours, and required parts cost $11,891, for a total cost per helicopter of $13,591.
Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking
action.
Regulatory Findings

We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.


### 68110 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that a regulatory distinction is required, and

(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

**PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES** 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–14–11, Amendment 39–17125 (77 FR 42971, July 23, 2012), and adding the following new AD:
2014–22–03 Various Restricted Category Helicopters: Amendment 39–18008; Docket No. FAA–2014–0337; Directorate Identifier 2014–SW–029–AD.

(a) Applicability

This AD applies to Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. (AFE), Rotorcraft Development Corporation (RDC) (formerly Garlick Helicopter Corporation, and Garlick Helicopter, Inc.), and San Joaquin Helicopters (SJH) Model OH–58A, OH–58A+, and OH–58C helicopters, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in the main rotor mast, which could result in failure of the mast and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected AD

This AD supersedes AD 2012–14–11, Amendment 39–17125 (77 FR 42971, July 23, 2012). (d) Effective Date

This AD becomes effective December 19,

2014.
(e) Compliance

You are responsible for performing each action required by this AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

(1) Within 90 days, unless accomplished previously within the last 12 months, and thereafter at intervals not exceeding 1,200 hours time-in-service or 3 years, whichever
occurs earlier:

(i) Remove any surface rust with a wire brush or steel wool and, using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass, inspect the
areas of the mast as shown in area E and area J of Figure 1 to Paragraph (f) of this AD for pitting, corrosion, or a crack.

(ii) Overhaul the main rotor mast assembly and magnetic particle inspect the mast; mast bearing nut; plate, mast and seal; and bearing
liner for a crack.

(iii) Fluorescent penetrant inspect the locking plate for a crack.

(2) If there is a crack, pitting, or corrosion, before further flight, replace the mast with an airworthy mast.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) For AFE and SJH helicopters, the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: John Cecil, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone (562) 627–5228; email john.cecil@faa.gov.

(2) For RDC helicopters, the Manager, Denver Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, Denver Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 26805 East 68th Ave., Room 214, Denver, CO 80249; telephone (303) 342– 1086; email roger.caldwell@faa.gov.

(3) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office before


### 68111 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

(1) Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc., Alert Service Bulletin: 2012–58–01, Revision 1, dated February 20, 2012, which is not incorporated by reference, contains more information about the subject of this AD. For Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. service information identified in this AD, contact Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc., 2081 South Wildcat Way, Porterville, CA 93257; telephone (559) 781–8604; fax (559) 781– 9271; email afe@arrowfalcon.com.

(2) Rotorcraft Development Corporation Alert Service Bulletin No. OH58–13–01, dated January 30, 2013, which is not incorporated by reference, contains more information about the subject of this AD. For Rotorcraft Development Corporation service information, contact Rotorcraft Development Corporation, PO Box 430, 1004 Eastside Highway, Corvallis, MT 59828; telephone (406) 961–4100; fax (406) 961–4101; or at http://www.rotorcraftdevelopment.com.

(3) United States Army Technical Manual Aviation Unit and Intermediate Maintenance Manual Army Model OH–58A and OH–58C Helicopters, TM 55–1520–228–23–1, which is not incorporated by reference, contains more information about the subject of this AD. For United States Army service information, contact Commander, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, ATTN: AMSAM–MMA–NP, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898–5000, telephone (256) 876–4044; or at https://www.logsa.army.mil/etmpdf/files/ 030000/035016.pdf.

(4) You may review the service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
(i) Subject

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6300: Main Rotor Drive.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 24,

2014. Lance T. Gant, Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–26829 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 71**

**[Docket No. 2014–0540; Amendment No. 71–46]** 

**RIN 2120–AA66**

**Airspace Designations; Incorporation by Reference Amendments** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule, technical amendment. **SUMMARY :**  This action incorporates certain amendments into FAA Order 7400.9Y, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15, 2014, for incorporation by reference in 14 CFR § 71.1.

**DATES :**  Effective date 0901 UTC November 14, 2014. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Sarah A. Combs, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267–8783.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  History

Federal Aviation Administration Airspace Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1, is published yearly. Amendments referred to as ‘‘effective date straddling amendments’’ were published under Order 7400.9X (dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013), but became effective under Order 7400.9Y (dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15, 2014). This action incorporates these rules into the current FAA Order 7400.9Y.

Accordingly, as this is an administrative correction to update final rule amendments into FAA Order 7400.9Y, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary. Also, to bring these rules and legal descriptions current, I find that good cause exists, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

The Rule

This action amends title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 to incorporate certain final rules into the current FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15, 2014, which are depicted on aeronautical charts.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency’s authority.

This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it makes the necessary updates for airspace areas within the National Airspace System.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

**PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR**  **TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS** 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 1963 Comp., p. 389.

■ 2. Section 71.1 is revised to read as follows:

**§ 71.1 [Amended]**

For Docket No. FAA–2013–0171; Airspace Docket No. 13–ANM–6 (79 FR 35279, June 20, 2014). On page 35279, column 3, line 6, under History; and on page 35280, column 1, line 63, under Amendatory Instruction 2 remove ‘‘. . . FAA Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013, . . .’’ and add in its place ‘‘FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15, 2014, . . .’’.