### 20769 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

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 Embraer S.A. Model EMB–550 airplanes.

1. Flight Envelope Protection: Normal Load Factor (g ) Limiting. To meet the intent of adequate maneuverability and controllability required by § 25.143(a), and in addition to the requirements of § 25.143(a) and in the absence of other limiting factors, the following special conditions are issued based on § 25.333(b):

(a) The positive limiting load factor must not be less than:

(1) 2.5 g for the normal state of the electronic flight control system with the high lift devices retracted.

(2) 2.0g for the normal state of the electronic flight control system with the high lift devices extended.

(b) The negative limiting load factor must be equal to or more negative than:

(1) Minus 1.0 g for the normal state of the electronic flight control system with the high lift devices retracted.

(2) 0.0g for the normal state of the electronic flight control system with high lift devices extended.

(c) Maximum reachable positive load factor wings level may be limited by the characteristics of the electronic flight control system or flight envelope protections (other than load factor protection) provided that:

(1) The required values are readily achievable in turns, and

(2) That wings level pitch up is satisfactory.

(d) Maximum achievable negative load factor may be limited by the characteristics of the electronic flight control system or flight envelope protections (other than load factor protection) provided that:

(1) Pitch down responsiveness is satisfactory, and

(2) From level flight, 0g is readily achievable, or alternatively, a satisfactory trajectory change is readily achievable at operational speeds. For the FAA to consider a trajectory change as satisfactory, the applicant should propose and justify a pitch rate that provides sufficient maneuvering capability in the most critical scenarios.

(e) Compliance demonstration with the above requirements may be performed without ice accretion on the airframe.

(f) These special conditions do not impose an upper bound for the normal load factor limit, nor does it require that the limiter exist. If the limit is set at a value beyond the structural design limit maneuvering load factor n of §§ 25.333(b), 25.337(b), 25.337(c), there should be a very obvious positive tactile feel built into the controller so that it serves as a deterrent to inadvertently exceeding the structural limit.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 8,
2014. John P. Piccola, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–08275 Filed 4–11–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 36**

**[Docket No. FAA–2012–0948; Amdt. No. 36– 30]** 

**RIN 2120–AJ96**

**Stage 3 Helicopter Noise Certification Standards; Correction** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule; correction.

**SUMMARY :**  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published in the Federal Register of March 4, 2014 a document adopting more stringent noise certification standards for helicopters that are certificated in the United States (U.S.). Inadvertently the incorrect amendment number was assigned. This document corrects the amendment number cited in the heading of the final rule.

**DATES :**  This correction is effective April 14, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Katherine Haley, Office of Rulemaking, ARM–203, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–5708; fax (202) 267–5075; email ralen.gao@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The FAA published a document in the Federal Register of March 4, 2014 (79 FR 12040) as Amendment Number 36–29. In FR Doc. 2014–04479, Amdt. No. 36–29 is incorrect. This document corrects the amendment number published on March 4, 2014.

In FR Doc. 2014–04479, beginning on page 12040 in the Federal Register of March 4, 2014, make the following correction:

On page 12040, in the second column heading, correct the amendment number from ‘‘36–29’’ to ‘‘36–30’’.

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 4,
2014. Lirio Liu, Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014–07941 Filed 4–11–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 71**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–0951; Airspace Docket No. 13–ASW–22]** 

**RIN 2120–AA66**

**Modification of Area Navigation (RNAV) Route Q–20, TX** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  This action modifies RNAV route Q–20 by relocating the FUSCO waypoint (WP) southwest to match the intersection of Jet routes J–15 and J–183. This action enhances the safe and efficient management of aircraft within the National Airspace System.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: 0901 UTC, July 24, 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 :**  Colby Abbott, 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

The FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Q–20 by moving the FUSCO WP to match the intersection of Jet Routes J–15 and J– 183, and re-designate the WP as a fix (78 FR 70900, November 27, 2013). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.