49938 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

that will not be exceeded, taking into 

account the performance of the highspeed protection system as well as its 

failure modes, failure indications, and 

accompanying flight-manual 

instructions. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the Model 

GVII–G500 airplane. Should Gulfstream 

apply at a later date 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 one model 

of 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 Proposed Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) proposes the 

following special conditions as part of 

the type certification basis for 

Gulfstream Model GVII–G500 airplanes. 

1. In lieu of compliance with 

§ 25.335(b)(1), if the flight-control 

system includes functions that act 

automatically to initiate recovery before 

the end of the 20-second period 

specified in § 25.335(b)(1), VD/MD must 

be determined from the greater of the 

speeds resulting from conditions (a) and 

(b) of these special cConditions. The 

speed increase occurring in these 

maneuvers may be calculated if reliable 

or conservative aerodynamic data are 

used. 

(a) From an initial condition of 

stabilized flight at VC/MC, the airplane 

is upset so as to take up a new flight 

path 7.5 degrees below the initial path. 

Control application, up to full authority, 

is made to try to maintain this new 

flight path. Twenty seconds after 

initiating the upset, manual recovery is 

made at a load factor of 1.5g (0.5 

acceleration increment), or such greater 

load factor that is automatically applied 

by the system with the pilot’s pitch 

control neutral. Power, as specified in 

§ 25.175(b)(1)(iv), is assumed until 

recovery is initiated, at which time 

power reduction, and the use of pilotcontrolled drag devices, may be used. 

(b) From a speed below VC/MC, with 

power to maintain stabilized level flight 

at this speed, the airplane is upset so as 

to accelerate through VC/MC at a flight 

path 15 degrees below the initial path 

(or at the steepest nose-down attitude 

that the system will permit with full 

control authority if less than 15 

degrees). The pilot’s controls may be in 

the neutral position after reaching VC/

MC and before recovery is initiated. 

Recovery may be initiated 3 seconds 

after operation of the high-speed 

warning system by application of a load 

of 1.5g (0.5 acceleration increment), or 

such greater load factor that is 

automatically applied by the system 

with the pilot’s pitch control neutral. 

Power may be reduced simultaneously. 

All other means of decelerating the 

airplane, the use of which is authorized 

up to the highest speed reached in the 

maneuver, may be used. The interval 

between successive pilot actions must 

not be less than 1 second. 

2. The applicant must also 

demonstrate that the speed margin, 

established as above, will not be 

exceeded in inadvertent or gust-induced 

upsets resulting in initiation of the dive 

from non-symmetric attitudes, unless 

the airplane is protected by the flightcontrol laws from getting into nonsymmetric upset conditions. The upset 

maneuvers described in Advisory 

Circular 25–7C, ‘‘Flight Test Guide for 

Certification of Transport Category 

Airplanes,’’ section 8, paragraph 32, 

sub-paragraphs c(3)(a), (b), and (c), may 

be used to comply with this 

requirement. 

3. The probability of any failure of the 

high-speed protection system, which 

would result in an airspeed exceeding 

those determined by Special Conditions 

1 and 2, must be less than 10¥5 per 

flight hour. 

4. Failures of the system must be 

annunciated to the pilots. Flight manual 

instructions must be provided that 

reduce the maximum operating speeds, 

VMO/MMO. With the system failed, the 

operating speed must be reduced to a 

value that maintains a speed margin 

between VMO/MMO and VD/MD, and that 

is consistent with showing compliance 

with § 25.335(b) without the benefit of 

the high-speed protection system. 

5. The applicant may request that the 

Master Minimum Equipment List relief 

for the high-speed protection system be 

considered by the FAA Flight 

Operations Evaluation Board, provided 

that the flight manual instructions 

indicate reduced maximum operating 

speeds as described in Special 

Condition 4. In addition, the flightdeck 

display of the reduced operating speeds, 

as well as the overspeed warning for 

exceeding those speeds, must be 

equivalent to that of the normal airplane 

with the high-speed protection system 

operative. Also, the applicant must 

show that no additional hazards are 

introduced with the high-speed 

protection system inoperative. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

5, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20297 Filed 8–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–2271; Notice No. 25– 

15–06–SC] 

Special Conditions: Cessna Airplane 

Company Model 680A Airplane, SideFacing Seats Equipped With Airbag 

Systems 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed special 

conditions. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes special 

conditions for the Cessna Model 680A 

airplane. This airplane will have novel 

or unusual design features when 

compared to the state of technology 

envisioned in the airworthiness 

standards for transport-category 

airplanes. This design features sidefacing seats equipped with airbag 

systems. The applicable airworthiness 

regulations do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for this 

design feature. These proposed 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: Send your comments on or 

before October 2, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2015–2271 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 49939 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov/, 

including any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot 

.gov/. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Sinclair, FAA, Airframe and Cabin 

Safety, ANM–115, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Airplane Certification 

Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–2195; facsimile 

425–227–1320. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

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. 

Background 

On January 25, 2012, Cessna Airplane 

Company applied for an amendment to 

Type Certificate no. T00012WI to 

include the new Model 680A airplane. 

The Cessna 680A airplane, which is a 

derivative of the Cessna Model 680 

airplane currently approved under Type 

Certificate no. T00012WI, is a new, 

high-performance, low-wing airplane 

derived from the Cessna Model 680 

beginning with serial no. 680–0501. 

This airplane will have a maximum 

takeoff weight of 30,800 pounds with a 

wingspan of 72 feet, and will have two 

aft-mounted Pratt & Whitney PW306D1 

FADEC-controlled turbofan engines. 

The pressurized cabin of the Model 

680A airplane is designed to 

accommodate a crew of two, plus nine 

passengers in the baseline interior 

configuration, and will make use of a 

forward, right-hand-belted, two-place, 

side-facing seat. An optional sevenpassenger interior configuration is also 

offered, which has a single-place sidefacing seat on the forward right-hand 

side of the airplane. Both the baseline 

multiple-place and optional single-place 

side-facing seats are to be occupied for 

taxi, takeoff, and landing, and will 

incorporate an integrated, inflatableairbag occupant-protection system. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of § 21.101, 

Cessna Airplane Company must show 

that the Model 680A airplane meets the 

applicable provisions of the regulations 

listed in Type Certificate no. T00012WI, 

or the applicable regulations in effect on 

the date of application for the change, 

except for earlier amendments as agreed 

upon by the FAA. 

The regulations listed in the type 

certificate are commonly referred to as 

the ‘‘original type certification basis.’’ 

The regulations listed in T00012WI are 

as follows: 

14 CFR part 25, effective February 1, 

1965, including Amendments 25–1 

through 25–98, with special conditions, 

exemptions, and later amended 

sections. 

In addition, the certification basis 

includes other regulations, special 

conditions, and exemptions that are not 

relevant to these proposed special 

conditions. Type Certificate no. 

T00012WI will be updated to include a 

complete description of the certification 

basis for this airplane model. 

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 Cessna Model 680A airplane 

because of a novel or unusual design 

feature, special conditions are 

prescribed under the provisions of 

§ 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, these special conditions 

would also apply to the other model 

under § 21.101. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, the Cessna Model 680A 

airplane must comply with the fuel-vent 

and exhaust-emission requirements of 

14 CFR part 34, and the noisecertification requirements of 14 CFR 

part 36. 

The FAA issues special conditions, as 

defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance 

with § 11.38, and they become part of 

the type-certification basis under 

§ 21.101. 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The Cessna Model 680A airplane will 

incorporate the following novel or 

unusual design features: Inflatable 

airbags on multiple-place and singleplace side-facing seats of Cessna Model 

680A airplanes to reduce the potential 

for both head and leg injury in the event 

of an accident. 

Discussion 

The FAA policy for side-facing seats 

at the time of application was provided 

in Policy Statement ANM–03–115–30. 

This policy statement describes the 

performance criteria and procedures to 

follow to certify single- and multipleplace side-facing seats. 

Also at the time of Cessna’s 

application, the FAA indicated that 

further research would be conducted to 

define criteria to establish a level of 

safety equivalent to that provided by the 

current regulations for forward- and aftfacing seats. Research later conducted 

by the FAA, as documented in report 

DOT/FAA/AR–09/41, resulted in new 

policy issued to identify new 

certification criteria based on the 

research findings. Policy Statement PS– 

ANM–25–03 was released on June 8, 

2012 (and was subsequently revised and 

reissued as Policy Statement PS–ANM– 

25–03–R1 on November 5, 2012). This 

new policy statement describes how to 

certify all side-facing seats to the new 

performance criteria through the 

issuance of special conditions. 

Along with the general seatperformance criteria, also included in 

the policy statement are the 

performance criteria for airbag systems 

used in shoulder-belt restraint systems. 

However, the policy statement does not 

specifically address airbag systems that 

are integrated into passenger-cabin 

monuments. Although the application 

date for the Model 680A airplane 

preceded Policy Statement PS–ANM– 

25–03, Cessna proposed using the 

guidance in Policy Statement PS–ANM– 

25–03–R1 to develop new special 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
49940 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

conditions applicable to the Model 

680A airplane’s side-facing seats. 

These proposed special conditions 

allow installation of an airbag system for 

a two-place side-facing seat and a 

single-place side-facing seat to protect 

the occupant from both head and legflail injury in Model 680A airplanes. 

Cessna’s proposed airbag system is 

designed to limit occupant forward 

excursion in the event of an accident. 

This will reduce the potential for head 

injury by reducing the head-injury 

criteria (HIC) measurement, and will 

also provide a means for limiting the 

lower-leg flail of the occupant. The 

inflatable-airbag system behaves 

similarly to an automotive inflatable 

airbag, but in this design, the airbag 

system is integrated into passengercabin monuments; the airbags inflate 

away from the seated occupants. While 

inflatable airbags are now standard in 

the automotive industry, the use of 

inflatable-airbag systems in commercial 

aviation is novel and unusual. 

14 CFR 25.785 requires that occupants 

must be protected from head injury by 

either the elimination of any injurious 

object within the striking radius of the 

head, or by padding. Traditionally, this 

has required a seat setback of 35 inches 

from any bulkhead or other rigid 

interior feature or, where such spacing 

is not practical, the installation of 

specified types of padding. The relative 

effectiveness of these means of injury 

protection was not quantified in the 

original rule. Amendment 25–64 to 

§ 25.562 established a standard that 

quantifies required head-injury 

protection. 

Section 25.562 specifies that each 

seat-type design, approved for crew or 

passenger occupancy during taxi, 

takeoff, and landing, must successfully 

complete dynamic tests, or be shown to 

be compliant by rational analysis based 

on dynamic tests of a similar type of 

seat. In particular, the regulations 

require that persons must not suffer 

serious head injury under the 

conditions specified in the tests, and 

that protection must be provided, or the 

seat must be designed such that the 

head impact does not exceed a HIC of 

1000 units. While the test conditions 

described for HIC are detailed and 

specific, it is the intent of the 

requirement that an adequate level of 

head-injury protection must be provided 

for passengers the event of an airplane 

accident. 

Because §§ 25.562 and 25.785 and 

associated guidance do not adequately 

address seats with inflatable-airbag 

systems, the FAA recognizes that 

appropriate pass/fail criteria are 

required to fully address the safety 

concerns specific to occupants of these 

seats. Previously issued special 

conditions addressed airbag systems 

integral to the shoulder belt for some 

forward-facing seats. The proposed 

special conditions for the Model 680A 

inflatable-airbag systems are based on 

the shoulder-belt airbag systems. 

Although the special conditions are 

applicable to the inflatable-airbag 

system as installed, compliance with the 

special conditions is not an installation 

approval. Therefore, while the special 

conditions relate to each such system 

installed, the overall installation 

approval is a separate finding, and must 

consider the combined effects of all 

such systems installed. 

Part 25 states the performance criteria 

for head-injury protection in objective 

terms. However, none of these criteria 

are adequate to address the specific 

issues raised concerning seats with 

inflatable-airbag systems. In addition to 

the requirements of part 25, special 

conditions are needed to address 

requirements particular to seats 

equipped with an integrated, inflatableairbag system. 

Part 25, appendix F, part I specifies 

the flammability requirements for 

interior materials and components. This 

rule does not reference inflatable-airbag 

systems because such devices did not 

exist at the time the flammability 

requirements were written. The existing 

requirements are based on material 

types as well as material applications, 

and have been specified in light of the 

state-of-the-art materials available to 

perform a given function. In the absence 

of such a specific reference, the default 

requirement, per the rule, would apply 

to the type of material used in 

constructing the inflatable restraint, 

which, in the case of the rule, would be 

a fabric. 

In writing special conditions, the FAA 

must also consider how the material is 

used within the cabin interior, and 

whether the default requirement is 

appropriate. Here, the specialized 

function of the inflatable-airbag system 

means that highly specialized materials 

are required. The standard normally 

applied to fabrics is a 12-second vertical 

ignition test. However, materials that 

meet this standard do not perform 

adequately as inflatable restraints; and 

materials used in the construction of 

inflatable-airbag systems do not perform 

well in this test. 

Because the safety benefit of the 

inflatable-airbag system is very 

significant, the FAA has determined 

that the flammability standard 

appropriate for these devices should not 

prohibit suitable inflatable-airbag 

system materials; disqualifying these 

materials would effectively not allow 

the use of inflatable-airbag systems. The 

FAA therefore is required to establish a 

balance between the safety benefit of the 

inflatable-airbag system and its 

flammability performance. At this time, 

the 2.5-inches-per-minute horizontal 

burn test provides that necessary 

balance. As the technology in materials 

progresses, the FAA may change this 

standard in subsequent special 

conditions to account for improved 

materials. 

From the standpoint of a passengersafety system, the inflatable-airbag 

system is unique in that it is both an 

active and entirely autonomous device. 

While the automotive industry has good 

experience with inflatable airbags, the 

conditions of use and reliance on the 

inflatable-airbag system as the sole 

means of injury protection are quite 

different. In automobile installations, 

the airbag is a supplemental system and 

works in conjunction with an uppertorso restraint. In addition, the crash 

event is more definable and of typically 

shorter duration, which can simplify the 

activation logic. The airplane-operating 

environment is quite different from 

automobiles, and includes the potential 

for greater wear and tear, and 

unanticipated abuse conditions (due to 

galley loading, passenger baggage, etc.); 

airplanes also operate where exposure 

to high-intensity electromagnetic fields 

could affect the activation system. 

The inflatable-airbag system has two 

potential advantages over other means 

of head-impact protection. First, it can 

provide significantly greater protection 

than would be expected with energyabsorbing pads, and second, it can 

provide essentially equivalent 

protection for occupants of all stature. 

These are significant advantages from a 

safety standpoint because such devices 

will likely provide a level of safety that 

exceeds the minimum standards of the 

Federal aviation regulations. 

Conversely, inflatable-airbag systems 

are, in general, active systems and must 

be relied upon to activate properly 

when needed, as opposed to an energyabsorbing pad or upper torso restraint 

that is passive and always available. 

Therefore, the potential advantages 

must be balanced against this and other 

potential disadvantages in developing 

standards for this design feature. 

The FAA considers the installation of 

inflatable-airbag systems to have two 

primary safety concerns: First, that they 

perform properly under foreseeable 

operating conditions, and second, that 

they do not perform in a manner or at 

such times as would constitute a hazard 

to the airplane or occupants. This latter 

point has the potential to be the more 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 49941 

rigorous of the requirements, owing to 

the active nature of the system. 

The inflatable-airbag system will rely 

on electronic sensors for signaling, and 

a stored gas canister for inflation. The 

sensors and canister could be 

susceptible to inadvertent activation, 

causing a potentially unsafe 

deployment. The consequences of 

inadvertent deployment, as well as a 

failure to deploy in a timely manner, 

must be considered in establishing the 

reliability of the system. Cessna must 

substantiate that an inadvertent 

deployment in-flight either would not 

cause injuries to occupants, or that the 

probability of such a deployment meets 

the requirements of § 25.1309(b). The 

effect of an inadvertent deployment on 

a passenger or crewmember, who could 

be positioned close to an airbag, should 

also be considered. The person could be 

either standing or sitting. A minimum 

reliability level must be established for 

this case, depending upon the 

consequences, even if the effect on the 

airplane is negligible. 

The potential for an inadvertent 

deployment could increase as a result of 

conditions in service. The installation 

must take into account wear and tear so 

that the likelihood of an inadvertent 

deployment is not increased to an 

unacceptable level. In this context, an 

appropriate inspection interval and selftest capability are considered necessary. 

In addition, outside influences, such as 

lightning and high-intensity radiated 

fields (HIRF), may also contribute to or 

cause inadvertent deployment. Existing 

regulations regarding lightning, 

§ 25.1316, and HIRF, § 25.1317, are 

applicable to the Model 680A airplane. 

The applicant must verify that 

electromagnetic interference (EMI) 

present, under foreseeable operating 

conditions, will not affect the function 

of the inflatable-airbag system or cause 

inadvertent deployment. Finally, the 

inflatable-airbag system installation 

must be protected from the effects of 

fire, so that an additional hazard is not 

created by, for example, a rupture of the 

pyrotechnic squib. 

To be an effective safety system, the 

inflatable-airbag system must function 

properly and must not introduce any 

additional hazards to occupants or the 

airplane as a result of its functioning. 

The inflatable-airbag system differs from 

traditional occupant-protection systems 

in several ways, requiring special 

conditions to ensure adequate 

performance. 

Because the inflatable-airbag system is 

a single-use device, it potentially could 

deploy under crash conditions that are 

not sufficiently severe as to require 

injury protection from the inflatableairbag system. Because an actual crash 

is frequently composed of a series of 

impacts before the airplane comes to 

rest, this could render the inflatableairbag system useless if a larger impact 

follows the initial impact. This situation 

does not exist with energy absorbing 

pads or upper-torso restraints, which 

tend to provide continuous protection 

regardless of severity or number of 

impacts in a crash event. Therefore, the 

inflatable-airbag system installation 

should provide protection, when it is 

required, and not expend its protection 

when it is not required. And while 

several large impact events may occur 

during the course of a crash, there are 

no requirements for the inflatable-airbag 

system to provide protection for 

multiple impacts. 

Each occupant’s restraint system 

provides protection for that occupant 

only. Likewise, the installation must 

address seats that are unoccupied. The 

applicant must show that the required 

protection is provided for each occupant 

regardless of the number of occupied 

seats, considering that unoccupied seats 

may have airbag systems that are active. 

The inflatable-airbag system should 

be effective for a wide range of 

occupants. The FAA has historically 

considered the range from the 5th 

percentile female to the 95th percentile 

male as the range of occupants that must 

be taken into account. In this case, the 

FAA is proposing consideration of a 

broader range of occupants, i.e., a twoyear-old child to a 95th percentile male, 

plus pregnant females. This is due to the 

nature of the inflatable-airbag system 

installation and its close proximity to 

the occupant. In a similar vein, these 

persons could assume the brace position 

for those accidents where an impact is 

anticipated. Test data indicate that 

occupants in the brace position do not 

require supplemental protection, and so 

it would not be necessary to show that 

the inflatable-airbag system will 

enhance the brace position. However, 

the inflatable-airbag system must not 

introduce a hazard in the case of 

deploying into the seated, braced 

occupant. 

Another area of concern is the use of 

seats so equipped, by children, whether 

lap-held, in approved child-safety seats, 

or occupying the seat directly. 

Similarly, if the seat is occupied by a 

pregnant woman, the installation should 

address such use, either by 

demonstrating that it will function 

properly, or by adding appropriate 

limitation on persons allowed to occupy 

the seat. 

Given that the airbag system will be 

electrically powered, the possibility 

exists that the system could fail due to 

a separation in the fuselage. And 

because this system is intended as a 

means of crash/post-crash protection, 

failure to deploy due to fuselage 

separation is not acceptable. As with 

emergency lighting, the system should 

function properly if such a separation 

occurs at any point in the fuselage. As 

required by § 25.1353(a), operation of 

the existing airplane electrical 

equipment should not adversely impact 

the function of the inflatable-airbag 

system under all foreseeable conditions. 

The inflatable-airbag system is likely 

to have a large volume displacement, 

and, likewise, the inflated airbag could 

potentially impede egress of passengers. 

Because the airbag deflates to absorb 

energy, it is likely that an inflatableairbag system would be deflated at the 

time that persons would be trying to 

leave their seats. Nonetheless, the FAA 

considers it appropriate to specify a 

time interval after which the inflatableairbag system may not impede rapid 

egress. Ten seconds is indicated as a 

reasonable time because this 

corresponds to the maximum time 

allowed for an exit to be openable 

(reference: § 25.809). 

The FAA position is provided in 

Policy Statement PS–ANM–25–03–R1 

‘‘Technical Criteria for Approving Side 

Facing Seats.’’ This policy statement 

refers to airbag systems in the shoulder 

belts, while Cessna’s design 

configuration has airbag systems 

integrated into the side-facing seats. The 

FAA genericized these proposed special 

conditions to be applicable to the 

Cessna design configuration. 

These proposed 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 are applicable to the Cessna 

Model 680A airplane. Should Cessna 

apply at a later date for a change to the 

type certificate to include another 

model incorporating the same novel or 

unusual design feature, these special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

of airplane. It is not a rule of general 

applicability. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Airplane, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
49942 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, 44704. 

The Proposed Special Conditions 

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) proposes the 

following special conditions are issued 

as part of the type certification basis for 

Cessna Model 680A airplanes. 

In addition to the requirements of 

§§ 25.562 and 25.785, the following 

special conditions 1 and 2 are proposed 

as part of the type certification basis of 

the Model 680A airplane with sidefacing seat installations. For seat places 

equipped with airbag systems, 

additional special conditions 3 through 

16 are proposed as part of the type 

certification basis. 

1. Additional requirements applicable 

to tests or rational analysis conducted to 

show compliance with §§ 25.562 and 

25.785 for side-facing seats: 

1.1. The longitudinal tests conducted 

in accordance with § 25.562(b)(2), to 

show compliance with the seat-strength 

requirements of § 25.562(c)(7) and (8) 

and these special conditions, must have 

an ES–2re anthropomorphic test dummy 

(ATD) (49 CFR part 572, subpart U) or 

equivalent, or a Hybrid-II ATD (49 CFR 

part 572, subpart B, as specified in 

§ 25.562) or equivalent, occupying each 

seat position, and including all items 

contactable by the occupant (e.g., 

armrest, interior wall, or furnishing) if 

those items are necessary to restrain the 

occupant. If included, the floor 

representation and contactable items 

must be located such that their relative 

position, with respect to the center of 

the nearest seat place, is the same at the 

start of the test as before floor 

misalignment is applied. For example, if 

floor misalignment rotates the centerline 

of the seat place nearest the contactable 

item 8 degrees clockwise about the 

airplane x-axis, then the item and floor 

representations also must be rotated by 

8 degrees clockwise to maintain the 

same relative position to the seat place, 

as shown in Figure 1 of these special 

conditions. Each ATD’s relative position 

to the seat, after application of floor 

misalignment, must be the same as 

before misalignment is applied. To 

ensure proper loading of the seat by the 

occupants, the ATD pelvis must remain 

supported by the seat pan, and the 

restraint system must remain on the 

pelvis and shoulder of the ATD until 

rebound begins. No injury-criteria 

evaluation is necessary for tests 

conducted only to assess seat-strength 

requirements. 

1.2. The longitudinal tests conducted 

in accordance with § 25.562(b)(2), to 

show compliance with the injury 

assessments required by § 25.562(c) and 

these special conditions, may be 

conducted separately from the tests to 

show structural integrity. In this case, 

structural-assessment tests must be 

conducted as specified in paragraph 1.1 

of these special conditions, and the 

injury-assessment test must be 

conducted without yaw or floor 

misalignment. Injury assessments may 

be accomplished by testing with ES–2re 

ATD (49 CFR part 572, subpart U) or 

equivalent at all places. Alternatively, 

these assessments may be accomplished 

by multiple tests that use an ES–2re at 

the seat place being evaluated, and a 

Hybrid-II ATD (49 CFR part 572, subpart 

B, as specified in § 25.562) or equivalent 

used in all seat places forward of the 

one being assessed, to evaluate occupant 

interaction. In this case, seat places aft 

of the one being assessed may be 

unoccupied. If a seat installation 

includes adjacent items that are 

contactable by the occupant, the injury 

potential of that contact must be 

assessed. To make this assessment, tests 

may be conducted that include the 

actual item, located and attached in a 

representative fashion. Alternatively, 

the injury potential may be assessed by 

a combination of tests with items having 

the same geometry as the actual item, 

but having stiffness characteristics that 

would create the worst case for injury 

(injuries due to both contact with the 

item and lack of support from the item). 

1.3. If a seat is installed aft of 

structure (e.g., an interior wall or 

furnishing) that does not have a 

homogeneous surface contactable by the 

occupant, additional analysis and/or 

tests may be required to demonstrate 

that the injury criteria are met for the 

area upon which an occupant could 

contact. For example, different yaw 

angles could result in different injury 

considerations, and may require 

additional analysis or separate tests to 

evaluate. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 49943 

1.4. To accommodate a range of 

occupant heights (5th percentile female 

to 95th percentile male), the surface of 

items contactable by the occupant must 

be homogenous 7.3 inches (185 mm) 

above and 7.9 inches (200 mm) below 

the point (center of area) that is 

contacted by the 50th percentile malesized ATD’s head during the 

longitudinal tests, conducted in 

accordance with paragraphs 1.1, 1.2, 

and 1.3 of these special conditions. 

Otherwise, additional HIC assessment 

tests may be necessary. Any surface 

(inflatable or otherwise) that provides 

support for the occupant of any seat 

place must provide that support in a 

consistent manner regardless of 

occupant stature. For example, if an 

inflatable shoulder belt is used to 

mitigate injury risk, then it must be 

demonstrated by inspection to bear 

against the range of occupants in a 

similar manner before and after 

inflation. Likewise, the means of 

limiting lower-leg flail must be 

demonstrated by inspection to provide 

protection for the range of occupants in 

a similar manner. 

1.5. For longitudinal tests conducted 

in accordance with 14 CFR 25.562(b)(2) 

and these special conditions, the ATDs 

must be positioned, clothed, and have 

lateral instrumentation configured as 

follows: 

1.5.1. ATD positioning: Lower the 

ATD vertically into the seat (see Figure 

2 of these special conditions) while 

simultaneously: 

1.5.1.1. Aligning the midsagittal plane 

(a vertical plane through the midline of 

the body; dividing the body into right 

and left halves) with approximately the 

middle of the seat place. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP18AU15.014</GPH>
49944 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1.5.1.2. Applying a horizontal x-axis 

direction (in the ATD coordinate 

system) force of about 20 lb (89 N) to the 

torso, at approximately the intersection 

of the midsagittal plane and the bottom 

rib of the ES–2re or lower sternum of 

the Hybrid-II at the midsagittal plane, to 

compress the seat-back cushion. 

1.5.1.3. Keeping the upper legs nearly 

horizontal by supporting them just 

behind the knees. 

1.5.2. After all lifting devices have 

been removed from the ATD: 

1.5.2.1. Rock it slightly to settle it into 

the seat. 

1.5.2.2. Separate the knees by about 4 

inches (100 mm). 

1.5.2.3. Set the ES–2re’s head at 

approximately the midpoint of the 

available range of z-axis rotation (to 

align the head and torso midsagittal 

planes). 

1.5.2.4. Position the ES–2re’s arms at 

the joint’s mechanical detent that puts 

them at approximately a 40-degree angle 

with respect to the torso. Position the 

Hybrid-II ATD hands on top of its upper 

legs. 

1.5.2.5. Position the feet such that the 

centerlines of the lower legs are 

approximately parallel to a lateral 

vertical plane (in the airplane 

coordinate system). 

1.5.3. ATD clothing: Clothe each ATD 

in form-fitting, mid-calf-length 

(minimum) pants and shoes (size 11E), 

all clothing weighing about 2.5 lb (1.1 

Kg) total. The color of the clothing 

should be in contrast to the color of the 

restraint system. The ES–2re jacket is 

sufficient for torso clothing, although a 

form-fitting shirt may be used in 

addition if desired. 

1.5.4. ES–2re ATD lateral 

instrumentation: The rib-module linear 

slides are directional, i.e., deflection 

occurs in either a positive or negative 

ATD y-axis direction. The modules 

must be installed such that the moving 

end of the rib module is toward the 

front of the airplane. The three 

abdominal-force sensors must be 

installed such that they are on the side 

of the ATD toward the front of the 

airplane. 

1.6. The combined horizontal/vertical 

test, required by § 25.562(b)(1) and these 

special conditions, must be conducted 

with a Hybrid II ATD (49 CFR part 572, 

subpart B, as specified in § 25.562), or 

equivalent, occupying each seat 

position. 

1.7. The design and installation of 

seatbelt buckles must prevent 

unbuckling due to applied inertial 

forces or impact of the hands/arms of 

the occupant during an emergency 

landing. 

1.8. Inflatable-airbag systems must be 

active during all dynamic tests 

conducted to show compliance with 

§ 25.562. 

2. Additional performance measures 

applicable to tests and rational analysis 

conducted to show compliance with 

§§ 25.562 and 25.785 for side-facing 

seats: 

2.1. Body-to-body contact: Contact 

between the head, pelvis, torso, or 

shoulder area of one ATD with the 

adjacent-seated ATD’s head, pelvis, 

torso, or shoulder area is not allowed. 

Contact during rebound is allowed. 

2.2. Thoracic: The deflection of any of 

the ES–2re ATD upper, middle, and 

lower ribs must not exceed 1.73 inches 

(44 mm). Data must be processed as 

defined in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards (FMVSS) 571.214. 

2.3. Abdominal: The sum of the 

measured ES–2re ATD front, middle, 

and rear abdominal forces must not 

exceed 562 lbs (2,500 N). Data must be 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP18AU15.015</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 159 / Tuesday, August 18, 2015 / Proposed Rules 49945 

processed as defined in FMVSS 

571.214. 

2.4. Pelvic: The pubic symphysis 

force measured by the ES–2re ATD must 

not exceed 1,350 lbs (6,000 N). Data 

must be processed as defined in FMVSS 

571.214. 

2.5. Leg: Axial rotation of the upper 

leg (femur) must be limited to 35 

degrees in either direction from the 

nominal seated position. 

2.6. Neck: As measured by the ES–2re 

ATD and filtered at CFC 600 as defined 

in SAE J211: 

2.6.1. The upper-neck tension force at 

the occipital condyle (O.C.) location 

must be less than 405 lb (1,800 N). 

2.6.2. The upper-neck compression 

force at the O.C. location must be less 

than 405 lb (1,800 N). 

2.6.3. The upper-neck bending torque 

about the ATD x-axis at the O.C. 

location must be less than 1,018 in.-lb 

(115 N-m). 

2.6.4. The upper-neck resultant shear 

force at the O.C. location must be less 

than 186 lb (825 N). 

2.7. Occupant (ES–2re ATD) 

retention: The pelvic restraint must 

remain on the ES–2re ATD’s pelvis 

during the impact and rebound phases 

of the test. The upper-torso restraint 

straps (if present) must remain on the 

ATD’s shoulder during the impact. 

2.8. Occupant (ES–2re ATD) support: 

2.8.1. Pelvis excursion: The loadbearing portion of the bottom of the 

ATD pelvis must not translate beyond 

the edges of its seat’s bottom seatcushion supporting structure. 

2.8.2. Upper-torso support: The lateral 

flexion of the ATD torso must not 

exceed 40 degrees from the normal 

upright position during the impact. 

3. For seats with an airbag system, 

show that the airbag system will deploy 

and provide protection under crash 

conditions where it is necessary to 

prevent serious injury. The means of 

protection must take into consideration 

a range of stature from a 2-year-old child 

to 95th percentile male. The airbag 

system must provide a consistent 

approach to energy absorption 

throughout that range of occupants. 

When the seat systems include airbag 

systems, the systems must be included 

in each of the certification tests as they 

would be installed in the airplane. In 

addition, the following situations must 

be considered: 

3.1. The seat occupant is holding an 

infant. 

3.2. The seat occupant is a pregnant 

woman. 

4. The airbag systems must provide 

adequate protection for each occupant 

regardless of the number of occupants of 

the seat assembly, considering that 

unoccupied seats may have an active 

airbag system. 

5. The design must prevent the airbag 

systems from being either incorrectly 

buckled or incorrectly installed, such 

that the airbag systems would not 

properly deploy. Alternatively, it must 

be shown that such deployment is not 

hazardous to the occupant and will 

provide the required injury protection. 

6. It must be shown that the airbag 

system is not susceptible to inadvertent 

deployment as a result of wear and tear, 

or inertial loads resulting from in-flight 

or ground maneuvers (including gusts 

and hard landings), and other operating 

and environment conditions (vibrations, 

moisture, etc.) likely to occur in service. 

7. Deployment of the airbag system 

must not introduce injury mechanisms 

to the seated occupant, nor result in 

injuries that could impede rapid egress. 

This assessment should include an 

occupant whose restraint is loosely 

fastened. 

8. It must be shown that inadvertent 

deployment of the airbag system, during 

the most critical part of the flight, will 

either meet the requirement of 

§ 25.1309(b) or not cause a hazard to the 

airplane or its occupants. 

9. It must be shown that the airbag 

system will not impede rapid egress of 

occupants 10 seconds after airbag 

deployment. 

10. The airbag systems must be 

protected from lightning and highintensity radiated fields (HIRF). The 

threats to the airplane specified in 

existing regulations regarding lighting, 

§ 25.1316, and HIRF, § 25.1317 apply to 

these special conditions for the purpose 

of measuring lightning and HIRF 

protection. 

11. The airbag system must function 

properly after loss of normal airplane 

electrical power, and after a transverse 

separation of the fuselage at the most 

critical location. A separation at the 

location of the airbag systems does not 

have to be considered. 

12. It must be shown that the airbag 

system will not release hazardous 

quantities of gas or particulate matter 

into the cabin. 

13. The airbag system installations 

must be protected from the effects of fire 

such that no hazard to occupants will 

result. 

14. A means must be available for a 

crew member to verify the integrity of 

the airbag system’s activation system 

prior to each flight, or it must be 

demonstrated to reliably operate 

between inspection intervals. The FAA 

considers that the loss of the airbagsystem deployment function alone (i.e., 

independent of the conditional event 

that requires the airbag-system 

deployment) is a major-failure 

condition. 

15. The inflatable material may not 

have an average burn rate of greater than 

2.5 inches/minute when tested using the 

horizontal flammability test defined in 

14 CFR part 25, appendix F, part I, 

paragraph (b)(5). 

16. The airbag system, once deployed, 

must not adversely affect the emergency 

lighting system (e.g., block floor 

proximity lights to the extent that the 

lights no longer meet their intended 

function). 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

5, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20300 Filed 8–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Office of Workers’ Compensation 

Programs 

20 CFR Parts 702 and 703 

RIN 1240–AA09 

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ 

Compensation Act: Transmission of 

Documents and Information 

AGENCY: Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs, Labor. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs (OWCP) 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and companion direct final 

rule in the Federal Register on March 

12, 2015, broadening the acceptable 

methods by which claimants, 

employers, and insurers can 

communicate with OWCP and each 

other regarding claims arising under the 

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ 

Compensation Act and its extensions. 

The comment period closed on May 11, 

2015. OWCP did not receive significant 

adverse comment and therefore the 

direct final rule took effect on June 10, 

2015. For these reasons, OWCP is 

withdrawing the notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Effective August 18, 2015, the 

notice of proposed rulemaking 

published on March 12, 2015 (80 FR 

12957), is withdrawn. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Antonio Rios, Director, Division of 

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ 

Compensation, Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs, U.S. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS