Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1133 

hundredweight is established for 

Riverside County, California dates. 

Dated: January 2, 2013. 

David R. Shipman, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00185 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 21 and 36 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0629; Amdt. Nos. 

21–97; 36–29] 

RIN 2120–AJ76 

Noise Certification Standards for 

Tiltrotors 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule amends the 

regulations governing noise certification 

standards for issuing type and 

airworthiness certificates for a new 

civil, hybrid airplane-rotorcraft known 

as the tiltrotor. This noise standard 

establishes new noise limits and 

procedures as the basis to ensure 

consistent aviation noise reduction 

technology is incorporated in tiltrotors 

for environmental protection. It 

provides uniform noise certification 

standards for tiltrotors certificated in the 

United States and harmonizes the U.S. 

regulations with the standards of the 

International Civil Aviation 

Organization’s (ICAO) Annex 16. 

DATES: Effective March 11, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: For information on where to 

obtain copies of rulemaking documents 

and other information related to this 

final rule, see ‘‘How To Obtain 

Additional Information’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this final 

rule contact Sandy Liu, AEE–100, Office 

of Environment and Energy, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 

493–4864; facsimile (202) 267–5594; 

email: sandy.liu@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

final rule contact Karen Petronis, AGC– 

200, Office of the Chief Counsel, 

International Law, Legislation, and 

Regulations Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–3073; email: 

karen.petronis@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

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 III, Section 

44715, Controlling aircraft noise and 

sonic boom. Under that section, the 

FAA is charged with prescribing 

regulations to measure and abate aircraft 

noise. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority since it would 

establish new noise certification test 

procedures and noise limits for a new 

class of aircraft. Applicants for type 

certificates, changes in type design, and 

airworthiness certificates for tiltrotors 

are required to comply with these new 

regulations. 

Overview of Final Rule 

The standards in this final rule apply 

to the issuance of an original type 

certificate, changes to a type certificate, 

and the issuance of a standard 

airworthiness certificate for tiltrotors. 

This final rule creates noise certification 

standards that are applicable to all 

tiltrotors, such as the AgustaWestland 

Model AW609 currently under 

development. These regulations 

incorporate the same standards as ICAO 

Annex 16, Volume 1, Chapter 13, 

Attachment F (Amendment 7) for 

tiltrotors, consistent with the FAA goal 

of harmonizing U.S. regulations with 

international standards. 

Background 

A new aircraft type known as a 

tiltrotor is currently in production after 

more than six decades of research and 

development. The aircraft uses rotating 

nacelles, a hybrid of propellers and 

helicopter rotors, to provide both lift 

and propulsive force. The tiltrotor is 

designed to function as a helicopter for 

takeoff and landing and as an airplane 

during the en-route portion of flight 

operations. 

The most recognizable tiltrotor 

operating today is the V–22 Osprey used 

by the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Air 

Force. The V–22 Osprey was designed 

for the U.S. Department of Defense 

Special Operations Forces and can 

transport 24 fully equipped troops. The 

proposed civil version of the tiltrotor 

would carry up to nine passengers. 

The tiltrotor concept was first 

explored for the U.S. Army in the mid1950s as a convertiplane concept that 

incorporated mixed vertical and forward 

flight capabilities. In 1958, Bell 

Helicopter Textron Inc. (Bell) of Fort 

Worth, Texas developed the XV–3 

tiltrotor for a joint research program 

between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air 

Force. The Bell XV–3 completed a 

successful full conversion from vertical 

flight to forward cruise and 

demonstrated the feasibility of tiltrotor 

technology. Following the successful 

full conversion of the Bell XV–3, the 

U.S. Army and National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration awarded Bell 

a prototype development contract in the 

mid 1970s to build two Bell XV–15 

tiltrotor demonstrator aircraft. These 

tiltrotor aircraft served as predecessors 

to the V–22 Osprey to demonstrate 

mature tiltrotor technology and flight 

capabilities. 

ICAO Noise Certification Standards 

ICAO is the international body with 

responsibility for the development of 

International Standards and 

Recommended Practices pursuant to the 

Convention on International Civil 

Aviation (the Chicago Convention). 

Consistent with their obligations under 

the Chicago Convention, Contracting 

States agree to implement ICAO 

standards in their national regulations 

to the extent practicable. The standards 

for aircraft noise are contained in Annex 

16, Environmental Protection, Volume 

1, Aircraft Noise. 

In anticipation of civil tiltrotor 

production, ICAO’s Committee on 

Aviation Environmental Protection 

(CAEP) chartered the Tiltrotor Task 

Group (TRTG) in 1997 to develop noise 

certification guidelines for tiltrotors. 

The FAA participated in the TRTG and 

its development of the tiltrotor noise 

guidelines from 1997 to 2000. The ICAO 

tiltrotor guidelines used the same noise 

limits that the United States had 

incorporated into part 36, Appendix H 

for helicopter noise certification. The 

ICAO has included additional 

requirements that are unique to the 

design of tiltrotors. 

On June 29, 2001, the TRTG’s 

guidelines were adopted by the ICAO 

Council for incorporation into Annex 

16, Volume 1, Chapter 13, Attachment 

F (Amendment 7). The ICAO guidelines 

became effective on October 29, 2001, 

with an applicability date of March 21, 

2002. 

Statement of the Problem 

Current regulations in part 36 do not 

contain noise certification requirements 

specific to the tiltrotor and its unique 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

1134 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

flight capabilities. Since no standards 

for the tiltrotor currently exist, the FAA 

is adding new standards to part 36, and 

amending part 21, § 21.93 (Classification 

of Changes in Type Design) to 

accommodate certification of the 

tiltrotor. In order to harmonize the U.S. 

regulations with the international 

standards, this rulemaking adopts the 

same noise certification standards as 

used in ICAO Annex 16, Volume 1, 

Chapter 13, Attachment F (Amendment 

7) for tiltrotors. 

Type Certification Activity in the United 

States 

As the tiltrotor concept and 

technology proved promising with the 

production of the V–22 Osprey, Bell and 

Agusta (now AgustaWestland) 

established a joint business venture in 

September 1998 to co-develop the Bell/ 

Agusta model BA609 civil tiltrotor. 

In August 1996, Bell, the original and 

lead developer of the tiltrotor, applied 

for a U.S. type certificate for the model 

BA609 tiltrotor, prior to the 

establishment of the joint venture. The 

BA609 would be type certificated as a 

‘‘special class’’ of aircraft under §§ 21.17 

and 21.21, using the applicable 

airworthiness provisions of part 25 

(Airworthiness Standards: Transport 

Category Airplanes) and part 29 

(Airworthiness Standards: Transport 

Category Rotorcraft). This is the first 

application for this class of aircraft. 

In June 2011, the contract for the joint 

tiltrotor program between Bell and 

AgustaWestland was renegotiated, with 

AgustaWestland assuming full 

ownership. The change in ownership 

resulted in the BA609 designation being 

renamed to the AW609, and on 

February 15, 2012, AgustaWestland 

applied for a type certificate from the 

FAA. AgustaWestland is targeting 

existing helicopter operators as the 

primary civil market for the AW609, 

and has stated that the AW609 could 

operate from existing heliports without 

the need for new infrastructure to 

accommodate the aircraft. 

Summary of the NPRM 

The FAA published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on June 

21, 2011 (76 FR 36001) that proposed 

the changes to parts 21 and 36 discussed 

above that would establish noise 

certification standards for issuing type 

and airworthiness certificates for the 

tiltrotor. 

Discussion of Public Comments 

The comment period for the NPRM 

closed on October 19, 2011. The FAA 

received one comment, from 

AgustaWestland. AgustaWestland stated 

that the proposed rule did not specify 

the entity that would determine the 

flyover configuration in Appendix K to 

Part 36. AgustaWestland recommended 

that the regulation specify that the 

applicant be the entity that prescribes 

the constant flyover aircraft 

configuration. 

The FAA agrees the regulation needs 

to specify what entity prescribes the 

constant flyover configuration. The FAA 

agrees the applicant is the proper entity, 

and has modified the final rule to 

incorporate this change. 

Differences Between the NPRM and the 

Final Rule 

We are adopting this final rule for the 

reasons stated in the NPRM, with the 

following changes. First, the NPRM 

incorrectly included VMCP and VMO as 

requirements for tiltrotors. Both VMCP

and VMO are voluntary reporting 

parameters for airspeeds at maximum 

continuous power and maximum 

operating limit for airplane mode as 

noted in the ICAO standards. The FAA 

is not requiring them in Part 36. 

However, the voluntary reporting of 

VMCP and VMO will be recommended in 

an accompanying Advisory Circular as 

supplemental information. The FAA is 

removing VMCP and VMO representing 

airplane mode from § 36.1 and 

Appendix K in the final rule since 

airplane mode is only a voluntary and 

supplemental condition for noise. The 

harshest (maximum) noise levels are 

identified in helicopter mode. 

Second, the labels used in the 

proposed Figure K.2 of Appendix K to 

part 36 incorrectly describe the two 

sideline noise measurement points as 

S(starboard) and S(port) instead of S(sideline)

for both. Since the flyover condition has 

a symmetrical test set-up, the generic 

label assignment, S(sideline), is used to 

indicate that flight from either direction 

is allowable without a reference to right 

or left. The figure is adopted in this final 

rule with the corrected labels. 

Third, the NPRM included the term 

‘‘power-on’’ in section K6.1(f) of 

Appendix K to part 36. That 

terminology is outdated and is replaced 

in this final rule by the term 

‘‘reference’’. 

Fourth, the final rule adds the phrase 

‘‘throughout the 10 dB-down time 

interval.’’ in sections K7.5, K7.9 and 

K7.10 of Appendix K of part 36 to be 

consistent throughout the appendix. 

Fifth, based on AgustaWestland’s 

comment discussed previously, section 

K6.3(b) of Appendix K to part 36 

specifies that the flyover configuration 

is to be selected by the applicant. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 13563 

direct each Federal agency to propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination follows, 

This final rule: 

(1) Imposes minimal incremental 

costs and provides benefits; 

(2) Is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866; 

(3) Is not significant as defined in 

DOT’s Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures; 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities; 

(5) Will not have a significant effect 

on international trade; and 

(6) Will not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1135 

governments, or on the private sector by 

exceeding the monetary threshold 

identified. 

These analyses are summarized below. 

No comments were received on the 

regulatory evaluation of the proposed 

rule. However, after the NPRM was 

published on June 21, 2011, there was 

a change in the ownership of the known 

civil tiltrotor program. 

When the NPRM was published, the 

one known civil tiltrotor development 

program was jointly owned by the Bell 

and AgustaWestland helicopter 

companies; the project was designated 

the BA609. In November, 2011 

AgustaWestland purchased Bell’s share 

of the civil tiltrotor program and 

changed the designation of the aircraft 

in development to AW609. The former 

Bell Agusta Aerospace Company 

(BAAC) was renamed the 

AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor Company, 

LLC and merged with Agusta US 

Incorporated to become AgustaWestland 

Tilt-Rotor Company Incorporated, an 

American company that is the applicant 

for a type certificate for the AW609. The 

new company is incorporated in 

Delaware and is a wholly owned 

subsidiary of AgustaWestland that is 

owned by Finmeccanica, an Italian firm. 

The AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor 

Company, Inc. has rented a facility at 

the Arlington, Texas Municipal Airport. 

The facility consists of approximately 

99,000 square feet including a hangar/ 

office building. The company plans to 

construct an adjacent office building. 

The facilities may be used for aircraft 

sales, engineering and design, flight 

testing, and aircraft maintenance, and 

other activities when approved by the 

airport. 

Because of the change in ownership of 

the civil tiltrotor program that occurred 

after the publication of the NPRM, this 

regulatory evaluation has been revised 

to incorporate the changed 

circumstances. 

There are currently no part 36 noise 

certification standards for tiltrotors in 

U.S. regulations. This final rule 

provides part 36 noise certification 

requirements for tiltrotors by adopting 

existing ICAO standards. The initial 

regulatory evaluation estimated that 

these noise requirements would be 

minimal cost. We asked for comments 

and received none. Accordingly, we 

affirm our determination that these 

requirements will be minimal cost. 

Providing U.S. tiltrotor noise 

certification standards will facilitate the 

startup and development of a new 

commercial class of aircraft, the 

tiltrotor, and allow for certification in 

the United States as exists for other 

aircraft designs. The tiltrotor aircraft 

type can then be marketed domestically 

and internationally. The FAA believes 

that this could result in substantial 

benefits. 

The FAA used the same price/cost 

estimates for the NPRM and received no 

comments. The FAA maintained in the 

NPRM that this rule was minimal cost 

and we received no comments on that 

determination. 

The total value of the estimated 

market equals the aircraft purchase 

price multiplied by the estimated units 

sold. The potential size of the tiltrotor 

market has been estimated using the 

sales projections of the previous 

developer, Bell/Agusta. In the next 10 

years, one model of a civil tiltrotor is 

expected to be available, the AW609 

(previously the BA609). This aircraft is 

currently in development. 

The price of a BA609 (now the 

AW609) was estimated to be $10 to $14 

million (aircraftcompare.com, ‘‘Bell 

Agusta BA609’’, http:// 

www.aircraftcompare.com/helicopterairplane/ 

Bell%20Agusta%20BA609%20/279). 

This is an increase from the original 

estimate of $7 million in 2000. The 

price of $14 million for a BA609 was 

used to estimate the potential market 

size for tiltrotor aircraft because 

AgustaWestland has not announced a 

purchase price for the AW609. 

Bell estimated that the market would 

result in sales of approximately 100 

BA609s over 10 years, making the 

potential near-term tiltrotor market 

worth a nominal $1 billion to $1.4 

billion. Table 1 shows the nominal and 

present value estimates of the tiltrotor 

market. The present value is based on a 

7 percent discount rate, and a ten year 

production period with 10 tiltrotors 

being delivered each year. The present 

value of the tiltrotor market is estimated 

to be between $702,000,000 and 

$983,000,000. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with ER08JA13.005</GPH>
1136 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Table 2 summarizes the incremental 

manufacturer costs for the noise 

certification of a civil tiltrotor as 

discussed in the initial regulatory 

evaluation. At that time we determined 

that these costs were minimal. We 

received no comments on that 

determination and it is not changed in 

the final rule. 

Issuance of a type certificate requires 

compliance with the applicable noise 

certification requirements of part 36. 

Full noise certification testing is 

generally required for each new aircraft 

type and for certain voluntary changes 

to type design that are classified as 

acoustical change under § 21.93(b). The 

incremental costs recur only when a 

new type certificate is issued, or when 

a change to a type design results after 

an acoustical change is made. 

Noise certification costs consist of 

four major items: Acoustics; Flight Test; 

Aircraft; and Miscellaneous. For 

tiltrotors noise certification, as for any 

aircraft certification, the noise 

demonstration flight testing and 

reporting is the largest incremental cost 

of the noise certification. 

To meet the regulatory requirements 

for noise control, acoustical 

measurements are used to quantify the 

characteristic noise levels of the aircraft. 

Almost half the noise certification 

expense ($250,000) is invested in the 

acoustics group equipment and analysis. 

This cost includes overall noise test 

planning and coordination, noise test 

site preparation and measurement setup. 

The second highest noise certification 

expense involves the flight test support 

($220,000). These are the expenses for 

configuring and preparing the aircraft to 

execute the required noise flight test 

procedures. 

The last two noise certification 

expense groups are aircraft and 

miscellaneous expenses. The aircraft 

expense ($50,000) involves costs 

associated with aircraft flight time, fuel, 

and flight crew support. Most other 

general expenses of test support are 

miscellaneous costs ($68,000). 

The cost estimates for noise 

certification were provided by Bell 

Helicopter Textron, the original 

developer of the civil tiltrotor. The cost 

of noise certification for the tiltrotor is 

comparable to that for a large helicopter 

(over 7,000 pounds). As shown in Table 

2, the estimated total incremental cost of 

a single noise certification is $588,000. 

As the $588,000 would be incurred in 

the first year, the nominal value equals 

the present value. 

The FAA may incur costs in this 

certification process. However, these 

costs are not expected to vary 

significantly from the agency’s current 

costs to noise certificate any other new 

aircraft type. 

Based on the above analyses, and 

consistent with the determinations 

made in the NPRM, this final rule is 

considered to be a minimal cost rule. 

Since the tiltrotor industry is still 

developing, the costs and benefits 

discussed are based on the single 

existing civil tiltrotor program. This 

final rule establishes the noise 

certification requirements for a tiltrotor. 

While the estimated benefits and costs 

are based on a single tiltrotor type, we 

have also determined that any future 

designs will benefit from the established 

noise certification requirements. 

The present value cost of the final 

rule is $588,000 for the certification of 

one tiltrotor type, about the same as 

would be required for a traditional 

helicopter design. The FAA considered 

this cost to be minimal in the NPRM. 

The FAA received no comments on this 

minimal cost determination. Therefore, 

the FAA considers this cost to be 

minimal in this final regulatory 

evaluation. 

The FAA believes that this final rule 

will be cost beneficial because it is 

minimal cost, and because it facilitates 

the development of tiltrotor aircraft and 

the commercial market for them. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of 

regulatory issuance that agencies shall 

endeavor, consistent with the objective 

of the rule and of applicable statutes, to 

fit regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, 

the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of 

small entities, including small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

and small governmental jurisdictions. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with ER08JA13.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1137 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule will have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. If the agency determines that it 

will, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis as 

described in the Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 RFA 

provides that the head of the agency 

may so certify and a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. The 

certification must include a statement 

providing the factual basis for this 

determination, and the reasoning should 

be clear. 

When the NPRM was published, the 

tiltrotor was being developed by a joint 

venture of Bell Helicopter, an American 

company and AgustaWestland, an 

Italian firm. Because an American firm 

was potentially affected by the proposed 

rule, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

was prepared. No comments were 

received on the Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis which concluded there was no 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

After the NPRM was published, 

AgustaWestland, an Italian company, 

bought the ownership interests of Bell 

Helicopter. As such, the original BAAC 

was renamed and merged to become 

AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor Company 

Incorporated, a wholly owned 

subsidiary of AgustaWestland, an Italian 

company. AgustaWestland is owned by 

Finmeccanica, also an Italian company. 

Section 601 of the RFA defines the 

term ‘‘small business’’ as follows: ‘‘The 

term ‘‘small business’’ has the same 

meaning as the term ‘‘small business 

concern’’ under section 3 of the Small 

Business Act, * * *’’ 

Section 3(a)(1) of the Small Business 

Act defines a small business concern as 

follows: ‘‘For the purposes of this Act, 

a small business concern, including, but 

not limited to enterprises that are 

engaged in the business of the 

production of food and fiber, ranching 

and raising of livestock, aquaculture, 

and all other farming and agricultural 

related industries, shall be deemed to be 

one which is independently owned and 

operated and which is not dominant in 

its field of operation: ’’ 

Section 3(a)(2) of the Small Business 

Act discusses the establishment of size 

standards. The Small Business 

Administration (SBA) size standard for 

a small entity in aircraft manufacturing 

is 1,500 employees. 

The AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor 

Company Incorporated currently 

employs 12 people. While the number 

of employees of the AgustaWestland Tilt 

Rotor Company meets the SBA 

employment size standard for a small 

entity, the company is not a small entity 

as defined by the SBA because it is not 

independently owned and operated. 

The owner of the AgustaWestland TiltRotor Company, Inc. is Finmeccanica, 

which has 75,733 employees, far 

exceeding the aircraft manufacturing 

size standard of 1,500 employees. 

There are no other companies which 

are known to be developing or 

manufacturing a civil tiltrotor. 

Therefore, Finmeccanica (including its 

subsidiaries) is the dominant company 

involved in the development of a 

civilian tiltrotor. This final rule is 

expected to be minimal cost and there 

are no small entities affected. Therefore, 

as the acting FAA Administrator, I 

certify that this final rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small tiltrotor 

manufacturers. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. 

The FAA has assessed the potential 

effect of this final rule and determined 

that it will encourage international trade 

by adopting the international standards 

of ICAO as the basis for a rule for the 

noise certification of tiltrotors. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 

one year by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector; such a mandate is 

deemed to be a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’. The FAA currently uses an 

inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 

million in lieu of $100 million. This 

final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II do not apply. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. The 

FAA has determined that there is no 

new requirement for information 

collection associated with this final 

rule. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. In 2001, 

ICAO adopted tiltrotor noise guidelines. 

This regulation harmonizes U.S. noise 

standards with the international 

standards by adopting the same 

requirements, adapted for the U.S. 

regulatory format. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

This rule adopts internationally 

established noise standards for a new 

civil, hybrid airplane-rotorcraft known 

as the tiltrotor. Based on the presence of 

both helicopter and propeller airplane 

characteristics inherit in the tiltrotor, 

the noise standards use preexisting 

helicopter noise certification limits and 

procedures. This final rule adopts these 

noise limits to control the harshest 

(maximum) noise levels when the 

tiltrotor operates in its noisiest 

configuration—helicopter mode. In 

airplane mode, the tiltrotor is 

significantly quieter because of its low 

RPM design in cruise mode. The FAA 

finds the applicability of the noise 

limits adopted here as technologically 

and environmentally consistent for this 

new class of aircraft. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f of the Order and 

involves no extraordinary 

circumstances. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

1138 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Executive Order Determinations 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency determined that this action will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and, therefore, 

does not have Federalism implications. 

Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The 

agency has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866 and DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures, and 

it is not likely to have a significant 

adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 

How To Obtain Additional Information 

Rulemaking Documents 

An electronic copy of a rulemaking 

document my be obtained by using the 

Internet— 

1. Search the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

3. Access the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request (identified by notice, 

amendment, or docket number of this 

rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. 

Comments Submitted to the Docket 

Comments received may be viewed by 

going to http://www.regulations.gov and 

following the online instructions to 

search the docket number for this 

action. Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of the FAA’s dockets 

by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document, may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the Internet, visit http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 21 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

14 CFR Part 36 

Aircraft, Noise control. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends chapter I of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 21—CERTIFICATION 

PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND 

PARTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 21 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 

106(g), 40105, 40113, 44701–44702, 44704, 

44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303. 

■ 2. Amend § 21.93 by adding paragraph 

(b)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 21.93 Classification of changes in type 

design. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Tiltrotors. 

* * * * * 

PART 36—NOISE STANDARDS: 

AIRCRAFT TYPE AND 

AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATION 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 36 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 49 

U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–44702, 44704, 

44715; sec. 305, Pub. L. 96–193, 94 Stat. 50, 

57; E.O. 11514, 35 FR 4247, 3 CFR, 1966– 

1970 Comp., p. 902. 

■ 4. Amend § 36.1 as follows: 

■ A. Add paragraph (a)(5); 

■ B. Amend paragraph (c) by removing 

the phrase ‘‘or 36.11’’ and adding the 

phrase ‘‘36.11 or 36.13’’ in its place; and 

■ C. Add paragraph (i) 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 36.1 Applicability and definitions. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(5) Type certificates, changes to those 

certificates, and standard airworthiness 

certificates, for tiltrotors. 

* * * * * 

(i) For the purpose of showing 

compliance with this part for tiltrotors, 

the following terms have the specified 

meanings: 

Airplane mode means a configuration 

with nacelles on the down stops (axis 

aligned horizontally) and rotor speed set 

to cruise revolutions per minute (RPM). 

Airplane mode RPM means the lower 

range of rotor rotational speed in RPM 

defined for the airplane mode cruise 

flight condition. 

Fixed operation points mean 

designated nacelle angle positions 

selected for airworthiness reference. 

These are default positions used to refer 

to normal nacelle positioning operation 

of the aircraft. The nacelle angle is 

controlled by a self-centering switch. 

When the nacelle angle is 0 degrees 

(airplane mode) and the pilot moves the 

nacelle switch upwards, the nacelles are 

programmed to automatically turn to the 

first default position (for example, 60 

degrees) where they will stop. A second 

upward move of the switch will tilt the 

nacelle to the second default position 

(for example, 75 degrees). Above the last 

default position, the nacelle angle can 

be set to any angle up to approximately 

95 degrees by moving the switch in the 

up or down direction. The number and 

position of the fixed operation points 

may vary on different tiltrotor 

configurations. 

Nacelle angle is defined as the angle 

between the rotor shaft centerline and 

the longitudinal axis of the aircraft 

fuselage. 

Tiltrotor means a class of aircraft 

capable of vertical take-off and landing, 

within the powered-lift category, with 

rotors mounted at or near the wing tips 

that vary in pitch from near vertical to 

near horizontal configuration relative to 

the wing and fuselage. 

Vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) 

mode means the aircraft state or 

configuration having the rotors 

orientated with the axis of rotation in a 

vertical manner (i.e., nacelle angle of 

approximately 90 degrees) for vertical 

takeoff and landing operations. 

VCON is defined as the maximum 

authorized speed for any nacelle angle 

in VTOL/Conversion mode. 

VTOL/Conversion mode is all 

approved nacelle positions where the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1139 

design operating rotor speed is used for 

hover operations. 

VTOL mode RPM means highest range 

of RPM that occur for takeoff, approach, 

hover, and conversion conditions. 

■ 5. Add § 36.13 to subpart A to read as 

follows: 

§ 36.13 Acoustical change: Tiltrotor 

aircraft. 

The following requirements apply to 

tiltrotors in any category for which an 

acoustical change approval is applied 

for under § 21.93(b) of this chapter on or 

after March 11, 2013: 

(a) In showing compliance with 

Appendix K of this part, noise levels 

must be measured, evaluated, and 

calculated in accordance with the 

applicable procedures and conditions 

prescribed in Appendix K of this part. 

(b) Compliance with the noise limits 

prescribed in section K4 (Noise Limits) 

of Appendix K of this part must be 

shown in accordance with the 

applicable provisions of sections K2 

(Noise Evaluation Measure), K3 (Noise 

Measurement Reference Points), K6 

(Noise Certification Reference 

Procedures), and K7 (Test Procedures) 

of Appendix K of this part. 

(c) After a change in type design, 

tiltrotor noise levels may not exceed the 

limits specified in § 36.1103. 

■ 6. Add Subpart K of part 36 to read 

as follows: 

Subpart K—Tiltrotors 

Sec. 

36.1101 Noise measurement and 

evaluation. 

36.1103 Noise limits. 

Subpart K—Tiltrotors 

§ 36.1101 Noise measurement and 

evaluation. 

For tiltrotors, the noise generated 

must be measured and evaluated under 

Appendix K of this part, or under an 

approved equivalent procedure. 

§ 36.1103 Noise limits. 

(a) Compliance with the maximum 

noise levels prescribed in Appendix K 

of this part must be shown for a tiltrotor 

for which the application for the 

issuance of a type certificate is made on 

or after March 11, 2013. 

(b) To demonstrate compliance with 

this part, noise levels may not exceed 

the noise limits listed in Appendix K, 

Section K4, Noise Limits of this part. 

Appendix K of this part (or an approved 

equivalent procedure) must also be used 

to evaluate and demonstrate compliance 

with the approved test procedures, and 

at the applicable noise measurement 

points. 

■ 7. Add Appendix K to part 36 to read 

as follows: 

Appendix K to Part 36—Noise 

Requirements for Tiltrotors Under Subpart 

K 

Sec. 

K1 General 

K2 Noise Evaluation Measure 

K3 Noise Measurement Reference Points 

K4 Noise Limits 

K5 Trade-offs 

K6 Noise Certification Reference 

Procedures 

K7 Test Procedures 

Section K1 General 

This appendix prescribes noise limits 

and procedures for measuring noise and 

adjusting the data to standard 

conditions for tiltrotors as specified in 

§ 36.1 of this part. 

Section K2 Noise Evaluation Measure 

The noise evaluation measure is the 

effective perceived noise level in 

EPNdB, to be calculated in accordance 

with section A36.4 of Appendix A to 

this part, except corrections for spectral 

irregularities must be determined using 

the 50 Hz sound pressure level found in 

section H36.201 of Appendix H to this 

part. 

Section K3 Noise Measurement 

Reference Points 

The following noise reference points 

must be used when demonstrating 

tiltrotor compliance with section K6 

(Noise Certification Reference 

Procedures) and section K7 (Test 

Procedures) of this appendix: 

(a) Takeoff reference noise 

measurement points— 

As shown in Figure K1 below: 

(1) The centerline noise measurement 

flight path reference point, designated 

A, is located on the ground vertically 

below the reference takeoff flight path. 

The measurement point is located 1,640 

feet (500 m) in the horizontal direction 

of flight from the point Cr where 

transition to climbing flight is initiated, 

as described in section K6.2 of this 

appendix; 

(2) Two sideline noise measurement 

points, designated as S(starboard) and 

S(port), are located on the ground 

perpendicular to and symmetrically 

stationed at 492 feet (150 m) on each 

side of the takeoff reference flight path. 

The measurement points bisect the 

centerline flight path reference point A. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

1140 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(b) Flyover reference noise 

measurement points— 

As shown in Figure K2 below: 

(1) The centerline noise measurement 

flight path reference point, designated 

A, is located on the ground 492 feet (150 

m) vertically below the reference flyover 

flight path. The measurement point is 

defined by the flyover reference 

procedure in section K6.3 of this 

appendix; 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with ER08JA13.007</GPH> ER08JA13.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1141 

(2) Two sideline noise measurement 

points, designated as S(sideline), are 

located on the ground perpendicular to 

and symmetrically stationed at 492 feet 

(150 m) on each side of the flyover 

reference flight path. The measurement 

points bisect the centerline flight path 

reference point A. 

(c) Approach reference noise 

measurement points— 

As shown in Figure K3 below: 

(1) The centerline noise measurement 

flight path reference point, designated 

A, is located on the ground 394 feet (120 

m) vertically below the reference 

approach flight path. The measurement 

point is defined by the approach 

reference procedure in section K6.4 of 

this appendix. On level ground, the 

measurement point corresponds to a 

position 3,740 feet (1,140 m) from the 

intersection of the 6.0 degree approach 

path with the ground plane; 

(2) Two sideline noise measurement 

points, designated as S(starboard) and 

S(port), are located on the ground 

perpendicular to and symmetrically 

stationed at 492 feet (150 m) on each 

side of the approach reference flight 

path. The measurement points bisect the 

centerline flight path reference point A. 

Section K4 Noise Limits 

For a tiltrotor, the maximum noise 

levels, as determined in accordance 

with the noise evaluation in EPNdB and 

calculation method described in section 

H36.201 of Appendix H of this part, 

must not exceed the noise limits as 

follows: 

(a) At the takeoff flight path reference 

point: For a tiltrotor having a maximum 

certificated takeoff weight (mass) of 

176,370 pounds (80,000 kg) or more, in 

VTOL/Conversion mode, 109 EPNdB, 

decreasing linearly with the logarithm 

of the tiltrotor weight (mass) at a rate of 

3.0 EPNdB per halving of weight (mass) 

down to 89 EPNdB, after which the 

limit is constant. Figure K4 illustrates 

the takeoff noise limit as a solid line. 

(b) At the Flyover path reference 

point: For a tiltrotor having a maximum 

certificated takeoff weight (mass) of 

176,370 pounds (80,000 kg) or more, in 

VTOL/Conversion mode, 108 EPNdB, 

decreasing linearly with the logarithm 

of the tiltrotor weight (mass) at a rate of 

3.0 EPNdB per halving of weight (mass) 

down to 88 EPNdB, after which the 

limit is constant. Figure K4 illustrates 

the flyover noise limit as a dashed line. 

(c) At the approach flight path 

reference point: For a tiltrotor having a 

maximum certificated takeoff weight 

(mass) of 176,370 pounds (80,000 kg) or 

more, in VTOL/Conversion mode, 110 

EPNdB, decreasing linearly with the 

logarithm of the tiltrotors weight (mass) 

at a rate of 3.0 EPNdB per halving of 

weight (mass) down to 90 EPNdB, after 

which the limit is constant. Figure K4 

illustrates the approach noise limit as a 

dash-dot line. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with ER08JA13.009</GPH>
1142 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

Section K5 Trade-Offs 

If the noise evaluation measurement 

exceeds the noise limits described in K4 

of this appendix at one or two 

measurement points: 

(a) The sum of excesses must not be 

greater than 4 EPNdB; 

(b) The excess at any single point 

must not be greater than 3 EPNdB; and 

(c) Any excess must be offset by the 

remaining noise margin at the other 

point or points. 

Section K6 Noise Certification 

Reference Procedures 

K6.1 General Conditions 

(a) [Reserved] 

(b) [Reserved] 

(c) The takeoff, flyover and approach 

reference procedures must be 

established in accordance with sections 

K6.2, K6.3 and K6.4 of this appendix, 

except as specified in section K6.1(d) of 

this appendix. 

(d) If the design characteristics of the 

tiltrotor prevent test flights from being 

conducted in accordance with section 

K6.2, K6.3 or K6.4 of this appendix, the 

applicant must revise the test 

procedures and resubmit the procedures 

for approval. 

(e) The following reference 

atmospheric conditions must be used to 

establish the reference procedures: 

(1) Sea level atmospheric pressure of 

2,116 pounds per square foot (1,013.25 

hPa); 

(2) Ambient air temperature of 

77 °Fahrenheit (25 ° Celsius, i.e. ISA + 

10 °C); 

(3) Relative humidity of 70 percent; 

and 

(4) Zero wind. 

(f) For tests conducted in accordance 

with sections K6.2, K6.3, and K6.4 of 

this appendix, use the maximum normal 

operating RPM corresponding to the 

airworthiness limit imposed by the 

manufacturer. For configurations for 

which the rotor speed automatically 

links with the flight condition, use the 

maximum normal operating rotor speed 

corresponding with the reference flight 

condition. For configurations for which 

the rotor speed can change by pilot 

action, use the highest normal rotor 

speed specified in the flight manual 

limitation section for the reference 

conditions. 

K6.2 Takeoff Reference Procedure. 

The takeoff reference flight procedure is 

as follows: 

(a) A constant takeoff configuration 

must be maintained, including the 

nacelle angle selected by the applicant; 

(b) The tiltrotor power must be 

stabilized at the maximum takeoff 

power corresponding to the minimum 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with ER08JA13.010</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 1143 

installed engine(s) specification power 

available for the reference ambient 

conditions or gearbox torque limit, 

whichever is lower. The tiltrotor power 

must also be stabilized along a path 

starting from a point located 1,640 feet 

(500 m) before the flight path reference 

point, at 65 ft (20 m) above ground level; 

(c) The nacelle angle and the 

corresponding best rate of climb speed, 

or the lowest approved speed for the 

climb after takeoff, whichever is the 

greater, must be maintained throughout 

the takeoff reference procedure; 

(d) The rotor speed must be stabilized 

at the maximum normal operating RPM 

certificated for takeoff; 

(e) The weight (mass) of the tiltrotors 

must be the maximum takeoff weight 

(mass) as requested for noise 

certification; and 

(f) The reference takeoff flight profile 

is a straight line segment inclined from 

the starting point 1,640 feet (500 m) 

before to the center noise measurement 

point and 65 ft (20 m) above ground 

level at an angle defined by best rate of 

climb and the speed corresponding to 

the selected nacelle angle and for 

minimum specification engine 

performance. 

K6.3 Flyover Reference Procedure. 

The flyover reference flight procedure is 

as follows: 

(a) The tiltrotor must be stabilized for 

level flight along the centerline flyover 

flight path and over the noise 

measurement reference point at an 

altitude of 492 ft (150 m) above ground 

level; 

(b) A constant flyover configuration 

selected by the applicant must be 

maintained; 

(c) The weight (mass) of the tiltrotor 

must be the maximum takeoff weight 

(mass) as requested for noise 

certification; 

(d) In the VTOL/Conversion mode: 

(1) The nacelle angle must be at the 

authorized fixed operation point that is 

closest to the shallow nacelle angle 

certificated for zero airspeed; 

(2) The airspeed must be 0.9VCON and 

(3) The rotor speed must be stabilized 

at the maximum normal operating RPM 

certificated for level flight. 

K6.4 Approach Reference Procedure. 

The approach reference procedure is as 

follows: 

(a) The tiltrotor must be stabilized to 

follow a 6.0 degree approach path; 

(b) An approved airworthiness 

configuration in which maximum noise 

occurs must be maintained; 

(1) An airspeed equal to the best rate 

of climb speed corresponding to the 

nacelle angle, or the lowest approved 

airspeed for the approach, whichever is 

greater, must be stabilized and 

maintained; and 

(2) The tiltrotor power during the 

approach must be stabilized over the 

flight path reference point, and continue 

as if landing; 

(c) The rotor speed must be stabilized 

at the maximum normal operating RPM 

certificated for approach; 

(d) The constant approach 

configuration used in airworthiness 

certification tests, with the landing gear 

extended, must be maintained; and 

(e) The weight (mass) of the tiltrotor 

at landing must be the maximum 

landing weight (mass) as requested for 

noise certification. 

Section K7 Test Procedures 

K7.1 [Reserved] 

K7.2 The test procedures and noise 

measurements must be conducted and 

processed to yield the noise evaluation 

measure designated in section K2 of this 

appendix. 

K7.3 If either the test conditions or 

test procedures do not comply to the 

applicable noise certification reference 

conditions or procedures prescribed by 

this part, the applicant must apply the 

correction methods described in section 

H36.205 of Appendix H of this part to 

the acoustic test data measured. 

K7.4 Adjustments for differences 

between test and reference flight 

procedures must not exceed: 

(a) For takeoff: 4.0 EPNdB, of which 

the arithmetic sum of delta 1 and the 

term ¥7.5 log (QK/QrKr) from delta 2 

must not in total exceed 2.0 EPNdB; 

(b) For flyover or approach: 2.0 

EPNdB. 

K7.5 The average rotor RPM must 

not vary from the normal maximum 

operating RPM by more than ±1.0 

percent throughout the 10 dB-down 

time interval. 

K7.6 The tiltrotor airspeed must not 

vary from the reference airspeed 

appropriate to the flight demonstration 

by more than ±5 kts (±9 km/h) 

throughout the 10 dB-down time 

interval. 

K7.7 The number of level flyovers 

made with a head wind component 

must be equal to the number of level 

flyovers made with a tail wind 

component. 

K7.8 The tiltrotor must operate 

between ±10 degrees from the vertical or 

between ±65 feet (±20 m) lateral 

deviation tolerance, whichever is 

greater, above the reference track and 

throughout the 10 dB-down time 

interval. 

K7.9 The tiltrotor altitude must not 

vary during each flyover by more than 

±30 ft (±9 m) from the reference altitude 

throughout the 10 dB-down time 

interval. 

K7.10 During the approach 

procedure, the tiltrotor must establish a 

stabilized constant speed approach and 

fly between approach angles of 5.5 

degrees and 6.5 degrees throughout the 

10 dB-down time interval. 

K7.11 During all test procedures, the 

tiltrotor weight (mass) must not be less 

than 90 percent and not more than 105 

percent of the maximum certificated 

weight (mass). For each of the test 

procedures, complete at least one test at 

or above this maximum certificated 

weight (mass). 

K7.12 A tiltrotor capable of carrying 

external loads or external equipment 

must be noise certificated without such 

loads or equipment fitted 

K7.13 The value of VCON used for 

noise certification must be included in 

the approved Flight Manual. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

21, 2012. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00111 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 420 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0105; Amdt. No. 

420–6A] 

RIN 2120–AJ73 

Explosive Siting Requirements; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a final 

rule published on September 7, 2012 (77 

FR 55108). In that rule, the FAA 

amended its regulations to the 

requirements for siting explosives under 

a license to operate a launch site. The 

rule increases flexibility for launch site 

operators in site planning for the storage 

and handling of energetic liquids and 

explosives. The FAA inadvertently did 

not correctly identify the Department of 

Defense Explosives Safety Board. This 

document corrects the error. 

DATES: Effective January 8, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this final 

rule, contact Yvonne Tran, Commercial 

Space Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–7908; facsimile 

(202) 267–5463, email 

yvonne.tran@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this final rule, 

contact Laura Montgomery, AGC 200, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with