Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36001 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463. All 

comments must include the full name 

and postal service address of a 

commenter, and of each commenter if 

filed jointly, or they will not be 

considered. The Commission will post 

comments on its website at the 

conclusion of the comment period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert M. Knop, Assistant General 

Counsel, or Ms. Cheryl A. F. Hemsley, 

Attorney, 999 E Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694–1650 

or (800) 424–9530. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Election Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has received a Petition 

for Rulemaking from United States 

Representative Chris Van Hollen. The 

petitioner asks that the Commission 

revise and amend 11 CFR 

109.10(e)(1)(vi) ‘‘relating to disclosure of 

donations made to persons [other than 

political committees], including 

corporations and labor organizations, 

which make independent expenditures, 

in order to conform the regulation with 

the law.’’ The Commission seeks 

comments on the petition. 

Copies of the Petition for Rulemaking 

are available for public inspection at the 

Commission’s Public Records Office, 

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20463, Monday through Friday between 

the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., and on 

the Commission’s Web site, http:// 

www.fec.gov/fosers/. Interested persons 

may also obtain a copy of the Petition 

by dialing the Commission’s Faxline 

service at (202) 501–3413 and following 

its instructions, at any time of the day 

and week. Request document #271. 

Consideration of the merits of the 

Petition will be deferred until the close 

of the comment period. If the 

Commission decides that the Petition 

has merit, it may begin a rulemaking 

proceeding. Any subsequent action 

taken by the Commission will be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

Dated: June 15, 2011. 

Cynthia L. Bauerly, 

Chair, Federal Election Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–15328 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

11 CFR Part 114 

[Notice 2011–08] 

Rulemaking Petition: Independent 

Expenditures and Electioneering 

Communications by Corporations and 

Labor Organizations 

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 

ACTION: Rulemaking petition: Notice of 

Availability. 

SUMMARY: On January 26, 2010, the 

James Madison Center for Free Speech 

submitted to the Commission a Petition 

for Rulemaking. The Petition urges the 

Commission to conform its regulations 

regarding independent expenditures 

and electioneering communications 

made by corporations, membership 

organizations, and labor organizations to 

the decision of the Supreme Court in 

Citizens United v. FEC. The Petition is 

available for inspection in the 

Commission’s Public Records Office, on 

its Web site, http://www.fec.gov/fosers/, 

and through its Faxline service. 

DATES: Statements in support of or in 

opposition to the Petition must be 

submitted on or before August 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: All comments must be in 

writing. Comments may be submitted 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Web site at http://www.fec.gov/fosers/. 

Commenters are encouraged to submit 

comments electronically to ensure 

timely receipt and consideration. 

Alternatively, comments may be 

submitted in paper form. Paper 

comments must be sent to the Federal 

Election Commission, Attn.: Robert M. 

Knop, Assistant General Counsel, 999 E 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463. All 

comments must include the full name 

and postal service address of a 

commenter, and of each commenter if 

filed jointly, or they will not be 

considered. The Commission will post 

comments on its Web site at the 

conclusion of the comment period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert M. Knop, Assistant General 

Counsel, or Ms. Cheryl A.F. Hemsley, 

Attorney, 999 E Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694–1650 

or (800) 424–9530. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Federal Election Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has received a Petition 

for Rulemaking from the James Madison 

Center for Free Speech. The petitioner 

asks that the Commission conform FEC 

regulations at 11 CFR 114.2, 114.4, 

114.9, 114.10, 114.14, and 114.15 to the 

decision of the Supreme Court in 

Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S., 130 S. 

Ct. 876 (2010) allowing corporations, 

membership organizations, and labor 

organizations to make independent 

expenditures and electioneering 

communications. The Commission 

seeks comments on the petition. 

Copies of the Petition for Rulemaking 

are available for public inspection at the 

Commission’s Public Records Office, 

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20463, Monday through Friday between 

the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., and on 

the Commission’s Web site, http:// 

www.fec.gov/fosers/. Interested persons 

may also obtain a copy of the Petition 

by dialing the Commission’s Faxline 

service at (202) 501–3413 and following 

its instructions, at any time of the day 

and week. Request document #272. 

Consideration of the merits of the 

Petition will be deferred until the close 

of the comment period. If the 

Commission decides that the Petition 

has merit, it may begin a rulemaking 

proceeding. Any subsequent action 

taken by the Commission will be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

Dated: June 15, 2010. 

Cynthia L. Bauerly, 

Chair, Federal Election Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–15327 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 21 and 36 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0629; Notice No. 11– 

04 ] 

RIN 2120–AJ76 

Noise Certification Standards for 

Tiltrotors 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would 

establish noise certification standards 

for issuing type and airworthiness 

certificates for a new civil, hybrid 

airplane-rotorcraft known as the 

tiltrotor. This rule proposes to adopt the 

same recommended guidelines for noise 

certification found in the International 

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 

Annex 16, Volume 1, Chapter 13, 

Attachment F (Amendment 7) for 

tiltrotors certificated in the United 

States (U.S.). The ICAO recommended 

practices are already harmonized 

internationally, and the adoption as 

standards into our regulations would be 

consistent with the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s (FAA) goal of 

harmonizing U.S. regulations with 

international standards. 

The proposed standards would apply 

to the issuance of the original type 

certificate, changes to the type 

certificate, and standard airworthiness 

certificates for tiltrotors. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before October 19, 2011. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
36002 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number [Insert 

docket number, for example, FAA– 

2011–0629] using any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking 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, 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 

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 

dockets, 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: For 

technical questions concerning this 

proposed 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; 

e-mail: sandy.liu@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this proposed rule 

contact Karen Petronis, AGC–200, Office 

of the Chief Counsel, Regulations 

Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–3073; e-mail: 

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 

proposed 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 

would be required to comply with these 

new regulations. 

Background 

A new aircraft type known as a 

tiltrotor is currently in development 

after more than six decades. The aircraft 

uses a hybrid of propellers and 

helicopter rotors to provide both lift and 

propulsive force using rotating nacelles. 

The aircraft 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 tailored for 

the 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 U.S. Army 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration prototype development 

contract award to Bell in the mid-1970s, 

two Bell XV–15 tiltrotor demonstrator 

aircraft were built as predecessors to the 

V–22 Osprey to demonstrate mature 

tiltrotor technology and flight 

capabilities. 

ICAO Noise Certification Standards 

The 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) to develop noise 

certification guidelines for tiltrotors in 

1997. 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 

flight capabilities. Since no standards 

for the tiltrotor currently exist, the FAA 

proposes to adopt the guidelines 

through rulemaking and add the new 

standards to part 36 and amend § 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 proposes the 

adoption of the same noise certification 

guidelines used in ICAO Annex 16, 

Volume 1, Chapter 13, Attachment F 

(Amendment 7) for tiltrotors. 

Application for Type Certification 

As the tiltrotor concept and 

technology proved promising with the 

production of the V–22 Osprey, Bell and 

Agusta-Westland established a joint 

business venture in 1998 to co-develop 

the Bell/Agusta model BA609 civil 

tiltrotor. 

In August 1996, Bell applied for a 

U.S. type certificate for the model 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36003 

BA609 tiltrotor. 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. Bell 

is targeting existing helicopter operators 

as the primary civil market for the 

BA609, and has stated the BA609 could 

operate from existing heliports without 

the need for new infrastructure to 

accommodate the aircraft. 

General Discussion of the Proposal 

The standards proposed in this 

rulemaking would 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 rulemaking proposes 

noise certification standards that would 

be applicable to all tiltrotors, including 

the Bell/Agusta Model BA609, which is 

currently under development. This rule 

proposes to incorporate the guidelines 

of ICAO Annex 16, Volume 1, Chapter 

13, Attachment F (Amendment 7) for 

tiltrotors, consistent with the FAA goal 

of harmonization of regulations with 

international standards. 

These proposed regulations would: 

• Amend § 21.93 for acoustical 

changes in type design to add the 

tiltrotor as a class of aircraft; 

• Amend § 36.1 noise certification 

standards for the issuance of type and 

airworthiness certificates for the new 

tiltrotor class of aircraft (including the 

definitions and applicability); 

• Add a new § 36.13 acoustical 

change requirements for tiltrotors; 

• Add a new subpart K to part 36 that 

includes noise measurement, evaluation 

and calculation criteria and maximum 

noise limits of tiltrotors; 

• Add a new Appendix K to part 36 

that includes noise certification 

standards (including the reference test 

conditions and reference test 

procedures) for tiltrotors certificated in 

the United States. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

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

consider the impact of paperwork and 

other information collection burdens 

imposed on the public. The FAA has 

determined there would be no new 

requirement for information collection 

associated with this proposed rule. The 

requirements are the same as for any 

other new aircraft type certification. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform our regulations to ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

to the maximum extent practicable. In 

2001, ICAO adopted tiltrotor noise 

guidelines. This proposed regulation 

will harmonize U.S. noise standards 

with the international standards by 

adopting the same requirements, 

adapted for the U.S. regulatory format. 

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 

Executive Order 13563 direct that each 

Federal agency shall 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 (Public Law 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 proposed 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 proposed rule. The reasoning for 

this determination follows: 

(1) Has benefits that justify its costs, 

(2) Is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866; 

(3) Would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities; 

(4) Would not have a significant effect 

on international trade; and 

(5) Would not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments, or on the private sector by 

exceeding the monetary threshold 

identified. 

These analyses are summarized below. 

The tiltrotor aircraft is a new class of 

aircraft. Currently there are no part 36 

certification standards for tiltrotor 

aircraft. This proposed rule would 

provide for the part 36 certification 

requirements for this new class of 

aircraft. The benefit of this proposed 

rule is that it would allow the startup 

and development of a market for a new 

class of aircraft, the tiltrotor. The FAA 

believes that this would result in 

substantial benefits. 

The potential size of the tiltrotor 

market can be estimated by the sales 

projections of the current developer, 

Bell/Agusta. In the next 10 years, only 

one model of tiltrotor is expected to be 

available, the BA609 currently in 

development. The price of a BA609 is 

expected to be $10 to $14 million, up 

from the original estimate of $7 million 

to the current $14 million. When first 

priced in 2000, the $7 million price was 

equivalent to the replacement value of 

a Bell 412 helicopter. The BA609 has 

unique capabilities, such as vertical 

takeoff and landing, combined with the 

speed and range of a turboprop airplane. 

Bell estimates that it will sell 

approximately 100 BA609s, 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. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
36004 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—NOMINAL AND PRESENT VALUE OF TILTROTOR MARKET AT A 14,000,000 AND 10,000,000 SELLING PRICE

Year Units produced Unit price 

Total market value 

Unit price 

Total market value 

Nominal Present value 

@ 7% Nominal Present value @ 7% 

1 ................................... 10 $14,000,000 $140,000,000 $138,844,000 $10,000,000 $100,000,000 $93,460,000 

2 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 122,276,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 87,340,000 

3 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 114,282,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 81,630,000 

4 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 106,806,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 76,290,000 

5 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 99,820,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 71,300,000 

6 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 93,282,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 66,630,000 

7 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 87,178,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 62,270,000 

8 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 81,480,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 58,200,000 

9 ................................... 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 76,146,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 54,390,000 

10 ................................. 10 14,000,000 140,000,000 71,162,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 50,830,000 

Totals ........................... 100 N.A. 1,400,000,000 983,276,000 N.A. 1,000,000,000 702,340,000 

3/29/2011. 

Table 2 shows the incremental 

manufacturer costs for the noise 

certification of a civil tiltrotor aircraft. 

The costs consist of four major items: 

Acoustics; Flight Test; Aircraft; and 

Miscellaneous. For tiltrotor aircraft 

noise certification, as for any aircraft 

certification, the noise demonstration 

flight testing and reporting is the major 

incremental cost. 

To meet the proposed requirements of 

noise control, acoustical measurements 

are used to quantify the characteristic 

noise levels of the aircraft. Almost half 

the 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 set-up. 

The next highest expense involves the 

support of the flight test group 

($220,000). These expenses are needed 

to configure and prepare the aircraft to 

execute the required noise flight test 

procedures. 

The last two major 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). 

Issuance of a type certificate requires 

compliance with the applicable noise 

certification requirements of part 36. 

Full noise certification testing is 

generally required for new aircraft types 

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 when 

an acoustical change is made. 

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 cost estimates for 

noise certification were prepared by Bell 

Helicopter Textron. The cost of noise 

certification for the tiltrotor is 

comparable to that for a large helicopter 

(over 7,000 pounds). Since noise testing 

is required for new aircraft to gain U.S. 

certification, the cost burden is 

comparable and does not impose any 

unexpected burden on manufacturers. 

The FAA may incur costs in this 

certification process, including the 

adoption of the new regulations. 

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, this 

proposed rule is considered to be a 

minimal cost rule. 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NOISE CERTIFICATION COSTS FOR A CIVIL TILTROTOR AIRCRAFT

Item Hours Cost per 

hour Total cost 

Acoustics Group Items 

Test Plan.

Test Coordination.

Acoustics/Met/TSPI setup.

Site Coordination/Survey/Preparation.

Instrument Calibration.

Testing.

Data Reduction.

Data Report.

Hours & Costs Acoustic Group ........................................................................................................ 2,000 $125 $250,000 

Flight Test Groups 

Airspeed Cal.

Statement of Conformity.

Instrument Calibration.

TSPI pilot guidance and off-site ground station development.

Aircraft mods to production-representation configuration.

Aircraft instrumentation buildup special to noise tests.


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36005 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NOISE CERTIFICATION COSTS FOR A CIVIL TILTROTOR AIRCRAFT—Continued 

Item Hours Cost per 

hour Total cost 

Testing.

Aircraft data archiving.

Hours & Costs Flight Test Groups ................................................................................................... 2,000 110 220,000 

Aircraft 

(Flight time: Instrumentation check out; ferry; & test) 

Miscellaneous flight time .................................................................................................................. 2 5,000 10,000 

Test flight time .................................................................................................................................. 8 5,000 40,000 

Hours & Costs—Aircraft ............................................................................................................ 10 .................... 50,000 

Miscellaneous Expenses 

Test site lease ......................................................................................................................................... .................... .................... 10,000 

Off-site equipment rental & supplies ....................................................................................................... .................... .................... 10,000 

Equipment shipping & local transportation costs (cars, pickups) ........................................................... .................... .................... 15,000 

Travel, food, and hotel costs (10 people* 14 days* $200/day + $500 airfare per person) .................... .................... .................... 33,000 

Costs—Miscellaneous Expenses ..................................................................................................... .................... .................... 68,000 

Total Hours & Costs .................................................................................................................. 4,010 N.A. 588,000 

Source: Bell Helicopter Textron, 04/01/2011. 

Since the tiltrotor industry is still 

developing, the costs and benefits 

discussed are based on a single tiltrotor 

program. The proposed rule would 

require the noise certification of a 

tiltrotor aircraft type. While the 

estimated benefits and costs are based 

on a single tiltrotor type, we believe the 

benefits will exceed the costs for any 

future designs. Bell Agusta anticipates 

selling 100 tiltrotor aircraft, allowing a 

$1 to $1.4 billion ($700 million to 

$1billion in present value) new market 

to start up and develop. 

The present value cost of the 

proposed rule is $588,000 for the 

certification of one aircraft type. The 

estimated 100 tiltrotor aircraft that 

would be sold would be covered under 

this type certificate, unless major 

modifications were made that would 

change the original certification. 

Therefore, the total present value cost of 

the proposed rule is $588,000, which 

the FAA considers to be minimal. 

Although the FAA cannot quantify 

the benefits of the proposed rule, the 

FAA believes that the benefits would be 

substantial. Because of this and the 

minimal cost nature of the proposed 

rule the FAA believes that the proposed 

rule would be cost beneficial. 

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. 

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. 

Tiltrotor Manufacturers 

Size standards for small entities are 

published by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) on their Web site 

at http://www.sba.gov/size. The size 

standards used herein are from ‘‘SBA 

U.S. Small Business Administration, 

Table of Small Business Size Standards, 

Matched to North American Industry 

Classification System Codes’’. The Table 

is effective November 5, 2010, and uses 

the 2007 NAICS codes. All aircraft 

manufacturers are listed in Sector 31– 

33—Manufacturing; Subsector 336— 

Transportation Equipment 

Manufacturing; NAICS Code 336411— 

Aircraft Manufacturing. The small entity 

size standard is 1,500 employees. 

Bell Helicopter is a wholly owned 

subsidiary of Textron Inc. Bell 

Helicopter employed approximately 

9,800 employees at the end of 2009 

while Textron employed approximately 

32,000 employees. (Textron Fact Book 

2009). Agusta-Westland is a wholly 

owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica. 

Agusta-Westland employed 13,886 

employees at September 30, 2010 while 

Finmeccanica employed 75,733 

employees. (Finmeccanica Press 

Release, Rome, 3 November 2010) Since 

the only tiltrotor manufacturer, Bell 

Helicopter, employs more than 1,500 

employees, there are no small-entity 

tiltrotor manufacturers. 

Consequently, the FAA certifies that 

this proposed rule would 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 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
36006 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 proposed rule and 

determined that it would encourage 

international trade by using 

international standards 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 $140.8 

million in lieu of $100 million. This 

proposed rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency determined that this action 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government, and, 

therefore, would not have federalism 

implications. 

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 guidelines for a new 

civil, hybrid airplane-rotorcraft known 

as the tiltrotor. Based on the dual 

helicopter and propeller airplane 

characteristics inherit in the tiltrotor, 

the noise guidelines utilize preexisting 

helicopter noise certification limits and 

procedures. This 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 given its low cruise 

RPM design. The FAA finds the 

applicability of the noise guidelines to 

be technologically and environmentally 

consistent for this new class of aircraft. 

The tiltrotor will function as a 

helicopter and will follow the same 

helicopter noise certification 

requirements, thus maintaining a 

comparable level of environmental 

protection. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this NPRM 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

agency determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order, it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory 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. 

Additional Information 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. We also invite comments relating 

to the economic, environmental, energy, 

or federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

please send only one copy of written 

comments, or if you are filing comments 

electronically, please submit your 

comments only one time. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

Before acting on this proposal, we will 

consider all comments we receive on or 

before the closing date for comments. 

We will consider comments filed after 

the comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. We may change this 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

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

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the docket or notice number of 

this rulemaking. 

You may access all documents the 

FAA considered in developing this 

proposed rule, including economic 

analyses and technical reports, from the 

internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced in 

paragraph (1). 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 21 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

14 CFR Part 36 

Aircraft, Noise control. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 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) * * * 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36007 

(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. 

VMCP is defined as the maximum level 

flight airspeed for airplane mode 

corresponding to minimum 

specification engine power 

corresponding to maximum continuous 

power available for sea level pressure of 

2,116 pounds per square foot (1,013.25 

hPa), at 77° Fahrenheit (25° Celsius) 

ambient conditions at the relevant 

maximum certificated weight (mass). 

VMO is defined as the maximum 

airspeed in airplane mode that may not 

be deliberately exceeded. 

VTOL/Conversion mode is all 

approved nacelle positions where the 

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 [effective date of final rule]: 

(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 4 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 

§ 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 [effective date of the final rule]. 

(b) To demonstrate compliance with 

this part, noise levels may not exceed 

the noise limits listed in section K4 of 

Appendix K 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 of 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 of this part, except 

corrections for spectral irregularities must be 

determined using the 50 Hertz sound 

pressure level found in section H36.201 of 

Appendix H of 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 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
36008 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 both sides of the 

takeoff reference flight path. The 

measurement points bisect the centerline 

flight path reference point A. 

(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; 

(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 both sides of the 

flyover reference flight path. The 

measurement points bisect the centerline 

flight path reference point A. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1EP21JN11.027</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36009 

(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 both sides of the 

approach reference flight path. The 

measurement points bisect the centerline 

flight path reference point A. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1EP21JN11.028</GPH> EP21JN11.029</GPH>
36010 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 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 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 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 dashdot line. 

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) When the design characteristics of the 

tiltrotor prevent test flights to be conducted 

in accordance with section K6.2, K6.3 or K6.4 

of this appendix, the applicant must revise 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1EP21JN11.030</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 36011 

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 for that 

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 

power-on 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 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 stabilize 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 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 to a landing; 

(c) The rotor speed must stabilize 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 conform 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 during 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 +/¥9 

km/h (5 kts) 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 dBdown time interval. 

K7.9 The tiltrotor altitude must not vary 

during each flight by more than +/¥30 ft (+/ 

¥9 m) from the reference altitude at the 

overhead point. 

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. 

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 values of VCON and VMCP or 

VMO used for noise certification must be 

included in the approved Flight Manual. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 

2011. 

Lourdes Maurice, 

Director, Office of Environment and Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–15276 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0568; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–010–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker 

Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 050, 

200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 

Airplanes; and Model F.28 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

[T]he Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) has published Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 88, and the Joint 

Aviation Authorities (JAA) has published 

Interim Policy INT/POL/25/12. The review 

conducted by Fokker Services on the Fokker 

F27 and F28 type designs in response to 

these regulations revealed that, under certain 

failure conditions, a short circuit can develop 

in the fuel pilot valve solenoid or in the 

wiring to the solenoid. Such a short circuit 

may result in an ignition source in the wing 

tank vapour space. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1