Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 224 / Friday, November 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 72561 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3367; Special 

Conditions No. 25–596–SC] 

Special Conditions: Flight Structures, 

Inc., Boeing Model 777–200 Dynamic 

Test Requirements for SingleOccupant, Oblique (Side-Facing) Seats 

With Airbag Devices 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects an 

error that appeared in Docket No. FAA– 

2015–3367, Special Conditions No. 25– 

596–SC, which was published in the 

Federal Register on September 30, 2015 

(80 FR 58597). The error is in a 

reference to Boeing in a note preceding 

a section titled, Inflatable Lap Belt 

Special Conditions. It is being corrected 

herein. 

DATES: The effective date of this 

correction is November 20, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Shelden, FAA, Airframe and Cabin 

Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–2785; facsimile 

425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

document designated as ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2015–3367, Special Conditions 

No. 25–596–SC’’ was published in the 

Federal Register on September 30, 2015 

(80 FR 58597). The document issued 

special conditions pertaining to 

dynamic test requirements for singleoccupant, oblique (side-facing) seats 

with airbag devices on Boeing Model 

777–200 airplanes. 

As published, the document 

contained one error in a note that refers 

to Boeing rather than Flight Structures, 

Inc. 

Because no other part of the 

regulatory information has been 

changed, the Special Conditions are not 

being re-published. 

Correction 

In the Final Special Conditions, 

Request for Comments document [FR 

Doc. 2015–24727 filed 9–29–15; 8:45 

a.m.] published on September 30, 2015 

(80 FR 58597), make the following 

correction: 

On page 58599, column 3, the 

paragraph marked ‘‘Note:’’ should read: 

Note: Flight Structures, Inc., must 

demonstrate that the installation of seats via 

plinths or pallets meets all applicable 

requirements. Compliance with the guidance 

contained in FAA Policy Memorandum PS– 

ANM–100–2000–00123, dated February 2, 

2000, titled ‘‘Guidance for Demonstrating 

Compliance with Seat Dynamic Testing for 

Plinths and Pallets,’’ is acceptable to the 

FAA. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 11, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–29624 Filed 11–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 33 and 35 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–4220; Special 

Conditions No. 33–017–SC] 

Special Conditions: CFM International, 

LEAP–1B Engine Models; 

Incorporation of Woven Composite 

Fan Blades 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the CFM International (CFM), 

LEAP–1B engine models. This engine 

model will have a novel or unusual 

design feature associated with the 

engine: woven composite fan blades. 

The applicable airworthiness 

regulations do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for this 

design feature. These special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: The effective date of these 

special conditions is December 21, 

2015. 

We must receive your comments by 

December 7, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2015–4220 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, 

DC, 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

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

Friday, except federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

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

any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

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

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

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

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Strom, Federal Aviation 

Administration Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service, ANE–112, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, 

Massachusetts, 01803–5213; telephone 

(781) 238–7143; fax (781) 238–7199; 

email alan.strom@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comment History 

The FAA has determined, in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) 

and 553(d)(3), that notice and 

opportunity for prior public comment 

heron are unnecessary because the 

substance of these special conditions 

was subject to the public comment 

process in a prior instance, with no 

substantive comments received. The 

FAA therefore finds that good cause 

exists for making these special 

conditions effective upon issuance. 

Special condition No. Company/Airplane 

model 

33–14–02–SC ........... CFM/LEAP–1A 

CFM/LEAP–1C 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
72562 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 224 / Friday, November 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

sending written comments, data, or 

views. The agency also invites 

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 special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit 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 action. Before acting on 

this action, 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 these 

special conditions based on the 

comments we receive. 

Background 

On May 9, 2013, CFM International 

(CFM) applied for a type certificate for 

their new LEAP–1B engine model(s). 

The high-bypass-ratio LEAP–1B engine 

models incorporate woven composite 

fan blades, a novel or unusual design 

feature. These fan blades have: 

• Significant material property 

characteristic differences from 

conventional, single-load path, metallic 

fan blades. 

• Multiple load path feature and/or 

crack arresting feature capabilities that, 

during blade life, may prevent 

delamination, crack propagation, and/or 

blade failure. 

Because of their novel or unusual 

design, these fan blades: 

• Require additional airworthiness 

standards for LEAP–1B engine type 

certification, to account for material 

property and failure mode differences 

with conventional fan blades. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

that exist do not contain appropriate 

safety standards for these new blades. 

• May allow for application of 

different fan blade containment 

requirements, if CFM demonstrates 

improved load path features and/or 

crack arresting feature capabilities of the 

new blade design, below the inner 

annulus flow path line. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, 

CFM must show that the LEAP–1B 

engine models meet the applicable 

provisions of the applicable regulations 

in effect on the date of application, 

except as detailed in paragraph 

21.101(b) and paragraph 21.101(c). 

The FAA has determined the 

following certification basis for the 

LEAP–1B engine models: 14 CFR part 

33, ‘‘Airworthiness Standards: Aircraft 

Engines,’’ dated February 1, 1965, with 

Amendments 33–1 through 33–33, 

dated September 20, 2012. 

If the FAA finds that the regulations 

in effect on the date of the application 

for the change do not provide adequate 

or appropriate safety standards for the 

LEAP–1B engine model(s) because of a 

novel or unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the engine model(s) for 

which they are issued. Should the type 

certificate for that engine model be 

amended later to include any other 

engine model(s) that incorporates the 

same novel or unusual design feature, 

the special conditions would also apply 

to the other engine model(s) under 

§ 21.101. 

In addition to complying with the 

applicable product airworthiness 

regulations and special conditions, the 

LEAP–1B engine model(s) must comply 

with the fuel venting and exhaust 

emission requirements of 14 CFR part 

34. 

The FAA issues special conditions, as 

defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance 

with § 11.38, and they become part of 

the type certification basis under 

§ 21.17(a)(2). 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The LEAP–1B engine models 

incorporate a novel or unusual design 

feature: Woven composite fan blades. 

Discussion 

As discussed in the summary section, 

the LEAP–1B engine model(s) 

incorporate woven composite fan blades 

instead of conventional, single-load 

path, metallic fan blades, which is a 

novel or unusual design feature for 

aircraft engines. The applicable 

airworthiness regulations do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for this design feature. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the LEAP– 

1B engine model(s). Should CFM apply 

at a later date for a change to the type 

certificate to include another model on 

the same type certificate incorporating 

the same novel or unusual design 

feature, the special conditions would 

apply to that model as well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on LEAP–1B 

models of engine(s). It is not a rule of 

general applicability and applies only to 

CFM, who requested FAA approval of 

this engine feature. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Parts 33 and 

35 

Aircraft, Engines, Aviation safety, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

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

44702, 44704. 

The Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the following special conditions are 

issued as part of the type certification 

basis for CFM LEAP–1B engine 

model(s). 

Special Conditions: CFM 

International LEAP–1B Model Turbofan 

Engines 

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) issues the 

following special conditions as part of 

the type certification basis for the CFM, 

LEAP–1B turbofan engines. 

Part 33, Requirements. In addition to 

the airworthiness standards in 14 CFR 

part 33, effective February 1, 1965, with 

Amendments 33–1 through 33–33 

applicable to the CFM, LEAP–1B engine 

models: 

(a) Conduct an engine fan blade 

containment test with the fan blade 

failing at the inner annulus flow path 

line instead of at the outermost 

retention groove. 

(b) Substantiate by test and analysis, 

or other methods acceptable to the FAA, 

that a fan disk and fan blade retention 

system with minimum material 

properties can withstand, without 

failure, a centrifugal load equal to two 

times the maximum load the retention 

system could experience within 

approved engine operating limitations. 

The fan blade retention system includes 

the portion of the fan blade from the 

inner annulus flow path line inward to 

the blade dovetail, the blade retention 

components, and the fan disk and fan 

blade attachment features. 

(c) Using a procedure approved by the 

FAA, establish an operating limitation 

that specifies the maximum allowable 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 224 / Friday, November 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 72563 

number of start-stop stress cycles for the 

fan blade retention system. The life 

evaluation must include the combined 

effects of high-cycle and low-cycle 

fatigue. If the operating limitation is less 

than 100,000 cycles, that limitation 

must be specified in Chapter 5 of the 

Engine Manual Airworthiness 

Limitation Section. The procedure used 

to establish the maximum allowable 

number of start-stop stress cycles for the 

fan blade retention system will 

incorporate the integrity requirements 

in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of 

these special conditions for the fan 

blade retention system. 

(1) An engineering plan, which 

establishes and maintains that the 

combinations of loads, material 

properties, environmental influences, 

and operating conditions, including the 

effects of parts influencing these 

parameters, are well known or 

predictable through validated analysis, 

test, or service experience. 

(2) A manufacturing plan that 

identifies the specific manufacturing 

constraints necessary to consistently 

produce the fan blade retention system 

with the attributes required by the 

engineering plan. 

(3) A service management plan that 

defines in-service processes for 

maintenance and repair of the fan blade 

retention system, which will maintain 

attributes consistent with those required 

by the engineering plan. 

(d) Substantiate by test and analysis, 

or other methods acceptable to the FAA, 

that the blade design below the inner 

annulus flow path line provides 

multiple load paths and/or crack 

arresting features that prevent 

delamination or crack propagation to 

blade failure during the life of the blade. 

(e) Substantiate that during the 

service life of the engine, the total 

probability of an individual blade 

retention system failure resulting from 

all possible causes, as defined in 

§ 33.75, will be extremely improbable 

with a cumulative calculated probability 

of failure of less than 10E–9 per engine 

flight hour. 

(f) Substantiate by test or analysis that 

not only will the engine continue to 

meet the requirements of § 33.75 

following a lightning strike on the 

composite fan blade structure, but that 

the lightning strike will not cause 

damage to the fan blades that would 

prevent continued safe operation of the 

affected engine. 

(g) Account for the effects of inservice deterioration, manufacturing 

variations, minimum material 

properties, and environmental effects 

during the tests and analyses required 

by paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and 

(f) of these special conditions. 

(h) Propose fleet leader monitoring 

and field sampling programs that will 

monitor the effects of engine fan blade 

usage and fan blade retention system 

integrity. 

(i) Mark each fan blade legibly and 

permanently with a part number and a 

serial number. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 30, 2015. 

Colleen D’Alessandro, 

Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–29589 Filed 11–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3398; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–CE–031–AD; Amendment 

39–18328; AD 2015–16–07 R1] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; REIMS 

AVIATION S.A. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for REIMS 

AVIATION S.A. Model F406 airplanes. 

This AD revises AD 2015–16–07, which 

required inspection of the left-hand and 

right-hand rudder control pedal torque 

tubes, and, depending on findings, 

replacement with a serviceable part. 

This AD retains the actions of AD 2015– 

16–07 and adds additional acceptable 

serviceable replacement parts. The AD 

was prompted by reports of detachment 

of the pilot’s rudder control pedal in 

flight. We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to address the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

28, 2015. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain other publication listed in 

this AD as of August 18, 2015 (80 FR 

49127). 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by January 4, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact ASI Aviation, 

Ae ́rodrome de Reims Prunay, 51360 

Prunay, FRANCE; telephone: +33 3 26 

48 46 65; fax: +33 3 26 49 18 57; email: 

none; Internet: http://asi-aviation.fr/asiaviation-support/1.html (requires user 

name and password). You may view this 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (816) 329– 

4148. It is also available on the Internet 

at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for locating Docket No. FAA– 

2015–3398. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3398; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– 

5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4119; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: 

albert.mercado@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

On August 6, 2015, we issued AD 

2015–16–07, Amendment 39–18232 (80 

FR 49127, August 17, 2015). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on REIMS AVIATION 

S.A. Model F406 airplanes and was 

based on mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country. 

Since we issued AD 2015–16–07, 

Amendment 39–18232 (80 FR 49127, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES