Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 6945 

Signed this 2nd day of February 2012, in 

Washington, DC. 

Dave White, 

Vice President, Commodity Credit 

Corporation and Chief, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3173 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0154; Special 

Conditions No. 25–457–SC] 

Special Conditions: Learjet Inc., 

Learjet Model LJ–200–1A10; 

Interaction of Systems and Structures 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Learjet Model LJ–200– 

1A10 airplane. This airplane will have 

novel or unusual design features 

associated with systems that, directly or 

as a result of failure or malfunction, 

affect structural performance. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards for these design 

features. 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 February 3, 2012. 

We must receive your comments by 

March 26, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2012–0154 

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 

8 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: 

Todd Martin, FAA, Airframe and Cabin 

Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227–1178; facsimile 

(425) 227–1320. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

has determined that notice of, and 

opportunity for public comments on, 

these special conditions are 

unnecessary. The substance of these 

special conditions has been subject to 

the public comment process in several 

prior instances with no substantive 

comments received. The FAA therefore 

finds that good cause exists for making 

these special conditions effective upon 

issuance. 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. 

We will consider all comments we 

receive by the closing date for 

comments. We may change these special 

conditions based on the comments we 

receive. 

Background 

On February 9, 2009, Learjet Inc. 

applied for a type certificate for their 

new Model LJ–200–1A10 (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘Model LJ–200’’) airplane. 

The Model LJ–200 is a business class 

aircraft powered by 2 high bypass 

turbine engines with an estimated 

maximum takeoff weight of 36,000 

pounds and an interior configuration for 

up to 10 passengers. 

The airplane is equipped with 

systems that, directly or as a result of 

failure or malfunction, affect its 

structural performance. Current 

regulations do not take into account 

loads for the aircraft due to the effects 

of system failures on structural 

performance. These special conditions 

define criteria to be used in the 

assessment of the effects of these 

systems on structures. The general 

approach of accounting for the effect of 

system failures on structural 

performance would be extended to 

include any system whose partial or 

complete failure, alone or in 

combination with other system failures, 

would affect structural performance. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, 

Learjet Inc. must show that the Model 

LJ–200 meets the applicable provisions 

of part 25, as amended by Amendments 

25–1 through 25–127 thereto. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for the Model LJ–200 because of a novel 

or unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the model for which they 

are issued. Should the type certificate 

for that model be amended later to 

include any other model that 

incorporates the same or similar novel 

or unusual design feature, these special 

conditions would also apply to the other 

model. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, the Model LJ–200 must 

comply with the fuel vent and exhaust 

emission requirements of 14 CFR part 

34 and the noise certification 

requirements of 14 CFR part 36; and the 

FAA must issue a finding of regulatory 

adequacy pursuant to § 611 of Public 

Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 

1972.’’ 

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 Model LJ–200 will incorporate 

the following novel or unusual design 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
6946 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

features: systems that affect the 

airplane’s structural performance, either 

directly or as a result of failure or 

malfunction. That is, the airplane’s 

systems affect how it responds in 

maneuver and gust conditions, and 

thereby affect its structural capability. 

These systems may also affect the 

aeroelastic stability of the airplane. 

Such systems include flight control 

systems, autopilots, stability 

augmentation systems, load alleviation 

systems, and fuel management systems. 

Such systems represent novel and 

unusual features when compared to the 

technology envisioned in the current 

airworthiness standards. 

Discussion 

Special conditions are needed to 

require consideration of the effects of 

systems on the structural capability and 

aeroelastic stability of the airplane, both 

in the normal and in the failed state, 

because these effects are not covered by 

current regulations. 

These special conditions require that 

the airplane meet the structural 

requirements of subparts C and D of 14 

CFR part 25 when the airplane systems 

are fully operative. The special 

conditions also require that the airplane 

meet these requirements considering 

failure conditions. In some cases, 

reduced margins are allowed for failure 

conditions based on system reliability. 

These special conditions establish a 

level of safety that neither raises nor 

lowers the standard set forth in the 

applicable regulations. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the Learjet 

Model LJ–200–1A10. Should Learjet Inc. 

apply at a later date for a change to the 

type certificate to include another 

model incorporating the same novel or 

unusual design features, the special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

of airplanes. It is not a rule of general 

applicability. 

The substance of these special 

conditions has been subjected to the 

notice and comment period in several 

prior instances and has been derived 

without substantive change from those 

previously issued. It is unlikely that 

prior public comment would result in a 

significant change from the substance 

contained herein. Therefore, the FAA 

has determined that prior public notice 

and comment are unnecessary and 

impracticable, and good cause exists for 

adopting these special conditions upon 

issuance. The FAA is requesting 

comments to allow interested persons to 

submit views that may not have been 

submitted in response to the prior 

opportunities for comment described 

above. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

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

44702, 44704. 

The Special Conditions 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the following special 

conditions are issued as part of the type 

certification basis for Learjet Model LJ– 

200–1A10 airplanes. 

1. General 

For airplanes equipped with systems 

that affect structural performance, either 

directly or as a result of a failure or 

malfunction, the influence of these 

systems and their failure conditions on 

structural performance must be taken 

into account when showing compliance 

with the requirements of 14 CFR part 

25, subparts C and D. The following 

criteria must be used for showing 

compliance with these special 

conditions for airplanes equipped with 

flight control systems, autopilots, 

stability augmentation systems, load 

alleviation systems, fuel management 

systems, and other systems that either 

directly or as a result of failure or 

malfunction affect structural 

performance. 

(a) The criteria defined herein only 

address the direct structural 

consequences of the system responses 

and performances. They cannot be 

considered in isolation but should be 

included in the overall safety evaluation 

of the airplane. These criteria may in 

some instances duplicate standards 

already established for this evaluation. 

These criteria are only applicable to 

structures whose failure could prevent 

continued safe flight and landing. 

Specific criteria that define acceptable 

limits on handling characteristics or 

stability requirements when operating 

in the system degraded or inoperative 

mode are not provided in these special 

conditions. 

(b) Depending upon the specific 

characteristics of the airplane, 

additional studies may be required that 

go beyond the criteria provided in these 

special conditions in order to 

demonstrate the capability of the 

airplane to meet other realistic 

conditions such as alternative gust or 

maneuver descriptions for an airplane 

equipped with a load alleviation system. 

(c) The following definitions are 

applicable to these special conditions. 

Structural performance: Capability of 

the airplane to meet the structural 

requirements of part 25. 

Flight limitations: Limitations that 

can be applied to the airplane flight 

conditions following an in-flight 

occurrence and that are included in the 

flight manual (e.g., speed limitations, 

avoidance of severe weather conditions, 

etc.). 

Operational limitations: Limitations, 

including flight limitations, that can be 

applied to the airplane operating 

conditions before dispatch (e.g., fuel, 

payload and Master Minimum 

Equipment List limitations). 

Probabilistic terms: The probabilistic 

terms (probable, improbable, extremely 

improbable) used in these special 

conditions are the same as those used in 

§ 25.1309. 

Failure condition: The term failure 

condition is the same as that used in 

§ 25.1309; however, these special 

conditions apply only to system failure 

conditions that affect the structural 

performance of the airplane (e.g., system 

failure conditions that induce loads, 

change the response of the airplane to 

inputs such as gusts or pilot actions, or 

lower flutter margins). 

2. Effects of Systems on Structures 

The following criteria will be used in 

determining the influence of a system 

and its failure conditions on the 

airplane structure. 

(a) System fully operative. With the 

system fully operative, the following 

apply: 

(1) Limit loads must be derived in all 

normal operating configurations of the 

system from all the limit conditions 

specified in subpart C (or defined by 

special condition or equivalent level of 

safety in lieu of those specified in 

Subpart C), taking into account any 

special behavior of such a system or 

associated functions or any effect on the 

structural performance of the airplane 

that may occur up to the limit loads. In 

particular, any significant nonlinearity 

(rate of displacement of control surface, 

thresholds, or any other system 

nonlinearities) must be accounted for in 

a realistic or conservative way when 

deriving limit loads from limit 

conditions. 

(2) The airplane must meet the 

strength requirements of part 25 (static 

strength, residual strength), using the 

specified factors to derive ultimate loads 

from the limit loads defined above. The 

effect of nonlinearities must be 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 6947 

investigated beyond limit conditions to 

ensure the behavior of the system 

presents no anomaly compared to the 

behavior below limit conditions. 

However, conditions beyond limit 

conditions need not be considered when 

it can be shown that the airplane has 

design features that will not allow it to 

exceed those limit conditions. 

(3) The airplane must meet the 

aeroelastic stability requirements of 

§ 25.629. 

(b) System in the failure condition. 

For any system failure condition not 

shown to be extremely improbable, the 

following apply: 

(1) At the time of occurrence, starting 

from 1-g level flight conditions, a 

realistic scenario including pilot 

corrective actions must be established to 

determine the loads occurring at the 

time of failure and immediately after 

failure. 

(i) For static strength substantiation, 

these loads, multiplied by an 

appropriate factor of safety that is 

related to the probability of occurrence 

of the failure, are ultimate loads to be 

considered for design. The factor of 

safety is defined in Figure 1. 

(ii) For residual strength 

substantiation, the airplane must be able 

to withstand two thirds of the ultimate 

loads defined in subparagraph 2(b)(1)(i) 

of these special conditions. For 

pressurized cabins, these loads must be 

combined with the normal operating 

differential pressure. 

(iii) Freedom from aeroelastic 

instability must be shown up to the 

speeds defined in § 25.629(b)(2). For 

failure conditions that result in speeds 

beyond VC/MC, freedom from 

aeroelastic instability must be shown to 

increased speeds, so that the margins 

intended by § 25.629(b)(2) are 

maintained. 

(iv) Failures of the system that result 

in forced structural vibrations 

(oscillatory failures) must not produce 

loads that could result in detrimental 

deformation of primary structure. 

(2) For the continuation of the flight. 

For the airplane, in the system failed 

state and considering any appropriate 

reconfiguration and flight limitations, 

the following apply: 

(i) The loads derived from the 

following conditions (or defined by 

special condition or equivalent level of 

safety in lieu of the following 

conditions) at speeds up to VC/MC, or 

the speed limitation prescribed for the 

remainder of the flight, must be 

determined: 

(A) The limit symmetrical 

maneuvering conditions specified in 

§ 25.331 and in § 25.345. 

(B) The limit gust and turbulence 

conditions specified in § 25.341 and in 

§ 25.345. 

(C) The limit rolling conditions 

specified in § 25.349 and the limit 

unsymmetrical conditions specified in 

§ 25.367 and § 25.427(b) and (c). 

(D) The limit yaw maneuvering 

conditions specified in § 25.351. 

(E) The limit ground loading 

conditions specified in §§ 25.473, 

25.491, 25.493(d) and 25.503. 

(ii) For static strength substantiation, 

each part of the structure must be able 

to withstand the loads in paragraph 

2(b)(2)(i) of these special conditions 

multiplied by a factor of safety 

depending on the probability of being in 

this failure state. The factor of safety is 

defined in Figure 2. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULESER10FE12.000</GPH>
6948 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Qj = (Tj)(Pj) 

Where: 

Tj = Average time spent in failure condition 

j (in hours) 

Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode 

j (per hour) 

Note: If Pj is greater than 10¥3 per flight 

hour, then a 1.5 factor of safety must be 

applied to all limit load conditions specified 

in Subpart C. 

(iii) For residual strength 

substantiation, the airplane must be able 

to withstand two thirds of the ultimate 

loads defined in paragraph 2(b)(2)(ii) of 

these special conditions. For 

pressurized cabins, these loads must be 

combined with the normal operating 

differential pressure. 

(iv) If the loads induced by the failure 

condition have a significant effect on 

fatigue or damage tolerance, then their 

effects must be taken into account. 

(v) Freedom from aeroelastic 

instability must be shown up to a speed 

determined from Figure 3. Flutter 

clearance speeds V′ and V′′ may be 

based on the speed limitation specified 

for the remainder of the flight using the 

margins defined by § 25.629(b). 

V1’ = Clearance speed as defined by 

§ 25.629(b)(2). 

V’’ = Clearance speed as defined by 

§ 25.629(b)(1). 

Qj = (Tj)(Pj) 

Where: 

Tj = Average time spent in failure condition 

j (in hours) 

Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode 

j (per hour) 

Note: If Pj is greater than 10¥3 per flight 

hour, then the flutter clearance speed must 

not be less than V′′. 

(vi) Freedom from aeroelastic 

instability must also be shown up to V′ 

in Figure 3 above for any probable 

system failure condition combined with 

any damage required or selected for 

investigation by § 25.571(b).’ ’’ 

(3) Consideration of certain failure 

conditions may be required by other 

sections of part 25 regardless of 

calculated system reliability. Where 

analysis shows the probability of these 

failure conditions to be less than 10¥9, 

criteria other than those specified in this 

paragraph may be used for structural 

substantiation to show continued safe 

flight and landing. 

(c) Failure indications. For system 

failure detection and indication, the 

following apply: 

(1) The system must be checked for 

failure conditions, not extremely 

improbable, that degrade the structural 

capability below the level required by 

part 25 or significantly reduce the 

reliability of the remaining system. As 

far as reasonably practicable, the flight 

crew must be made aware of these 

failures before flight. Certain elements 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULESER10FE12.001</GPH> ER10FE12.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 6949 

of the control system, such as 

mechanical and hydraulic components, 

may use special periodic inspections, 

and electronic components may use 

daily checks, in lieu of detection and 

indication systems to achieve the 

objective of this requirement. These 

certification maintenance requirements 

must be limited to components that are 

not readily detectable by normal 

detection and indication systems and 

where service history shows that 

inspections will provide an adequate 

level of safety. 

(2) The existence of any failure 

condition, not extremely improbable, 

during flight that could significantly 

affect the structural capability of the 

airplane and for which the associated 

reduction in airworthiness can be 

minimized by suitable flight limitations, 

must be signaled to the flight crew. For 

example, failure conditions that result 

in a factor of safety between the airplane 

strength and the loads of Subpart C 

below 1.25, or flutter margins below V′′, 

must be signaled to the crew during 

flight. 

(d) Dispatch with known failure 

conditions. If the airplane is to be 

dispatched in a known system failure 

condition that affects structural 

performance, or affects the reliability of 

the remaining system to maintain 

structural performance, then the 

provisions of these special conditions 

must be met, including the provisions of 

paragraph 2(a) for the dispatched 

condition, and paragraph 2(b) for 

subsequent failures. Expected 

operational limitations may be taken 

into account in establishing Pj as the 

probability of failure occurrence for 

determining the safety margin in Figure 

1. Flight limitations and expected 

operational limitations may be taken 

into account in establishing Qj as the 

combined probability of being in the 

dispatched failure condition and the 

subsequent failure condition for the 

safety margins in Figures 2 and 3. These 

limitations must be such that the 

probability of being in this combined 

failure state and then subsequently 

encountering limit load conditions is 

extremely improbable. No reduction in 

these safety margins is allowed if the 

subsequent system failure rate is greater 

than 10¥3 per hour. 

For each system for which these 

special conditions are applied, the 

following must be identified for 

showing compliance: 

(a) The system that either directly or 

as a result of failure or malfunction 

affects structural performance; 

(b) The failure condition of the system 

and the probability of that failure; 

(c) The structure whose performance 

is affected directly or as a result of 

failure or malfunction of the system; 

and, 

(d) The loading condition(s) on the 

structure affected by the system. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

3, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3077 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

14 CFR Part 1215 

[Notice (12–009)] 

RIN 2700–AD72 

Tracking and Data Relay Satellite 

System (TDRSS) Rates for Non-U.S. 

Government Customers 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: This direct final rule makes 

non-substantive changes to the policy 

governing the Tracking and Data Relay 

Satellite System (TDRSS) services 

provided to non-U.S. Government users 

and the reimbursement for rendering 

such services. TDRSS, also known as 

the Space Network, provides command, 

tracking, data, voice, and video services 

to the International Space Station, 

NASA’s space and Earth science 

missions, and other Federal agencies, 

including the Department of Defense 

and the National Science Foundation. 

For a fee, commercial users can also 

have access to TDRSS for tracking and 

data acquisition purposes. Over the last 

25 years, TDRSS has delivered pictures, 

television, scientific, and voice data to 

the scientific community and the 

general public, including data from 

more than 100 Space Shuttle and 

International Space Station missions 

and the Hubble Space Telescope. A 

principal advantage of TDRSS is 

providing communications services, 

which previously have been provided 

by multiple worldwide ground stations, 

with much higher data rates and lower 

latency to the user missions. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

April 10, 2012 unless the Agency 

receives significant adverse comments 

by midnight Eastern Standard Time on 

March 12, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

identified with ‘‘RIN 2700–AD72’’ and 

may be sent to NASA by the following 

method: 

• Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: 

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

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Please note that NASA will 

post all comments on the Internet 

without change, including any personal 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

more information on the Tracking and 

Data Relay Satellite System visit: 

https://www.spacecomm.nasa.gov/

spacecomm/programs/Space_

network.cfm. Questions may be directed 

to Jon Walker at (202) 358–2145 or via 

email at Jon.Z.Walker@nasa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

regulations pertaining to TDRSS were 

originally published in 1983 and, apart 

from minor revisions in 1991 and the 

revision to the rates in 1997, have not 

been updated and do not reflect current 

operating procedures for determining 

how fees are charged, billed, or 

received. In addition to updating the fee 

structure, this rule also removes and 

replaces obsolete references. Finally, 

this rule responds to recommendations 

from a NASA IG Audit of the TRDSS 

program. These rule changes will ensure 

non-U.S. Government users of TDRSS 

properly reimburse NASA for services 

provided to them and share in the costs 

of system upgrades. The revisions to 

this rule are part of NASA’s 

retrospective plan under EO 13563 

completed in August 2011. NASA’s full 

plan can be accessed at: http://

www.nasa.gov/pdf/581545main_Final

%20Plan%20for%20Retrospective%20

Analysis%20of%20Existing%20

Regulations.pdf. 

I. Direct Final Rule and Significant 

Adverse Comments 

NASA has determined this 

rulemaking meets the criteria for a 

direct final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with 

NASA’s management of TDRSS 

program. NASA expects no opposition 

to the changes and no significant 

adverse comments. However, if NASA 

receives a significant adverse comment, 

the Agency will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register. A significant adverse 

comment is one that explains: (1) Why 

the direct final rule is inappropriate, 

including challenges to the rule’s 

underlying premise or approach; or (2) 

why the direct final rule will be 

ineffective or unacceptable without a 

change. In determining whether a 

comment necessitates withdrawal of 

this direct final rule, NASA will 

consider whether it warrants a 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES