73462 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Public Protection Notification 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a request for information or an 

information collection requirement 

unless the requesting document 

displays a currently valid Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number. 

VI. Plain Writing 

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. 

L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to 

write documents in a clear, concise, and 

well-organized manner. The NRC has 

written this document to be consistent 

with the Plain Writing Act as well as the 

Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing,’’ 

published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). 

VII. Backfitting and Issue Finality 

The NRC has determined that the 

amendments in this final rule do not 

constitute backfitting and are not 

inconsistent with any of the issue 

finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. 

The amendments are non-substantive in 

nature, and include adding three 

inadvertently omitted addenda to 

Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code to 

the list of documents approved for 

incorporation by reference and 

correcting a footnote number. They 

impose no new requirements and make 

no substantive changes to the 

regulations. The amendments do not 

involve any provisions that would 

impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 

part 50, or would be inconsistent with 

the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR 

part 52. For these reasons, the issuance 

of the rule in final form would not 

constitute backfitting or represent an 

inconsistency with any of the issue 

finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. 

Therefore, the NRC has not prepared 

any additional documentation for this 

final rule addressing backfitting or issue 

finality. 

VIII. Congressional Review Act 

In accordance with the Congressional 

Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801–808), 

the NRC has determined that this action 

is not a major rule and has verified this 

determination with the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 

Antitrust, Classified information, 

Criminal penalties, Fire protection, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear 

power plants and reactors, Radiation 

protection, Reactor siting criteria, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble and under the authority of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; 

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 

as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, 

the NRC is adopting the following 

amendments to 10 CFR part 50. 

PART 50—DOMESTIC LICENSING OF 

PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 

FACILITIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 50 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Atomic Energy Act secs. 102, 

103, 104, 105, 147, 149, 161, 181, 182, 183, 

186, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 

2134, 2135, 2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 

2233, 2236, 2239, 2273, 2282); Energy 

Reorganization Act secs. 201, 202, 206 (42 

U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Nuclear Waste 

Policy Act sec. 306 (42 U.S.C. 10226); 

Government Paperwork Elimination Act sec. 

1704 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy Policy Act 

of 2005, Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 194 (2005). 

Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95– 

601, sec. 10, as amended by Pub. L. 102–486, 

sec. 2902 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 50.10 also 

issued under Atomic Energy Act secs. 101, 

185 (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235); National 

Environmental Protection Act sec. 102 (42 

U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, 50.54(d), and 

50.103 also issued under Atomic Energy Act 

sec. 108 (42 U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23, 

50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued under 

Atomic Energy Act sec. 185 (42 U.S.C. 2235). 

Appendix Q also issued under National 

Environmental Protection Act sec. 102 (42 

U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 and 50.54 also 

issued under sec. 204 (42 U.S.C. 5844). 

Sections 50.58, 50.91, and 50.92 also issued 

under Pub. L. 97–415 (42 U.S.C. 2239). 

Section 50.78 also issued under Atomic 

Energy Act sec. 122 (42 U.S.C. 2152). 

Sections 50.80–50.81 also issued under 

Atomic Energy Act sec. 184 (42 U.S.C. 2234). 

■ 2. In § 50.55a, add paragraphs 

(a)(1)(ii)(B)(5) through (7) to read as 

follows: 

§ 50.55a Codes and standards. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(5) 1975 Winter Addenda, 

(6) 1976 Summer Addenda, and 

(7) 1976 Winter Addenda. 

* * * * * 

§ 50.55a [Amended] 

■ 3. In § 50.55a, paragraph (e)(1), in the 

second sentence, remove footnote ‘‘9’’ 

and add, in its place, footnote ‘‘7’’. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 

of December 2014. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Cindy Bladey, 

Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives 

Branch, Division of Administrative Services, 

Office of Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29037 Filed 12–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No.: FAA–2013–0142; Amdt. No. 

25–141] 

RIN 2120–AK12 

Harmonization of Airworthiness 

Standards—Gust and Maneuver Load 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends certain 

airworthiness regulations for transport 

category airplanes, based on 

recommendations from the FAAsponsored Aviation Rulemaking 

Advisory Committee (ARAC). This 

amendment eliminates regulatory 

differences between the airworthiness 

standards of the FAA and European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). It does 

not add new requirements beyond what 

manufacturers currently meet for EASA 

certification and does not affect current 

industry design practices. This final rule 

revises the pitch maneuver design loads 

criteria; revises the gust and turbulence 

design loads criteria; revises the 

application of gust loads to engine 

mounts, high lift devices, and other 

control surfaces; adds a ‘‘round-theclock’’ discrete gust criterion and a 

multi-axis discrete gust criterion for 

airplanes equipped with wing-mounted 

engines; revises the engine torque loads 

criteria; adds an engine failure dynamic 

load condition; revises the ground gust 

design loads criteria; revises the criteria 

used to establish the rough air design 

speed; and requires the establishment of 

a rough air Mach number. 

DATES: Effective February 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: For information on where to 

obtain copies of rulemaking documents 

and other information related to this 

final rule, see ‘‘How To Obtain 

Additional Information’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Todd Martin, Airframe 

and Cabin Safety Branch, ANM–115, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73463 

1On April 16, 2014, the Federal Register 

published a correction (79 FR 21413) changing the 

Notice No. to ‘‘13–04’’ for the NPRM that published 

May 28, 2013 (78 FR 31851) and for subsequent 

NPRM corrections that published June 24, 2013 (78 

FR 37722) and July 16, 2013 (78 FR 42480). 

Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1178; facsimile (425) 227– 

1232; email Todd.Martin@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

action, contact Sean Howe, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, ANM–7, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2591; 

facsimile (425) 227–1007; email 

Sean.Howe@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 

44701, ‘‘General Requirements.’’ Under 

that section, the FAA is charged with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

and minimum standards for the design 

and performance of aircraft that the 

Administrator finds necessary for safety 

in air commerce. This regulation is 

within the scope of that authority. It 

prescribes new safety standards for the 

design and operation of transport 

category airplanes. 

I. Overview of Final Rule 

The FAA is amending Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 25 

as described below. This action 

harmonizes part 25 requirements with 

the corresponding requirements in Book 

1 of the EASA Certification 

Specifications and Acceptable Means of 

Compliance for Large Aeroplanes (CS– 

25). As such, this action— 

1. Revises § 25.331, ‘‘Symmetric 

maneuvering conditions,’’ to prescribe 

both positive and negative checked 

pitch maneuver loads that take into 

account the size of the airplane and any 

effects of the flight control system. The 

introductory paragraph, § 25.331(c), is 

revised by moving some criteria to 

§ 25.331(c)(2) where those criteria 

apply. 

2. Removes appendix G to part 25, 

‘‘Continuous Gust Design Criteria,’’ and 

§ 25.341(b) now clearly sets forth the 

continuous turbulence requirement. 

3. Revises § 25.341, ‘‘Gust and 

turbulence loads,’’ to— 

• Remove the optional mission 

analysis method currently specified in 

appendix G in favor of the design 

envelope analysis method. 

• Update the turbulence intensity 

criteria in § 25.341(b) to take into 

account in-service measurements of 

derived gust intensities. 

• Update § 25.341(a) to require 

evaluation of discrete gust conditions at 

airplane speeds from design speed for 

maximum gust intensity, VB, to design 

cruising speed, VC, (previously required 

only at VC) and to specify reference gust 

velocities up to 60,000 feet, rather than 

the previously specified 50,000 feet. 

• Add a new paragraph § 25.341(c) 

that specifies a ‘‘round-the-clock’’ 

discrete gust criterion and a multi-axis 

discrete gust criterion for airplanes 

equipped with wing-mounted engines. 

4. Revises § 25.343, ‘‘Design fuel and 

oil loads,’’ § 25.345, ‘‘High lift devices,’’ 

§ 25.371, ‘‘Gyroscopic loads,’’ § 25.373, 

‘‘Speed control devices,’’ and § 25.391, 

‘‘Control surface loads: General,’’ by 

adding to each of these regulations a 

requirement to evaluate the continuous 

turbulence loads criteria in § 25.341(b). 

5. Revises § 25.361, ‘‘Engine and 

auxiliary power unit torque,’’ to— 

• Remove the requirement to assess 

engine torque loads due to engine 

structural failures (this requirement is 

re-established in the new § 25.362, 

outlined below). 

• Provide specific engine torque load 

criteria for auxiliary power unit 

installations. 

• Remove the requirements that apply 

to reciprocating engines. 

• Change the title of § 25.361 from 

‘‘Engine torque’’ to ‘‘Engine and 

auxiliary power unit torque.’’ 

6. Adds new § 25.362, ‘‘Engine failure 

loads,’’ to require engine mounts and 

supporting airframe structure be 

designed for 1g flight loads combined 

with the most critical transient dynamic 

loads and vibrations resulting from 

failure of a blade, shaft, bearing or 

bearing support, or bird strike event. 

7. Revises § 25.391, ‘‘Control surface 

loads: General,’’ and § 25.395, ‘‘Control 

system,’’ to remove references to the 

ground gust requirements in § 25.415. 

8. Revises § 25.415, ‘‘Ground gust 

conditions’’ to— 

• Reorganize and clarify the design 

conditions to be considered. 

• Identify the components and parts 

of the control system to which each of 

the conditions apply. 

• Make it stand alone in regard to the 

required multiplying factors and to 

provide an additional multiplying factor 

to account for dynamic amplification. 

9. Revises § 25.1517, ‘‘Rough air 

speed, VRA’’ to remove the reference to 

VB in the definition of rough air speed 

and to require that a rough air Mach 

number, MRA, be established in 

addition to rough air speed. Also, this 

action removes the reference to 

§ 25.1585, ‘‘Operating procedures,’’ 

because it is no longer applicable since 

that regulation was modified. 

II. Background 

A. Statement of the Problem 

Part 25 prescribes airworthiness 

standards for type certification of 

transport category airplanes for products 

certified in the United States. EASA CS– 

25 Book 1 prescribes the corresponding 

airworthiness standards for products 

certified in Europe. While part 25 and 

CS–25 Book 1 are similar, they differ in 

several respects. 

The FAA tasked ARAC through the 

Loads and Dynamics Harmonization 

Working Group (LDHWG) to review 

existing structures regulations and 

recommend changes that would 

eliminate differences between the U.S. 

and European airworthiness standards. 

The LDHWG developed 

recommendations, which EASA has 

incorporated into CS–25 with some 

changes. The FAA agrees with the 

ARAC recommendations as adopted by 

EASA, and this final rule amends part 

25 accordingly. 

B. Summary of the NPRM 

On May 6, 2013, the FAA issued a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM), Notice No. 25–139,1 Docket 

No. FAA–2013–0142, to amend 

§§ 25.331, 25.341, 25.343, 25.345, 

25.361, 25.371, 25.373, 25.391, 25.395, 

25.415, and 25.1517; to add § 25.362; 

and to remove appendix G of 14 CFR 

part 25. That NPRM was published in 

the Federal Register on May 28, 2013 

(78 FR 31851). In the NPRM, the FAA 

proposed to (1) revise the pitch 

maneuver design loads criteria; (2) 

revise the gust and turbulence design 

loads criteria; (3) revise the application 

of gust loads to engine mounts, high lift 

devices, and other control surfaces; (4) 

add a ‘‘round-the-clock’’ discrete gust 

criterion and a multi-axis discrete gust 

criterion for airplanes equipped with 

wing-mounted engines; (5) revise the 

engine torque loads criteria and add an 

engine failure dynamic load condition; 

(6) revise the ground gust design loads 

criteria; (7) revise the criteria used to 

establish the rough air design speed; 

and (8) require the establishment of a 

rough air Mach number. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
73464 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

The FAA proposed these changes to 

eliminate regulatory differences 

between the airworthiness standards of 

the FAA and EASA. The NPRM 

comment period closed on August 26, 

2013. 

On June 24, 2013, the Federal 

Register published a correction to the 

NPRM to correct three equations in the 

proposed amendments to § 25.341 (78 

FR 37722). On July 16, 2013, the 

Federal Register published a second 

correction to one equation in the 

proposed amendments to § 25.341 (78 

FR 42480). The equations in this final 

rule have not changed from those in the 

corrected NPRM. 

C. General Overview of Comments 

The FAA received two comments. 

One commenter supported the NPRM 

and the ongoing international 

harmonization of certification 

requirements. The other comment 

addressed § 25.341 and is discussed 

below. 

III. Discussion of Public Comments and 

Final Rule 

A. Section 25.341, ‘‘Gust and 

Turbulence Loads’’ 

Section 25.341(a)(6) uses the term 

Zmo, which is the maximum operating 

altitude, in feet, specifically defined in 

§ 25.1527. A commenter noted that the 

units for the term Zmo are not provided 

in the current rule. While § 25.341(a)(6) 

was not being revised as part of this 

rulemaking, the commenter 

recommended that this paragraph be 

revised to include the appropriate units 

for Zmo (feet) for ease of reference. We 

agree, and revise the rule as 

recommended. 

B. Section 25.415, ‘‘Ground Gust 

Conditions’’ 

After further FAA review of what we 

proposed by NPRM, we now specify 

that control system gust locks are to be 

taken into account only when the 

airplane is so equipped. As proposed, 

§ 25.415 would have required that the 

airplane be evaluated while taxiing with 

the controls locked and unlocked, and 

while parked with the controls locked. 

However, many transport category 

airplanes with powered flight controls 

do not have control system gust locks. 

As noted in the NPRM, these airplanes 

rely on their hydraulic actuators to 

provide protection from ground gusts. 

We, therefore, now revise § 25.415 to 

clarify that, for all airplanes, the ground 

gust conditions apply when the airplane 

is taxiing and while parked. For 

airplanes that include control system 

gust locks, the taxiing condition must be 

evaluated with the controls locked and 

unlocked, and the parked condition 

must be evaluated with the controls 

locked. Airplanes not equipped with 

gust locks are to be evaluated in their 

normal configuration while taxiing and 

while parked. With these changes to 

§ 25.415, the rule wording will no 

longer be exactly the same as CS 25.415; 

however, the intent of the two rules is 

the same in how airplanes with and 

without gust locks are evaluated. 

C. Advisory Material 

On May 31, 2013, the FAA published 

and solicited public comments on three 

proposed ACs that describe acceptable 

means for showing compliance with the 

NPRM’s proposed regulations. The 

comment period for the proposed ACs 

closed on September 26, 2013. The FAA 

did not receive any comments on the 

proposed ACs. Concurrently with this 

final rule, the FAA is issuing the 

following final ACs to provide guidance 

material for the new regulations adopted 

by this amendment: 

• AC 25.341–1, ‘‘Dynamic Gust 

Loads.’’ 

• AC 25.362–1, ‘‘Engine Failure 

Loads.’’ 

• AC 25.415–1, ‘‘Ground Gust 

Conditions.’’ 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

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 (Public Law 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

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

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, the Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination follows. 

The FAA is amending certain 

airworthiness standards for transport 

category airplanes. Adopting this final 

rule will eliminate regulatory 

differences between the airworthiness 

standards of the FAA and EASA. This 

final rule does not add new 

requirements beyond what 

manufacturers currently meet for EASA 

certification and does not affect current 

industry design practices. Meeting two 

sets of certification requirements raises 

the cost of developing new transport 

category airplanes with little to no 

increase in safety. In the interest of 

fostering international trade, lowering 

the cost of manufacturing new transport 

category airplanes, and making the 

certification process more efficient, the 

FAA, EASA, and several industry 

working groups came together to create, 

to the maximum extent possible, a 

single set of certification requirements 

that would be accepted in both the 

United States and Europe. Therefore, as 

a result of these harmonization efforts, 

the FAA is amending the airworthiness 

regulations described in section I of this 

final rule, ‘‘Overview of Final Rule.’’ 

This action harmonizes part 25 

requirements with the corresponding 

requirements in EASA CS–25 Book 1. 

Currently, all manufacturers of 

transport category airplanes, certificated 

under part 25 are expected to continue 

their current practice of compliance 

with the EASA certification 

requirements in CS–25 Book 1. Since 

future certificated transport airplanes 

are expected to meet CS–25 Book 1, and 

this rule simply adopts EASA 

requirements, manufacturers will incur 

minimal or no additional cost resulting 

from this final rule. The FAA made this 

same determination in the NPRM and 

received no comments. 

The FAA has, therefore, determined 

that this final rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73465 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Public Law 96–354) (RFA) establishes 

‘‘as a principle of regulatory issuance 

that agencies shall endeavor, consistent 

with the objectives 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 this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a 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 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the 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. 

In the NPRM, the FAA determined 

that this rule would not impose more 

than minimal cost. 

The FAA believes that this final rule 

does not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities for the following reasons. We 

did not receive any comments from 

small entities. All United States 

transport category airplane 

manufacturers exceed the Small 

Business Administration small-entity 

criteria of 1,500 employees. Therefore, 

as provided in section 605(b), the head 

of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking 

will not result in a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such the 

protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this final rule and 

determined that it is in accord with the 

Trade Agreements Act as the rule 

furthers the legitimate domestic 

objectives of safety, creates no 

unnecessary obstacles to foreign 

commerce, does not exclude imports, 

and uses European standards as the 

basis for United States regulation. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 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 (in 

1995 dollars) 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 $151 

million in lieu of $100 million. This 

final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

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

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. The 

FAA has determined that there is no 

new requirement for information 

collection associated with this final 

rule. 

F. International Compatibility and 

Cooperation 

(1) In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no differences with 

these regulations. 

(2) Executive Order (EO) 13609, 

Promoting International Regulatory 

Cooperation (77 FR 26413, May 4, 

2012), promotes international regulatory 

cooperation to meet shared challenges 

involving health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this action under the policy and agency 

responsibilities of Executive Order 

13609, Promoting International 

Regulatory Cooperation. The agency has 

determined that this action would 

eliminate differences between U.S. 

aviation standards and those of other 

civil aviation authorities by creating a 

single set of certification requirements 

for transport category airplanes that 

would be acceptable in both the United 

States and Europe. 

G. 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. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f of Order 1050.1E and 

involves no extraordinary 

circumstances. 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency determined that this action will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and, therefore, 

does not have Federalism implications. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

agency has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order and it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
73466 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

VI. How To Obtain Additional 

Information 

A. Rulemaking Documents 

An electronic copy of a rulemaking 

document may be obtained by using the 

Internet— 

1. Search the Federal eRulemaking 

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

2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/, or 

3. Access the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request (identified by notice, 

amendment, or docket number of this 

rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591; or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. 

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket 

Comments received may be viewed by 

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

following the online instructions to 

search the docket number for this 

action. Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of the FAA’s dockets 

by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

C. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires the FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document, may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the Internet, visit http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 25 of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: TRANSPORT 

CATEGORY AIRPLANES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 25 

continues to read as follows: 

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

44702, and 44704. 

■ 2. Amend § 25.331 by revising 

paragraph (c) introductory text and 

paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 25.331 Symmetric maneuvering 

conditions. 

* * * * * 

(c) Maneuvering pitching conditions. 

The following conditions must be 

investigated: 

* * * * * 

(2) Checked maneuver between VA

and VD. Nose-up checked pitching 

maneuvers must be analyzed in which 

the positive limit load factor prescribed 

in § 25.337 is achieved. As a separate 

condition, nose-down checked pitching 

maneuvers must be analyzed in which 

a limit load factor of 0g is achieved. In 

defining the airplane loads, the flight 

deck pitch control motions described in 

paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iv) of this 

section must be used: 

(i) The airplane is assumed to be 

flying in steady level flight at any speed 

between VA and VD and the flight deck 

pitch control is moved in accordance 

with the following formula: 

d(t) = d1 sin(wt) for 0 ≤ t ≤t max

Where— 

d1 = the maximum available displacement of 

the flight deck pitch control in the initial 

direction, as limited by the control 

system stops, control surface stops, or by 

pilot effort in accordance with 

§ 25.397(b); 

d(t) = the displacement of the flight deck 

pitch control as a function of time. In the 

initial direction, d(t) is limited to d1. In 

the reverse direction, d(t) may be 

truncated at the maximum available 

displacement of the flight deck pitch 

control as limited by the control system 

stops, control surface stops, or by pilot 

effort in accordance with 25.397(b); 

tmax = 3p/2w; 

w = the circular frequency (radians/second) 

of the control deflection taken equal to 

the undamped natural frequency of the 

short period rigid mode of the airplane, 

with active control system effects 

included where appropriate; but not less 

than: 

Where 

V = the speed of the airplane at entry to the 

maneuver. 

VA = the design maneuvering speed 

prescribed in § 25.335(c). 

(ii) For nose-up pitching maneuvers, 

the complete flight deck pitch control 

displacement history may be scaled 

down in amplitude to the extent 

necessary to ensure that the positive 

limit load factor prescribed in § 25.337 

is not exceeded. For nose-down pitching 

maneuvers, the complete flight deck 

control displacement history may be 

scaled down in amplitude to the extent 

necessary to ensure that the normal 

acceleration at the center of gravity does 

not go below 0g. 

(iii) In addition, for cases where the 

airplane response to the specified flight 

deck pitch control motion does not 

achieve the prescribed limit load 

factors, then the following flight deck 

pitch control motion must be used: 

d(t) = d1 sin(wt) for 0 ≤ t ≤ t1

d(t) = d1 for t1 ≤ t ≤ t2

d(t) = d1 sin(w[t + t1 ¥ t2]) for t2 ≤ t ≤ 

tmax

Where— 

t1 = p/2w 

t2 = t1 + Dt 

tmax = t2 + p/w; 

Dt = the minimum period of time necessary 

to allow the prescribed limit load factor 

to be achieved in the initial direction, 

but it need not exceed five seconds (see 

figure below). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULESER11DE14.023</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73467 

(iv) In cases where the flight deck 

pitch control motion may be affected by 

inputs from systems (for example, by a 

stick pusher that can operate at high 

load factor as well as at 1g), then the 

effects of those systems shall be taken 

into account. 

(v) Airplane loads that occur beyond 

the following times need not be 

considered: 

(A) For the nose-up pitching 

maneuver, the time at which the normal 

acceleration at the center of gravity goes 

below 0g; 

(B) For the nose-down pitching 

maneuver, the time at which the normal 

acceleration at the center of gravity goes 

above the positive limit load factor 

prescribed in § 25.337; 

(C) tmax.. 

■ 3. Amend § 25.341 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(5)(i), (a)(6), and (b), and 

by adding paragraph (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 25.341 Gust and turbulence loads. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * 

(5) * * * 

(i) At airplane speeds between VB and 

VC: Positive and negative gusts with 

reference gust velocities of 56.0 ft/sec 

EAS must be considered at sea level. 

The reference gust velocity may be 

reduced linearly from 56.0 ft/sec EAS at 

sea level to 44.0 ft/sec EAS at 15,000 

feet. The reference gust velocity may be 

further reduced linearly from 44.0 ft/sec 

EAS at 15,000 feet to 20.86 ft/sec EAS 

at 60,000 feet. 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

Zmo = Maximum operating altitude defined in 

§ 25.1527 (feet). 

* * * * * 

(b) Continuous turbulence design 

criteria. The dynamic response of the 

airplane to vertical and lateral 

continuous turbulence must be taken 

into account. The dynamic analysis 

must take into account unsteady 

aerodynamic characteristics and all 

significant structural degrees of freedom 

including rigid body motions. The limit 

loads must be determined for all critical 

altitudes, weights, and weight 

distributions as specified in § 25.321(b), 

and all critical speeds within the ranges 

indicated in § 25.341(b)(3). 

(1) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(b)(4) and (5) of this section, the 

following equation must be used: 

PL = PL¥1g ± UσA 

Where— 

PL = limit load; 

PL¥1g = steady 1g load for the condition; 

A = ratio of root-mean-square incremental 

load for the condition to root-meansquare turbulence velocity; and 

Uσ = limit turbulence intensity in true 

airspeed, specified in paragraph (b)(3) of 

this section. 

(2) Values of A must be determined 

according to the following formula: 

Where— 

H(W) = the frequency response function, 

determined by dynamic analysis, that 

relates the loads in the aircraft structure 

to the atmospheric turbulence; and 

F(W) = normalized power spectral density of 

atmospheric turbulence given by— 

Where— 

W = reduced frequency, radians per foot; and 

L = scale of turbulence = 2,500 ft. 

(3) The limit turbulence intensities, 

Uσ, in feet per second true airspeed 

required for compliance with this 

paragraph are— 

(i) At airplane speeds between VB and 

VC: Uσ = Uσρεφ Fg

Where— 

Uσρεφ is the reference turbulence intensity 

that varies linearly with altitude from 90 

fps (TAS) at sea level to 79 fps (TAS) at 

24,000 feet and is then constant at 79 fps 

(TAS) up to the altitude of 60,000 feet. 

Fg is the flight profile alleviation factor 

defined in paragraph (a)(6) of this 

section; 

(ii) At speed VD: Uσ is equal to 1⁄2 the 

values obtained under paragraph 

(b)(3)(i) of this section. 

(iii) At speeds between VC and VD: Uσ

is equal to a value obtained by linear 

interpolation. 

(iv) At all speeds, both positive and 

negative incremental loads due to 

continuous turbulence must be 

considered. 

(4) When an automatic system 

affecting the dynamic response of the 

airplane is included in the analysis, the 

effects of system non-linearities on 

loads at the limit load level must be 

taken into account in a realistic or 

conservative manner. 

(5) If necessary for the assessment of 

loads on airplanes with significant nonlinearities, it must be assumed that the 

turbulence field has a root-mean-square 

velocity equal to 40 percent of the Uσ

values specified in paragraph (b)(3) of 

this section. The value of limit load is 

that load with the same probability of 

exceedance in the turbulence field as 

AUσ of the same load quantity in a 

linear approximated model. 

(c) Supplementary gust conditions for 

wing-mounted engines. For airplanes 

equipped with wing-mounted engines, 

the engine mounts, pylons, and wing 

supporting structure must be designed 

for the maximum response at the nacelle 

center of gravity derived from the 

following dynamic gust conditions 

applied to the airplane: 

(1) A discrete gust determined in 

accordance with § 25.341(a) at each 

angle normal to the flight path, and 

separately, 

(2) A pair of discrete gusts, one 

vertical and one lateral. The length of 

each of these gusts must be 

independently tuned to the maximum 

response in accordance with § 25.341(a). 

The penetration of the airplane in the 

combined gust field and the phasing of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULESER11DE14.024</GPH> ER11DE14.025</GPH> ER11DE14.026</GPH>
73468 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

the vertical and lateral component gusts 

must be established to develop the 

maximum response to the gust pair. In 

the absence of a more rational analysis, 

the following formula must be used for 

each of the maximum engine loads in all 

six degrees of freedom: 

Where— 

PL = limit load; 

PL-1g = steady 1g load for the condition; 

LV = peak incremental response load due to 

a vertical gust according to § 25.341(a); 

and 

LL = peak incremental response load due to 

a lateral gust according to § 25.341(a). 

■ 4. Amend § 25.343 by revising 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 25.343 Design fuel and oil loads. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) The gust and turbulence 

conditions of § 25.341(a) and (b), but 

assuming 85% of the gust velocities 

prescribed in § 25.341(a)(4) and 85% of 

the turbulence intensities prescribed in 

§ 25.341(b)(3). 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 25.345 by revising 

paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 25.345 High lift devices. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) The vertical gust and turbulence 

conditions prescribed in § 25.341(a) and 

(b). 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Revise § 25.361 to read as follows: 

§ 25.361 Engine and auxiliary power unit 

torque. 

(a) For engine installations— 

(1) Each engine mount, pylon, and 

adjacent supporting airframe structures 

must be designed for the effects of— 

(i) A limit engine torque 

corresponding to takeoff power/thrust 

and, if applicable, corresponding 

propeller speed, acting simultaneously 

with 75% of the limit loads from flight 

condition A of § 25.333(b); 

(ii) A limit engine torque 

corresponding to the maximum 

continuous power/thrust and, if 

applicable, corresponding propeller 

speed, acting simultaneously with the 

limit loads from flight condition A of 

§ 25.333(b); and 

(iii) For turbopropeller installations 

only, in addition to the conditions 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) 

of this section, a limit engine torque 

corresponding to takeoff power and 

propeller speed, multiplied by a factor 

accounting for propeller control system 

malfunction, including quick feathering, 

acting simultaneously with 1g level 

flight loads. In the absence of a rational 

analysis, a factor of 1.6 must be used. 

(2) The limit engine torque to be 

considered under paragraph (a)(1) of 

this section must be obtained by— 

(i) For turbopropeller installations, 

multiplying mean engine torque for the 

specified power/thrust and speed by a 

factor of 1.25; 

(ii) For other turbine engines, the 

limit engine torque must be equal to the 

maximum accelerating torque for the 

case considered. 

(3) The engine mounts, pylons, and 

adjacent supporting airframe structure 

must be designed to withstand 1g level 

flight loads acting simultaneously with 

the limit engine torque loads imposed 

by each of the following conditions to 

be considered separately: 

(i) Sudden maximum engine 

deceleration due to malfunction or 

abnormal condition; and 

(ii) The maximum acceleration of 

engine. 

(b) For auxiliary power unit 

installations, the power unit mounts 

and adjacent supporting airframe 

structure must be designed to withstand 

1g level flight loads acting 

simultaneously with the limit torque 

loads imposed by each of the following 

conditions to be considered separately: 

(1) Sudden maximum auxiliary power 

unit deceleration due to malfunction, 

abnormal condition, or structural 

failure; and 

(2) The maximum acceleration of the 

auxiliary power unit. 

■ 7. Add § 25.362 to read as follows: 

§ 25.362 Engine failure loads. 

(a) For engine mounts, pylons, and 

adjacent supporting airframe structure, 

an ultimate loading condition must be 

considered that combines 1g flight loads 

with the most critical transient dynamic 

loads and vibrations, as determined by 

dynamic analysis, resulting from failure 

of a blade, shaft, bearing or bearing 

support, or bird strike event. Any 

permanent deformation from these 

ultimate load conditions must not 

prevent continued safe flight and 

landing. 

(b) The ultimate loads developed from 

the conditions specified in paragraph (a) 

of this section are to be— 

(1) Multiplied by a factor of 1.0 when 

applied to engine mounts and pylons; 

and 

(2) Multiplied by a factor of 1.25 

when applied to adjacent supporting 

airframe structure. 

■ 8. Revise § 25.371 to read as follows: 

§ 25.371 Gyroscopic loads. 

The structure supporting any engine 

or auxiliary power unit must be 

designed for the loads, including 

gyroscopic loads, arising from the 

conditions specified in §§ 25.331, 

25.341, 25.349, 25.351, 25.473, 25.479, 

and 25.481, with the engine or auxiliary 

power unit at the maximum rotating 

speed appropriate to the condition. For 

the purposes of compliance with this 

paragraph, the pitch maneuver in 

§ 25.331(c)(1) must be carried out until 

the positive limit maneuvering load 

factor (point A2 in § 25.333(b)) is 

reached. 

■ 9. Amend § 25.373 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 25.373 Speed control devices. 

* * * * * 

(a) The airplane must be designed for 

the symmetrical maneuvers prescribed 

in §§ 25.333 and 25.337, the yawing 

maneuvers in § 25.351, and the vertical 

and lateral gust and turbulence 

conditions prescribed in § 25.341(a) and 

(b) at each setting and the maximum 

speed associated with that setting; and 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 25.391 by revising the 

introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 25.391 Control surface loads: General. 

The control surfaces must be designed 

for the limit loads resulting from the 

flight conditions in §§ 25.331, 25.341(a) 

and (b), 25.349, and 25.351, considering 

the requirements for— 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Amend § 25.395 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 25.395 Control system. 

* * * * * 

(b) The system limit loads of 

paragraph (a) of this section need not 

exceed the loads that can be produced 

by the pilot (or pilots) and by automatic 

or power devices operating the controls. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Revise § 25.415 to read as follows: 

§ 25.415 Ground gust conditions. 

(a) The flight control systems and 

surfaces must be designed for the limit 

loads generated when the airplane is 

subjected to a horizontal 65-knot ground 

gust from any direction while taxiing 

and while parked. For airplanes 

equipped with control system gust 

locks, the taxiing condition must be 

evaluated with the controls locked and 

unlocked, and the parked condition 

must be evaluated with the controls 

locked. 

(b) The control system and surface 

loads due to ground gust may be 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULESER11DE14.027</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73469 

assumed to be static loads, and the 

hinge moments H must be computed 

from the formula: 

H = K (1/2) ro V2 c S 

Where— 

K = hinge moment factor for ground gusts 

derived in paragraph (c) of this section; 

ro = density of air at sea level; 

V = 65 knots relative to the aircraft; 

S = area of the control surface aft of the hinge 

line; 

c = mean aerodynamic chord of the control 

surface aft of the hinge line. 

(c) The hinge moment factor K for 

ground gusts must be taken from the 

following table: 

Surface K Position of 

controls 

(1) Aileron ....... 0 .75 Control column 

locked or 

lashed in 

mid-position. 

(2) Aileron ....... * ±0 .50 Ailerons at full 

throw. 

(3) Elevator ..... * ±0 .75 Elevator full 

down. 

(4) Elevator ..... * ±0 .75 Elevator full up. 

(5) Rudder ....... 0 .75 Rudder in neutral. 

(6) Rudder ....... 0 .75 Rudder at full 

throw. 

* A positive value of K indicates a moment 

tending to depress the surface, while a negative value of K indicates a moment tending to 

raise the surface. 

(d) The computed hinge moment of 

paragraph (b) of this section must be 

used to determine the limit loads due to 

ground gust conditions for the control 

surface. A 1.25 factor on the computed 

hinge moments must be used in 

calculating limit control system loads. 

(e) Where control system flexibility is 

such that the rate of load application in 

the ground gust conditions might 

produce transient stresses appreciably 

higher than those corresponding to 

static loads, in the absence of a rational 

analysis substantiating a different 

dynamic factor, an additional factor of 

1.6 must be applied to the control 

system loads of paragraph (d) of this 

section to obtain limit loads. If a rational 

analysis is used, the additional factor 

must not be less than 1.2. 

(f) For the condition of the control 

locks engaged, the control surfaces, the 

control system locks, and the parts of 

any control systems between the 

surfaces and the locks must be designed 

to the resultant limit loads. Where 

control locks are not provided, then the 

control surfaces, the control system 

stops nearest the surfaces, and the parts 

of any control systems between the 

surfaces and the stops must be designed 

to the resultant limit loads. If the control 

system design is such as to allow any 

part of the control system to impact 

with the stops due to flexibility, then 

the resultant impact loads must be taken 

into account in deriving the limit loads 

due to ground gust. 

(g) For the condition of taxiing with 

the control locks disengaged, or where 

control locks are not provided, the 

following apply: 

(1) The control surfaces, the control 

system stops nearest the surfaces, and 

the parts of any control systems between 

the surfaces and the stops must be 

designed to the resultant limit loads. 

(2) The parts of the control systems 

between the stops nearest the surfaces 

and the flight deck controls must be 

designed to the resultant limit loads, 

except that the parts of the control 

system where loads are eventually 

reacted by the pilot need not exceed: 

(i) The loads corresponding to the 

maximum pilot loads in § 25.397(c) for 

each pilot alone; or 

(ii) 0.75 times these maximum loads 

for each pilot when the pilot forces are 

applied in the same direction. 

■ 13. Revise 25.1517 to read as follows: 

§ 25.1517 Rough air speed, VRA.

(a) A rough air speed, VRA, for use as 

the recommended turbulence 

penetration airspeed, and a rough air 

Mach number, MRA, for use as the 

recommended turbulence penetration 

Mach number, must be established. 

VRA/MRA must be sufficiently less than 

VMO/MMO to ensure that likely speed 

variation during rough air encounters 

will not cause the overspeed warning to 

operate too frequently. 

(b) At altitudes where VMO is not 

limited by Mach number, in the absence 

of a rational investigation substantiating 

the use of other values, VRA must be less 

than VMO—35 KTAS. 

(c) At altitudes where VMO is limited 

by Mach number, MRA may be chosen 

to provide an optimum margin between 

low and high speed buffet boundaries. 

Appendix G to Part 25 [Removed and 

Reserved] 

■ 14. Remove and reserve appendix G to 

part 25. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a) in Washington, 

DC, on November 14, 2014. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28938 Filed 12–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0668; Special 

Conditions No. 25–572–SC] 

Special Conditions: AAR Engineering 

Services, Boeing 757–200 Series 

Airplane; Seats With Non-Traditional, 

Large, Non-Metallic Panels 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special condition; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Boeing 757–200 series 

airplane. This airplane, as modified by 

AAR Engineering Services, will have 

novel or unusual design features when 

compared to the state of technology 

envisioned in the airworthiness 

standards for transport-category 

airplanes. This design feature includes 

seats with non-traditional, large, nonmetallic panels on Boeing 757–200 

series airplanes. 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: This action is effective on AAR 

Engineering Services on December 11, 

2014. We must receive your comments 

by January 26, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2014–0668 

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES