34014 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration.

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA–2000–8511; Amendment

No. 25–105]

RIN 2120–AH32

Revisions to Requirements

Concerning Airplane Operating

Limitations and the Content of

Airplane Flight Manuals for Transport

Category Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation

Administration amends the

airworthiness standards for transport

category airplanes concerning airplane

operating limitations and the content of

airplane flight manuals. Issuing this

amendment eliminates regulatory

differences between the airworthiness

standards of the U.S. and the Joint

Aviation Requirements of Europe,

without affecting current industry

design practices.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 26, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may review the public

docket concerning this amendment at

the Department of Transportation (DOT)

Dockets Office, located on the plaza

level of the Nassif Building at the above

address. You may review the public

docket in person at this address between

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Also, you may review the public

dockets on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don

Stimson, FAA, Airplane and Flight

Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue

SW., Renton, WA 98055–4056;

telephone: 425-227–1129; fax: 425–227–

1320, e-mail: don.stimson@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Get a Copy of Rulemaking

Documents?

You can get an electronic copy using

the Internet by taking the following

steps:

(1) Go to the search function of the

Department of Transportation’s

electronic Docket Management System

(DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/

search).

(2) On the search page type in the last

four digits of the Docket number shown

at the beginning of this notice. Click on

‘‘search.’’

(3) On the next page, which contains

the Docket summary information for the

Docket you selected, click on the

document number for the item you wish

to view.

You can also get an electronic copy

using the Internet through FAA’s web

page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/

nprm/nprm.htm or the Federal

Register’s web page at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/

aces140.html.

You can also get a copy by sending a

request to the Federal Aviation

Administration, Office of Rulemaking,

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to

identify the amendment number or

docket number of this rulemaking.

How Does This Amendment Affect the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act?

The Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of

1996 requires FAA to comply with

small entity requests for information or

advice about compliance with statutes

and regulations within its jurisdiction.

Therefore, any small entity that has a

question regarding this document may

contact their local FAA official, or the

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out

more about SBREFA on the Internet at

our site, http://www.gov/avr/arm/

sbrefa.htm, or e-mail us at 9–AWA–

SBREFA@faa.gov.

Background

What Are the Relevant Airworthiness

Standards in the United States?

In the United States, Title 14 of the

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR),

part 25, contains the airworthiness

standards for type certification of

transport category airplanes.

Manufacturers of transport category

airplanes must show that each airplane

they produce of a different type design

complies with the appropriate part 25

standards. These standards apply to:

• Airplanes manufactured within the

U.S. for use by U.S.-registered operators,

and

• Airplanes manufactured in other

countries and imported to the U.S.

under a bilateral airworthiness

agreement.

What Are the Relevant Airworthiness

Standards in Europe?

In Europe, Joint Aviation

Requirements (JAR)-25 contains the

airworthiness standards for type

certification of transport category

airplanes. The Joint Aviation

Authorities (JAA) of Europe developed

these standards, which are based on part

25, to provide a common set of

airworthiness standards within the

European aviation community. Twentythree European countries accept

airplanes type certificated to the JAR–25

standards, including airplanes

manufactured in the U.S. that are type

certificated to JAR–25 standards for

export to Europe.

What Is ‘‘Harmonization’’ and How Did

It Start?

Although part 25 and JAR–25 are

similar, they are not identical in every

respect. When airplanes are type

certificated to both sets of standards, the

differences between part 25 and JAR–25

can result in substantial added costs to

manufacturers and operators. These

added costs, however, often do not bring

about an increase in safety. In many

cases, part 25 and JAR–25 may contain

different requirements to accomplish

the same safety intent. Consequently,

manufacturers are usually burdened

with meeting the requirements of both

sets of standards, although the level of

safety is not increased correspondingly.

Recognizing that a common set of

standards would not only benefit the

aviation industry economically, but also

preserve the necessary high level of

safety, the FAA and the JAA began an

effort in 1988 to ‘‘harmonize’’ their

respective aviation standards. The goal

of the harmonization effort is to ensure

that:

• Where possible, standards do not

require domestic and foreign parties to

manufacture or operate to different

standards for each country involved;

and

• The standards adopted are mutually

acceptable to the FAA and the foreign

aviation authorities.

The FAA and JAA have identified

many significant regulatory differences

(SRD) between the wording of part 25

and JAR–25. Both the FAA and the JAA

consider ‘‘harmonization’’ of the two

sets of standards a high priority.

What Is ARAC and What Role Does It

Play in Harmonization?

After beginning the first steps towards

harmonization, the FAA and JAA soon

realized that traditional methods of

rulemaking and accommodating

different administrative procedures was

neither sufficient nor adequate to make

noticeable progress towards fulfilling

the goal of harmonization. The FAA

then identified the Aviation Rulemaking

Advisory Committee (ARAC) as an ideal

vehicle for helping to resolve

harmonization issues, and, in 1992, the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34015

FAA tasked ARAC to undertake the

entire harmonization effort.

The FAA had formally established

ARAC in 1991 (56 FR 2190, January 22,

1991), to provide advice and

recommendations on the full range of

the FAA’s safety-related rulemaking

activity. The FAA sought this advice to

develop better rules in less overall time

and using fewer FAA resources than

previously needed. The committee

provides the FAA firsthand information

and insight from interested parties on

potential new rules or revisions of

existing rules.

There are 64 member organizations on

the committee, representing a wide

range of interests within the aviation

community. Meetings of the committee

are open to the public, except as

authorized by section 10(d) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act.

The ARAC sets up working groups to

develop recommendations for resolving

specific airworthiness issues. Tasks

assigned to working groups are

published in the Federal Register.

Although working group meetings are

not generally open to the public, the

FAA invites participation in working

groups from interested members of the

public who have knowledge or

experience in the task areas. Working

groups report directly to the ARAC, and

the ARAC must accept a working group

proposal before ARAC presents the

proposal to the FAA as an advisory

committee recommendation.

The activities of the ARAC will not,

however, circumvent the public

rulemaking procedures; nor is the FAA

limited to the rule language

‘‘recommended’’ by ARAC. If the FAA

accepts an ARAC recommendation, the

agency continues with the normal

public rulemaking procedures. Any

ARAC participation in a rulemaking

package is fully disclosed in the public

docket.

What Is the Status of the Harmonization

Effort Today?

Despite the work that ARAC has

undertaken to address harmonization,

there remain many regulatory

differences between part 25 and JAR–25.

The current harmonization process is

costly and time-consuming for industry,

the FAA, and the JAA. Industry has

expressed a strong desire to finish the

harmonization program as quickly as

possible to relieve the drain on their

resources and to finally establish one

acceptable set of standards.

Recently, representatives of the

aviation industry [including Aerospace

Industries Association of America, Inc.

(AIA), General Aviation Manufacturers

Association (GAMA), and European

Association of Aerospace Industries

(AECMA)] proposed an accelerated

process to reach harmonization.

What Is the ‘‘Fast Track Harmonization

Program’’?

In light of a general agreement among

the affected industries and authorities to

speed up the harmonization program,

the FAA and JAA in March 1999 agreed

on a method to achieve these goals. This

method, titled ‘‘The Fast Track

Harmonization Program,’’ seeks to speed

up the rulemaking process for

harmonizing not only the 42 standards

that are currently tasked to ARAC for

harmonization, but nearly 80 additional

standards for part 25 airplanes.

The FAA launched the Fast Track

program on November 26, 1999 (64 FR

66522). This program involves grouping

all the standards needing harmonization

into three categories:

Category 1: Envelope—For these

standards, parallel part 25 and JAR–25

standards would be compared, and

harmonization would be reached by

accepting the more stringent of the two

standards. Thus, the more stringent

requirement of one standard would be

‘‘enveloped’’ into the other standard.

Occasionally, it may be necessary to

incorporate parts of both the part 25 and

JAR standard to achieve the final, more

stringent standard. (This may call for

each authority revising its current

standard to incorporate more stringent

provisions of the other.)

Category 2: Completed or near

complete—For these standards, ARAC

has reached, or has nearly reached,

technical agreement or consensus on the

new wording of the proposed

harmonized standards.

Category 3: Harmonize—For these

standards, ARAC is not near technical

agreement on harmonization, and the

parallel part 25 and JAR–25 standards

cannot be ‘‘enveloped’’ (as described

under Category 1) for reasons of safety

or unacceptability. A standard

developed under Category 3 would be

mutually acceptable to the FAA and

JAA, with a consistent means of

compliance.

Further details on the Fast Track

Program can be found in the tasking

statement (64 FR 66522, November 26,

1999) and the first Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) published under

this program, ‘‘Fire Protection

Requirements for Powerplant

Installations on Transport Category

Airplanes’’ (65 FR 36978, June 12,

2000).

How Does This Amendment Relate to

‘‘Fast Track’’?

This amendment results from

recommendations that ARAC submitted

to the FAA under the FAA’s Fast Track

Harmonization Program. This

rulemaking project has been identified

as a Category 1 item.

Discussion of the Amendment

What Did the FAA Propose?

On December 4, 2000 (65 FR 79294,

December 18, 2000), the FAA issued an

NPRM that proposed to amend certain

airworthiness standards for transport

category airplanes. The proposed

amendment involved changes to six

different standards related to airplane

operating limitations and the content of

airplane flight manuals.

How Is This Preamble Organized?

The six specific changes are discussed

individually below. Although the reader

may find some of the text repetitious,

we consider it appropriate for the public

to be aware of the background and full

reasoning behind each change to these

standards.

Change 1: New Section 25.1516, ‘‘Other

Speed Limitations’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

There may be speeds above which it

is unsafe to:

• Extend devices such as ram air

turbines, thrust reversers, and landing

lights into the air stream; or

• Open windows or doors.

The current standards require that

speed limitations must be established

and made available to the flightcrew to

ensure safe operation.

What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The FAA has traditionally relied on

§ 25.1503 (‘‘Airspeed limitations:

general’’) and § 25.1533 (‘‘Additional

operating limitations’’) as the means to

fulfill the underlying safety issue. Those

two sections mandate speed limitations.

Additionally, the text of paragraph (a) of

§ 25.1501 [at amendment 25–42 (43 FR

2323, January 16, 1978)] states:

‘‘§ 25.1501 Operating Limitations and

Information—General.

(a) Each operating limitation specified in

§ § 25.1503 through 25.1533, and other

limitations and information necessary for

safe operation, must be established.’’

There are parallel sections in JAR–25.

However, JAR–25 also contains an

additional paragraph, JAR 25X1516

(Change 15, October 2000), that states:

‘‘JAR 25X1516 Other speed limitations.

34016 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Any other limitation associated with speed

must be established. (See also ACJ

25X1516.)’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

Part 25 has not had an explicit

requirement to mandate that any other

limitation associated with speed be

established; JAR–25 does contain an

explicit requirement. There are no

practical differences, however, resulting

from the difference in the standards.

Currently, applicants seeking

certification of transport airplane

designs by both the FAA and JAA must

establish all limitations associated with

speed.

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

There are no differences between part

25 and JAR–25 in the means of

compliance with the addressed

requirement.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

harmonize the regulations by revising

part 25 to adopt the text of JAR 25X1516

as new § 25.1516. The proposed action

would codify current FAA policy, as

wells as achieve harmonization with the

JAR.

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue by

requiring that airspeed limitations be

established for devices that can open

into the air stream in flight. With the

addition of this standard, part 25 will

have one explicit requirement for

applicants to establish all limitations

associated with speed.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA has not considered another

option. We consider that revising the

standard, as discussed above, is the

most appropriate way to fulfill

harmonization goals while, at the same

time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA’s Advisory Circular (AC)

25.1581–1, ‘‘Airplane Flight Manual,’’

dated July 14, 1997, provides adequate

guidance related to the issue addressed

by this revised standard. Additionally,

the JAA recently issued a parallel

Advisory Material Joint (AMJ) 25.1581,

which provides guidance that is similar

to, and harmonized with, that contained

in AC 25.1581–1. In light of this, we do

not consider that any additional

advisory material is needed relevant to

the revised standard.

Change 2: Section 25.1527, ‘‘Maximum

Operating Altitude’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

Operation of a transport category

airplane outside of the environmental

envelope established for the airplane

may be unsafe. Therefore, the

boundaries of that envelope must be

established to ensure safe operations.

Section 25.1527 requires that such

boundaries be established.

What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The current text of 14 CFR 25.1527

[original amendment, Doc. No. 5066, (29

FR 18291, December 24, 1964)] is:

‘‘§ 25.1527 Maximum operating altitude.

The maximum altitude up to which

operation is allowed, as limited by flight,

structural, powerplant, functional, or

equipment characteristics, must be

established.’’

The current text of JAR 25.1527

(Change 15, October 2000) is:

‘‘JAR 25.1527 Ambient air temperature

and operating altitude.

The extremes of the ambient air

temperature and operating altitude for which

operation is allowed, as limited by flight,

structural, powerplant, functional, or

equipment characteristics, must be

established.’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

The current § 25.1527 requires that

only the maximum altitude portion of

the environmental envelope be

established. However, the parallel JAR

25.1527 requires that both the minimum

and maximum altitudes as well as the

ambient temperatures be established.

Although this difference exists, the

FAA’s policy of applying § 25.1527 is

consistent with JAR 25.1527. This is

evidenced by the compliance method

described in FAA AC 25.1581–1.

However, for a regulatory basis, the FAA

has traditionally relied on the general

provisions of § 25.1501(a) that require

‘‘* * * other limitations and

information necessary for safe operation

must be established.’’

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

Although the explicit current

standards are different, there are no

differences in their application or means

of compliance. As stated previously, the

FAA has relied on both the general

provisions of § 25.1501(a) and the

guidance in AC 25.1581–1 to apply the

requirement.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

harmonize the regulations by revising

§ 25.1527 to adopt the language

currently in JAR 25.1527. The proposed

action would codify current FAA policy

and practice, as well as achieve

harmonization with the JAR.

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue in

the same manner. It simply codifies

current FAA policy and application of

the regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA has not considered another

option. We find that revising the

standard, as discussed above, is the

most appropriate way to fulfill

harmonization goals while, at the same

time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34017

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA considers that the guidance

contained in AC 25.1581–1 is adequate

as it pertains to the revised standard.

Additionally, the JAA recently issued a

parallel AMJ 25.1581, which provides

guidance that is similar to, and

harmonized with, that contained in AC

25.1581–1. In light of this, we do not

consider that any additional advisory

material is needed relevant to the

revised standard.

Change 3: § 25.1583(c), ‘‘Operating

Limitations/Weight and Loading

Distribution’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

Section 25.1583 (as well as JAR

25.1583) currently requires that certain

operating limitations established under

§§ 25.1501 through 25.1533 be provided

in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM).

To ensure safe operation, any

limitations established for the airplane

must be made known to the flightcrew.

This is accomplished through

instrument markings, placards, and the

information provided in the AFM.

What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The current text of 14 CFR 25.1583(c)

[amendment 25–72 (55 FR 29787, July

20, 1990)] is:

‘‘§ 25.1583 Operating limitations.

* * * (c) Weight and loading distribution.

The weight and center of gravity limits

required by §§ 25.25 and 25.27 must be

furnished in the Airplane Flight Manual. All

of the following information must be

presented either in the Airplane Flight

Manual or in a separate weight and balance

control and loading document which is

incorporated by reference in the Airplane

Flight Manual:

(1) The condition of the airplane and the

items included in the empty weight as

defined in accordance with § 25.29.

(2) Loading instructions necessary to

ensure loading of the airplane within the

weight and center of gravity limits, and to

maintain the loading within these limits in

flight.

(3) If certification for more than one center

of gravity range is requested, the appropriate

limitations, with regard to weight and

loading procedures, for each separate center

of gravity range.’’

The current text of JAR 25.1583(c)

(Change 15, October 2000) is:

‘‘JAR 25.1583 Operating limitations.

* * * (c) Weight and loading distribution.

The weight and centre of gravity limitations

established under JAR 25.1519 must be

furnished in the aeroplane Flight Manual. All

the following information, including weight

distribution limitations established under

JAR 25.1519, must be presented either in the

aeroplane Flight Manual or in a separate

weight and balance control and loading

document which is incorporated by reference

in the aeroplane Flight Manual [see ACJ

25.1583(c)];

(1) The condition of the aeroplane and the

items included in the empty weight as

defined in accordance with JAR 25.29.

(2) Loading instructions necessary to

ensure loading of the aeroplane within the

weight and centre of gravity limits, and to

maintain the loading within these limits in

flight.

(3) If certification for more than one centre

of gravity range is requested, the appropriate

limitations, with regard to weight and

loading procedures, for each separate centre

of gravity range.’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

There are no practical differences in

the application of the current two

standards. However, the references to

other standards that appear in JAR

25.1583(c) are more exact than those

that appear in § 25.1583(c). The

standards referenced are:

Section

number Title of section*

25.23 ..... Load distribution limits.

25.25 ..... Weight limits.

25.27 ..... Center of gravity limits.

25.1519 Weight, center of gravity, and

weight distribution.

*The title of each section is the same in

both part 25 and JAR–25.

JAR 25.1583(c) requires that the

operating limitations established under

JAR 25.1519 be provided in the AFM.

JAR 25.1519 then requires that weight,

center of gravity, and weight

distribution limitations, ‘‘including

those established under JAR 25.23 to

JAR 25.27,’’ be established as operating

limitations.

On the other hand, § 25.1583(c) of

part 25 requires that the weight and

center of gravity limitations required by

§§ 25.25 and 25.27 must be provided in

the AFM. Like its counterpart JAR

standard, § 25.1519 requires that weight,

center of gravity, and weight

distribution limitations established in

§§ 25.23 through 25.27 be established as

operating limitations. However, instead

of referencing § 25.1519, the

requirements of the current § 25.1583(c)

specifically refer to the weight and

center of gravity limitations determined

under §§ 25.25 and 25.27. This

mistakenly excludes any operating

limitations established under § 25.23.

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

Although there are difference in the

text of the current standards, there are

no differences in their application or

means of compliance. The FAA’s policy

of applying § 25.1583 is consistent with

JAR 25.1583. The FAA has relied on the

general provisions of § 25.1501(a) and

the guidance material in AC 25.1581–1

to apply the same requirement.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

harmonize the regulations by revising

§ 25.1583(c) to include the same

references that are currently in JAR

25.1583(c). The proposed action would

codify current FAA policy, as well as

achieve harmonization with the JAR.

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue in

the same manner. It simply codifies

current FAA policy and application of

the regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA has not considered another

option. We find that revising the

standard, as discussed above, is the

most appropriate way to fulfill

harmonization goals while, at the same

time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

34018 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA considers that the guidance

contained in AC 25.1581–1 is adequate

as it pertains to the revised standard.

Additionally, the JAA recently issued a

parallel AMJ 25.1581, that provides

guidance similar to, and harmonized

with, that contained in AC 25.1581–1.

In light of this, we do not consider that

any additional advisory material is

needed relevant to the revised standard.

Change 4: Section 25.1583(f),

‘‘Operating Limitations/Altitudes’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

As discussed previously, § 25.1583 (as

well as JAR 25.1583) currently requires

that certain operating limitations

established under §§ 25.1501 through

25.1533 be provided in the AFM. To

ensure safe operation, any limitations

established for the airplane must be

made known to the flightcrew. This is

accomplished through instrument

markings, placards, and the information

provided in the AFM.

What are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The current text of 14 CFR 25.1583(f)

[amendment 25–72 (55 FR 29787, July

20, 1990)] is:

‘‘§ 25.1583 Operating limitations.

* * * (f) Altitudes. The altitude

established under § 25.1527.’’

The current text of JAR 25.1583(f)

(Change 15, October 2000) is:

‘‘JAR 25.1583 Operating limitations.

* * * (f) Ambient air temperatures and

operating altitudes. The extremes of the

ambient air temperatures and operating

altitudes established under JAR 25.1527 and

an explanation of the limiting factors must be

furnished.’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

Consistent with § 25.1527 (refer to

previous discussion), § 25.1583(f)

requires that only the maximum altitude

portion of the environmental envelope

be furnished in the AFM. Consistent

with JAR 25.1527, JAR 25.1583(f)

requires that the limitations relative to

both the minimum and maximum

altitudes as well as ambient

temperatures be furnished in the AFM.

Although the current standards are

different, there are no differences in

their application or means of

compliance. The FAA’s policy of

applying § 25.1583(f) is consistent with

JAR 25.1583(f). This is evidenced by the

compliance method described in FAA

AC 25.1581–1. However, the FAA has

relied on the general provisions of

§§ 25.1501(a) and 25.1581(a)(2) for its

regulatory basis.

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

Although the current standards are

different, there are no differences in the

means of compliance. As stated above,

the FAA has relied on the general

provisions of §§ 25.1501(a) and

25.1581(a)(2) along with the guidance

material in AC 25.1581–1 to apply the

same requirement.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

harmonize the regulations by revising

§ 25.1583(f) to adopt the language

currently in JAR 25.1583(f). The

proposed action would codify current

FAA policy, as well as achieve

harmonization with the JAR.

However, we did not propose

including the current requirement in

JAR 25.1583(f) for an explanation of the

limiting factors. We find that the

provision does not represent current

practice, and is unnecessary for safety.

The JAA is now planning to remove this

requirement from JAR 25.1583(f). When

this is done, harmonization of this

standard will be complete.

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue in

the same manner. It simply codifies

current FAA policy and application of

the regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA has not considered another

option. We consider that revising the

standard, as discussed above, is the

most appropriate way to fulfill

harmonization goals while, at the same

time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA considers that the guidance

contained in AC 25.1581–1 is adequate

as it pertains to the revised standard.

Additionally, as noted previously, the

JAA recently issued a parallel AMJ

25.1581 that provides guidance similar

to, and harmonized with, that contained

in AC 25.1581–1. In light of this, we do

not consider that any additional

advisory material is needed relevant to

the revised standard.

Change 5: Section 25.1585, ‘‘Operating

Procedures’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

The primary purpose of the AFM is to

provide an authoritative and approved

source of information that is considered

necessary for safely operating the

airplane. Consistent with this purpose,

the current § 25.1585 requires that the

AFM must provide those operating

procedures related to airworthiness and

necessary for safe operation, including

those procedures that may be unique to

the specific type of airplane.

What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The current text of 14 CFR 25.1585

[amendment 25–46, (43 FR 50598,

October 30, 1978)] is:

‘‘§ 25.1585 Operating procedures.

(a) Information and instructions regarding

the peculiarities of normal operations

(including starting and warming the engines,

taxiing, operation of wing flaps, landing gear,

and the automatic pilot) must be furnished,

together with recommended procedures for—

(1) Engine failure (including minimum

speeds, trim, operation of the remaining

engines, and operation of flaps);

(2) Stopping the rotation of propellers in

flight;

(3) Restarting turbine engines in flight

(including the effects of altitude);

(4) Fire, decompression, and similar

emergencies;

(5) Ditching [including the procedures

based on the requirements of §§ 25.801,

25.807(d), 25.1411, and 25.1415(a) through

(e)];

(6) Use of ice protection equipment;

(7) Use of fuel jettisoning equipment,

including any operating precautions relevant

to the use of the system;

(8) Operation in turbulence for turbine

powered airplanes (including recommended

turbulence penetration airspeeds, flight

peculiarities, and special control

instructions);

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34019

(9) Restoring a deployed thrust reverser

intended for ground operation only to the

forward thrust position in flight or

continuing flight and landing with the thrust

reverser in any position except forward

thrust; and

(10) Disconnecting the battery from its

charging source, if compliance is shown with

§ 25.1353(c)(6)(ii) or (c)(6)(iii).

(b) Information identifying each operating

condition in which the fuel system

independence prescribed in § 25.953 is

necessary for safety must be furnished,

together with instructions for placing the fuel

system in a configuration used to show

compliance with that section.

(c) The buffet onset envelopes, determined

under § 25.251 must be furnished. The buffet

onset envelopes presented may reflect the

center of gravity at which the airplane is

normally loaded during cruise if corrections

for the effect of different center of gravity

locations are furnished.

(d) Information must be furnished which

indicates that when the fuel quantity

indicator reads ‘‘zero’’ in level flight, any fuel

remaining in the fuel tank cannot be used

safely in flight.

(e) Information on the total quantity of

usable fuel for each fuel tank must be

furnished.’’

The current text of JAR 25.1585

(Change 15, October 2000) is:

‘‘JAR 25.1585 Operating procedures.

(a) Information and instructions regarding

operating procedures must be furnished [see

ACJ 25.1585(a)] in substantial accord with

the categories described below—

(1) Emergency procedures which are

concerned with foreseeable but unusual

situations in which immediate and precise

action by the crew, as detailed in the

recommended procedures, may be expected

substantially to reduce the risk of

catastrophe.

(2) Other procedures peculiar to the

particular type or model encountered in

connection with routine operations including

malfunction cases and failure conditions,

involving the use of special systems and/or

the alternative use of regular systems not

considered as emergency procedures.

(b) Information or procedures not directly

related to airworthiness or not under the

control of the crew, must not be included,

nor must any procedure which is accepted as

basic airmanship.

(c) The buffet onset envelopes, determined

under JAR 25.251 must be furnished. The

buffet onset envelopes presented may reflect

the centre of gravity at which the aeroplane

is normally loaded during cruise if

corrections for the effect of different centre of

gravity locations are furnished. [See ACJ

25.1585(c).]

(d) Information must be furnished which

indicates that when the fuel quantity

indicator reads ‘‘zero’’ in level flight, any fuel

remaining in the fuel tank cannot be used

safely in flight.

(e) Information on the total quantity of

usable fuel for each fuel tank must be

furnished.’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

There are two differences between the

standards:

First, the JAR standard does not

include the text of current § 25.1585(b),

which requires including information in

the AFM concerning each operating

condition in which the fuel system

independence is necessary for safety,

and instructions for placing the fuel

system in a configuration used to show

compliance with § 25.953 (‘‘Fuel system

independence’’). Lack of such

information may compromise the intent

of the rules regarding fuel system

independence. On this specific issue,

the part 25 standard is ‘‘more stringent’’

than the JAR standard. (As discussed

later, the JAA intends to revise JAR

25.1585 to add this requirement.)

Second, the text of JAR 25.1585(a) and

(b) essentially ‘‘updates’’ the

requirements of § 25.1585(a) to better

reflect current policy, practices, and

interpretations.

These differences do not necessarily

entail any substantial differences in the

technical requirements for including

procedural information in the AFM. If

differences in practice have arisen, they

may have resulted more from

differences in the means of compliance

(and interpretation). Because the

relevant guidance material—the FAA’s

AC 25.1581–1 and the JAA’s new AMJ

25.1581—is now harmonized, any

potential for such differences to arise in

the future is minimized.

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

As one means to demonstrate

compliance with § 25.1585, applicants

have relied on the guidance material

related to the operating procedures

section of the AFM that is contained in

AC 25.1581–1. The JAA has provided

relevant guidance in ACJs 25.1585(a),

25.1585(c), and 25.251(e). Although

there are differences between the texts

of the FAA AC and the JAA ACJs, both

authorities agree that the FAA’s AC

represents a harmonized text. The JAA

has recently revised its guidance and

published a new AMJ 25.1581, which is

harmonized with the FAA’s AC

25.1581–1.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

revise § 25.1585 to incorporate the text

of JAR 25.1585. The current text of

§ 25.1585(b) is retained, but is

redesignated as § 25.1585(c). [The JAA

intends to revise JAR 25.1585 to

incorporate these same requirements,

and will designate them as JAR

25.1585(c).] The incorporated text has

been revised editorially to simplify it

and make it better reflect current

practices. (The JAA intends to make

these same editorial revisions to JAR

25.1585.)

Although the text of the current

§ 25.1585(a) could be considered ‘‘more

stringent’’ because it is more specific

than the JAR as to the procedures that

must be furnished in the AFM, it is

considered outdated and not completely

consistent with current practices.

Additionally, some of the mandated

procedures are no longer appropriate

and other important procedures are not

included. The revised standard provides

a better description of what types of

procedures are required to be in the

AFM, the specifics of which will

depend on the particular design

developed by the applicant (i.e., a

performance-based requirement).

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue in

the same manner by requiring

information and procedures necessary

for airworthiness and operational safety

to be furnished in the AFM.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA did not consider any option

other than harmonizing this item with

the JAR. The JAR 25.1585(a) standard is

considered to be closer to current

practices than the manner in which

§ 25.1585(a) is actually applied. We find

that revising the standard, as discussed

above, is the most appropriate way to

fulfill harmonization goals while, at the

same time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

34020 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA considers that the guidance

contained in AC 25.1581–1 is adequate

as it pertains to the revised standard.

Additionally, as noted above, the JAA

recently issued a parallel AMJ 25.1581

that provides guidance similar to, and

harmonized with, that contained in AC

25.1581–1. In light of this, we do not

consider that any additional advisory

material is needed relevant to the

revised standard.

Change 6: § 25.1587, ‘‘Performance

Information’’

What Is the Underlying Safety Issue

Addressed by the Current Standards?

The primary purpose of the AFM is to

provide an authoritative and approved

source of information considered

necessary for safely operating the

airplane. Consistent with this purpose,

§ 25.1587 requires that performance

information related to airworthiness and

necessary for safe operation must be

provided in the AFM.

What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR

Standards?

The current text of 14 CFR 25.1587

[amendment 25–72 (55 FR 29787, July

20, 1990)] is:

‘‘§ 25.1587 Performance information.

(a) Each Airplane Flight Manual must

contain information to permit conversion of

the indicated temperature to free air

temperature if other than a free air

temperature indicator is used to comply with

the requirements of § 25.1303(a)(1).

(b) Each Airplane Flight Manual must

contain the performance information

computed under the applicable provisions of

this part for the weights, altitudes,

temperatures, wind components, and runway

gradients, as applicable within the

operational limits of the airplane, and must

contain the following:

(1) The conditions under which the

performance information was obtained,

including the speeds associated with the

performance information.

(2) VS determined in accordance with

§ 25.103.

(3) The following performance information

(determined by extrapolation and computed

for the range of weights between the

maximum landing and maximum takeoff

weights):

(i) Climb in the landing configuration.

(ii) Climb in the approach configuration.

(iii) Landing distance.

(4) Procedures established under

§ 25.101(f), (g) and (h) that are related to the

limitations and information required by

§ 25.1533 and by this paragraph. These

procedures must be in the form of guidance

material, including any relevant limitations

or information.

(5) An explanation of significant or

unusual flight or ground handling

characteristics of the airplane.’’

The current text of JAR 25.1587

(Change 15, October 2000) is:

‘‘JAR 25.1587 Performance information.

‘‘(a) Not required for JAR–25.

(b) Each aeroplane Flight Manual must

contain the performance information

computed under the applicable provisions of

this JAR–25 (including JAR 25.115, 25.123,

and 25.125 for the weights, altitudes,

temperatures, wind components, and runway

gradients, as applicable) within the

operational limits of the aeroplane, and must

contain the following:

(1) The condition of power, configuration,

speeds and the procedures for handling the

aeroplane and any system having a

significant effect on performance upon which

the performance graphs are based must be

stated in each case. (See ACJ 25.1587(b)(1).)

(2) Not required for JAR–25 as this subparagraph is covered by the opening sentence

of sub-paragraph (b).

(3) The following gross performance

information (determined by extrapolation

and computed for the range of weights

between the maximum landing weight and

maximum takeoff weight) must be provided:

(i) Climb in the landing configuration.

(ii) Climb in the approach configuration.

(iii) Landing distance.

(4) Procedures established under § 25.101

(f) and (g) that are related to the limitations

and information required by JAR 25.1533 and

by this paragraph must be stated in the form

of guidance material, including any relevant

limitation or information.

(5) An explanation of significant or

unusual flight or ground handling

characteristics of the aeroplane.

(6) Corrections to indicated values of

airspeed, altitude and outside air

temperature.

(7) An explanation of operational landing

runway length factors included in the

presentation of the landing distance, if

appropriate. (See ACJ 25.1587(b)(7).)’’

What Are the Differences in the

Standards and What Do Those

Differences Result In?

There are several differences between

the current standards:

• Part 25 does not include the text of

JAR 25.1587(b)(6) or (b)(7).

• The JAR does not include the text

of § 25.1587(a) or (b)(2).

• The JAR contains some wording

different from part 25 that better reflects

current interpretations and practices.

These differences do not necessarily

entail any substantial differences in

technical requirements for including

performance information in the AFM. If

differences in practice have arisen, they

would have resulted more from

differences in the means of compliance

(and interpretation). Because the

relevant guidance material—the FAA’s

AC 25.1581–1 and the JAA’s new AMJ

25.1581—is now harmonized, any

potential for such differences to arise in

the future is minimized.

What, If Any, Are the Differences in the

Means of Compliance?

As one means to demonstrate

compliance with § 25.1585, applicants

have relied on the guidance material

related to the operating procedures

section of the AFM that is contained in

AC 25.1581–1. The JAA has provided

relevant guidance in ACJs 25.1587(b)(1)

and ACJ 25.1587(b)(7). Although there

are differences between the texts of the

FAA AC and the JAA ACJs, both

authorities agree that the FAA’s AC

represents a harmonized text. As noted

previously, the JAA has recently revised

its guidance and published a new AMJ

25.1581, which is harmonized with the

FAA’s AC 25.1581–1.

What Action Did the FAA Propose?

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to

harmonize the regulations by revising

§ 25.1587 to adopt portions of the text

of JAR 25.1587. The proposed action

would codify current FAA policy, and

achieve harmonization with the JAR.

In general, where the standards were

different, the FAA found that the JAR

standard more properly reflects current

practices and, in those cases, proposed

using the JAR text as the harmonized

standard. In areas where there was a

requirement in one standard that did

not appear in the other standard, the

FAA proposed carrying over that

requirement into the proposed

harmonized standard. The FAA also

proposed including some minor nonsubstantive editorial changes in the

proposed standard. The JAA is now

planning to revise JAR 25.1587 in the

same way; once this is done,

harmonization of this standard will be

complete.

How Does the Revised Standard

Address the Underlying Safety Issue?

The revised standard continues to

address the underlying safety issue in

the same manner by requiring

performance information necessary for

airworthiness and operational safety to

be furnished in the AFM.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on the Current Regulations?

The revised standard maintains the

same level, and may increase the level,

of safety provided by the current

regulations.

What Is the Effect of the Revised

Standard on Current Industry Practice?

The revised standard maintains the

same level of safety relative to current

industry practice.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34021

What Other Options Were Considered

and Why Were They Not Selected?

The FAA has not considered another

option. We find that revising the

standard, as discussed above, is the

most appropriate way to fulfill

harmonization goals while, at the same

time, maintaining safety and not

affecting current industry design

practices.

Who Will Be Affected by the Revised

Standard?

Manufacturers and operators of

transport category airplanes could be

affected by the revised standard.

However, because the revised standard

does not result in any practical changes

in requirements or practice, there will

not be any significant effect.

Is Existing FAA Advisory Material

Adequate?

The FAA considers that the guidance

contained in AC 25.1581–1 is adequate

as it pertains to the revised standard.

Additionally, as noted above, the JAA

recently issued a parallel AMJ 25.1581

that provides guidance similar to, and

harmonized with, that contained in AC

25.1581–1. In light of this, we do not

consider that any additional advisory

material is needed relevant to the

revised standard.

Discussion of Comments Submitted to

the NPRM

We received comments from two

commenters in response to the proposal.

The first commenter, representing

numerous groups in the aviation

industry, fully supports the proposed

actions.

Comments Concerning Section 25.1527

The second commenter, a non-U.S.

airframe manufacturer, suggests that the

title of revised § 25.1527, ‘‘Maximum

operating altitude,’’ be changed.

Because the new text applies to the

extremes of the ambient air temperature

and operating altitude, the title should

better reflect the content of the section.

The commenter also notes that the title

should be changed to be consistent with

that of JAR 25.1527, which is ‘‘Ambient

air temperature and operating altitude.’’

We concur and have changed the title

of § 25.1527 to ‘‘Ambient air

temperature and operating altitude.’’

Since this section has been harmonized

by adopting the JAR standard, it is

appropriate that the two parallel

sections have the same title.

Comments Concerning Section 25.1587

The same commenter notes that

paragraph (b)(3) of the proposed

§ 25.1587 refers to ‘‘* * * the range of

weights between the maximum landing

weight and the maximum takeoff

weight.’’ The commenter believes that

this range should cover the minimum

landing weight and maximum takeoff

weight. The commenter notes that this

same comment applies to the existing

§ 25.1587(b)(3).

We disagree with this commenter.

Section 25.1587(b) requires applicants

to provide the performance information

computed under the applicable part 25

provisions for all weights within the

operational limits of the airplane in the

Airplane Flight Manual. This general

requirement would require the

performance information specified in

§ 25.1587(b)(3) to be provided for the

weights between the minimum and

maximum landing weights. Section

25.1587(b)(3) additionally requires

applicants to provide certain

performance information pertinent to

landing for weights between the

maximum landing weight and the

maximum takeoff weight. The reason for

requiring this additional information

beyond the maximum landing weight to

be provided in the Airplane Flight

Manual is to cover the possibility of an

immediate return to landing after a

maximum weight takeoff. Accordingly,

we have made no changes to this section

in the final rule.

What Regulatory Analyses and

Assessments Has the FAA Conducted?

Economic Evaluation, Regulatory

Flexibility Determination, Trade Impact

Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates

Assessment

Changes to Federal regulations must

undergo several economic analyses.

First, Executive Order 12866 directs

each Federal agency to propose or adopt

a regulation only upon a reasoned

determination that the benefits of the

intended regulation justify its costs.

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act

of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the

economic impact of regulatory changes

on small entities. Third, the Trade

Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. section

2531–2533) prohibits agencies from

setting standards that create

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign

commerce of the United States. In

developing U.S. standards, this Trade

Act also requires agencies to consider

international standards and, where

appropriate, use them as the basis of

U.S. standards. And fourth, the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

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.)

In conducting these analyses, the FAA

has determined that this rule has

benefits, but no more than minimal

costs, and that it is not ‘‘a significant

regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866. This rule will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities, reduces barriers to international

trade, and imposes no unfunded

mandates on state, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector.

The (DOT) Order 2100.5, ‘‘Regulatory

Policies and Procedures,’’ prescribes

policies and procedures for

simplification, analysis, and review of

regulations. If it is determined that the

expected impact is so minimal that the

rule does not warrant a full evaluation,

a statement to that effect and the basis

for it is included in the regulation. We

provide the basis for this minimal

impact determination below. We

received no comments that conflicted

with the economic assessment of

minimal impact published in the NPRM

for this action. Given the reasons

presented below, and the fact that no

comments were received to the contrary,

we have determined that the expected

impact of this rule is so minimal that

the final rule does not warrant a full

evaluation.

Currently, airplane manufacturers

must satisfy both the requirements of 14

CFR and the European JAR certification

standards to market transport category

aircraft in both the United States and

Europe. Meeting two sets of certification

requirements raises the cost of

developing a new transport category

airplane, often with no increase in

safety. In the interest of fostering

international trade, lowering the cost of

aircraft development, and making the

certification process more efficient, the

FAA, JAA, and aircraft manufacturers

have been working to create, to the

maximum possible extent, a single set of

certification requirements accepted in

both the United States and Europe. As

discussed previously, these efforts are

referred to as ‘‘harmonization.’’ This

final rule results from the FAA’s

acceptance of an ARAC harmonization

working group’s recommendation.

Members of the ARAC working group

agreed that the requirements of this rule

will not impose additional costs to U.S.

manufacturers of part 25 aircraft.

Specifically, this rule requires the

following:

34022 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Change 1: New § 25.1516, ‘‘Other Speed

Limitations’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now with § 25.1501

through the advice of FAA AC 25.1581–

1. They also will comply with the new

§ 25.1516, which is harmonized to

existing JAR 25X1516, because

§ 25.1501 encompasses the requirements

of the new FAA standard.

We expect that the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1516 or JAR

25X1516 will mean compliance with the

other. Further, because new JAA

advisory material is harmonized with

FAA’s AC 25.1581–1, the U.S.

manufacturers will not need to change

the means by which they comply with

these harmonized rules.

Change 2: § 25.1527, ‘‘Ambient Air

Temperature and Operating Altitude’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now with § 25.1501

through the advice of FAA’s AC

25.1581–1. They also will comply with

the revised § 25.1527, which is

harmonized with JAR 25.1527, because

§ 25.1501 encompasses the requirements

of § 25.1527 as it is amended in this

rulemaking action.

We expect that the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1527 or JAR

25.1527 will mean compliance with the

other. Further, because new JAA

advisory material is harmonized with

FAA AC 25.1581–1, U.S. manufacturers

will not need to change the means by

which they comply with these

harmonized rules.

Change 3: § 25.1583(c), ‘‘Operating

Limitations/Weight and Loading

Distribution’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now with §§ 25.1501

and 25.1581(a)(2) through the advice of

FAA’s AC 25.1581–1. They also will

comply with revised of § 25.1583(c) ,

which is harmonized with the existing

JAR 25.1583(c), because §§ 25.1501 and

25.1581(a)(2) encompass § 25.1583(c) as

it is amended in this rulemaking action.

This amendment revises § 25.1583(c)

to eliminate its inclusion of direct

references to § 25.25 and to § 25.27, and

its concomitant omission of a direct

reference to § 25.23. By amending

§ 25.1583(c) so that it refers directly to

§ 25.1519, which includes references to

these three sections, they—§ 25.25,

§ 25.27, and § 25.23—are incorporated

into the scope of § 25.1583. Thus, all

three sections will be referenced

indirectly by § 25.1583(c) through its

reference to § 25.1519.

We expect that the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1583(c) or

JAR 25.1583(c) will mean compliance

with the other. Further, because new

JAA advisory material is harmonized

with the FAA’s AC 25.1581-1, the U.S.

manufacturers will not need to change

the means by which they comply with

the harmonized rules.

Change 4: § 25.1583(f), ‘‘Operating

Limitations/Altitudes’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now with §§ 25.1501

and 25.1581(a)(2) through the advice of

the FAA’s AC 25.1581–1. They also will

comply with this amendment, which

harmonizes § 25.1583(f) with the

existing JAR 25.1583(f), because

§ § 25.1501 and 25.1581(a)(2) encompass

the requirements of § 25.1583(f) as it is

amended in this rulemaking action.

We expect the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1583(f) or

JAR 25.1583(f) will mean compliance

with the other. Further, because new

JAA advisory material is harmonized to

FAA’s AC 25.1581–1, the U.S.

manufacturers will not need to change

the means by which they comply with

these harmonized rules.

Change 5: § 25.1585, ‘‘Operating

Procedures’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now with existing

§ 25.1585, which encompasses and

exceeds the scope of existing JAR

25.1585. They also will comply with the

revised standard that harmonizes

§ 25.1585 with JAR 25.1585.

The part 25 requirement will be

harmonized with the JAR because, with

one exception, the content of the JAA

rule better presents FAA’s current

policy, practices, and interpretations

than does the content of the existing

FAA rule. The single exception is the

omission in JAR 25.1585 as an

equivalent to § 25.1585(b). This

paragraph requires information and

instructions to be furnished toward

compliance with § 25.953. The

harmonized FAA/JAA standard will

maintain this current FAA requirement.

Harmonization of related advisory

material is completed now that new JAA

advisory material is harmonized with

existing FAA advisory material.

We expect the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1585 or JAR

25.1585 will mean compliance with the

other. Further, no reduction in the level

of safety will result from this action.

Neither the harmonization of the rules,

nor the harmonization of associated JAA

advisory material with the FAA

advisory material, will present U.S.

manufacturers with any practical

change in their procedures.

Change 6: § 25.1587, ‘‘Performance

Information’’

U.S. manufacturers of part 25

airplanes comply now separately with

existing § 25.1587 and JAR 25.1587,

which differ in some particulars. This

rulemaking action results in a

harmonized FAA/JAA standard, such

that manufacturers’’ compliance with

either rule will mean compliance with

the other.

The harmonized standard

incorporates the requirements of

§ 25.1587(a) and of § 25.1587(b)(2),

which now are lacking in the JAR. It

also incorporates the requirements of

JAR 25.1587(b)(6) and of JAR

25.1587(b)(7), which were lacking in

part 25. Harmonization of related

advisory material is completed now that

the JAA advisory material is

harmonized with existing FAA advisory

material.

We expect the result of this

harmonization action will be that

compliance with either § 25.1587 or JAR

25.1587 will mean compliance with the

other. Neither the harmonization of the

rules, nor the harmonization of

associated JAA advisory material with

the FAA advisory material, will present

U.S. manufacturers with any practical

change in their procedures.

Benefits and Costs of the Changes

The effect of these regulatory changes

will be to improve the codification of

current certification practice, and no

consequent substantive change either in

practice or in costs of compliance will

result. Thus, we anticipate that minimal

additional costs will be associated with

compliance with this rule.

We expect that these changes will

result in benefits in the form of cost

savings received by affected

manufacturers because they will be able

to effect compliance with both part 25

and JAR requirements in a simpler and

more direct fashion. Further, we expect

that the existing level of safety will be

maintained.

We have not attempted to quantify the

benefits from cost savings that may

accrue because of this rule beyond

noting that, while the savings from this

rule may be small, they are part of a

potentially large savings from the

harmonization program. We have

concluded that, because there is

agreement among the potentially

affected airplane manufacturers that no

costs and no more than minimal savings

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 34023

will result, further analysis is not

required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, directs the

FAA to fit regulatory requirements to

the scale of the business, organizations,

and governmental jurisdictions subject

to the regulation. We are required to

determine whether a proposed or final

action will have a ‘‘significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities’’ as defined in the Act.

If we find that the action will have a

significant impact, we must do a

‘‘regulatory flexibility analysis.’’

However, if we find that the action will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities, we are not required to do the

analysis. In this case, the Act requires

that we include a statement that

provides the factual basis for our

determination.

We have determined that this

amendment will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities for two

reasons:

First, the net economic effect of the

rule is minimal regulatory cost relief.

The amendment requires that new

transport category aircraft

manufacturers meet just the ‘‘more

stringent’’ European certification

requirement, rather than both the

United States and European standards.

Airplane manufacturers already meet or

expect to meet this standard, as well as

the existing part 25 requirement.

Second, all United States

manufacturers of transport category

airplanes exceed the Small Business

Administration small entity criteria of

1,500 employees for aircraft

manufacturers. Those U.S.

manufacturers include:

• The Boeing Company,

• Cessna Aircraft Company,

• Gulfstream Aerospace,

• Learjet (owned by Bombardier

Aerospace),

• Lockheed Martin Corporation,

• McDonnell Douglas (a whollyowned subsidiary of The Boeing

Company),

• Raytheon Aircraft, and

• Sabreliner Corporation.

We received no comments from the

public that differed with the assessment

given in this section. Since this final

rule is minimally cost-relieving and

there are no small entity manufacturers

of part 25 airplanes, the FAA

Administrator certifies that this rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

Trade Impact Assessment

The Trade Agreement Act of 1979

prohibits Federal agencies from

engaging in any standards or related

activities that create unnecessary

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the

United States. Legitimate domestic

objectives, such as safety, are not

considered unnecessary obstacles. The

statute also requires consideration of

international standards and where

appropriate, that they be the basis for

U.S. standards. In addition, consistent

with the Administration’s belief in the

general superiority and desirability of

free trade, it is the policy of the

Administration to remove or diminish

to the extent feasible, barriers to

international trade, including both

barriers affecting the export of American

goods and services to foreign countries

and barriers affecting the import of

foreign goods and services into the

United States.

In accordance with that statute and

policy, we have assessed the potential

effect of this final rule and have

determined that it supports the

Administration’s free trade policy

because the rule will use European

international standards as the basis for

U.S. standards.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (the Act), enacted as Public Law

104–4 on March 22, 1995, is intended,

among other things, to curb the practice

of imposing unfunded Federal mandates

on State, local, and tribal governments.

Title II of the Act 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 a $100 million or

more expenditure (adjusted yearly for

inflation) in any one year by State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or by the private sector; such a mandate

is considered to be a ‘‘significant

regulatory action.’’

This final rule does not contain such

a mandate. Therefore, the requirements

of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.

What Other Assessments Has the FAA

Conducted?

Executive Order 3132, Federalism

The FAA has analyzed this final rule

under the principles and criteria of

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We

determined that this action will not

have a substantial direct effect on the

States, or the relationship between the

national Government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, we

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C.

3507(d)], the FAA has determined there

are no new requirements for information

collection associated with this

amendment.

International Compatibility

In keeping with U.S. obligations

under the Convention on International

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to

comply with International Civil

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards

and Recommended Practices to the

maximum extent practicable. We

determined there are no ICAO

Standards and Recommended Practices

that correspond to these regulations.

Environmental Analysis

FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA

actions that may be categorically

excluded from preparation of a National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

environmental impact statement. In

accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D,

appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this

rulemaking action qualifies for a

categorical exclusion.

Energy Impact

The FAA has assessed the energy

impact of this final rule accordance with

the Energy Policy and Conservation Act

(EPCA), Public Law 94–163, as amended

(43 U.S.C. 6362), and FAA Order

1053.1. We have determined that the

amendment is not a major regulatory

action under the provisions of the

EPCA.

Regulations Affecting Intrastate

Aviation in Alaska

Section 1205 of the FAA

Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.

3213) requires the Administrator, when

modifying regulations in Title 14 of the

CFR in a manner affecting intrastate

aviation in Alaska, to consider the

extent to which Alaska is not served by

transportation modes other than

aviation, and to establish such

regulatory distinctions as he or she

considers appropriate. Because this final

rule would apply to the certification of

future designs of transport category

airplanes and their subsequent

operation, it could affect intrastate

aviation in Alaska.

Plain Language

In response to the June 1, 1998,

Presidential memorandum regarding the

use of plain language, the FAA reVerDate 11<MAY>2000 16:47 Jun 25, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26JNR3.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 26JNR3
34024 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

examined the writing style currently

used in the development of regulations.

The memorandum requires Federal

agencies to communicate clearly with

the public. We are interested in your

comments on whether the style of this

document is clear, and in any other

suggestions you might have to improve

the clarity of FAA communications that

affect you. You can get more

information about the Presidential

memorandum and the plain language

initiative at http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

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. Add new § 25.1516 to read as

follows:

§ 25.1516 Other speed limitations.

Any other limitation associated with

speed must be established.

3. Revise § 25.1527 to read as follows:

§ 25.1527 Ambient air temperature and

operating altitude.

The extremes of the ambient air

temperature and operating altitude for

which operation is allowed, as limited

by flight, structural, powerplant,

functional, or equipment characteristics,

must be established.

4. Amend § 25.1583 by revising

paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as follows:

§ 25.1583 Operating limitations.

* * * * *

(c) Weight and loading distribution.

The weight and center of gravity

limitations established under § 25.1519

must be furnished in the Airplane Flight

Manual. All of the following

information, including the weight

distribution limitations established

under § 25.1519, must be presented

either in the Airplane Flight Manual or

in a separate weight and balance control

and loading document that is

incorporated by reference in the

Airplane Flight Manual:

(1) The condition of the airplane and

the items included in the empty weight

as defined in accordance with § 25.29.

(2) Loading instructions necessary to

ensure loading of the airplane within

the weight and center of gravity limits,

and to maintain the loading within

these limits in flight.

(3) If certification for more than one

center of gravity range is requested, the

appropriate limitations, with regard to

weight and loading procedures, for each

separate center of gravity range.

* * * * *

(f) Ambient air temperatures and

operating altitudes. The extremes of the

ambient air temperatures and operating

altitudes established under § 25.1527

must be furnished.

* * * * *

5. Revise § 25.1585 to read as follows:

§ 25.1585 Operating procedures.

(a) Operating procedures must be

furnished for—

(1) Normal procedures peculiar to the

particular type or model encountered in

connection with routine operations;

(2) Non-normal procedures for

malfunction cases and failure

conditions involving the use of special

systems or the alternative use of regular

systems; and

(3) Emergency procedures for

foreseeable but unusual situations in

which immediate and precise action by

the crew may be expected to

substantially reduce the risk of

catastrophe.

(b) Information or procedures not

directly related to airworthiness or not

under the control of the crew, must not

be included, nor must any procedure

that is accepted as basic airmanship.

(c) Information identifying each

operating condition in which the fuel

system independence prescribed in

§ 25.953 is necessary for safety must be

furnished, together with instructions for

placing the fuel system in a

configuration used to show compliance

with that section.

(d) The buffet onset envelopes,

determined under § 25.251 must be

furnished. The buffet onset envelopes

presented may reflect the center of

gravity at which the airplane is

normally loaded during cruise if

corrections for the effect of different

center of gravity locations are furnished.

(e) Information must be furnished that

indicates that when the fuel quantity

indicator reads ‘‘zero’’ in level flight,

any fuel remaining in the fuel tank

cannot be used safely in flight.

(f) Information on the total quantity of

usable fuel for each fuel tank must be

furnished.

6. Revise § 25.1587 to read as follows:

§ 25.1587 Performance information.

(a) Each Airplane Flight Manual must

contain information to permit

conversion of the indicated temperature

to free air temperature if other than a

free air temperature indicator is used to

comply with the requirements of

§ 25.1303(a)(1).

(b) Each Airplane Flight Manual must

contain the performance information

computed under the applicable

provisions of this part (including

§§ 25.115, 25.123, and 25.125 for the

weights, altitudes, temperatures, wind

components, and runway gradients, as

applicable) within the operational limits

of the airplane, and must contain the

following:

(1) In each case, the conditions of

power, configuration, and speeds, and

the procedures for handling the airplane

and any system having a significant

effect on the performance information.

(2) VS determined in accordance with

§ 25.103.

(3) The following performance

information (determined by

extrapolation and computed for the

range of weights between the maximum

landing weight and the maximum

takeoff weight):

(i) Climb in the landing configuration.

(ii) Climb in the approach

configuration.

(iii) Landing distance.

(4) Procedures established under

§ 25.101(f) and (g) that are related to the

limitations and information required by

§ 25.1533 and by this paragraph (b) in

the form of guidance material, including

any relevant limitations or information.

(5) An explanation of significant or

unusual flight or ground handling

characteristics of the airplane.

(6) Corrections to indicated values of

airspeed, altitude, and outside air

temperature.

(7) An explanation of operational

landing runway length factors included

in the presentation of the landing

distance, if appropriate.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 15,

2001.

D.L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–15852 Filed 6–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P