Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-Driven Small Airplanes, 45502-45505 [05-15465]

Download as PDF 45502 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 150 / Friday, August 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 36 [Docket No.: FAA–2003–15279; Amendment No. 36–27] RIN 2120–AI25 Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-Driven Small Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This final rule amends FAA regulations regarding airplane noise certification standards. These changes are necessary to harmonize two technical items with international standards and provide uniform noise certification standards for airplanes certificated in the United States and Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) countries. This amendment will simplify airworthiness approvals for import and export purposes. We anticipate that the changes to these two items will apply only to a small number of older-technology airplanes. DATES: This amendment becomes effective September 6, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mehmet Marsan, Office of Environment and Energy, AEE–100, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–7703; facsimile (202) 267–5594, e-mail mehmet.marsan@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability of Rulemaking Documents You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by: (1) Searching the Department of Transportation’s electronic Docket Management System (DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search); (2) Visiting the FAA’s web page at http://www.faa.gov; or (3) Accessing the Government Printing Office’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. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the VerDate jul<14>2003 15:39 Aug 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 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. If you are a small entity and you have a question regarding this document, you may contact your local FAA official, or the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out more about SBREFA on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.cfm. Authority for This Rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding 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, Air Commerce and Safety, Section 44715, Controlling aircraft noise and sonic boom. Under that section, the Administrator of the FAA is charged with prescribing standards to measure aircraft noise and sonic boom and prescribing the regulations to control and abate aircraft noise and sonic boom. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because Title 14 part 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) contains the FAA’s noise standards and regulations that apply to the issuance of type certificates for all types of aircraft. Background This final rule completes the FAA’s efforts to harmonize the regulations of 14 CFR Part 36 Appendix G, with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10, regarding propeller-driven small airplane noise certification. The FAA proposed these changes in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), ‘‘Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-Driven Small Airplanes’’ (68 FR 34256), published on June 6, 2003. In the NPRM, you will find a discussion of the current requirements and why they do not PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 adequately address the noise certification standards for airplanes in keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation. In the NPRM, we also refer to the studies and reports we relied on in developing the proposed rule, and discuss each alternative that we considered and the reasons for rejecting the ones we did not propose. The background material in the NPRM also contains the basis and rationale for these requirements and, except where we have specifically expanded on the background elsewhere in this preamble, supports this final rule. Discussions regarding the intent of the requirements may refer to the background in the NPRM without repeating it in this document. History Under 49 U.S.C. 44715, the Administrator of the FAA is directed to prescribe ‘‘standards to measure aircraft noise and sonic boom; * * * and regulations to control and abate aircraft noise and sonic boom.’’ On October 13, 1999, the FAA published a final rule (64 FR 55598) adopting noise certification standards for propeller-driven small airplanes. That rule, which harmonized the U.S. noise certification regulations with the European Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR) for propeller-driven small airplanes, resulted from a joint effort of the FAA, the JAA, and the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC). However, two technical items contained in Appendix G to Part 36 remained unharmonized with ICAO Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10. These two items were not harmonized at that time because the effect on exported older airplanes was not known. The two unharmonized items are as follows: (1) Appendix G, section G34.111 allows the use of ‘‘maximum continuous power’’ during the second segment of the noise certification test flight path. Annex 16, Chapter 10, Section 10.5.2 defines ‘‘power’’ for the second segment as ‘‘maximum power.’’ Since ‘‘maximum continuous power’’ is typically lower than ‘‘maximum power’’ or ‘‘takeoff power,’’ as described in ICAO, this is considered unharmonized. (2) Appendix G, section G36.201 specifies a simplified data correction procedure for fixed-pitch type propellers if the engine test power is within 5 percent of the reference power. However, ICAO Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10 does not have a corresponding simplified data correction procedure. In keeping with U.S. obligations, it is the FAA’s policy to comply with ICAO E:\FR\FM\05AUR2.SGM 05AUR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 150 / Friday, August 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA is revising part 36 to make the requirements the same as the propellerdriven small airplane noise certification regulations of Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10. The Annex 16 version better represents the intent of the original noise certification standards, which was to certify propeller-driven small airplanes at takeoff power. This final rule completes the FAA’s efforts to harmonize part 36 Appendix G and Annex 16. Related Activity The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was established July 15, 2002, and assumed authority to conduct certification of aircraft, engines and parts on September 28, 2003. The EASA will eventually absorb all JAA functions and activities, including the JAA’s rulemaking harmonization activities. Since this rulemaking action is a result of FAA/JAA harmonization efforts, we anticipate that it will be incorporated into the EASA’s requirements as well. Discussion of Comments The FAA received comments from three commenters on the proposed rule. All three commenters oppose the adoption of this final rule. However, as discussed below, we made no changes to the rule based on these comments. Comment: One commenter disagreed with the statement in the summary section of the NPRM that states that the revisions to these two unharmonized technical items would apply only to a small number of older-technology airplanes. The commenter states that the majority of the world’s small airplanes are based in the United States, and believes that all of these airplanes are potential candidates for retrofit. FAA reply: While the U.S. small airplane fleet is large, the FAA has no information to suggest that a significant number of airplanes are candidates for engine or propeller retrofits. The FAA believes the only airplanes that would be affected are those undergoing a voluntary retrofit that have time-limited engines; based on past experience this is a very small number. Further, among the airplanes that are retrofitted, compliance with this part 36 amendment would only be required if the retrofit results in an acoustical change. Section 21.93(b) defines acoustical change as any voluntary change in type design of an aircraft that may increase the noise level of an aircraft. Comment: Two commenters state that it would be detrimental to the safe operation of airplanes if they cannot be VerDate jul<14>2003 15:39 Aug 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 noise certificated at engine power levels lower than takeoff power. FAA reply: The FAA disagrees that it would be unsafe for airplanes to operate at an engine power level lower than takeoff power. The FAA believes the commenters fear losing the operational performance level between maximum continuous power and takeoff power, because they often operate in that range, but do noise certification at the maximum continuous power level. The FAA is not advocating operation at an unsafe power level, only that noise certification should not be conducted at a level consistently lower than the usual operating power. The rule is being changed to harmonize the standards and close this loophole, which does not exist under ICAO Annex 16. Operators will still have the option of maintaining takeoff power and rpm for as long as the airplane’s airworthiness limitations permit, after which maximum continuous power and rpm must be maintained. Comment: One commenter states that, in the background section of the NPRM, the FAA discussed the 14 CFR Part 36 amendments, but did not discuss any of the recent power testing changes made in ICAO Annex 16 Chapter 10. The commenter states that in June 2000, the JAA approved a small airplane of European design, manufacture, and certification, using a maximumcontinuous power rating. This would mean that the European authorities were not complying with their own regulations at that time. FAA reply: All JAA countries use ICAO Annex 16, Volume I as their environmental standard. Individual JAA member countries may file differences with ICAO from Volume I, and these differences are listed in Volume I. Germany was the only JAA member country that filed differences with the ICAO on defining power during testing. Our understanding is that Germany recently realized it would be the only country not harmonized on this standard and changed its rule to remove the difference with ICAO Annex 16. At present, there are no differences in defining power during testing. Paperwork Reduction Act Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, there are no current or new requirements for information collection associated with this final rule. International Compatibility In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with ICAO Standards and PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 45503 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 other than those directly addressed by the rule change. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs 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 requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 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 requires agencies to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for 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). The Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations. If it is determined that the expected cost impact is so minimal that a rulemaking does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits a statement to that effect along with the basis for that determination to be in the preamble. In this case, a full regulatory evaluation cost benefit evaluation need not be prepared. Such a determination has been made for this rule. The reasoning for that determination follows. The FAA has determined that this rule will increase the harmonization of the U.S. Federal regulations with the ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and will impose, at most, negligible costs. Because the costs and benefits of this action do not make it a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as defined in the Order, we have not prepared a ‘‘regulatory impact analysis.’’ Similarly, we have not prepared a full ‘‘regulatory evaluation,’’ which is the written cost/benefit analysis ordinarily E:\FR\FM\05AUR2.SGM 05AUR2 45504 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 150 / Friday, August 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations required for all rulemaking under the DOT Regulatory and Policies and Procedures. We do not need to do a full evaluation where the economic impact of a rule is minimal. Regulatory Flexibility Determination The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statues, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to the regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including small business, not-for-profit organizations and small governmental jurisdictions. Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 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. This final rule revises two technical items, which are the only remaining unharmonized items between part 36 Appendix G and the ICAO Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10, regarding the noise certification of small propellerdriven airplanes. Our assessment of this rulemaking indicates that its economic impact is minimal because these two items affect only airplanes with oldertechnology engines that are not required to undergo new noise certification, or are already noise certificated. Therefore, we certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Trade Impact Assessment The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. VerDate jul<14>2003 16:51 Aug 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 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. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this rulemaking and has determined that it will impose the same minimal costs on domestic and international entities and thus have a neutral trade impact. Unfunded Mandates Assessment The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act) 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 an expenditure of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently uses an inflationadjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu of $100 million. This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The requirements of Title II do not apply. Executive Order 13132, Federalism The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We have 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, and therefore does not have federalism implications. Environmental Analysis In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, the FAA has determined that this action is categorically excluded from environmental review under section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This action is categorically excluded under FAA Order 1050.1E, Chapter 3, Paragraph 312f, which covers regulations ‘‘excluding those which if implemented may cause a significant impact on the human environment.’’ It qualifies for a categorical exclusion because no significant impacts to the environment are expected to result from its finalization or implementation and no extraordinary circumstances exist as prescribed under Chapter 3, paragraph 304 of Order 1050.1E. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use The FAA has analyzed this rulemaking action under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under the executive order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866, and it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 36 Aircraft, Noise control. The Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows: I PART 36—NOISE STANDARDS: AIRCRAFT TYPE AND AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATION 1. The authority citation for part 36 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–44702, 44704, 44715, sec. 305, Pub. L. 96–193, 94 Stat. 50, 57; E.O. 11514, 35 FR 4247, 3 CFR, 1966–1970 Comp., p. 902. 2. Amend Appendix G to part 36 by revising section G36.111(c)(2)(iv) to read as follows: I Appendix G to Part 36—Takeoff Noise Requirements for Propeller-Driven Small Airplane and Propeller-Driven, Commuter Category Airplane Certification Tests on or After December 22, 1988 Sec. G36.111 * * * Flight Procedures * * (c) * * * (2) * * * (iv) For airplanes equipped with fixed pitch propellers, takeoff power must be maintained throughout the second segment. For airplanes equipped with variable pitch or constant speed propellers, takeoff power and rpm must be maintained throughout the second segment. If airworthiness limitations do not allow the application of takeoff power and rpm up to the reference point, then takeoff power and rpm must be maintained for as long as is permitted by such limitations; thereafter, maximum continuous power and rpm must be maintained. Maximum time allowed at takeoff power under the airworthiness standards must be used in the second segment. The reference height must be calculated assuming climb gradients appropriate to each power setting used. E:\FR\FM\05AUR2.SGM 05AUR2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 150 / Friday, August 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 3. Amend Appendix G to part 36 by revising section G36.201(c) to read as follows: * * * * * I (c) No corrections for helical tip Mach number variation need to be made if the propeller helical tip Mach number is: (1) At or below 0.70 and the test helical tip Mach number is within 0.014 of the reference helical tip Mach number. VerDate jul<14>2003 15:39 Aug 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 (2) Above 0.70 and at or below 0.80 and the test helical tip Mach number is within 0.007 of the reference helical tip Mach number. (3) Above 0.80 and the test helical tip Mach number is within 0.005 of the reference helical tip Mach number. For mechanical tachometers, if the helical tip Mach number is above 0.8 and the test helical tip Mach PO 00000 number is within 0.008 of the reference helical tip Mach number. * * * * Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 * Issued in Washington, DC, on July 28, 2005. Marion C. Blakey, Administrator. [FR Doc. 05–15465 Filed 8–4–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Frm 00005 45505 E:\FR\FM\05AUR2.SGM 05AUR2

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 150 (Friday, August 5, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45502-45505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15465]



[[Page 45501]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV





Department of Transportation





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Federal Aviation Administration



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



14 CFR Part 36



Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-Driven 
Small Airplanes; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 150 / Friday, August 5, 2005 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 45502]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 36

[Docket No.: FAA-2003-15279; Amendment No. 36-27]
RIN 2120-AI25


Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-
Driven Small Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule amends FAA regulations regarding airplane 
noise certification standards. These changes are necessary to harmonize 
two technical items with international standards and provide uniform 
noise certification standards for airplanes certificated in the United 
States and Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) countries. This amendment 
will simplify airworthiness approvals for import and export purposes. 
We anticipate that the changes to these two items will apply only to a 
small number of older-technology airplanes.

DATES: This amendment becomes effective September 6, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mehmet Marsan, Office of Environment 
and Energy, AEE-100, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-7703; facsimile 
(202) 267-5594, e-mail mehmet.marsan@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by:
    (1) Searching the Department of Transportation's electronic Docket 
Management System (DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search);
    (2) Visiting the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov; or
    (3) Accessing the Government Printing Office'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.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our 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.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.

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. If you are a small entity and you have a question 
regarding this document, you may contact your local FAA official, or 
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find 
out more about SBREFA on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/
sbrefa.cfm.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding 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, Air Commerce and Safety, Section 44715, 
Controlling aircraft noise and sonic boom. Under that section, the 
Administrator of the FAA is charged with prescribing standards to 
measure aircraft noise and sonic boom and prescribing the regulations 
to control and abate aircraft noise and sonic boom. This regulation is 
within the scope of that authority because Title 14 part 36 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR) contains the FAA's noise standards and 
regulations that apply to the issuance of type certificates for all 
types of aircraft.

Background

    This final rule completes the FAA's efforts to harmonize the 
regulations of 14 CFR Part 36 Appendix G, with International Civil 
Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10, regarding 
propeller-driven small airplane noise certification. The FAA proposed 
these changes in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), 
``Harmonization of Noise Certification Standards for Propeller-Driven 
Small Airplanes'' (68 FR 34256), published on June 6, 2003. In the 
NPRM, you will find a discussion of the current requirements and why 
they do not adequately address the noise certification standards for 
airplanes in keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation. In the NPRM, we also refer to the studies 
and reports we relied on in developing the proposed rule, and discuss 
each alternative that we considered and the reasons for rejecting the 
ones we did not propose.
    The background material in the NPRM also contains the basis and 
rationale for these requirements and, except where we have specifically 
expanded on the background elsewhere in this preamble, supports this 
final rule. Discussions regarding the intent of the requirements may 
refer to the background in the NPRM without repeating it in this 
document.

History

    Under 49 U.S.C. 44715, the Administrator of the FAA is directed to 
prescribe ``standards to measure aircraft noise and sonic boom; * * * 
and regulations to control and abate aircraft noise and sonic boom.'' 
On October 13, 1999, the FAA published a final rule (64 FR 55598) 
adopting noise certification standards for propeller-driven small 
airplanes. That rule, which harmonized the U.S. noise certification 
regulations with the European Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR) for 
propeller-driven small airplanes, resulted from a joint effort of the 
FAA, the JAA, and the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC). 
However, two technical items contained in Appendix G to Part 36 
remained unharmonized with ICAO Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10. These 
two items were not harmonized at that time because the effect on 
exported older airplanes was not known. The two unharmonized items are 
as follows:
    (1) Appendix G, section G34.111 allows the use of ``maximum 
continuous power'' during the second segment of the noise certification 
test flight path. Annex 16, Chapter 10, Section 10.5.2 defines 
``power'' for the second segment as ``maximum power.'' Since ``maximum 
continuous power'' is typically lower than ``maximum power'' or 
``takeoff power,'' as described in ICAO, this is considered 
unharmonized.
    (2) Appendix G, section G36.201 specifies a simplified data 
correction procedure for fixed-pitch type propellers if the engine test 
power is within 5 percent of the reference power. However, ICAO Annex 
16, Volume I, Chapter 10 does not have a corresponding simplified data 
correction procedure.
    In keeping with U.S. obligations, it is the FAA's policy to comply 
with ICAO

[[Page 45503]]

Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. 
The FAA is revising part 36 to make the requirements the same as the 
propeller-driven small airplane noise certification regulations of 
Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10. The Annex 16 version better represents 
the intent of the original noise certification standards, which was to 
certify propeller-driven small airplanes at takeoff power. This final 
rule completes the FAA's efforts to harmonize part 36 Appendix G and 
Annex 16.

Related Activity

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was established July 15, 
2002, and assumed authority to conduct certification of aircraft, 
engines and parts on September 28, 2003. The EASA will eventually 
absorb all JAA functions and activities, including the JAA's rulemaking 
harmonization activities. Since this rulemaking action is a result of 
FAA/JAA harmonization efforts, we anticipate that it will be 
incorporated into the EASA's requirements as well.

Discussion of Comments

    The FAA received comments from three commenters on the proposed 
rule. All three commenters oppose the adoption of this final rule. 
However, as discussed below, we made no changes to the rule based on 
these comments.
    Comment: One commenter disagreed with the statement in the summary 
section of the NPRM that states that the revisions to these two 
unharmonized technical items would apply only to a small number of 
older-technology airplanes. The commenter states that the majority of 
the world's small airplanes are based in the United States, and 
believes that all of these airplanes are potential candidates for 
retrofit.
    FAA reply: While the U.S. small airplane fleet is large, the FAA 
has no information to suggest that a significant number of airplanes 
are candidates for engine or propeller retrofits. The FAA believes the 
only airplanes that would be affected are those undergoing a voluntary 
retrofit that have time-limited engines; based on past experience this 
is a very small number. Further, among the airplanes that are 
retrofitted, compliance with this part 36 amendment would only be 
required if the retrofit results in an acoustical change. Section 
21.93(b) defines acoustical change as any voluntary change in type 
design of an aircraft that may increase the noise level of an aircraft.
    Comment: Two commenters state that it would be detrimental to the 
safe operation of airplanes if they cannot be noise certificated at 
engine power levels lower than takeoff power.
    FAA reply: The FAA disagrees that it would be unsafe for airplanes 
to operate at an engine power level lower than takeoff power. The FAA 
believes the commenters fear losing the operational performance level 
between maximum continuous power and takeoff power, because they often 
operate in that range, but do noise certification at the maximum 
continuous power level. The FAA is not advocating operation at an 
unsafe power level, only that noise certification should not be 
conducted at a level consistently lower than the usual operating power. 
The rule is being changed to harmonize the standards and close this 
loophole, which does not exist under ICAO Annex 16. Operators will 
still have the option of maintaining takeoff power and rpm for as long 
as the airplane's airworthiness limitations permit, after which maximum 
continuous power and rpm must be maintained.
    Comment: One commenter states that, in the background section of 
the NPRM, the FAA discussed the 14 CFR Part 36 amendments, but did not 
discuss any of the recent power testing changes made in ICAO Annex 16 
Chapter 10. The commenter states that in June 2000, the JAA approved a 
small airplane of European design, manufacture, and certification, 
using a maximum-continuous power rating. This would mean that the 
European authorities were not complying with their own regulations at 
that time.
    FAA reply: All JAA countries use ICAO Annex 16, Volume I as their 
environmental standard. Individual JAA member countries may file 
differences with ICAO from Volume I, and these differences are listed 
in Volume I. Germany was the only JAA member country that filed 
differences with the ICAO on defining power during testing. Our 
understanding is that Germany recently realized it would be the only 
country not harmonized on this standard and changed its rule to remove 
the difference with ICAO Annex 16. At present, there are no differences 
in defining power during testing.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, there 
are no current or new requirements for information collection 
associated with this final rule.

International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with 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 
other than those directly addressed by the rule change.

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several 
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs 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 requires agencies 
to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. 
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 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 requires agencies to consider international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for 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).
    The Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes 
policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of 
regulations. If it is determined that the expected cost impact is so 
minimal that a rulemaking does not warrant a full evaluation, this 
order permits a statement to that effect along with the basis for that 
determination to be in the preamble. In this case, a full regulatory 
evaluation cost benefit evaluation need not be prepared. Such a 
determination has been made for this rule. The reasoning for that 
determination follows.
    The FAA has determined that this rule will increase the 
harmonization of the U.S. Federal regulations with the ICAO Standards 
and Recommended Practices and will impose, at most, negligible costs. 
Because the costs and benefits of this action do not make it a 
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Order, we have not 
prepared a ``regulatory impact analysis.'' Similarly, we have not 
prepared a full ``regulatory evaluation,'' which is the written cost/
benefit analysis ordinarily

[[Page 45504]]

required for all rulemaking under the DOT Regulatory and Policies and 
Procedures. We do not need to do a full evaluation where the economic 
impact of a rule is minimal.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ``as a 
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, 
consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statues, to 
fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the 
business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to the 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale for their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small 
entities, including small business, not-for-profit organizations and 
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or 
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in 
the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 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.
    This final rule revises two technical items, which are the only 
remaining unharmonized items between part 36 Appendix G and the ICAO 
Annex 16, Volume I, Chapter 10, regarding the noise certification of 
small propeller-driven airplanes. Our assessment of this rulemaking 
indicates that its economic impact is minimal because these two items 
affect only airplanes with older-technology engines that are not 
required to undergo new noise certification, or are already noise 
certificated. Therefore, we certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from 
establishing any standards or engaging in 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. The FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this rulemaking and has determined that it will 
impose the same minimal costs on domestic and international entities 
and thus have a neutral trade impact.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act) 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 an expenditure of $100 million or more (adjusted 
annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate 
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently 
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu of $100 
million.
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The requirements 
of Title II do not apply.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We have 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, and therefore does not have federalism implications.

Environmental Analysis

    In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, the FAA has determined that 
this action is categorically excluded from environmental review under 
section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This 
action is categorically excluded under FAA Order 1050.1E, Chapter 3, 
Paragraph 312f, which covers regulations ``excluding those which if 
implemented may cause a significant impact on the human environment.'' 
It qualifies for a categorical exclusion because no significant impacts 
to the environment are expected to result from its finalization or 
implementation and no extraordinary circumstances exist as prescribed 
under Chapter 3, paragraph 304 of Order 1050.1E.

Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use

    The FAA has analyzed this rulemaking action under Executive Order 
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it 
is not a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order 
because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866, and it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect 
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 36

    Aircraft, Noise control.

The Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration 
amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 36--NOISE STANDARDS: AIRCRAFT TYPE AND AIRWORTHINESS 
CERTIFICATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 36 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 
44701-44702, 44704, 44715, sec. 305, Pub. L. 96-193, 94 Stat. 50, 
57; E.O. 11514, 35 FR 4247, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 902.

0
2. Amend Appendix G to part 36 by revising section G36.111(c)(2)(iv) to 
read as follows:

Appendix G to Part 36--Takeoff Noise Requirements for Propeller-Driven 
Small Airplane and Propeller-Driven, Commuter Category Airplane 
Certification Tests on or After December 22, 1988

Sec. G36.111 Flight Procedures

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) For airplanes equipped with fixed pitch propellers, takeoff 
power must be maintained throughout the second segment. For 
airplanes equipped with variable pitch or constant speed propellers, 
takeoff power and rpm must be maintained throughout the second 
segment. If airworthiness limitations do not allow the application 
of takeoff power and rpm up to the reference point, then takeoff 
power and rpm must be maintained for as long as is permitted by such 
limitations; thereafter, maximum continuous power and rpm must be 
maintained. Maximum time allowed at takeoff power under the 
airworthiness standards must be used in the second segment. The 
reference height must be calculated assuming climb gradients 
appropriate to each power setting used.


[[Page 45505]]



0
3. Amend Appendix G to part 36 by revising section G36.201(c) to read 
as follows:
* * * * *
    (c) No corrections for helical tip Mach number variation need to 
be made if the propeller helical tip Mach number is:
    (1) At or below 0.70 and the test helical tip Mach number is 
within 0.014 of the reference helical tip Mach number.
    (2) Above 0.70 and at or below 0.80 and the test helical tip 
Mach number is within 0.007 of the reference helical tip Mach 
number.
    (3) Above 0.80 and the test helical tip Mach number is within 
0.005 of the reference helical tip Mach number. For mechanical 
tachometers, if the helical tip Mach number is above 0.8 and the 
test helical tip Mach number is within 0.008 of the reference 
helical tip Mach number.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 28, 2005.
Marion C. Blakey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-15465 Filed 8-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P