Special Conditions: Cessna Model 650 Airplanes; High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF), 41216-41218 [E7-14593]

Download as PDF 41216 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 144 / Friday, July 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 301 [Docket No. APHIS–2006–0116] Gypsy Moth Generally Infested Areas; Addition of Counties in Ohio and West Virginia Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as final rule. AGENCY: We are adopting as a final rule, without change, an interim rule that amended the gypsy moth regulations by adding Delaware and Franklin Counties in Ohio and Monroe County in West Virginia to the list of generally infested areas based upon the detection of infestations of gypsy moth in those counties. As a result of the interim rule, the interstate movement of regulated articles from those areas is restricted. The interim rule was necessary to prevent the artificial spread of the gypsy moth to noninfested States. DATES: Effective on July 27, 2007, we are adopting as a final rule the interim rule published at 71 FR 53546–53547 on September 12, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Weyman Fussell, Program Manager, Pest Detection and Management Programs, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734– 5705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES Background The gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (Linnaeus), is a destructive pest of forest and shade trees. The gypsy moth regulations (contained in 7 CFR 301.45 through 301.45–12 and referred to below as the regulations) restrict the interstate movement of regulated articles from generally infested areas to prevent the artificial spread of the gypsy moth. In an interim rule 1 effective and published in the Federal Register on September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53546– 53547, Docket No. APHIS–2006–0116), we amended the gypsy moth regulations by adding Delaware and Franklin Counties in Ohio and Monroe County in West Virginia to the list of generally 1 To view the interim rule, go to http:// www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘Advanced Search’’ tab, and select ‘‘Docket Search.’’ In the Docket ID field, enter APHIS–2006–0116, then click ‘‘Submit.’’ Clicking on the Docket ID link in the search results page will produce the document in the docket. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:44 Jul 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 infested areas. Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or before November 13, 2006. We did not receive any comments. Therefore, for the reasons given in the interim rule, we are adopting the interim rule as a final rule. This action also affirms the information contained in the interim rule concerning Executive Orders 12866, 12372, and 12988, and the Paperwork Reduction Act. Further, for this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review under Executive Order 12866. Regulatory Flexibility Act The following analysis addresses the economic effects of the interim rule on small entities, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The rule affected the interstate movement of regulated articles, including forest products (logs, pulpwood, wood chips) and Christmas trees, nursery stock, and mobile homes and outdoor household articles from and through Delaware and Franklin Counties in Ohio and Monroe County in West Virginia. Most of the area of the three counties now considered generally infested are on the fringe of generally infested areas and do not have high levels of infestation. In the three newly quarantined counties, there are 161 establishments that produce and ship regulated articles. Many of the establishments are in areas where there is negligible or no infestation. Of these, 38 are Christmas tree growers and 123 are nurseries. Nearly 99 percent of the establishments are considered to be small businesses. Sales of forest products and Christmas trees in the affected counties in 2002 were valued at $33 million, representing about 6.7 percent of the total values of such sales in the two States. There were 950 shipments of shrubs and trees, nursery items, and Christmas trees. Of those, only 200 shipments were to nonregulated areas. The regulatory requirements of the regulations are expected to cause a slight increase in the costs of business for affected entities. However, any negative economic effects are small when compared with the potential for harm to the forest industry and the U.S. economy as a whole that would result from the spread of the pest. Since the total value of regulated articles moved from the affected counties to nonregulated areas is a small fraction of the national total, the regulatory effect on national prices is expected to be insignificant. Additionally, since the regulations do not prohibit movement of regulated articles, articles that meet the PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 requirements of the regulations can continue to enter the market. The overall impact upon price and competitiveness is expected to be insignificant. Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation. PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES Accordingly, we are adopting as a final rule, without change, the interim rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and that was published at 71 FR 53546– 53547 on September 12, 2006. I Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of July 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7–14527 Filed 7–26–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM380; Special Conditions No. 25–361–SC] Special Conditions: Cessna Model 650 Airplanes; High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics, Inc. These modified airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. The modification consists of installing an Electronic Flight Instrument System (EFIS) with the options for the Universal Avionics Vision 1 Synthetic Vision System. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the protection of these systems from the effects of high- E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM 27JYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 144 / Friday, July 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES intensity radiated fields (HIRF). These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is July 18, 2007. We must receive your comments by August 27, 2007. ADDRESSES: You must mail two copies of your comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attention: Rules Docket (ANM–113), Docket No. NM380, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356. You may deliver two copies to the Transport Airplane Directorate at the above address. You must mark your comments: Docket No. NM380. You can inspect comments in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal Holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Dunn, FAA, Airplane and Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2799; facsimile (425) 227–1320. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited The FAA has determined that notice and opportunity for prior public comment is impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay certification of the airplane and thus delivery of the affected aircraft. In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been subject to the public comment process in several prior instances with no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon issuance; however, we invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel about these special conditions. You may inspect the docket before and after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:44 Jul 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 preamble between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive. If you want the FAA to acknowledge receipt of your comments on these special conditions, include with your comments a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background On March 15, 2007, Columbia Avionics, Inc., 11200 Airport Road, Columbia, Missouri, 65201, applied for a supplemental type certificate (STC) to modify Cessna Model 650 airplanes. The Cessna Model 650 is a low-wing, pressurized, transport category airplane with two fuselage-mounted jet engines. It can seat up to 19 passengers, with a crew of two pilots. The modification consists of installing an electronic flight instrument system (EFIS) with the options for the Universal Avionics Vision 1 Synthetic Vision System. These systems have the potential to be vulnerable to high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF) external to the airplane. Type Certification Basis Under 14 CFR 21.101, Columbia Avionics, Inc., must show that the Cessna Model 650 airplanes, as changed, continue to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A9NM, or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the ‘‘original type certification basis.’’ The regulations incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A9NM include the following: Part 25 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) effective February 1, 1965, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–39. In addition, the following regulations apply: §§ 25.901(c) and 25.1199, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–40; §§ 25.1309 and 25.1351(d), as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–41; §§ 25.177, 25.255, and 25.703, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–42; § 25.1326, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–43; § 25.1413, as amended by Amendments 25–1 through 25–44; and §§ 25.1305 and 25.1529, as amended by Amendments PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 41217 25–1 through 25–54. In addition, the certification basis includes certain special conditions, exemptions, equivalent levels of safety, or later amended sections of the applicable part 25 regulations that are not relevant to these special conditions. These special conditions will form an additional part of the supplemental type certification basis. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., part 25, as amended) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Cessna Model 650 airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under § 21.16. Besides the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Cessna Model 650 airplanes must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36. Special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, are issued under § 11.38 and become part of the type certification basis under § 21.101. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should Columbia Avionics apply later for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model included on Type Certificate No. A9NM to incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features As noted earlier, the Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified Columbia Avionics will incorporate dual Electronic Primary Flight Displays that will perform critical functions. This system may be vulnerable to highintensity radiated fields external to the airplane. The current airworthiness standards of part 25 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the protection of this equipment from the adverse effects of HIRF. Accordingly, this system is considered to be a novel or unusual design feature. Discussion There is no specific regulation that addresses protection requirements for electrical and electronic systems from HIRF. Increased power levels from ground-based radio transmitters and the growing use of sensitive avionics/ electronics and electrical systems to command and control airplanes have made it necessary to provide adequate protection. To ensure that a level of safety is achieved equivalent to that intended by E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM 27JYR1 41218 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 144 / Friday, July 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations the regulations incorporated by reference, special conditions are needed for the Cessna 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics. These special conditions require that new avionics/ electronics and electrical systems that perform critical functions be designed and installed to preclude component damage and interruption of function due to both the direct and indirect effects of HIRF. High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) With the trend toward increased power levels from ground-based transmitters, and the advent of space and satellite communications coupled with electronic command and control of the airplane, the immunity of critical avionics/electronics and electrical systems to HIRF must be established. It is not possible to precisely define the HIRF to which the airplane will be exposed in service. There is also uncertainty concerning the effectiveness of airframe shielding for HIRF. Furthermore, coupling of electromagnetic energy to cockpitinstalled equipment through the cockpit window apertures is undefined. Based on surveys and analysis of existing HIRF emitters, an adequate level of protection exists when compliance with the HIRF protection special condition is shown with either paragraph 1 OR 2 below: 1. A minimum threat of 100 volts rms (root-mean-square) per meter electric field strength from 10 kHz to 18 GHz. a. The threat must be applied to the system elements and their associated wiring harnesses without the benefit of airframe shielding. b. Demonstration of this level of protection is established through system tests and analysis. 2. A threat external to the airframe of the field strengths identified in the table below for the frequency ranges indicated. Both peak and average field strength components from the table are to be demonstrated. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES Frequency 10 kHz–100 kHz ........... 100 kHz–500 kHz ......... 500 kHz–2 MHz ............ 2 MHz–30 MHz ............. 30 MHz–70 MHz ........... 70 MHz–100 MHz ......... 100 MHz–200 MHz ....... 200 MHz–400 MHz ....... 400 MHz–700 MHz ....... 700 MHz–1 GHz ........... 1 GHz–2 GHz ............... 2 GHz–4 GHz ............... 4 GHz–6 GHz ............... 6 GHz–8 GHz ............... VerDate Aug<31>2005 Field strength (volts per meter) Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are 8 GHz–12 GHz ............. 3000 300 issued as part of the supplemental type 12 GHz–18 GHz ........... 2000 200 certification basis for the Cessna Model 18 GHz–40 GHz ........... 600 200 650 airplanes modified by Columbia The field strengths are expressed in terms Avionics. 1. Protection from Unwanted Effects of peak of the root-mean-square (rms) over the complete modulation period. of High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF). Each electrical and electronic The threat levels identified above are system that performs critical functions the result of an FAA review of existing must be designed and installed to studies on the subject of HIRF, in light ensure that the operation and of the ongoing work of the operational capability of these systems Electromagnetic Effects Harmonization to perform critical functions are not Working Group of the Aviation adversely affected when the airplane is Rulemaking Advisory Committee. exposed to high-intensity radiated Applicability fields. 2. For the purpose of these special As discussed above, these special conditions, the following definition conditions are applicable to Cessna applies: Model 650 airplanes modified by Critical Functions: Functions whose Columbia Avionics. Should Columbia failure would contribute to or cause a Avionics apply later for a supplemental failure condition that would prevent the type certificate to modify any other continued safe flight and landing of the model included on Type Certificate No. airplane. A9NM to incorporate the same or Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 18, similar novel or unusual design feature, 2007. these special conditions would apply to Stephen P. Boyd, that model as well under § 21.101. Frequency Peak 17:44 Jul 26, 2007 Jkt 211001 50 50 100 100 50 100 200 200 200 200 Conclusion List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: I Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 I Average This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics. It is not a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these features on the airplane. The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the notice and comment procedure in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. Because a delay would significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are Field strength unnecessary and impracticable, and (volts per meter) good cause exists for adopting these Peak Average special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments to allow 50 50 interested persons to submit views that 50 50 may not have been submitted in 50 50 response to the prior opportunities for 100 100 comment described above. 50 50 100 100 700 700 2000 3000 3000 1000 The Special Conditions Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–14593 Filed 7–26–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 30560 Amdt. No. 3227] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, Weather Takeoff Minimums; Miscellaneous Amendments Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This amendment establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and/or Weather Takeoff Minimums for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, addition of new obstacles, or changes in air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM 27JYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 144 (Friday, July 27, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41216-41218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-14593]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. NM380; Special Conditions No. 25-361-SC]


Special Conditions: Cessna Model 650 Airplanes; High-Intensity 
Radiated Fields (HIRF)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for Cessna Model 650 
airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics, Inc. These modified airplanes 
will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state 
of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport 
category airplanes. The modification consists of installing an 
Electronic Flight Instrument System (EFIS) with the options for the 
Universal Avionics Vision 1 Synthetic Vision System. The applicable 
airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety 
standards for the protection of these systems from the effects of high-

[[Page 41217]]

intensity radiated fields (HIRF). These special conditions contain the 
additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary 
to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the 
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is July 18, 2007. 
We must receive your comments by August 27, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You must mail two copies of your comments to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attention: 
Rules Docket (ANM-113), Docket No. NM380, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 
Washington 98057-3356. You may deliver two copies to the Transport 
Airplane Directorate at the above address. You must mark your comments: 
Docket No. NM380. You can inspect comments in the Rules Docket 
weekdays, except Federal Holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Dunn, FAA, Airplane and Flight 
Crew Interface Branch, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-2799; facsimile (425) 227-
1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    The FAA has determined that notice and opportunity for prior public 
comment is impracticable because these procedures would significantly 
delay certification of the airplane and thus delivery of the affected 
aircraft. In addition, the substance of these special conditions has 
been subject to the public comment process in several prior instances 
with no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that 
good cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon 
issuance; however, we invite interested people to take part in this 
rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most 
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special 
conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include 
supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written 
comments.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a 
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel 
about these special conditions. You may inspect the docket before and 
after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in 
person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 
between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for 
comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do 
so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special 
conditions based on the comments we receive.
    If you want the FAA to acknowledge receipt of your comments on 
these special conditions, include with your comments a pre-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the 
date on the postcard and mail it back to you.

Background

    On March 15, 2007, Columbia Avionics, Inc., 11200 Airport Road, 
Columbia, Missouri, 65201, applied for a supplemental type certificate 
(STC) to modify Cessna Model 650 airplanes. The Cessna Model 650 is a 
low-wing, pressurized, transport category airplane with two fuselage-
mounted jet engines. It can seat up to 19 passengers, with a crew of 
two pilots. The modification consists of installing an electronic 
flight instrument system (EFIS) with the options for the Universal 
Avionics Vision 1 Synthetic Vision System. These systems have the 
potential to be vulnerable to high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF) 
external to the airplane.

Type Certification Basis

    Under 14 CFR 21.101, Columbia Avionics, Inc., must show that the 
Cessna Model 650 airplanes, as changed, continue to meet the applicable 
provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in Type 
Certificate No. A9NM, or the applicable regulations in effect on the 
date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by 
reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the 
``original type certification basis.'' The regulations incorporated by 
reference in Type Certificate No. A9NM include the following: Part 25 
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) effective February 1, 1965, 
as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-39. In addition, the following 
regulations apply: Sec. Sec.  25.901(c) and 25.1199, as amended by 
Amendments 25-1 through 25-40; Sec. Sec.  25.1309 and 25.1351(d), as 
amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-41; Sec. Sec.  25.177, 25.255, 
and 25.703, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-42; Sec.  25.1326, 
as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-43; Sec.  25.1413, as amended 
by Amendments 25-1 through 25-44; and Sec. Sec.  25.1305 and 25.1529, 
as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-54. In addition, the 
certification basis includes certain special conditions, exemptions, 
equivalent levels of safety, or later amended sections of the 
applicable part 25 regulations that are not relevant to these special 
conditions. These special conditions will form an additional part of 
the supplemental type certification basis.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness 
regulations (i.e., part 25, as amended) do not contain adequate or 
appropriate safety standards for the Cessna Model 650 airplanes because 
of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed 
under Sec.  21.16.
    Besides the applicable airworthiness regulations and special 
conditions, the Cessna Model 650 airplanes must comply with the fuel 
vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise 
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    Special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, are issued under 
Sec.  11.38 and become part of the type certification basis under Sec.  
21.101.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which 
they are issued. Should Columbia Avionics apply later for a 
supplemental type certificate to modify any other model included on 
Type Certificate No. A9NM to incorporate the same or similar novel or 
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to 
the other model under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    As noted earlier, the Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified Columbia 
Avionics will incorporate dual Electronic Primary Flight Displays that 
will perform critical functions. This system may be vulnerable to high-
intensity radiated fields external to the airplane. The current 
airworthiness standards of part 25 do not contain adequate or 
appropriate safety standards for the protection of this equipment from 
the adverse effects of HIRF. Accordingly, this system is considered to 
be a novel or unusual design feature.

Discussion

    There is no specific regulation that addresses protection 
requirements for electrical and electronic systems from HIRF. Increased 
power levels from ground-based radio transmitters and the growing use 
of sensitive avionics/electronics and electrical systems to command and 
control airplanes have made it necessary to provide adequate 
protection.
    To ensure that a level of safety is achieved equivalent to that 
intended by

[[Page 41218]]

the regulations incorporated by reference, special conditions are 
needed for the Cessna 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics. 
These special conditions require that new avionics/electronics and 
electrical systems that perform critical functions be designed and 
installed to preclude component damage and interruption of function due 
to both the direct and indirect effects of HIRF.

High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF)

    With the trend toward increased power levels from ground-based 
transmitters, and the advent of space and satellite communications 
coupled with electronic command and control of the airplane, the 
immunity of critical avionics/electronics and electrical systems to 
HIRF must be established.
    It is not possible to precisely define the HIRF to which the 
airplane will be exposed in service. There is also uncertainty 
concerning the effectiveness of airframe shielding for HIRF. 
Furthermore, coupling of electromagnetic energy to cockpit-installed 
equipment through the cockpit window apertures is undefined. Based on 
surveys and analysis of existing HIRF emitters, an adequate level of 
protection exists when compliance with the HIRF protection special 
condition is shown with either paragraph 1 OR 2 below:
    1. A minimum threat of 100 volts rms (root-mean-square) per meter 
electric field strength from 10 kHz to 18 GHz.
    a. The threat must be applied to the system elements and their 
associated wiring harnesses without the benefit of airframe shielding.
    b. Demonstration of this level of protection is established through 
system tests and analysis.
    2. A threat external to the airframe of the field strengths 
identified in the table below for the frequency ranges indicated. Both 
peak and average field strength components from the table are to be 
demonstrated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Field strength
                                                       (volts per meter)
                      Frequency                      -------------------
                                                        Peak     Average
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 kHz-100 kHz......................................        50        50
100 kHz-500 kHz.....................................        50        50
500 kHz-2 MHz.......................................        50        50
2 MHz-30 MHz........................................       100       100
30 MHz-70 MHz.......................................        50        50
70 MHz-100 MHz......................................        50        50
100 MHz-200 MHz.....................................       100       100
200 MHz-400 MHz.....................................       100       100
400 MHz-700 MHz.....................................       700        50
700 MHz-1 GHz.......................................       700       100
1 GHz-2 GHz.........................................      2000       200
2 GHz-4 GHz.........................................      3000       200
4 GHz-6 GHz.........................................      3000       200
6 GHz-8 GHz.........................................      1000       200
8 GHz-12 GHz........................................      3000       300
12 GHz-18 GHz.......................................      2000       200
18 GHz-40 GHz.......................................       600       200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The field strengths are expressed in terms of peak of the root-mean-
  square (rms) over the complete modulation period.

    The threat levels identified above are the result of an FAA review 
of existing studies on the subject of HIRF, in light of the ongoing 
work of the Electromagnetic Effects Harmonization Working Group of the 
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to 
Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics. Should 
Columbia Avionics apply later for a supplemental type certificate to 
modify any other model included on Type Certificate No. A9NM to 
incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, these 
special conditions would apply to that model as well under Sec.  
21.101.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features 
on Cessna Model 650 airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics. It is not 
a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant who 
applied to the FAA for approval of these features on the airplane.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the 
notice and comment procedure in several prior instances and has been 
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. 
Because a delay would significantly affect the certification of the 
airplane, which is imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public 
notice and comment are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause 
exists for adopting these special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is 
requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that 
may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for 
comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

0
The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of 
the supplemental type certification basis for the Cessna Model 650 
airplanes modified by Columbia Avionics.
    1. Protection from Unwanted Effects of High-Intensity Radiated 
Fields (HIRF). Each electrical and electronic system that performs 
critical functions must be designed and installed to ensure that the 
operation and operational capability of these systems to perform 
critical functions are not adversely affected when the airplane is 
exposed to high-intensity radiated fields.
    2. For the purpose of these special conditions, the following 
definition applies:
    Critical Functions: Functions whose failure would contribute to or 
cause a failure condition that would prevent the continued safe flight 
and landing of the airplane.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 18, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-14593 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P