Special Conditions: Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F Series Airplanes; Interaction of Systems and Structures, 71913-71917 [E8-28024]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
will notify the federal credit union in
writing, and the federal credit union
must, within five years, meet the criteria
for the designation or come into
compliance with the regulatory
requirements applicable to federal credit
unions that do not have a low-income
designation. The designation will
remain in effect during the five-year
period. If a federal credit union does not
requalify and has secondary capital or
nonmember deposit accounts with a
maturity beyond the five-year period, a
regional director may extend the time
for a federal credit union to come into
compliance with regulatory
requirements to allow the federal credit
union to satisfy the terms of any account
agreements. A federal credit union may
appeal a regional director’s
determination that the credit union no
longer meets the criteria for a lowincome designation to the Board within
60 days of the date of the notice from
the regional director. An appeal must be
submitted through the regional director.
(5) Any credit union with a lowincome credit union designation on
January 1, 2009 will have five years
from that date to meet the criteria for
low-income designation under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, unless
the regional director determines a longer
time is required to allow the lowincome credit union to satisfy the terms
of a secondary capital or nonmember
deposit account agreement.
(6) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this section:
Median family income and total
median earnings for individuals are
income statistics reported by the U.S.
Census Bureau. The applicable income
data can be obtained via the American
FactFinder on the Census Bureau’s
webpage at https://factfinder.census.gov/
home/saff/main.html?_lang=en.
Metropolitan area means an area
designated by the Office of Management
and Budget pursuant to 31 U.S.C.
1104(d), 44 U.S.C. 3504(c), and
Executive Order 10253, 16 FR 5605
(June 13, 1951) (as amended).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 705—COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN
FUND FOR CREDIT UNIONS
3. The authority for part 705
continues to read as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1772c–1; 42 U.S.C.
9822 and 9822 note.
4. Amend § 705.3 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Nov 25, 2008
Jkt 217001
§ 705.3
Definitions.
(a) The term ‘‘low-income members’’
means those members defined in
§ 701.34 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E8–28076 Filed 11–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. NM396 Special Conditions No.
25–376–SC]
Special Conditions: Boeing Model 767–
300 and –300F Series Airplanes;
Interaction of Systems and Structures
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions; request
for comments.
SUMMARY: These special conditions are
issued for the Boeing Model 767–300
and –300F airplane as modified by
Aviation Partners Boeing Supplemental
Type Certificate (STC). The modified
airplane has novel or unusual design
features involving installation of
blended winglets and a speedbrake
wing-load-alleviation system. This
system reduces loading on the wing.
The applicable airworthiness
regulations for the Boeing Model 767–
300 and –300F do not contain adequate
or appropriate safety standards for
systems which alleviate loads on
structures. 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
applicable airworthiness standards.
DATES: The effective date of these
special conditions is November 14,
2008. We must receive your comments
by January 12, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal
may be mailed in duplicate to: Federal
Aviation Administration, Transport
Airplane Directorate, Attention: Rules
Docket (ANM–113), Docket No. NM396,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; or delivered in
duplicate to the Transport Airplane
Directorate at the above address. All
comments must be marked Docket No.
NM396. Comments may be inspected in
the Rules Docket weekdays, except
Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and
4 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian
Won, FAA, Airframe & Cabin Safety
Branch, ANM–115, Transport Airplane
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71913
Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057–3356;
telephone (425) 227–2145; facsimile
(425) 227–1149.
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, the FAA invites
interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting 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
concerning these special conditions.
The docket is available for public
inspection 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 consider all comments we receive
on or before the closing date for
comments. We 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 self-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 February 21, 2007, Aviation
Partners Boeing, Seattle, WA, applied
for an STC to modify Boeing Model
767–300 and –300F series airplanes.
These models are currently approved
under Type Certificate No. A1NM. The
Boeing Model 767–300 and 767–300F
series airplanes are large transportcategory airplanes. The Model 767–300
airplane is powered by either two Pratt
E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM
26NOR1
71914
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
& Whitney or two General Electric
engines. The Model 767–300F airplane
is powered by two General Electric
engines. The Boeing Model 767–300
airplane carries a maximum of 351
passengers. The Boeing Model 767–
300F airplane is a freighter
configuration.
The Boeing Model 767–300 and
–300F airplanes, as modified by
Aviation Partners Boeing, feature a
wing-load-alleviation system which
precludes full deployment of the
speedbrakes given certain aircraft
weights and airspeeds, thereby reducing
wing loading. Special conditions have
been applied on past airplane programs
to require consideration of the effects of
systems on structures. Current
regulations do not take into account the
effects of system failures on aircraft
loads. A special condition is needed to
account for these effects. These special
conditions define the necessary
requirements for assessing the effects of
the speedbrake wing-load alleviation
system on structures.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of 14 CFR
21.101, Aviation Partners Boeing must
show that the Boeing Model 767–300
and –300F series airplanes, as changed,
continue to meet the applicable
provisions of the regulations
incorporated by reference in Type
Certificate No. A1NM, 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 certification
basis for Boeing Model 767–300 and
–300F series airplanes includes
applicable sections of 14 CFR part 25, as
amended by Amendments 25–1 through
25–37, with some later amendments as
noted in Type Certificate No. AINM. In
addition, the certification basis includes
certain special conditions, exemptions,
equivalent levels of safety, or later
amended sections of the applicable part
25 that are not relevant to these special
conditions.
If the Administrator finds that the
applicable airworthiness regulations
(i.e., part 25, as amended) do not
contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for Boeing Model 767–300
and –300F series airplanes because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec. 21.16.
In addition to the applicable
airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Boeing Model 767–300
and –300F series airplanes must comply
with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Nov 25, 2008
Jkt 217001
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 in accordance
with Sec. 11.38 and become part of the
type certification basis in accordance
with Sec. 21.101.
Special conditions are initially
applicable to the model for which they
are issued. Should Aviation Partners
Boeing apply at a later date for an STC
to modify any other model included on
Type Certificate No. A1NM to
incorporate the same or similar novel or
unusual design feature, these special
conditions would also apply to the other
model under the provisions of Sec.
21.101.
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Boeing Model 767–300 and
–300F, as modified by Aviation Partners
Boeing, incorporates the following novel
or unusual design features:
Blended winglets are installed on the
wing tips. To reduce the structural
loading of the 767–300 and 767–300F
with Aviation Partners Boeing blended
winglets, a wing-load-alleviation system
will be used that limits the speedbrake
deflection under certain conditions. The
regulations do not provide adequate
criteria governing the safety margins
required for systems that affect design
loads when they fail.
For airplanes equipped with systems
that affect structural performance, either
directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the influence of these
systems and their failure conditions
must be taken into account when
showing compliance with the
requirements of 14 CFR part 25 Subparts
C and D.
The following criteria must be used
for showing compliance with this
special condition for airplanes equipped
with flight-control systems, autopilots,
stability-augmentation systems, loadalleviation systems, flutter-control
systems, fuel-management systems, and
other systems that either directly, or as
a result of failure or malfunction, affect
structural performance. If this special
condition is used for other systems, it
may be necessary to adapt the criteria to
the specific system.
The criteria defined herein only
address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses
and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation, but should be
included in the overall safety evaluation
of the airplane. These criteria may, in
some instances, duplicate standards
already established for this evaluation.
These criteria are only applicable to
structures whose failure could prevent
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
continued safe flight and landing.
Specific criteria that define acceptable
limits on handling characteristics or
stability requirements, when operating
in the system-degraded or inoperative
mode, are not provided in this special
condition.
Depending upon the specific
characteristics of the airplane,
additional studies may be required that
go beyond the criteria provided in this
special condition to demonstrate the
capability of the airplane to meet other
realistic conditions such as alternative
gust or maneuver descriptions for an
airplane equipped with a wing-loadalleviation system.
The following definitions are
applicable to this special condition.
1. Structural performance: Capability
of the airplane to meet the structural
requirements of 14 CFR part 25.
2. Flight limitations: Limitations that
can be applied to the airplane flight
conditions following an in-flight
occurrence and that are included in the
flight manual (e.g., speed limitations,
avoidance of severe-weather conditions,
etc.).
3. Operational limitations:
Limitations, including flight limitations,
that can be applied to the airplane
operating conditions before dispatch
(e.g., fuel, payload, and Master
Minimum Equipment List limitations).
4. Probabilistic terms: The
probabilistic terms (probable,
improbable, extremely improbable) used
in this special condition are the same as
those used in § 25.1309.
5. Failure condition: The term failure
condition is the same as that used in
§ 25.1309. However, this special
condition applies only to system-failure
conditions that affect the structural
performance of the airplane (e.g., system
failure conditions that induce loads,
change the response of the airplane to
inputs such as gusts or pilot actions, or
lower flutter margins).
Applicability
As discussed above, these special
conditions are applicable to Boeing
Model 767–300 and –300F airplanes
modified by Aviation Partners Boeing.
Should Aviation Partners Boeing apply
at a later date for an STC to modify any
other model included on Type
Certificate No. A1NM, to incorporate the
same or similar novel or unusual design
feature, these special conditions would
apply to that model as well under the
provisions of Sec. 21.101.
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel
or unusual design features on Boeing
Model 767–300 and –300F series
E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM
26NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 44704.
(2) For residual-strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able
to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate
loads defined in subparagraph 3(a)(1).
For pressurized cabins, these loads must
be combined with the normal operating
differential pressure.
(3) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in § 25.629(b)(2). For
failure conditions that result in speeds
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Nov 25, 2008
Jkt 217001
The Special Conditions
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the following special conditions are
issued as part of the STC basis for the
Boeing Model 767–300 and –300F series
airplanes modified by Aviation Partners
Boeing.
1. General. The following criteria will
be used in determining the influence of
a system and its failure conditions on
the airplane structure.
2. System fully operative. With the
system fully operative, the following
apply:
(a) Limit loads must be derived in all
normal operating configurations of the
system from all the limit conditions
specified in Subpart C (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in
Subpart C), taking into account any
special behavior of such a system or
associated functions, or any effect on
the structural performance of the
airplane that may occur up to the limit
loads. In particular, any significant
nonlinearity (rate of displacement of
control surface, thresholds, or any other
system nonlinearities) must be
accounted for in a realistic or
conservative way when deriving limit
loads from limit conditions.
(b) The airplane must meet the
strength requirements of part 25 (static
■
beyond VC/MC, freedom from
aeroelastic instability must be shown to
increase speeds, so that the margins
intended by § 25.629(b)(2) are
maintained.
(4) Failures of the system that result
in forced-structural vibrations
(oscillatory failures) must not produce
loads that could result in detrimental
deformation of primary structure.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
strength, residual strength), using the
specified factors to derive ultimate loads
from the limit loads defined above. The
effect of nonlinearities must be
investigated beyond limit conditions to
ensure that the behavior of the system
presents no anomaly compared to the
behavior below limit conditions.
However, conditions beyond limit
conditions need not be considered when
it can be shown that the airplane has
design features that do not allow it to
exceed those limit conditions.
(c) The airplane must meet the
aeroelastic stability requirements of
§ 25.629.
3. System in the failure condition. For
any system-failure condition not shown
to be extremely improbable, the
following apply:
(a) At the time of occurrence. Starting
from 1-g level-flight conditions, a
realistic scenario, including pilot
corrective actions, must be established
to determine the loads occurring at the
time of failure and immediately after
failure.
(1) For static-strength substantiation,
these loads, multiplied by an
appropriate factor of safety that is
related to the probability of occurrence
of the failure, are ultimate loads to be
considered for design. The factor of
safety (FS) is defined in Figure 1.
(b) For the continuation of the flight.
For the airplane, in the system-failed
state and considering any appropriate
reconfiguration and flight limitations,
the following apply:
(1) The loads derived from the
following conditions (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of the following
conditions) at speeds up to VC/MC, or
the speed limitation prescribed for the
E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM
26NOR1
ER26NO08.005
airplanes modified by Aviation Partners
Boeing. 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.
71915
71916
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition
j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode
j (per hour)
in Subpart C.3. For residual-strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able to
withstand two-thirds of the ultimate loads
defined in paragraph 3(b)(2) of the special
condition. For pressurized cabins, these
loads must be combined with the normal
operating differential pressure.
Note: If Pj is greater than 10·3 per flight
hour then a 1.5 factor of safety must be
applied to all limit-load conditions specified
4. If the loads induced by the failure
condition have a significant effect on
fatigue or damage tolerance, then their
effects must be taken into account.
5. Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to a speed
determined from Figure 3. Flutter
clearance speeds V′ and V″ may be
based on the speed limitation specified
for the remainder of the flight using the
margins defined by § 25.629(b).
V′ = Clearance speed as defined by
§ 25.629(b)(2).
V″ = Clearance speed as defined by
§ 25.629(b)(1).
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition
j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode
j (per hour)
Qj = (Tj)(Pj)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10·3 per flight
hour, then the flutter clearance speed must
not be less than V″.
Where:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Nov 25, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6. Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must also be shown up to V′
in Figure 3 above, for any probable
system-failure condition combined with
any damage required or selected for
investigation by § 25.571(b).
E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM
26NOR1
ER26NO08.007
to withstand the loads in paragraph
3(b)(1) of the special condition
multiplied by a factor of safety
depending on the probability of being in
this failure state. The factor of safety is
defined in Figure 2.
ER26NO08.006
(iv) The limit-unsymmetrical
conditions specified in § 25.367 and
§ 25.427(b) and (c).
(v) The limit-yaw-maneuvering
conditions specified in § 25.351.
(vi) The limit-ground-loading
conditions specified in §§ 25.473 and
25.491.
(2) For static-strength substantiation,
each part of the structure must be able
Qj = (Tj)(Pj)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
remainder of the flight, must be
determined:
(i) The limit-symmetricalmaneuvering conditions specified in
§ 25.331 and in § 25.345.
(ii) The limit-gust-and-turbulence
conditions specified in § 25.341 and in
§ 25.345.
(iii) The limit-rolling conditions
specified in § 25.349
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
(c) Consideration of certain failure
conditions may be required by other
sections of 14 CFR part 25 regardless of
calculated system reliability. Where
analysis shows the probability of these
failure conditions to be less than 10·9,
criteria other than those specified in this
paragraph may be used for structural
substantiation to show continued safe
flight and landing.
4. Failure indications. For system
failure detection and indication, the
following apply:
(a) The system must be checked for
failure conditions, not extremely
improbable, that degrade the structural
capability below the level required by
part 25 or significantly reduce the
reliability of the remaining system. As
far as reasonably practicable, the flight
crew must be made aware of these
failures before flight. Certain elements
of the control system, such as
mechanical and hydraulic components,
may use special periodic inspections,
and electronic components may use
daily checks, in lieu of detection-andindication systems to achieve the
objective of this requirement. These
certification-maintenance requirements
must be limited to components that are
not readily detectable by normal
detection-and-indication systems and
where service history shows that
inspections provide an adequate level of
safety.
(b) The existence of any failure
condition, not extremely improbable,
during flight that could significantly
affect the structural capability of the
airplane, and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be
minimized by suitable flight limitations,
must be signaled to the flight crew. For
example, failure conditions that result
in a factor of safety between the airplane
strength and the loads of Subpart C
below 1.25, or flutter margins below V″,
must be signaled to the crew during
flight.
5. Dispatch with known failure
conditions. If the airplane is to be
dispatched in a known system-failure
condition that affects structural
performance, or affects the reliability of
the remaining system to maintain
structural performance, then the
provisions of this special condition
must be met, including the provisions of
paragraph 2 for the dispatched
condition, and paragraph 3 for
subsequent failures. Expected
operational limitations may be taken
into account in establishing Pj as the
probability of failure occurrence for
determining the safety margin in Figure
1. Flight limitations and expected
operational limitations may be taken
into account in establishing Qj as the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:53 Nov 25, 2008
Jkt 217001
71917
combined probability of being in the
dispatched failure condition, and the
subsequent failure condition for the
safety margins in Figures 2 and 3. These
limitations must be such that the
probability of being in this combined
failure state and then subsequently
encountering limit-load conditions is
extremely improbable. No reduction in
these safety margins is allowed if the
subsequent system-failure rate is greater
than 1E–3 per hour.
participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the
proposal to the FAA. No comments
were received. Class E airspace
designations are published in paragraph
6005 of FAA Order 7400.9S signed
October 3, 2008, and effective October
31, 2008, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this
document will be published
subsequently in that Order.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 14, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8–28024 Filed 11–25–08; 8:45 am]
The Rule
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0757; Airspace
Docket No. 08–ASW–13]
Amendment of Class E Airspace; Big
Spring, TX
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This action amends Class E
airspace at Big Spring McMahonWrinkle Airport, Big Spring, TX.
Changes to the VOR/DME RWY 17
Standard Instrument Approach
Procedure (SIAP) have made this action
necessary for the safety of Instrument
Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the
airport.
DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, March
12, 2009. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by
reference action under 1 CFR Part 51,
subject to the annual revision of FAA
Order 7400.9 and publication of
conforming amendments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal
Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Ft Worth,
TX 76193–0530; telephone (817) 222–
5582.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On September 29, 2008, the FAA
published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend
Class E airspace at Big Spring, TX (73
FR 56528, Docket No. FAA–2008–0757).
Interested parties were invited to
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This action amends Title 14 Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by
amending Class E airspace at Big Spring
McMahon-Wrinkle Airport, Big Spring,
TX. Additional controlled airspace is
necessary to accommodate changes to
the VOR/DME Rwy 17 SIAP.
The FAA has determined that this
regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which
frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally
current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1,
Section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it amends
controlled airspace at Big Spring
McMahon-Wrinkle Airport, Big Spring,
TX.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM
26NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 26, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71913-71917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28024]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. NM396 Special Conditions No. 25-376-SC]
Special Conditions: Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F Series
Airplanes; Interaction of Systems and Structures
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Boeing Model 767-
300 and -300F airplane as modified by Aviation Partners Boeing
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC). The modified airplane has novel or
unusual design features involving installation of blended winglets and
a speedbrake wing-load-alleviation system. This system reduces loading
on the wing. The applicable airworthiness regulations for the Boeing
Model 767-300 and -300F do not contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for systems which alleviate loads on structures. 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 applicable airworthiness
standards.
DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is November 14,
2008. We must receive your comments by January 12, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal may be mailed in duplicate to:
Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Attention: Rules Docket (ANM-113), Docket No. NM396, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; or delivered in duplicate to the
Transport Airplane Directorate at the above address. All comments must
be marked Docket No. NM396. Comments may be inspected in the Rules
Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian Won, FAA, Airframe & Cabin Safety
Branch, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone (425) 227-2145; facsimile (425) 227-1149.
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, the FAA invites interested persons to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting 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
concerning these special conditions. The docket is available for public
inspection 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 consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date
for comments. We 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 self-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 February 21, 2007, Aviation Partners Boeing, Seattle, WA,
applied for an STC to modify Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series
airplanes. These models are currently approved under Type Certificate
No. A1NM. The Boeing Model 767-300 and 767-300F series airplanes are
large transport-category airplanes. The Model 767-300 airplane is
powered by either two Pratt
[[Page 71914]]
& Whitney or two General Electric engines. The Model 767-300F airplane
is powered by two General Electric engines. The Boeing Model 767-300
airplane carries a maximum of 351 passengers. The Boeing Model 767-300F
airplane is a freighter configuration.
The Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F airplanes, as modified by
Aviation Partners Boeing, feature a wing-load-alleviation system which
precludes full deployment of the speedbrakes given certain aircraft
weights and airspeeds, thereby reducing wing loading. Special
conditions have been applied on past airplane programs to require
consideration of the effects of systems on structures. Current
regulations do not take into account the effects of system failures on
aircraft loads. A special condition is needed to account for these
effects. These special conditions define the necessary requirements for
assessing the effects of the speedbrake wing-load alleviation system on
structures.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Aviation Partners Boeing
must show that the Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series airplanes, as
changed, continue to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A1NM, 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 certification basis for Boeing Model 767-300
and -300F series airplanes includes applicable sections of 14 CFR part
25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-37, with some later
amendments as noted in Type Certificate No. AINM. In addition, the
certification basis includes certain special conditions, exemptions,
equivalent levels of safety, or later amended sections of the
applicable part 25 that are not relevant to these special conditions.
If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., part 25, as amended) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series
airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec. 21.16.
In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series 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 in
accordance with Sec. 11.38 and become part of the type certification
basis in accordance with Sec. 21.101.
Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should Aviation Partners Boeing apply at a later date
for an STC to modify any other model included on Type Certificate No.
A1NM to incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design
feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other model
under the provisions of Sec. 21.101.
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F, as modified by Aviation
Partners Boeing, incorporates the following novel or unusual design
features:
Blended winglets are installed on the wing tips. To reduce the
structural loading of the 767-300 and 767-300F with Aviation Partners
Boeing blended winglets, a wing-load-alleviation system will be used
that limits the speedbrake deflection under certain conditions. The
regulations do not provide adequate criteria governing the safety
margins required for systems that affect design loads when they fail.
For airplanes equipped with systems that affect structural
performance, either directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the influence of these systems and their failure
conditions must be taken into account when showing compliance with the
requirements of 14 CFR part 25 Subparts C and D.
The following criteria must be used for showing compliance with
this special condition for airplanes equipped with flight-control
systems, autopilots, stability-augmentation systems, load-alleviation
systems, flutter-control systems, fuel-management systems, and other
systems that either directly, or as a result of failure or malfunction,
affect structural performance. If this special condition is used for
other systems, it may be necessary to adapt the criteria to the
specific system.
The criteria defined herein only address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation, but should be included in the overall safety
evaluation of the airplane. These criteria may, in some instances,
duplicate standards already established for this evaluation. These
criteria are only applicable to structures whose failure could prevent
continued safe flight and landing. Specific criteria that define
acceptable limits on handling characteristics or stability
requirements, when operating in the system-degraded or inoperative
mode, are not provided in this special condition.
Depending upon the specific characteristics of the airplane,
additional studies may be required that go beyond the criteria provided
in this special condition to demonstrate the capability of the airplane
to meet other realistic conditions such as alternative gust or maneuver
descriptions for an airplane equipped with a wing-load-alleviation
system.
The following definitions are applicable to this special condition.
1. Structural performance: Capability of the airplane to meet the
structural requirements of 14 CFR part 25.
2. Flight limitations: Limitations that can be applied to the
airplane flight conditions following an in-flight occurrence and that
are included in the flight manual (e.g., speed limitations, avoidance
of severe-weather conditions, etc.).
3. Operational limitations: Limitations, including flight
limitations, that can be applied to the airplane operating conditions
before dispatch (e.g., fuel, payload, and Master Minimum Equipment List
limitations).
4. Probabilistic terms: The probabilistic terms (probable,
improbable, extremely improbable) used in this special condition are
the same as those used in Sec. 25.1309.
5. Failure condition: The term failure condition is the same as
that used in Sec. 25.1309. However, this special condition applies
only to system-failure conditions that affect the structural
performance of the airplane (e.g., system failure conditions that
induce loads, change the response of the airplane to inputs such as
gusts or pilot actions, or lower flutter margins).
Applicability
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to
Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F airplanes modified by Aviation Partners
Boeing. Should Aviation Partners Boeing apply at a later date for an
STC to modify any other model included on Type Certificate No. A1NM, to
incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, these
special conditions would apply to that model as well under the
provisions of Sec. 21.101.
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series
[[Page 71915]]
airplanes modified by Aviation Partners Boeing. 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.
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 STC basis for the Boeing Model 767-300 and -300F series airplanes
modified by Aviation Partners Boeing.
1. General. The following criteria will be used in determining the
influence of a system and its failure conditions on the airplane
structure.
2. System fully operative. With the system fully operative, the
following apply:
(a) Limit loads must be derived in all normal operating
configurations of the system from all the limit conditions specified in
Subpart C (or defined by special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in Subpart C), taking into account
any special behavior of such a system or associated functions, or any
effect on the structural performance of the airplane that may occur up
to the limit loads. In particular, any significant nonlinearity (rate
of displacement of control surface, thresholds, or any other system
nonlinearities) must be accounted for in a realistic or conservative
way when deriving limit loads from limit conditions.
(b) The airplane must meet the strength requirements of part 25
(static strength, residual strength), using the specified factors to
derive ultimate loads from the limit loads defined above. The effect of
nonlinearities must be investigated beyond limit conditions to ensure
that the behavior of the system presents no anomaly compared to the
behavior below limit conditions. However, conditions beyond limit
conditions need not be considered when it can be shown that the
airplane has design features that do not allow it to exceed those limit
conditions.
(c) The airplane must meet the aeroelastic stability requirements
of Sec. 25.629.
3. System in the failure condition. For any system-failure
condition not shown to be extremely improbable, the following apply:
(a) At the time of occurrence. Starting from 1-g level-flight
conditions, a realistic scenario, including pilot corrective actions,
must be established to determine the loads occurring at the time of
failure and immediately after failure.
(1) For static-strength substantiation, these loads, multiplied by
an appropriate factor of safety that is related to the probability of
occurrence of the failure, are ultimate loads to be considered for
design. The factor of safety (FS) is defined in Figure 1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26NO08.005
Factor of safety at the time of occurrence(2) For residual-strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able to withstand two-thirds of
the ultimate loads defined in subparagraph 3(a)(1). For pressurized
cabins, these loads must be combined with the normal operating
differential pressure.
(3) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in Sec. 25.629(b)(2). For failure conditions that
result in speeds beyond VC/MC, freedom from
aeroelastic instability must be shown to increase speeds, so that the
margins intended by Sec. 25.629(b)(2) are maintained.
(4) Failures of the system that result in forced-structural
vibrations (oscillatory failures) must not produce loads that could
result in detrimental deformation of primary structure.
(b) For the continuation of the flight. For the airplane, in the
system-failed state and considering any appropriate reconfiguration and
flight limitations, the following apply:
(1) The loads derived from the following conditions (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of safety in lieu of the
following conditions) at speeds up to VC/MC, or
the speed limitation prescribed for the
[[Page 71916]]
remainder of the flight, must be determined:
(i) The limit-symmetrical-maneuvering conditions specified in Sec.
25.331 and in Sec. 25.345.
(ii) The limit-gust-and-turbulence conditions specified in Sec.
25.341 and in Sec. 25.345.
(iii) The limit-rolling conditions specified in Sec. 25.349
(iv) The limit-unsymmetrical conditions specified in Sec. 25.367
and Sec. 25.427(b) and (c).
(v) The limit-yaw-maneuvering conditions specified in Sec. 25.351.
(vi) The limit-ground-loading conditions specified in Sec. Sec.
25.473 and 25.491.
(2) For static-strength substantiation, each part of the structure
must be able to withstand the loads in paragraph 3(b)(1) of the special
condition multiplied by a factor of safety depending on the probability
of being in this failure state. The factor of safety is defined in
Figure 2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26NO08.006
Qj = (Tj)(Pj)
Where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode j (per hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10-3 per flight hour then
a 1.5 factor of safety must be applied to all limit-load conditions
specified in Subpart C.3. For residual-strength substantiation, the
airplane must be able to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate loads
defined in paragraph 3(b)(2) of the special condition. For
pressurized cabins, these loads must be combined with the normal
operating differential pressure.
4. If the loads induced by the failure condition have a significant
effect on fatigue or damage tolerance, then their effects must be taken
into account.
5. Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to a speed
determined from Figure 3. Flutter clearance speeds V' and V'' may be
based on the speed limitation specified for the remainder of the flight
using the margins defined by Sec. 25.629(b).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26NO08.007
V' = Clearance speed as defined by Sec. 25.629(b)(2).
V'' = Clearance speed as defined by Sec. 25.629(b)(1).
Qj = (Tj)(Pj)
Where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode j (per hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10-3 per flight hour,
then the flutter clearance speed must not be less than V''.
6. Freedom from aeroelastic instability must also be shown up to V'
in Figure 3 above, for any probable system-failure condition combined
with any damage required or selected for investigation by Sec.
25.571(b).
[[Page 71917]]
(c) Consideration of certain failure conditions may be required by
other sections of 14 CFR part 25 regardless of calculated system
reliability. Where analysis shows the probability of these failure
conditions to be less than 10-9, criteria other than those
specified in this paragraph may be used for structural substantiation
to show continued safe flight and landing.
4. Failure indications. For system failure detection and
indication, the following apply:
(a) The system must be checked for failure conditions, not
extremely improbable, that degrade the structural capability below the
level required by part 25 or significantly reduce the reliability of
the remaining system. As far as reasonably practicable, the flight crew
must be made aware of these failures before flight. Certain elements of
the control system, such as mechanical and hydraulic components, may
use special periodic inspections, and electronic components may use
daily checks, in lieu of detection-and-indication systems to achieve
the objective of this requirement. These certification-maintenance
requirements must be limited to components that are not readily
detectable by normal detection-and-indication systems and where service
history shows that inspections provide an adequate level of safety.
(b) The existence of any failure condition, not extremely
improbable, during flight that could significantly affect the
structural capability of the airplane, and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be minimized by suitable flight
limitations, must be signaled to the flight crew. For example, failure
conditions that result in a factor of safety between the airplane
strength and the loads of Subpart C below 1.25, or flutter margins
below V'', must be signaled to the crew during flight.
5. Dispatch with known failure conditions. If the airplane is to be
dispatched in a known system-failure condition that affects structural
performance, or affects the reliability of the remaining system to
maintain structural performance, then the provisions of this special
condition must be met, including the provisions of paragraph 2 for the
dispatched condition, and paragraph 3 for subsequent failures. Expected
operational limitations may be taken into account in establishing Pj as
the probability of failure occurrence for determining the safety margin
in Figure 1. Flight limitations and expected operational limitations
may be taken into account in establishing Qj as the combined
probability of being in the dispatched failure condition, and the
subsequent failure condition for the safety margins in Figures 2 and 3.
These limitations must be such that the probability of being in this
combined failure state and then subsequently encountering limit-load
conditions is extremely improbable. No reduction in these safety
margins is allowed if the subsequent system-failure rate is greater
than 1E-3 per hour.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 14, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-28024 Filed 11-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P