Special Conditions: Bombardier Aerospace, Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 Series Airplanes; Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks, 31886-31888 [2014-12691]
Download as PDF
31886
§ 4274.304
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Prior loans.
Any loan made under this program
prior to September 2, 2014 may submit
to the Agency a written request for an
irrevocable election to have the loan
serviced in accordance with this
subpart.
■ 9. Section 4274.331 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as
follows:
§ 4274.331
Loan limits.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) The intermediary is promptly
relending all collections from loans
made from its IRP revolving fund in
excess of what is needed for required
debt service, reasonable administrative
costs approved by the Agency, and a
reasonable reserve for debt service and
uncollectible accounts. The
intermediary provides documentation to
demonstrate that funds available for
relending do not exceed the greater of
$150,000 or the total amount of loans
closed during a calendar quarter on
average, over the last 12 months.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Section 4274.332 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(4) to
read as follows:
§ 4274.332
Post award requirements.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) The intermediary must submit an
annual budget of proposed
administrative costs for Agency
approval. The annual budget should
itemize cash income and cash out-flow.
Projected cash income should consist of,
but is not limited to, collection of
principal repayment, interest
repayment, interest earnings on
deposits, fees, and other income.
Projected cash out-flow should consist
of, but is not limited to, principal and
interest payments, reserve for bad debt,
and an itemization of administrative
costs to operate the IRP revolving fund.
Proceeds received from the collection of
principal repayment cannot be used for
administrative expenses. The amount
removed from the IRP revolving fund for
administrative costs in any year must be
reasonable, must not exceed the actual
cost of operating the IRP revolving fund,
including loan servicing and providing
technical assistance, and must not
exceed the amount approved by the
Agency in the intermediary’s annual
budget.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Any cash in the IRP revolving fund
from any source that is not needed for
debt service, approved administrative
costs, or reasonable reserves must be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Jun 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
available for additional loans to ultimate
recipients. Funds may not be used for
any investments in securities or
certificates of deposit of over 30-day
duration without the concurrence of
Rural Development. If funds in excess of
$250,000 have been unused to make
loans to ultimate recipients for 6 months
or more, those funds will be returned to
Rural Development unless Rural
Development provides an exception to
the intermediary. Any exception would
be based on evidence satisfactory to
Rural Development that every effort is
being made by the intermediary to
utilize the IRP funding in conformance
with program objectives.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. Section 4274.338 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(9) and adding
paragraph (b)(10) to read as follows:
§ 4274.338 Loan agreements between the
Agency and the Intermediary.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(9) If any part of the loan has not been
used in accordance with the
intermediary’s work plan by a date 3
years from the date of the loan
agreement, the Agency may cancel the
approval of any funds not yet delivered
to the intermediary and the
intermediary will return, as an extra
payment on the loan, any funds
delivered to the intermediary that have
not been used by the intermediary in
accordance with the work plan. The
Agency, at its sole discretion, may allow
the intermediary additional time to use
the loan funds. Regular loan payments
will be based on the amount of funds
actually drawn by the intermediary.
(10) For IRP intermediaries, IRP funds
in excess of $250,000 that have not been
used to make loans to ultimate
recipients for 6 months or more will be
returned to Rural Development unless
Rural Development provides an
exception to the intermediary. Any
exception would be based on evidence
satisfactory to Rural Development that
every effort is being made by the
intermediary to utilize the IRP funding
in conformance with program
objectives.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Section 4274.361 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 4274.361 Requests to make loans to
ultimate recipients.
(a) An intermediary may use revolved
funds to make loans to ultimate
recipients in accordance with
§ 4274.314(b) without obtaining prior
Agency concurrence. Prior Agency
concurrence is required when an
intermediary proposes to use Agency
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
IRP loan funds to make a loan to an
ultimate recipient.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 20, 2014.
Douglas J. O’Brien.
Deputy Under Secretary, Rural Development.
Dated: May 15, 2014.
Michael T. Scuse,
Under Secretary, Farm and Foreign
Agricultural Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–12632 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0329; Notice No. 25–
14–03–SC]
Special Conditions: Bombardier
Aerospace, Models BD–500–1A10 and
BD–500–1A11 Series Airplanes; Tire
Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed special
conditions.
AGENCY:
This action proposes special
conditions for the Bombardier
Aerospace Models BD–500–1A10 and
BD–500–1A11 series airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual
design feature associated with the use of
carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP)
for most of the wing fuel tank structure,
which, when impacted by tire debris,
may resist penetration or rupture
differently from aluminum wing skins.
The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this
design feature. These proposed 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: Send your comments on or
before July 18, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by docket number FAA–2014–0329
using any of the following methods:
• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/and follow
the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take
comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12–140 of the West Building
Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all
comments it receives, without change,
to https://www.regulations.gov/,
including any personal information the
commenter provides. Using the search
function of the docket Web site, anyone
can find and read the electronic form of
all comments received into any FAA
docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or
signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement can be
found in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478),
as well as at https://DocketsInfo.dot.
gov/.
Docket: Background documents or
comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov/at any time.
Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Margaret Langsted, FAA, Propulsion
and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM–
112, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington,
98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2677;
facsimile 425–227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Comments Invited
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 will consider all comments we
receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We may change these special
conditions based on the comments we
receive.
Background
On December 10, 2009, Bombardier
Aerospace applied for a type certificate
for their new Models BD–500–1A10 and
BD–500–1A11 series airplanes (hereafter
collectively referred to as ‘‘CSeries’’).
The CSeries airplanes are swept-wing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:16 Jun 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
monoplanes with an aluminum alloy
fuselage sized for 5-abreast seating.
Passenger capacity is designated as 110
for the Model BD–500–1A10 and 125 for
the Model BD–500–1A11. Maximum
takeoff weight is 131,000 pounds for the
Model BD–500–1A10 and 144,000
pounds for the Model BD–500–1A11.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17,
Bombardier Aerospace must show that
the CSeries airplanes meet the
applicable provisions of part 25, as
amended by Amendments 25–1 through
25–129 thereto.
If the Administrator finds that the
applicable airworthiness regulations
(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
for the CSeries airplanes because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of § 21.16.
Special conditions are initially
applicable to the model for which they
are issued. Should the type certificate
for that model be amended later to
include any other model that
incorporates the same or similar novel
or unusual design feature, the special
conditions would also apply to the other
model under § 21.101.
In addition to the applicable
airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the CSeries 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, and the
FAA must issue a finding of regulatory
adequacy under § 611 of Public Law 92–
574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’
The FAA issues special conditions, as
defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance
with § 11.38, and they become part of
the type-certification basis under
§ 21.17(a)(2).
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The CSeries airplanes will incorporate
the following novel or unusual design
features: The use of carbon fiber
reinforced plastic (CFRP) for most of the
wing fuel tank structure. The ability of
aluminum wing skins to resist
penetration or rupture when impacted
by tire debris is understood from
extensive experience, but the ability of
CFRP construction to resist these
hazards has not been established. There
are no existing regulations that
adequately establish a level of safety
with respect to the performance of the
composite materials used in the
construction of wing fuel tanks. It
requires the consideration of fuel tank
penetration, fuel leaks, discrete source
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31887
damage tolerance, and the effects of
shock waves generated by tire debris
impact.
Discussion
Accidents have resulted from
uncontrolled fires caused by fuel leaks
following penetration or rupture of the
lower wing by fragments of tires or from
uncontained engine failure. The
Concorde accident in 2000 is the most
notable example. That accident
demonstrated an unanticipated failure
mode in an airplane with an unusual
transport airplane configuration. Impact
to the lower wing surface by tire debris
induced pressure waves within the fuel
tank that resulted in fuel leakage and
fire. Regulatory authorities subsequently
required modifications to the Concorde
to improve impact resistance of the
lower wing or means to retain fuel if the
primary fuel retention means is
damaged.
In another incident, a Boeing Model
747 tire burst during an aborted takeoff
from Honolulu, Hawaii. That tire debris
penetrated a fuel tank access cover,
causing substantial fuel leakage.
Passengers were evacuated down the
emergency chutes into pools of fuel that
fortunately had not ignited.
These accidents highlight deficiencies
in the existing regulations pertaining to
fuel retention following impact of the
fuel tanks by tire fragments. Following
a 1985 Boeing Model 737 accident in
Manchester, England, in which a fuel
tank access panel was penetrated by
engine debris, the FAA amended 14
CFR 25.963 to require fuel tank access
panels that are resistant to both tire and
engine debris (engine debris is
addressed elsewhere). This regulation,
§ 25.963(e), only addressed the fuel tank
access covers since service experience at
the time showed that the lower wing
skin of a conventional, subsonic
airplane provided adequate inherent
capability to resist tire and engine
debris threats. More specifically, that
regulation requires showing by analysis
or tests that the access covers ‘‘. . .
minimize penetration and deformation
by tire fragments, low energy engine
debris, or other likely debris.’’ Advisory
Circular (AC) 25.963–1, Fuel Tank
Access Covers, describes the region of
the wing that is vulnerable to impact
damage from these sources and provides
a method to substantiate that the rule
has been met for tire fragments. No
specific requirements were established
for the contiguous wing areas into
which the access covers are installed,
because of the inherent ability of
conventional aluminum wing skins to
resist penetration by tire debris. AC
25.963–1 specifically notes, ‘‘The access
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
31888
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
covers, however, need not be more
impact resistant than the contiguous
tank structure,’’ highlighting the
assumption that the wing structure is
more capable of resisting tire impact
debris than fuel tank access covers.
In order to maintain the level of safety
envisioned by 14 CFR 25.963(e), these
special conditions propose a standard
for resistance to potential tire debris
impacts to the contiguous wing surfaces
and require consideration of possible
secondary effects of a tire impact, such
as the induced pressure wave that was
a factor in the Concorde accident. It
takes into account that new construction
methods and materials will not
necessarily yield debris resistance that
has historically been shown as
adequate. The proposed standard is
based on the defined tire impact areas
and tire fragment characteristics.
In addition, despite practical design
considerations, some uncommon debris
larger than that defined in paragraph 2
may cause a fuel leak within the defined
area, so paragraph 3 of these proposed
special conditions also takes into
consideration possible leakage paths.
Fuel tank surfaces of typical transport
airplanes have thick aluminum
construction in the tire debris impact
areas that is tolerant to tire debris larger
than that defined in paragraph 2 of these
special conditions. Consideration of
leaks caused by larger tire fragments is
needed to ensure that an adequate level
of safety is provided.
These proposed 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.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special
conditions are applicable to the BD–
500–1A10 and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries)
airplanes. Should Bombardier
Aerospace apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include
another model incorporating the same
novel or unusual design feature, the
special conditions would apply to that
model as well.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel
or unusual design features on one model
series of airplanes. It is not a rule of
general applicability.
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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Jun 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 44704.
The Proposed Special Conditions
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of
the type certification basis for
Bombardier Aerospace BD–500–1A10
and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries) airplanes.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15,
2014.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–12691 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks
Federal Aviation Administration
1. Impacts by tire debris to any fuel
tank or fuel system component located
within 30 degrees to either side of wheel
rotational planes may not result in
penetration or otherwise induce fuel
tank deformation, rupture (for example,
through propagation of pressure waves),
or cracking sufficient to allow a
hazardous fuel leak. A hazardous fuel
leak results if debris impact to a fuel
tank surface causes a—
a. Running leak,
b. Dripping leak, or
c. Leak that, 15 minutes after wiping
dry, results in a wetted airplane surface
exceeding 6 inches in length or
diameter.
The leak must be evaluated under
maximum fuel head pressure.
2. Compliance with paragraph 1 must
be shown by analysis or tests assuming
all of the following:
a. The tire debris fragment size is 1
percent of the tire mass.
b. The tire debris fragment is
propelled at a tangential speed that
could be attained by a tire tread at the
airplane flight manual airplane
rotational speed (VR at maximum gross
weight).
c. The tire debris fragment load is
distributed over an area on the fuel tank
surface equal to 11⁄2 percent of the total
tire tread area.
3. Fuel leaks caused by impact from
tire debris larger than that specified in
paragraph 2, from any portion of a fuel
tank or fuel system component located
within the tire debris impact area
defined in paragraph 1, may not result
in hazardous quantities of fuel entering
any of the following areas of the
airplane:
a. Engine inlet,
b. Auxiliary power unit inlet, or
c. Cabin air inlet.
This must be shown by test or
analysis, or a combination of both, for
each approved engine forward thrust
condition and each approved reverse
thrust condition.
14 CFR Part 39
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0338; Directorate
Identifier 2014–CE–010–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Piper
Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA–31–350
airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a report of an engine fire
caused by a leak in the fuel pump inlet
hose. This proposed AD would require
inspecting the fuel hose assembly and
the turbocharger support assembly for
proper clearance between them,
inspecting each assembly for any sign of
damage, and making any necessary
repairs or replacements. We are
proposing this AD to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by July 18, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero
Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772)
567–4361; fax: (772) 978–6573; Internet:
www.piper.com/home/pages/
Publications.cfm. You may review
copies of the referenced service
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 3, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31886-31888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12691]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FAA-2014-0329; Notice No. 25-14-03-SC]
Special Conditions: Bombardier Aerospace, Models BD-500-1A10 and
BD-500-1A11 Series Airplanes; Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Bombardier
Aerospace Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with
the use of carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) for most of the wing
fuel tank structure, which, when impacted by tire debris, may resist
penetration or rupture differently from aluminum wing skins. The
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These proposed
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: Send your comments on or before July 18, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2014-0329
using any of the following methods:
Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
[[Page 31887]]
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/ gov/.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov/at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Langsted, FAA, Propulsion
and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM-112, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington, 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2677; facsimile 425-227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
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 will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the
comments we receive.
Background
On December 10, 2009, Bombardier Aerospace applied for a type
certificate for their new Models BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 series
airplanes (hereafter collectively referred to as ``CSeries''). The
CSeries airplanes are swept-wing monoplanes with an aluminum alloy
fuselage sized for 5-abreast seating. Passenger capacity is designated
as 110 for the Model BD-500-1A10 and 125 for the Model BD-500-1A11.
Maximum takeoff weight is 131,000 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A10 and
144,000 pounds for the Model BD-500-1A11.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.17, Bombardier Aerospace must show that the CSeries airplanes
meet the applicable provisions of part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-
1 through 25-129 thereto.
If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the CSeries airplanes because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under the provisions of Sec. 21.16.
Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec. 21.101.
In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the CSeries 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, and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under Sec. 611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec. 11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec. 21.17(a)(2).
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The CSeries airplanes will incorporate the following novel or
unusual design features: The use of carbon fiber reinforced plastic
(CFRP) for most of the wing fuel tank structure. The ability of
aluminum wing skins to resist penetration or rupture when impacted by
tire debris is understood from extensive experience, but the ability of
CFRP construction to resist these hazards has not been established.
There are no existing regulations that adequately establish a level of
safety with respect to the performance of the composite materials used
in the construction of wing fuel tanks. It requires the consideration
of fuel tank penetration, fuel leaks, discrete source damage tolerance,
and the effects of shock waves generated by tire debris impact.
Discussion
Accidents have resulted from uncontrolled fires caused by fuel
leaks following penetration or rupture of the lower wing by fragments
of tires or from uncontained engine failure. The Concorde accident in
2000 is the most notable example. That accident demonstrated an
unanticipated failure mode in an airplane with an unusual transport
airplane configuration. Impact to the lower wing surface by tire debris
induced pressure waves within the fuel tank that resulted in fuel
leakage and fire. Regulatory authorities subsequently required
modifications to the Concorde to improve impact resistance of the lower
wing or means to retain fuel if the primary fuel retention means is
damaged.
In another incident, a Boeing Model 747 tire burst during an
aborted takeoff from Honolulu, Hawaii. That tire debris penetrated a
fuel tank access cover, causing substantial fuel leakage. Passengers
were evacuated down the emergency chutes into pools of fuel that
fortunately had not ignited.
These accidents highlight deficiencies in the existing regulations
pertaining to fuel retention following impact of the fuel tanks by tire
fragments. Following a 1985 Boeing Model 737 accident in Manchester,
England, in which a fuel tank access panel was penetrated by engine
debris, the FAA amended 14 CFR 25.963 to require fuel tank access
panels that are resistant to both tire and engine debris (engine debris
is addressed elsewhere). This regulation, Sec. 25.963(e), only
addressed the fuel tank access covers since service experience at the
time showed that the lower wing skin of a conventional, subsonic
airplane provided adequate inherent capability to resist tire and
engine debris threats. More specifically, that regulation requires
showing by analysis or tests that the access covers ``. . . minimize
penetration and deformation by tire fragments, low energy engine
debris, or other likely debris.'' Advisory Circular (AC) 25.963-1, Fuel
Tank Access Covers, describes the region of the wing that is vulnerable
to impact damage from these sources and provides a method to
substantiate that the rule has been met for tire fragments. No specific
requirements were established for the contiguous wing areas into which
the access covers are installed, because of the inherent ability of
conventional aluminum wing skins to resist penetration by tire debris.
AC 25.963-1 specifically notes, ``The access
[[Page 31888]]
covers, however, need not be more impact resistant than the contiguous
tank structure,'' highlighting the assumption that the wing structure
is more capable of resisting tire impact debris than fuel tank access
covers.
In order to maintain the level of safety envisioned by 14 CFR
25.963(e), these special conditions propose a standard for resistance
to potential tire debris impacts to the contiguous wing surfaces and
require consideration of possible secondary effects of a tire impact,
such as the induced pressure wave that was a factor in the Concorde
accident. It takes into account that new construction methods and
materials will not necessarily yield debris resistance that has
historically been shown as adequate. The proposed standard is based on
the defined tire impact areas and tire fragment characteristics.
In addition, despite practical design considerations, some uncommon
debris larger than that defined in paragraph 2 may cause a fuel leak
within the defined area, so paragraph 3 of these proposed special
conditions also takes into consideration possible leakage paths. Fuel
tank surfaces of typical transport airplanes have thick aluminum
construction in the tire debris impact areas that is tolerant to tire
debris larger than that defined in paragraph 2 of these special
conditions. Consideration of leaks caused by larger tire fragments is
needed to ensure that an adequate level of safety is provided.
These proposed 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.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 (CSeries) airplanes. Should Bombardier
Aerospace apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to
include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design
feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.
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 Proposed Special Conditions
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Bombardier Aerospace BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 (CSeries)
airplanes.
Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks
1. Impacts by tire debris to any fuel tank or fuel system component
located within 30 degrees to either side of wheel rotational planes may
not result in penetration or otherwise induce fuel tank deformation,
rupture (for example, through propagation of pressure waves), or
cracking sufficient to allow a hazardous fuel leak. A hazardous fuel
leak results if debris impact to a fuel tank surface causes a--
a. Running leak,
b. Dripping leak, or
c. Leak that, 15 minutes after wiping dry, results in a wetted
airplane surface exceeding 6 inches in length or diameter.
The leak must be evaluated under maximum fuel head pressure.
2. Compliance with paragraph 1 must be shown by analysis or tests
assuming all of the following:
a. The tire debris fragment size is 1 percent of the tire mass.
b. The tire debris fragment is propelled at a tangential speed that
could be attained by a tire tread at the airplane flight manual
airplane rotational speed (VR at maximum gross weight).
c. The tire debris fragment load is distributed over an area on the
fuel tank surface equal to 1\1/2\ percent of the total tire tread area.
3. Fuel leaks caused by impact from tire debris larger than that
specified in paragraph 2, from any portion of a fuel tank or fuel
system component located within the tire debris impact area defined in
paragraph 1, may not result in hazardous quantities of fuel entering
any of the following areas of the airplane:
a. Engine inlet,
b. Auxiliary power unit inlet, or
c. Cabin air inlet.
This must be shown by test or analysis, or a combination of both,
for each approved engine forward thrust condition and each approved
reverse thrust condition.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 2014.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-12691 Filed 6-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P