Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards-Fire Extinguishers and Class B and F Cargo Compartments, 7698-7704 [2016-03000]

Agencies

• Federal Aviation Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7698-7704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03000]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No.: FAA-2014-0001; Amdt. No. 25-141]
RIN 2120-AK29


Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--Fire Extinguishers and 
Class B and F Cargo Compartments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is amending certain airworthiness regulations for 
transport category airplanes by upgrading fire safety standards for 
Class B cargo compartments; establishing fire safety standards for a 
new type of cargo compartment, Class F; and updating related standards 
for fire extinguishers. This amendment is based on recommendations from 
the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) and the National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and the changes address designs for 
which airworthiness directives (ADs) have been issued by both the FAA 
and the French civil aviation authority, Direction 
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC).
    This amendment eliminates certain regulatory differences between 
the airworthiness standards of the FAA and the European Aviation Safety 
Agency (EASA), without affecting current industry design practices. 
These changes ensure an acceptable level of safety for these types of 
cargo compartments by standardizing certain requirements and 
procedures.

DATES: Effective April 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking 
documents

[[Page 7699]]

and other information related to this final rule, see ``How To Obtain 
Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning 
this action, contact Stephen M. Happenny, Propulsion/Mechanical Systems 
Branch, ANM-112, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, 
WA 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2147; facsimile (425) 227 1232; 
email: stephen.happenny@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes 
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, the FAA is charged with promoting 
safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations and minimum standards for the design and performance of 
aircraft that the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air 
commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because 
it prescribes new safety standards for the design and operation of 
transport category airplanes.

I. Overview of Final Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 
part 25 as described below. This action harmonizes part 25 requirements 
for fire extinguishers and cargo compartments with the corresponding 
requirements in EASA Certification Specifications and Acceptable Means 
of Compliance for Large Aeroplanes (CS-25).
    This amendment defines a new classification of cargo compartment, 
Class F, with certification standards similar to those for Class C 
compartments. Class F cargo compartments have no size limit, but must 
be located on the main deck of the airplane. They must have a liner 
that meets the fire resistance requirements for Class C compartments, 
unless the proposed design provides other means to contain a fire and 
protect critical systems and structure. If a Class F cargo compartment 
is accessible to crewmembers in flight, at least one readily accessible 
fire extinguisher must be available for the crew's use. If a proposed 
Class F cargo compartment incorporates a built-in fire extinguishing 
system, the applicant must conduct flight tests to demonstrate that 
there are means to extinguish or control a fire without requiring a 
crewmember to enter the compartment, and hazardous quantities of 
extinguishing agent are excluded from any compartment occupied by crew 
or passengers. The floor panels of Class F cargo compartments must also 
be self-extinguishing under certain flammability tests in appendix F to 
part 25, and ceiling and sidewall liner panels must meet the flame 
penetration resistance test requirements of part III of appendix F.
    In addition, this amendment requires Class B cargo compartments to 
have a defined firefighting access point that will allow a crewmember 
to fight a fire without stepping into the compartment. This requirement 
will indirectly limit the size of those compartments.
    Finally, this amendment clarifies what the FAA considers 
``adequate'' capacity for built-in fire extinguishing systems.
    Manufacturers and modifiers seeking FAA type certification already 
use the principles of these changes through equivalent level of safety 
findings and special conditions. Harmonizing FAA and EASA requirements 
will benefit these applicants by providing a single set of 
requirements, thereby reducing the cost and complexity of certification 
and codifying a consistent level of safety.
    The changes apply to new airplane designs only, not to existing 
airplanes. Applicability to derivative airplanes or changed products 
will be determined according to 14 CFR 21.101, ``Designation of 
applicable regulations.''

II. Background

A. Statement of the Problem

    This rulemaking addresses the problem of fire safety of cargo 
compartments on passenger airplanes, specifically the need to detect 
and extinguish cargo compartment fires in a manner that is prompt, 
reliable, and without hazard to crew or passengers. The EASA enacted 
standards addressing those issues, and this amendment harmonizes with 
those standards.
    The revised standards stem from actions following a 1987 accident 
that were discussed in detail in the notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM), published in the Federal Register July 7, 2014 (79 FR 38266). 
In summary, a fire occurred in the Class B cargo compartment of a 
Boeing Model 747-244B airplane operated by South African Airways. It 
was carrying both passengers and cargo on the main deck, a 
configuration known as a ``combi'' and classified under FAA regulations 
as a Class B cargo compartment. The airplane crashed in the Indian 
Ocean about 140 miles northeast of Mauritius. All people aboard the 
airplane perished.
    The South African Board of Inquiry reported that (1) there was 
clear indication that a fire broke out on a right-hand front pallet 
(one of six) in the main deck cargo hold, and (2) the fire could not be 
controlled and consequently led to the crash.
    An FAA Review Team evaluated the fire protection requirements in 
Class B cargo compartments at that time and issued the following 
findings and conclusions: \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ FAA Review Team report, ``Evaluation of Transport Airplane 
Main Deck Cargo Compartment Fire Protection Certification 
Procedures,'' June 1, 1988, available in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Existing rules, policies, and procedures for the certification 
of Class B cargo or baggage compartments for smoke and fire protection 
were inadequate.
    2. The required quantity of fire extinguishing agent and the number 
of portable fire extinguishers were inadequate.
    3. The use of pallets to carry cargo in Class B compartments was no 
longer acceptable.
    4. While entry into the cargo compartment was available, not all 
cargo was accessible.
    5. The reliance on crewmembers to fight a cargo fire had to be 
discontinued.
    This accident led to further investigations and the formation of 
industry and FAA study groups, including the ARAC and associated 
working groups, the Cargo Standards Harmonization Working Group (CSHWG) 
and the Mechanical Systems Harmonization Working Group (MSHWG). The 
findings and recommendations from these groups underscored the need to 
limit the size of, and enhance fire detection and suppression in, Class 
B compartments. They also recommended creating a new classification of 
cargo compartments on the main deck (Class F cargo compartment) with 
enhanced fire detection and suppression, and standardization of 
guidance for testing of fire extinguishing agent concentration.
    The ARAC, in a related tasking, recommended harmonization of FAA 
regulations with EASA standards for cargo compartments and associated 
fire extinguishers.

[[Page 7700]]

    These findings and recommendations, and the FAA's support of the 
harmonization effort with EASA, formed the basis for this rulemaking.

B. Related Actions

    In response to the South African Airways accident, the FAA and the 
DGAC issued airworthiness directives (ADs) that require operational and 
procedural changes, additional equipment, and enhanced fire detection 
and suppression systems on applicable large, main-deck combi airplanes. 
These ADs provide options to the operators of the affected airplanes 
for achieving an adequate level of safety. The enhanced fire detection 
and suppression system standards of the ADs require modification of the 
design of Class B cargo compartments to either comply with the 
requirements for a Class C cargo compartment or incorporate other 
specified safeguards.
    This amendment and associated guidance material encompass the 
enhanced standards and options included in the ADs.

C. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Recommendations

    The NTSB investigated the South African 747-244B accident and 
issued the following safety recommendations:
    1. A-88-61. Until fire detection and suppression methods for Class 
B cargo compartment fires were evaluated and revised, as necessary, the 
NTSB recommended that the FAA require all cargo carried in Class B 
cargo compartments of U.S.-registered transport category airplanes be 
carried in fire resistant containers.
    The FAA addressed this recommendation with current AD 93-07-15. The 
revisions in this amendment to the cargo compartment fire protection 
requirements and to part 25, appendix F, part I for fire testing 
requirements also address this recommendation.
    2. A-88-62. The NTSB recommended that the FAA research the fire 
detection and suppression methods needed to protect transport category 
airplanes from catastrophic fires in Class B compartments.
    To address this recommendation, the FAA and Europe's Joint Aviation 
Authorities (JAA), the predecessor to EASA, researched whether Class B 
cargo compartments might be unsafe. Both authorities concluded that 
entering the compartment to combat a fire was ineffective for cargo 
compartments larger than 200 cubic feet in volume and that tests with 
actual fires should be conducted to more closely establish the maximum 
safe size. The conclusions of these and other tests, as detailed in the 
NPRM, were that, when standing at an access point, the person fighting 
the fire must be able to reach any part of the compartment with the 
contents of a hand fire extinguisher, and that access should be a 
function of how the compartment was configured rather than by volume. 
The revisions to Sec.  25.857(b)(2) in this amendment address these 
conclusions.
    3. A-88-63. The NTSB recommended that the FAA establish fire 
resistance requirements for the ceiling and sidewall liners in Class B 
cargo compartments of transport category airplanes that equal or exceed 
the requirements for Class C as set forth in 14 CFR part 25, appendix 
F, part III.
    The current AD and the revisions to cargo compartment 
classifications in this amendment address this recommendation.

D. Summary of the NPRM

    On June 26, 2014, the FAA issued an NPRM to amend Sec. Sec.  
25.851, 25.855, and 25.857. The Federal Register published NPRM Notice 
No. 14-06, Docket No. FAA-2014-0001, on July 7, 2014 (79 FR 38266). In 
the NPRM, the FAA proposed to:
    1. Extend the hand fire extinguisher and built-in fire extinguisher 
requirements for Class A, B, C, or E cargo or baggage compartments to a 
new Class F accessible cargo or baggage compartment;
    2. Revise the requirements for built-in fire extinguishing and 
suppression systems to clarify that the capacity of the system must be 
adequate to respond to a fire that could occur in any part of the cargo 
compartment where cargo or baggage is placed;
    3. Extend the material standards and design considerations for 
cargo compartment interiors and the requirement for flight test to 
demonstrate compliance with Sec.  25.857 regarding the dissipation of 
extinguishing agent to include the new Class F cargo compartments (with 
designs that incorporate a built-in fire extinguisher/suppression 
system); and
    4. Indirectly limit the size of a Class B cargo compartment by 
requiring a defined firefighting access point that will allow a 
crewmember to fight a fire without stepping into the compartment.
    The comment period closed on October 6, 2014.

E. General Overview of Comments

    The FAA received eight (8) comments from five (5) commenters 
representing airplane manufacturers, material manufacturers, and 
pilots. All of the commenters generally supported the proposed changes; 
however, some commenters suggested changes, as discussed more fully in 
the discussion of the final rule below. The Air Line Pilots Association 
International and SABIC Innovative Plastics concurred with the proposal 
without comment.

III. Discussion of the Final Rule and Public Comments

A. New Class F Cargo Compartments

    This final rule establishes a new classification, Class F, for 
cargo or baggage compartments. The design requirements for Class F 
cargo compartments are set forth in new Sec.  25.857(f). We are also 
amending Sec. Sec.  25.851 and 25.855, and appendix F to part 25 to 
include the new Class F compartment in their applicability.
1. ``Cargo Compartment Classification,'' (Sec.  25.857)
    With one modification from what the FAA proposed in the NPRM, Sec.  
25.857(f) requires Class F compartments to be located on the main deck; 
have a separate approved smoke or fire detection system that provides a 
warning on the flight deck; have a means to exclude smoke, flames, or 
extinguishing agent from crew or passenger compartments; and have a 
means to control or extinguish a fire without requiring a crewmember to 
enter the compartment. This new class of cargo compartments is added to 
harmonize with EASA and provide a flexible option for cargo compartment 
certification.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For example, the requirement that a Class F compartment have 
a means to control or extinguish a fire without crewmember entry 
allows flexibility in design. A proposed design may rely on a 
crewmember to control or extinguish a fire using a hand fire 
extinguisher without entering the compartment, similar to Class B 
compartments, or it could employ another means of compliance such as 
a built-in fire extinguishing/suppression system similar to Class C 
compartments. The FAA anticipates analyzing a variety of proposed 
designs for Class F cargo compartments. Alternative processes for 
approval, such as special conditions and equivalent level of safety 
findings, will remain available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the FAA originally proposed in the NPRM that Class F cargo 
compartments be readily accessible in flight, it is not adopting that 
proposed requirement. One of the purposes of this rulemaking is to 
harmonize with EASA. As noted in a comment by Boeing Commercial 
Airplanes (Boeing), EASA's rule does not include that requirement. The 
FAA concluded that requiring Class F cargo compartments to be readily 
accessible in flight would go beyond EASA's rule (CS 25.855 and 25.857, 
equivalent to 14 CFR 25.855 and 25.857) and associated Acceptable Means 
of Compliance (AMC). It would also be

[[Page 7701]]

unduly restrictive. For example, the FAA currently certifies certain 
compartments that are not accessible in flight by using the Class C 
compartment requirements. As explained in the NPRM, a Class F cargo 
compartment located on the main deck and using a built-in fire 
suppression system would meet the requirements of a Class C cargo 
compartment, without accessibility. Therefore, accessibility in flight 
is an option, but not a requirement, for Class F cargo compartments.
    Boeing also commented that requiring Class F cargo compartments to 
be located on the main deck would not harmonize with EASA's rule. The 
FAA's requirement is consistent with EASA's certification policy. 
EASA's AMC states that, ``It is not envisaged that lower deck cargo 
compartments be approved as Class F cargo compartments.'' The FAA 
agrees with EASA's position; however, instead of stating this position 
in guidance material as EASA did, the FAA opted to include it in the 
regulation. Since this is a harmonization rule, the FAA confirmed with 
EASA \3\ that the FAA rule has the same intent as the corresponding 
EASA rule and AMC. Therefore, Sec.  25.857(f) requires that Class F 
cargo compartments be located on the main deck of the airplane.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Details of the communication are in the docket.
    \4\ An editorial change from ``is located on the main deck'' to 
``must be located on the main deck'' is adopted in this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. ``Fire Extinguishers'' (Sec.  25.851)
    As proposed in the NPRM, Sec.  25.851(a)(3), ``Hand fire 
extinguishers,'' adds Class F cargo compartments that are accessible in 
flight to the types of cargo compartments that must have hand fire 
extinguishers. This requirement is consistent with the FAA's prior 
regulatory practice for accessible cargo compartments and is harmonized 
with EASA's corresponding regulation.
    Embraer commented that the proposed Sec.  25.851(a)(3) would 
require an applicant to have one hand fire extinguisher in Class F 
cargo compartments despite any other fire extinguishing means that may 
be present, such as a built-in fire extinguishing system or fire 
containment covers.
    This comment overlooks one of the conditions for requiring a hand 
fire extinguisher. Only those Class F cargo compartments that are 
accessible in flight must meet this requirement, so that hand fire 
extinguishers would not be required for all Class F compartments. Even 
for compartments that are accessible in flight and have a built-in fire 
extinguishing system, the presence of a hand fire extinguisher should, 
in most circumstances, mitigate the additional risk presented by 
accessibility.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ An exception would be a proposed Class F cargo compartment 
for which the combination of accessibility and use of a hand fire 
extinguisher would create additional risk. For example, a proposed 
design that included a fire-resistant cargo container with a built-
in fire suppression unit would likely be safer if the compartment 
and container were left unopened.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 25.851(b)(2), ``Built-in fire extinguishers,'' describes 
the required capacity of built-in fire extinguishing systems. The FAA 
revises paragraph (b)(2), as proposed in the NPRM, to clarify what the 
FAA will accept as ``adequate'' capacity of built-in fire extinguishing 
systems. The revised rule states that a built-in fire extinguishing 
system is adequate if there is sufficient quantity of agent to 
extinguish the fire or suppress the fire anywhere baggage or cargo is 
placed within the cargo compartment for the time required to land and 
evacuate the airplane. The FAA is taking this step to harmonize with 
EASA and because testing has shown that current methods of compliance 
are inadequate.
    Boeing recommended against this requirement because it is not 
included in EASA CS 25.851(b)(2). The FAA is adopting this 
clarification to ensure its enforceability. The FAA coordinated this 
addition with EASA \6\ and ensured that this rule has the same effect 
as the corresponding EASA rule and AMC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Details of the communications are in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. ``Cargo and Baggage Compartments,'' (Sec.  25.855)
    Sections 25.855(b) and (c) now include the new Class F compartment 
in those compartments that are required to have a liner that meets the 
flame penetration standards required for Class C cargo compartments, 
unless the proposed design provides other means to contain a fire and 
protect critical systems and structure.
    One material manufacturer, Du Pont Protection Technologies (Du 
Pont), recommended, in addition to requiring such liners, the 
enhancement of material standards and design considerations for Class B 
and F cargo compartment interiors. Specifically, Du Pont suggested 
requiring the use of fire resistant unit load devices and fire 
containment covers that meet part 25, appendix F, part III flame 
penetration resistance test requirements in all Class F cargo 
compartments in addition to, rather than as an alternative to, 
requiring cargo compartment liners that meet the same test criteria. 
While the FAA appreciates the commenter's intent of providing improved 
fire protection, the proposed additional requirements are unnecessarily 
burdensome and restrictive, and therefore not adopted.
    Section 25.855(h)(3) is revised to extend the requirement for 
flight tests to those Class F cargo compartments that have built-in 
fire extinguishers in order to demonstrate compliance with Sec.  
25.857.
    Also, as a minor correction from what was proposed in the NPRM, 
this rule changes ``or'' to ``and'' to clarify that the flight test 
requirement in Sec.  25.855(h)(3) applies to both Class C compartments 
and applicable Class F compartments. The rule now states, ``The 
dissipation of the extinguishing agent in all Class C compartments and, 
if applicable, in any Class F compartment.''
4. Flammability Requirements of Class F Compartment Floor Panels 
(Appendix F to Part 25)
    The FAA is including Class F as a compartment that must meet the 
flammability standards for certain materials used in interior 
compartments of airplanes. Specifically, Class F floor panels must meet 
the standards in part I of appendix F to part 25, ``Test Criteria and 
Procedures for Showing Compliance with Sec.  25.853 or Sec.  25.855,'' 
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(iii).

B. Class B Cargo or Baggage Compartments

    As proposed in the NPRM, Sec.  25.857(b)(1) now requires sufficient 
access in flight to enable a crewmember, standing at any one access 
point and without stepping into a Class B compartment, to extinguish a 
fire occurring in any part of the compartment using a hand fire 
extinguisher. As discussed in the NPRM, this requirement will have the 
effect of limiting the size of Class B compartments.

C. Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule

    The rule text as proposed in the NPRM is adopted with one 
exception. As explained above, Class F cargo or baggage compartments 
are not required to be readily accessible in flight.

E. Advisory Material

    On July 9, 2014, the FAA published and solicited public comments on 
two proposed advisory circulars (ACs) that describe acceptable means 
for showing compliance with the NPRM's proposed regulations. The 
comment period for the proposed ACs closed on October 6, 2014. The FAA 
received 7 comments

[[Page 7702]]

from 2 commenters representing airplane and helicopter manufacturers on 
proposed AC 25.851-1; and 12 comments from 5 commenters representing 
airplane manufacturers, an airplane equipment manufacturer, and 
industry standards committees on proposed AC 25.857-1. All of the 
commenters generally supported the proposed ACs; however, some 
commenters suggested changes. The FAA added clarification to the 
guidance in the ACs but did not change the regulatory requirements as a 
result of the comments to the proposed ACs. Concurrent with this final 
rule, the FAA is issuing the following final ACs to provide guidance 
material for the new regulations adopted by this amendment:
     AC 25.851-1, ``Built-in Fire Extinguishing/Suppression 
Systems in Class C and Class F Cargo Compartments.''
     AC 25.857-1, ``Class B and F Cargo Compartments.''

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct that each 
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its 
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354), 
as codified in 5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires agencies to analyze the 
economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the 
Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits agencies from setting 
standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires 
agencies to consider international standards and, where appropriate, 
that they be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. 1532, 
requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of 
the economic impacts of this final rule.
    Department of Transportation (DOT) Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes 
policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of 
regulations. If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed 
or final rule does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits 
that a statement to that effect and the basis for it be included in the 
preamble if a full regulatory evaluation of the costs and benefits is 
not prepared. Such a determination has been made for this final rule. 
The reasoning for this determination follows.
    The FAA tasked the ARAC through the Cargo Standards Harmonization 
Working Group and the Mechanical Systems Harmonization Working Group to 
review existing part 25 cargo compartments and fire extinguisher 
regulations and to recommend changes that would eliminate differences 
between the U.S. and the European airworthiness standards, while 
maintaining or improving the level of safety in the current 
regulations. The FAA agrees with the ARAC recommendations to harmonize 
airworthiness standards for cargo compartments and associated fire 
extinguishers with the corresponding EASA regulations, which were 
incorporated into the CS-25 requirements in 2007 and 2009. The final 
rule eliminates differences between the U.S. and European airworthiness 
standards.
    The final rule applies to new airplane designs only and revises 
Sec. Sec.  25.851, ``Fire extinguishers;'' 25.855, ``Cargo or baggage 
compartments;'' 25.857, ``Cargo compartment classification;'' and part 
25, appendix F, part I, ``Test Criteria and Procedures for Showing 
Compliance with Sec.  25.853, or Sec.  25.855.'' A review of U.S. 
manufacturers of transport category airplanes revealed that these 
manufacturers intend to fully comply with the EASA standards (or are 
already complying). In the NPRM, the FAA stated this rule imposes no 
more than minimal cost, and cost-savings could occur. The FAA asked for 
comment on the cost estimates and received none. The FAA has therefore 
determined that this final rule will impose at most minimal cost with 
possible cost-savings and does not warrant a full regulatory 
evaluation.
    The FAA has also determined that this final rule is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866 and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are 
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to 
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals 
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small 
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and 
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the 
agency may so certify, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required. The certification must include a statement providing the 
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.
    Small Business Administration size standards specify aircraft 
manufacturing firms having less than 1,500 employees as small. However, 
there are no U.S. manufacturers of part 25 airplanes with less than 
1,500 employees. Moreover, the final rule has no cost. The FAA made a 
similar determination for the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, 
and we received no comments. Therefore, as provided in Sec.  605(b), 
the head of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking will not result in a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related 
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are 
not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires 
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that 
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this rule and has

[[Page 7703]]

determined that the rule is in accord with the Trade Agreements Act as 
the rule uses European standards as the basis for U.S. standards.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement 
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final 
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more 
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate 
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently 
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155.0 million in lieu of $100 
million. This rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires 
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information 
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that 
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with 
this final rule.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and 
has identified no differences with these regulations.
    Executive Order (EO) 13609, Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation, [77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012] promotes international 
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health, 
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and reduce, 
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory 
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policy and 
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, Promoting 
International Regulatory Cooperation. The agency has determined that 
this action eliminates differences between U.S. aviation standards and 
those of other civil aviation authorities by creating a single set of 
certification requirements for transport category airplanes that is 
acceptable in both the United States and Europe.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically 
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy 
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has 
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical 
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f of Order 1050.1E and involves no 
extraordinary circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined 
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the 
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have Federalism 
implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

VI. How To Obtain Additional Information

A. Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by 
using the Internet--
    1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by 
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket

    Comments received may be viewed by going to https://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions to search the 
docket number for this action. Anyone is able to search the electronic 
form of all comments received into any of the FAA's dockets by the name 
of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if 
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).

C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information 
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its 
jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this document, 
may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble. 
To find out more about SBREFA on the Internet, visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 25--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRPLANES

0
1. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Amend Sec.  25.851 by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(2) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  25.851  Fire extinguishers.

    (a) * * *
    (3) At least one readily accessible hand fire extinguisher must be 
available for use in each Class A or Class B cargo or baggage 
compartment and in each Class E or Class F cargo or baggage compartment 
that is accessible to crewmembers in flight.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) The capacity of each required built-in fire extinguishing 
system must be adequate for any fire likely to occur in the compartment 
where used,

[[Page 7704]]

considering the volume of the compartment and the ventilation rate. The 
capacity of each system is adequate if there is sufficient quantity of 
agent to extinguish the fire or suppress the fire anywhere baggage or 
cargo is placed within the cargo compartment for the duration required 
to land and evacuate the airplane.

0
3. Amend Sec.  25.855 by revising paragraphs (b), (c), and (h)(3) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  25.855  Cargo or baggage compartments.

* * * * *
    (b) Each of the following cargo or baggage compartments, as defined 
in Sec.  25.857, must have a liner that is separate from, but may be 
attached to, the airplane structure:
    (1) Any Class B through Class E cargo or baggage compartment, and
    (2) Any Class F cargo or baggage compartment, unless other means of 
containing a fire and protecting critical systems and structure are 
provided.
    (c) Ceiling and sidewall liner panels of Class C cargo or baggage 
compartments, and ceiling and sidewall liner panels in Class F cargo or 
baggage compartments, if installed to meet the requirements of 
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, must meet the test requirements of 
part III of appendix F of this part or other approved equivalent 
methods.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (3) The dissipation of the extinguishing agent in all Class C 
compartments and, if applicable, in any Class F compartments.
* * * * *


0
4. Amend Sec.  25.857 by revising paragraph (b)(1) and adding paragraph 
(f) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.857  Cargo compartment classification.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) There is sufficient access in flight to enable a crewmember, 
standing at any one access point and without stepping into the 
compartment, to extinguish a fire occurring in any part of the 
compartment using a hand fire extinguisher;
* * * * *
    (f) Class F. A Class F cargo or baggage compartment must be located 
on the main deck and is one in which--
    (1) There is a separate approved smoke detector or fire detector 
system to give warning at the pilot or flight engineer station;
    (2) There are means to extinguish or control a fire without 
requiring a crewmember to enter the compartment; and
    (3) There are means to exclude hazardous quantities of smoke, 
flames, or extinguishing agent from any compartment occupied by the 
crew or passengers.


0
5. Amend appendix F to part 25 by revising the heading for part I and 
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(iii) under part 1 to read as follows:

APPENDIX F TO PART 25

Part I--Test Criteria and Procedures for Showing Compliance With Sec.  
25.853 or Sec.  25.855

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Floor covering, textiles (including draperies and 
upholstery), seat cushions, padding, decorative and non-decorative 
coated fabrics, leather, trays and galley furnishings, electrical 
conduit, air ducting, joint and edge covering, liners of Class B and 
E cargo or baggage compartments, floor panels of Class B, C, E, or F 
cargo or baggage compartments, cargo covers and transparencies, 
molded and thermoformed parts, air ducting joints, and trim strips 
(decorative and chafing), that are constructed of materials not 
covered in paragraph (a)(1)(iv) below, must be self-extinguishing 
when tested vertically in accordance with the applicable portions of 
part I of this appendix or other approved equivalent means. The 
average burn length may not exceed 8 inches, and the average flame 
time after removal of the flame source may not exceed 15 seconds. 
Drippings from the test specimen may not continue to flame for more 
than an average of 5 seconds after falling.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) A cargo or baggage compartment defined in Sec.  25.857 as 
Class B, C, E, or F must have floor panels constructed of materials 
which meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of part I of 
this appendix and which are separated from the airplane structure 
(except for attachments). Such panels must be subjected to the 45 
degree angle test. The flame may not penetrate (pass through) the 
material during application of the flame or subsequent to its 
removal. The average flame time after removal of the flame source 
may not exceed 15 seconds, and the average glow time may not exceed 
10 seconds.
* * * * *

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), 
and 44702 in Washington, DC, on January 29, 2016.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-03000 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P