Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the Yamaha Fazer R, 19021-19024 [2018-09102]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules exemptions are needed to protect information relating to DHS activities from disclosure to subjects or others related to these activities. Specifically, the exemptions are required to avoid disclosure of screening techniques; to protect the identities and physical safety of confidential informants and law enforcement personnel; to ensure DHS’s ability to obtain information from third parties and other sources; to protect the privacy of third parties; and to safeguard classified information. Disclosure of information to the subject of the inquiry could also permit the subject to avoid detection or apprehension. In appropriate circumstances, when compliance would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the law enforcement purposes of this system and the overall law enforcement process, the applicable exemptions may be waived on a case by case basis. A notice of system of records for DHS/ ALL–039 Foreign Access Management System of Records is also published in this issue of the Federal Register. List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 Freedom of information, Privacy. For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS proposes to amend chapter I of title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION 1. Revise the authority citation for Part 5 to read as follows: ■ Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135; 5 U.S.C. 301. 2. Amend appendix C to part 5 by adding paragraph 78: ■ Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy Act amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * 78. The DHS/ALL–039 Foreign Access Management System of Records consists of electronic and paper records and will be used by DHS and its components. The DHS/ALL– 039 Foreign Access Management System of Records is a repository of information held by DHS in connection with its several and varied missions and functions, including, but not limited to the enforcement of civil and criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, and proceedings there under; and national security and intelligence activities. The DHS/ ALL–039 Foreign Access Management System of Records contains information that is collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation with DHS and its components and may contain personally identifiable information collected by other federal, state, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. The Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5), has exempted this system from the VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). When a record received from another system has been exempted in that source system under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), DHS will claim the same exemptions for those records that are claimed for the original primary systems of records from which they originated and claims any additional exemptions set forth here. Exemptions from these particular subsections are justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a request is made, for the following reasons: (a) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement efforts and efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension, which would undermine the entire investigative process. When an investigation has been completed, information on disclosures made may continue to be exempted if the fact that an investigation occurred remains sensitive after completion. (b) From subsection (d) (Access and Amendment to Records) because access to the records contained in this system of records could inform the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS or another agency. Access to the records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension. Amendment of the records could interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and would impose an unreasonable administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continually reinvestigated. In addition, permitting access and amendment to such information could disclose security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to homeland security. (c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of Information) because in the course of investigations into potential violations of federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or introduced occasionally may be unclear, or the information may not be strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information that may aid in establishing patterns of unlawful activity. (d) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) (Agency Rules), because portions of this system are exempt from the individual access provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 19021 noted above, and therefore DHS is not required to establish requirements, rules, or procedures with respect to such access. Providing notice to individuals with respect to existence of records pertaining to them in the system of records or otherwise setting up procedures pursuant to which individuals may access and view records pertaining to themselves in the system would undermine investigative efforts and reveal the identities of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and confidential informants. Philip S. Kaplan, Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. 2018–09195 Filed 4–30–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 21 [Docket No. FAA–2018–0379] Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the Yamaha Fazer R Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed airworthiness criteria. AGENCY: The FAA announces the availability of and requests comments on proposed airworthiness criteria for an unmanned aircraft system, Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A., model Fazer R. This document proposes policy for a special class of aircraft, to designate airworthiness criteria found by the FAA to provide an equivalent level of safety, for this proposed design, to existing standards. SUMMARY: Send comments on or before May 31, 2018. ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA–2018–0379 using any of the following methods: D Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically. D 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. D Hand Delivery of 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. DATES: E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1 19022 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules D Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202–493–2251. Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket website, 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 http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at http://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: Mr. Quentin Coon, AIR–692, Federal Aviation Administration, Policy & Innovation Division, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106, telephone (816) 329– 4168, facsimile (816) 329–4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite interested people to take part in the development of these airworthiness criteria by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the airworthiness criteria, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments. We will consider all comments received on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these airworthiness criteria based on received comments. amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS Background Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. (Yamaha) applied to the FAA on April 28, 2017 for special class type certification under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17(b) for the Fazer R Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). The Fazer R UAS (Fazer R) consists of the Unmanned Aircraft (UA), flight transmitter ground control VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 station, and payload spray system. The Fazer R is a vertical take-off UAS that is of the traditional main/tail rotor helicopter design. Its intended primary use is conducting crop-spraying operations in the agricultural industry. The aircraft and payload spray system would weigh approximately 244 lbs with full fuel and oil tanks, and be able to carry a payload of approximately 105 lbs. The main rotor is just over nine feet in diameter, and the aircraft would be just over three feet high and 12 feet long with a carbon frame. The aircraft would be powered by a fuel-injected 2-cylinder engine running on regular gasoline. The aircraft would have a ‘‘Turn Assistance’’ function that enables automatic turning to facilitate back-and-forth agricultural operations. The proposed policy was developed in order to establish performance-based airworthiness criteria appropriate for the Yamaha Fazer R. Discussion The FAA establishes airworthiness criteria to ensure the safe operation of aircraft in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44701(a) and 44704. The applicant has proposed a design with constraints upon its operations and an unusual design characteristic: The pilot is remotely located. The FAA proposes that existing airworthiness criteria, including Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 23 and 27, do not provide criteria appropriate to the proposed design. The FAA proposes this aircraft is a ‘‘special class’’ under 14 CFR 21.17(b), and proposes that the following airworthiness criteria are appropriate for this aircraft and would provide an equivalent level of safety to existing airworthiness standards. These proposed airworthiness criteria differ from those in 14 CFR parts 23 and 27 due to the aircraft’s design, which includes various constraints upon the aircraft’s operation. These constraints include its relatively small size, lack of humans on board, and operations that would be limited to remote locations, low altitude, and visual range of a trained flight crew. The FAA has reviewed the proposed design and assessed the potential risk to the National Aerospace System (NAS). The FAA took into consideration the size of the proposed aircraft, its maximum airspeed and altitude, and operational limitations such as where it would operate and whether it would operate out of sight of its operators. These factors allowed the FAA to estimate the kinetic energy of the proposed design when in operation, and the potential risk the aircraft could pose PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 to other aircraft and people and property nearby. Using these types of parameters, the FAA developed airworthiness criteria appropriate for that risk to ensure the aircraft remains reliable, controllable, safe, and airworthy. The particular airworthiness criteria proposed by this notice were selected for the following reasons: UAS Concept of Operations: To assist the FAA in identifying and analyzing the risks and impacts associated with integrating the Fazer R proposed design into the NAS, the applicant would be required to submit a Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The CONOPS identifies the applicant’s proposed operational concepts for this aircraft and would contain a description of the UAS and its operation. UAS Means of Compliance: To address the risks associated with inadequate or incomplete showings of compliance to the performance-based criteria described in this notice, the proposed airworthiness criteria include a requirement that the applicant only utilize a means of compliance accepted by the FAA, in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 23.2010–1. UAS Operational Envelope and Limitations: In order to ensure the UAS is operated only in accordance with its type design, the applicant must define the operational envelope and proposed operational limitations. The applicant would be required to show that the UAS can be operated safely and reliably within the operational envelope and limitations, mitigating the hazards that could result from an unconstrained operating envelope. UAS Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA): To address the risks associated with degradation of the aircraft caused by age and use, and to ensure that the UAS can be maintained for safe operation, the applicant would be required to prepare Instructions for Continued Airworthiness for the UAS that are accepted by the FAA, in accordance with FAA Order 8110.54A. The proposed criteria are derived from 14 CFR parts 23 and 27, and past FAA practices, but are tailored for this proposed design. UAS Flight Manual: To address the risks associated with improper operation of the UAS, such as flight above the approved operating altitude, at weights above maximum takeoff weight, and at speeds greater than the maximum allowed speed, the applicant would be required to provide a flight manual. The manual would be used to ensure that the flight crew operates the aircraft only within the proposed operational envelope and limitations. E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1 amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules UAS Flight Testing: To address the risks associated with inadequate design and integration, the applicant would be required to conduct flight testing to demonstrate adequate structure, system reliability, and proper function. UAS Critical Parts: To ensure the continued airworthiness of the aircraft and address the risks of castrophic failure, which is a failure that causes a fatal injury or results in destruction of the UAS, the applicant would be required to identify those parts that could cause a catastrophic event upon failure. Those parts must be properly maintained to prevent a catastrophic failure. UAS Controls: To address the risks associated with loss of control of the UAS caused by the failure or improper use of UAS controls, the applicant would be required to design controls that are adequate to safely and reliably control the UAS. UAS Flight Termination System: To address the risks associated with uncontrolled flight and inadvertent or unsafe operation, the applicant would be required to provide a means to quickly and safely terminate the UAS flight. UAS Engine and Engine Control System: To address the risks associated with failure or loss of control of the powerplant, the applicant would be required to design the engine and engine controls so that they are durable and reliable. UAS Powerplant Installation: To address the risks associated with failure of the powerplant installation that includes each component necessary for propulsion or that affects propulsion safety, the applicant would be required to design the powerplant installation to ensure its continued safe operation. UAS Systems and Equipment: To address the risks associated with the failure or malfunction of electric and mechanical systems and equipment, the applicant would be required to design and install the systems and equipment to perform safely and reliably their intended function when considered separately and in relation to other systems. UAS Communication: To address the risks associated with loss of communication between the flight crew members and between the flight crew and the UA, the applicant would be required to provide an FAA approved means that allows for all communication necessary to safely operate the UA. UAS Interference from External Sources: To address the risks associated with cyber threats and system failures or malfunctions, the applicant would be VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 required to design the UAS’ electronic systems and networks to protect against and minimize the effects of intentional and unintentional external interference. UAS Interference with Other Aircraft or Obstacles: To address the risks associated with collisions with obstacles and other aircraft, the applicant would be required to use an FAA accepted means of compliance showing how the UAS will remain well clear of obstacles and other aircraft so as to avoid the risk of collision. Operational Considerations The following operational considerations were derived from the applicant’s CONOPS, which helped drive the development of these proposed airworthiness criteria. The aircraft would: 1. Be primarily used for agricultural use to include spraying, sensing, and imaging. 2. Operate in remote or sparsely populated areas. 3. Not operate over people and occupied vehicles on roads and highways. 4. Operate at 400 feet above ground level (AGL) or lower. 5. Operate at a maximum altitude of 6,500 feet above mean sea level (MSL). 6. Be operated within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) as defined in 14 CFR part 107.31, Visual line-of-sight aircraft operation. 7. Be operated by a minimum flight crew consisting of one pilot-incommand (PIC) and one visual observer. 8. Be operated by a flight crew that is appropriately qualified and trained. 9. Be operated by a minimum flight crew that would operate only one UAS at any time. 10. Be operated by a flight crew that has successfully completed required flight crew training. 11. Be maintained by persons who hold required FAA maintenance certificates or work according to an FAA approved maintenance program. 12. Be maintained by persons who have completed required maintenance training. 13. Be equipped with caution and alerting annunciation that is visible to the PIC and visual observer during flight. 14. Remain within Radio Line-ofSight (RLOS) of the control station. RLOS is the straight and unobstructed path between the transmitting and receiving antennas. 15. Electronically communicate between the UA and the ground control station only within frequencies approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 19023 16. Operate in Class G airspace unless specifically authorized by the FAA. 17. Operate subject to minimum setback distances that define how far people must be from the UA, the control station, and the operating zone when the UA is operating. 18. Operate within specific meteorological conditions that define permissible wind speeds, turbulence, visibility, outside air temperature, or other parameters as identified. The UAS would not operate in icing conditions, in accordance with 14 CFR 91.527. 19. Operate in day Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC). Note: A change to the CONOPS may require a change to the airworthiness criteria. Proposed Airworthiness Criteria The FAA proposes to establish, as a matter of policy, the following airworthiness criteria for type certification of the Yamaha Fazer R. The FAA proposes that compliance with the following would appropriately mitigate the risks associated with the proposed design and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and would provide an equivalent level of safety to existing rules: UAS Concept of Operations: The applicant must define and submit to the FAA a (CONOPS) proposal describing the intended UAS operation in the National Airspace System (NAS). UAS Accepted Means of Compliance: 1. An applicant must comply with these airworthiness criteria using a means of compliance, which may include consensus standards, accepted by the FAA. 2. An applicant requesting acceptance of a means of compliance must provide the means of compliance to the FAA in a form and manner acceptable to the FAA. UAS Operational Envelope and Limitations: The operational envelope and operational limitations must be defined: 1. The UAS must be shown to perform as intended within the defined operational envelope and operational limitations. 2. The UAS must be consistently and predictably controllable and maneuverable within the operating envelope, including: (a) At all loading conditions for which certification is requested; (b) During all phases of flight; and (c) During configuration changes. UAS Instructions for Continued Airworthiness: The applicant must prepare Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) for the UAS that are acceptable to the FAA. The ICA may E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1 amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS 19024 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules be incomplete at type certification if a program exists to ensure their completion prior to delivery of the first UAS or issuance of a standard certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs later. The ICA must contain a section titled Airworthiness Limitations that is segregated and clearly distinguishable from the rest of the document. This section must set forth each mandatory replacement time, structural inspection interval, and related structural inspection procedure required for type certification. If the ICA consist of multiple documents, the section required by this paragraph must be included in the principal manual. This section must contain a legible statement in a prominent location that reads ‘‘The Airworthiness Limitations section is FAA approved and specifies maintenance conducted under §§ 43.16 and 91.403 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations unless an alternative program has been FAA approved.’’ UAS Flight Manual: The applicant must provide a UAS Flight Manual with each UAS. The UAS Flight Manual must contain the following information— (a) UAS operating limitations; (b) UAS normal and emergency operating procedures; (c) Performance information; (d) Loading information; and (e) Other information that is necessary for safe operation because of design, operating, or handling characteristics. UAS Flight Testing: The UAS must successfully complete at least 150 hours of flight testing to determine whether there is reasonable assurance that the UAS, its components, its equipment, and structures are adequate, reliable, and function properly. The testing must consist of: 1. At least 50 hours with the Unmanned Aircraft (UA) at 5 percent over maximum weight at critical weight, altitude, and temperature; and 2. At least 100 hours in normal operations. UAS Critical Parts: A critical part is a part, the failure of which could have a catastrophic effect upon the UAS. If the type design includes critical parts, a critical parts list must be established. The applicant must develop and define inspections or other procedures to prevent failures due to degradation of critical parts. Each of these inspections or procedures must be included in the Airworthiness Limitations Section of the ICA. UAS Controls: 1. Flight Controls: The applicant must design the flight control systems and control station to: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 (a) Operate easily, smoothly, and positively enough to allow proper performance of their functions, and (b) Protect against likely hazards. 2. Flight Crew Interface: The control station must be designed to allow the flight crew to perform their duties and to perform any maneuvers within the operating envelope of the UAS, without excessive concentration, skill, alertness, or fatigue considering the intended operating conditions for the control station. 3. Equipment: The applicant must define and install necessary equipment so the flight crew can monitor and perform defined tasks associated with the intended functions of the systems and equipment. 4. Flight Crew Error: The UAS must be designed to minimize flight crew errors which could result in additional hazards. UAS Flight Termination System: 1. There must be a means for the flight crew to quickly and safely terminate the UA flight. 2. The UAS must have a means to safely terminate the UA flight when safe operation cannot continue or be maintained. 3. There must be means to prevent inadvertent operation of the flight termination system. UAS Engine and Engine Control System: 1. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System includes each component necessary for propulsion or which affects propulsion safety. 2. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System installation must be designed, constructed, installed, and maintained to ensure its continued safe operation within the operational envelope between normal inspections and overhauls. 3. The UAS Engine Control System including any Engine Control Unit (ECU) software or electronic hardware must be designed and developed using methods accepted by the FAA. 4. The applicant must identify the UAS Engine and Engine Control System failure modes and effects that may result in a catastrophic condition to the UAS. The applicant must mitigate each hazard to a level acceptable to the FAA. 5. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System operability, durability and reliability must be demonstrated. UAS Powerplant Installation: 1. The powerplant installation includes each part of the UAS (other than the main and auxiliary rotor structures) that— (a) Is necessary for propulsion; (b) Affects the control of the major propulsive units; or PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (c) Affects the safety of the major propulsive units between normal inspections or overhauls. 2. Each component of the powerplant installation must be constructed, arranged, and installed to ensure its continued safe operation between normal inspections or overhauls for the range of temperature and altitude for which approval is requested. UAS Systems and Equipment: This requirement applies to the UAS unless another requirement has been imposed for a specific piece of equipment, system, or systems. The UAS systems and equipment, including any software or electronic hardware, must be designed and developed using methods accepted by the FAA. 1. The systems and equipment required for a UAS to operate safely in the kinds of operations for which certification is requested must be designed and installed to perform their intended function throughout the operating and environmental limits for which the UAS is certificated. 2. All systems and equipment not covered by paragraph 1 of this section, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed and installed so their operation or failure, does not have an adverse effect on the UAS. UAS Communication: 1. The applicant must define the type, methods, and operational limits of communication, including the mitigation of any hazard created by any loss of communication between the flight crew and between the flight crew and the UAS. 2. A means must be provided to allow for all communication necessary to safely operate the UA. UAS Interference from External Sources: The design must minimize the risks associated with interference to UAS electronic systems and networks from external sources. UAS Interference with Other Aircraft or Obstacles: The UAS must have a means to remain well clear of obstacles and other aircraft for its intended operation and airspace to avoid the risk of collision. Note: The FAA may propose amending this airworthiness criteria, or propose additional operational criteria, prior to approval of the type design. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 23, 2018. Pat Mullen, Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2018–09102 Filed 4–30–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19021-19024]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09102]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 21

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0379]


Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for 
the Yamaha Fazer R

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed airworthiness criteria.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA announces the availability of and requests comments on 
proposed airworthiness criteria for an unmanned aircraft system, Yamaha 
Motor Corporation, U.S.A., model Fazer R. This document proposes policy 
for a special class of aircraft, to designate airworthiness criteria 
found by the FAA to provide an equivalent level of safety, for this 
proposed design, to existing standards.

DATES: Send comments on or before May 31, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0379 
using any of the following methods:
    [ssquf] Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
    [ssquf] 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.
    [ssquf] Hand Delivery of 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.

[[Page 19022]]

    [ssquf] Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without 
change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information 
the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket 
website, 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 http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at 
http://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: Mr. Quentin Coon, AIR-692, Federal 
Aviation Administration, Policy & Innovation Division, Small Airplane 
Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, 
Kansas City, MO 64106, telephone (816) 329-4168, facsimile (816) 329-
4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in the development of 
these airworthiness criteria by sending written comments, data, or 
views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the 
airworthiness criteria, explain the reason for any recommended change, 
and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of 
written comments.
    We will consider all comments received on or before the closing 
date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is 
possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change 
these airworthiness criteria based on received comments.

Background

    Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. (Yamaha) applied to the FAA on 
April 28, 2017 for special class type certification under Title 14, 
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17(b) for the Fazer R Unmanned 
Aircraft System (UAS). The Fazer R UAS (Fazer R) consists of the 
Unmanned Aircraft (UA), flight transmitter ground control station, and 
payload spray system. The Fazer R is a vertical take-off UAS that is of 
the traditional main/tail rotor helicopter design. Its intended primary 
use is conducting crop-spraying operations in the agricultural 
industry.
    The aircraft and payload spray system would weigh approximately 244 
lbs with full fuel and oil tanks, and be able to carry a payload of 
approximately 105 lbs. The main rotor is just over nine feet in 
diameter, and the aircraft would be just over three feet high and 12 
feet long with a carbon frame. The aircraft would be powered by a fuel-
injected 2-cylinder engine running on regular gasoline. The aircraft 
would have a ``Turn Assistance'' function that enables automatic 
turning to facilitate back-and-forth agricultural operations.
    The proposed policy was developed in order to establish 
performance-based airworthiness criteria appropriate for the Yamaha 
Fazer R.

Discussion

    The FAA establishes airworthiness criteria to ensure the safe 
operation of aircraft in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44701(a) and 44704. 
The applicant has proposed a design with constraints upon its 
operations and an unusual design characteristic: The pilot is remotely 
located. The FAA proposes that existing airworthiness criteria, 
including Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 23 and 
27, do not provide criteria appropriate to the proposed design.
    The FAA proposes this aircraft is a ``special class'' under 14 CFR 
21.17(b), and proposes that the following airworthiness criteria are 
appropriate for this aircraft and would provide an equivalent level of 
safety to existing airworthiness standards. These proposed 
airworthiness criteria differ from those in 14 CFR parts 23 and 27 due 
to the aircraft's design, which includes various constraints upon the 
aircraft's operation. These constraints include its relatively small 
size, lack of humans on board, and operations that would be limited to 
remote locations, low altitude, and visual range of a trained flight 
crew.
    The FAA has reviewed the proposed design and assessed the potential 
risk to the National Aerospace System (NAS). The FAA took into 
consideration the size of the proposed aircraft, its maximum airspeed 
and altitude, and operational limitations such as where it would 
operate and whether it would operate out of sight of its operators. 
These factors allowed the FAA to estimate the kinetic energy of the 
proposed design when in operation, and the potential risk the aircraft 
could pose to other aircraft and people and property nearby. Using 
these types of parameters, the FAA developed airworthiness criteria 
appropriate for that risk to ensure the aircraft remains reliable, 
controllable, safe, and airworthy.
    The particular airworthiness criteria proposed by this notice were 
selected for the following reasons:
    UAS Concept of Operations: To assist the FAA in identifying and 
analyzing the risks and impacts associated with integrating the Fazer R 
proposed design into the NAS, the applicant would be required to submit 
a Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The CONOPS identifies the applicant's 
proposed operational concepts for this aircraft and would contain a 
description of the UAS and its operation.
    UAS Means of Compliance: To address the risks associated with 
inadequate or incomplete showings of compliance to the performance-
based criteria described in this notice, the proposed airworthiness 
criteria include a requirement that the applicant only utilize a means 
of compliance accepted by the FAA, in accordance with FAA Advisory 
Circular 23.2010-1.
    UAS Operational Envelope and Limitations: In order to ensure the 
UAS is operated only in accordance with its type design, the applicant 
must define the operational envelope and proposed operational 
limitations. The applicant would be required to show that the UAS can 
be operated safely and reliably within the operational envelope and 
limitations, mitigating the hazards that could result from an 
unconstrained operating envelope.
    UAS Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA): To address the 
risks associated with degradation of the aircraft caused by age and 
use, and to ensure that the UAS can be maintained for safe operation, 
the applicant would be required to prepare Instructions for Continued 
Airworthiness for the UAS that are accepted by the FAA, in accordance 
with FAA Order 8110.54A. The proposed criteria are derived from 14 CFR 
parts 23 and 27, and past FAA practices, but are tailored for this 
proposed design.
    UAS Flight Manual: To address the risks associated with improper 
operation of the UAS, such as flight above the approved operating 
altitude, at weights above maximum takeoff weight, and at speeds 
greater than the maximum allowed speed, the applicant would be required 
to provide a flight manual. The manual would be used to ensure that the 
flight crew operates the aircraft only within the proposed operational 
envelope and limitations.

[[Page 19023]]

    UAS Flight Testing: To address the risks associated with inadequate 
design and integration, the applicant would be required to conduct 
flight testing to demonstrate adequate structure, system reliability, 
and proper function.
    UAS Critical Parts: To ensure the continued airworthiness of the 
aircraft and address the risks of castrophic failure, which is a 
failure that causes a fatal injury or results in destruction of the 
UAS, the applicant would be required to identify those parts that could 
cause a catastrophic event upon failure. Those parts must be properly 
maintained to prevent a catastrophic failure.
    UAS Controls: To address the risks associated with loss of control 
of the UAS caused by the failure or improper use of UAS controls, the 
applicant would be required to design controls that are adequate to 
safely and reliably control the UAS.
    UAS Flight Termination System: To address the risks associated with 
uncontrolled flight and inadvertent or unsafe operation, the applicant 
would be required to provide a means to quickly and safely terminate 
the UAS flight.
    UAS Engine and Engine Control System: To address the risks 
associated with failure or loss of control of the powerplant, the 
applicant would be required to design the engine and engine controls so 
that they are durable and reliable.
    UAS Powerplant Installation: To address the risks associated with 
failure of the powerplant installation that includes each component 
necessary for propulsion or that affects propulsion safety, the 
applicant would be required to design the powerplant installation to 
ensure its continued safe operation.
    UAS Systems and Equipment: To address the risks associated with the 
failure or malfunction of electric and mechanical systems and 
equipment, the applicant would be required to design and install the 
systems and equipment to perform safely and reliably their intended 
function when considered separately and in relation to other systems.
    UAS Communication: To address the risks associated with loss of 
communication between the flight crew members and between the flight 
crew and the UA, the applicant would be required to provide an FAA 
approved means that allows for all communication necessary to safely 
operate the UA.
    UAS Interference from External Sources: To address the risks 
associated with cyber threats and system failures or malfunctions, the 
applicant would be required to design the UAS' electronic systems and 
networks to protect against and minimize the effects of intentional and 
unintentional external interference.
    UAS Interference with Other Aircraft or Obstacles: To address the 
risks associated with collisions with obstacles and other aircraft, the 
applicant would be required to use an FAA accepted means of compliance 
showing how the UAS will remain well clear of obstacles and other 
aircraft so as to avoid the risk of collision.

Operational Considerations

    The following operational considerations were derived from the 
applicant's CONOPS, which helped drive the development of these 
proposed airworthiness criteria. The aircraft would:
    1. Be primarily used for agricultural use to include spraying, 
sensing, and imaging.
    2. Operate in remote or sparsely populated areas.
    3. Not operate over people and occupied vehicles on roads and 
highways.
    4. Operate at 400 feet above ground level (AGL) or lower.
    5. Operate at a maximum altitude of 6,500 feet above mean sea level 
(MSL).
    6. Be operated within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) as defined in 14 
CFR part 107.31, Visual line-of-sight aircraft operation.
    7. Be operated by a minimum flight crew consisting of one pilot-in-
command (PIC) and one visual observer.
    8. Be operated by a flight crew that is appropriately qualified and 
trained.
    9. Be operated by a minimum flight crew that would operate only one 
UAS at any time.
    10. Be operated by a flight crew that has successfully completed 
required flight crew training.
    11. Be maintained by persons who hold required FAA maintenance 
certificates or work according to an FAA approved maintenance program.
    12. Be maintained by persons who have completed required 
maintenance training.
    13. Be equipped with caution and alerting annunciation that is 
visible to the PIC and visual observer during flight.
    14. Remain within Radio Line-of-Sight (RLOS) of the control 
station. RLOS is the straight and unobstructed path between the 
transmitting and receiving antennas.
    15. Electronically communicate between the UA and the ground 
control station only within frequencies approved by the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC).
    16. Operate in Class G airspace unless specifically authorized by 
the FAA.
    17. Operate subject to minimum setback distances that define how 
far people must be from the UA, the control station, and the operating 
zone when the UA is operating.
    18. Operate within specific meteorological conditions that define 
permissible wind speeds, turbulence, visibility, outside air 
temperature, or other parameters as identified. The UAS would not 
operate in icing conditions, in accordance with 14 CFR 91.527.
    19. Operate in day Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC).

    Note: A change to the CONOPS may require a change to the 
airworthiness criteria.

Proposed Airworthiness Criteria

    The FAA proposes to establish, as a matter of policy, the following 
airworthiness criteria for type certification of the Yamaha Fazer R. 
The FAA proposes that compliance with the following would appropriately 
mitigate the risks associated with the proposed design and Concept of 
Operations (CONOPS) and would provide an equivalent level of safety to 
existing rules:
    UAS Concept of Operations: The applicant must define and submit to 
the FAA a (CONOPS) proposal describing the intended UAS operation in 
the National Airspace System (NAS).
    UAS Accepted Means of Compliance:
    1. An applicant must comply with these airworthiness criteria using 
a means of compliance, which may include consensus standards, accepted 
by the FAA.
    2. An applicant requesting acceptance of a means of compliance must 
provide the means of compliance to the FAA in a form and manner 
acceptable to the FAA.
    UAS Operational Envelope and Limitations: The operational envelope 
and operational limitations must be defined:
    1. The UAS must be shown to perform as intended within the defined 
operational envelope and operational limitations.
    2. The UAS must be consistently and predictably controllable and 
maneuverable within the operating envelope, including:
    (a) At all loading conditions for which certification is requested;
    (b) During all phases of flight; and
    (c) During configuration changes.
    UAS Instructions for Continued Airworthiness: The applicant must 
prepare Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) for the UAS that 
are acceptable to the FAA. The ICA may

[[Page 19024]]

be incomplete at type certification if a program exists to ensure their 
completion prior to delivery of the first UAS or issuance of a standard 
certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs later.
    The ICA must contain a section titled Airworthiness Limitations 
that is segregated and clearly distinguishable from the rest of the 
document. This section must set forth each mandatory replacement time, 
structural inspection interval, and related structural inspection 
procedure required for type certification. If the ICA consist of 
multiple documents, the section required by this paragraph must be 
included in the principal manual. This section must contain a legible 
statement in a prominent location that reads ``The Airworthiness 
Limitations section is FAA approved and specifies maintenance conducted 
under Sec. Sec.  43.16 and 91.403 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations unless an alternative program has been FAA approved.''
    UAS Flight Manual: The applicant must provide a UAS Flight Manual 
with each UAS. The UAS Flight Manual must contain the following 
information--
    (a) UAS operating limitations;
    (b) UAS normal and emergency operating procedures;
    (c) Performance information;
    (d) Loading information; and
    (e) Other information that is necessary for safe operation because 
of design, operating, or handling characteristics.
    UAS Flight Testing: The UAS must successfully complete at least 150 
hours of flight testing to determine whether there is reasonable 
assurance that the UAS, its components, its equipment, and structures 
are adequate, reliable, and function properly. The testing must consist 
of:
    1. At least 50 hours with the Unmanned Aircraft (UA) at 5 percent 
over maximum weight at critical weight, altitude, and temperature; and
    2. At least 100 hours in normal operations.
    UAS Critical Parts: A critical part is a part, the failure of which 
could have a catastrophic effect upon the UAS. If the type design 
includes critical parts, a critical parts list must be established.
    The applicant must develop and define inspections or other 
procedures to prevent failures due to degradation of critical parts. 
Each of these inspections or procedures must be included in the 
Airworthiness Limitations Section of the ICA.
    UAS Controls:
    1. Flight Controls: The applicant must design the flight control 
systems and control station to:
    (a) Operate easily, smoothly, and positively enough to allow proper 
performance of their functions, and
    (b) Protect against likely hazards.
    2. Flight Crew Interface: The control station must be designed to 
allow the flight crew to perform their duties and to perform any 
maneuvers within the operating envelope of the UAS, without excessive 
concentration, skill, alertness, or fatigue considering the intended 
operating conditions for the control station.
    3. Equipment: The applicant must define and install necessary 
equipment so the flight crew can monitor and perform defined tasks 
associated with the intended functions of the systems and equipment.
    4. Flight Crew Error: The UAS must be designed to minimize flight 
crew errors which could result in additional hazards.
    UAS Flight Termination System:
    1. There must be a means for the flight crew to quickly and safely 
terminate the UA flight.
    2. The UAS must have a means to safely terminate the UA flight when 
safe operation cannot continue or be maintained.
    3. There must be means to prevent inadvertent operation of the 
flight termination system.
    UAS Engine and Engine Control System:
    1. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System includes each component 
necessary for propulsion or which affects propulsion safety.
    2. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System installation must be 
designed, constructed, installed, and maintained to ensure its 
continued safe operation within the operational envelope between normal 
inspections and overhauls.
    3. The UAS Engine Control System including any Engine Control Unit 
(ECU) software or electronic hardware must be designed and developed 
using methods accepted by the FAA.
    4. The applicant must identify the UAS Engine and Engine Control 
System failure modes and effects that may result in a catastrophic 
condition to the UAS. The applicant must mitigate each hazard to a 
level acceptable to the FAA.
    5. The UAS Engine and Engine Control System operability, durability 
and reliability must be demonstrated.
    UAS Powerplant Installation:
    1. The powerplant installation includes each part of the UAS (other 
than the main and auxiliary rotor structures) that--
    (a) Is necessary for propulsion;
    (b) Affects the control of the major propulsive units; or
    (c) Affects the safety of the major propulsive units between normal 
inspections or overhauls.
    2. Each component of the powerplant installation must be 
constructed, arranged, and installed to ensure its continued safe 
operation between normal inspections or overhauls for the range of 
temperature and altitude for which approval is requested.
    UAS Systems and Equipment: This requirement applies to the UAS 
unless another requirement has been imposed for a specific piece of 
equipment, system, or systems. The UAS systems and equipment, including 
any software or electronic hardware, must be designed and developed 
using methods accepted by the FAA.
    1. The systems and equipment required for a UAS to operate safely 
in the kinds of operations for which certification is requested must be 
designed and installed to perform their intended function throughout 
the operating and environmental limits for which the UAS is 
certificated.
    2. All systems and equipment not covered by paragraph 1 of this 
section, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must 
be designed and installed so their operation or failure, does not have 
an adverse effect on the UAS.
    UAS Communication:
    1. The applicant must define the type, methods, and operational 
limits of communication, including the mitigation of any hazard created 
by any loss of communication between the flight crew and between the 
flight crew and the UAS.
    2. A means must be provided to allow for all communication 
necessary to safely operate the UA.
    UAS Interference from External Sources: The design must minimize 
the risks associated with interference to UAS electronic systems and 
networks from external sources.
    UAS Interference with Other Aircraft or Obstacles: The UAS must 
have a means to remain well clear of obstacles and other aircraft for 
its intended operation and airspace to avoid the risk of collision.

    Note: The FAA may propose amending this airworthiness criteria, 
or propose additional operational criteria, prior to approval of the 
type design.


    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 23, 2018.
Pat Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-09102 Filed 4-30-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P