Federal Aviation Administration December 23, 2010 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 1 - 10 of 10
Fifteenth Meeting: EUROCAE WG-72: RTCA Special Committee 216: Aeronautical Systems Security (Joint Meeting)
The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of EUROCAE WG-72: RTCA Special Committee 216: Aeronautical Systems Security (Joint Meeting).
Third Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 224: Airport Security Access Control Systems
The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 224: Airport Security Access Control Systems.
Ninth Meeting-RTCA Special Committee 220: Automatic Flight Guidance and Control
The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 220: Automatic Flight Guidance and Control.
Special Conditions: Gulfstream Model GVI Airplane; High Incidence Protection
This action proposes special conditions for the Gulfstream GVI airplane. This airplane will have novel or unusual design features when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes associated with the use of high incidence protection. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for these design features. These proposed special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.
Interpretation of Rest Requirements
This action proposes to interpret the application of 14 CFR 135.263 and the rest requirements of Sec. 135.267(d) to situations in which a flight crewmember's flight time exceeds the permissible limits due to circumstances beyond his or her control. As discussed below, the FAA issued several interpretations addressing this issue in the 1990s. However, because the proposed interpretation relies heavily on a seminal FAA interpretation issued in 2000, the proposed interpretation would supersede any previous contrary interpretations of Sec. Sec. 135.263 and 135.267(d).
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 Airplanes
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD- 87) and MD-88 airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking of the left and right upper center skin panels of the horizontal stabilizer, and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a crack found in the upper skin panel at the aft inboard corner of a right horizontal stabilizer. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracks in the horizontal stabilizer upper center skin panel. Uncorrected cracks might ultimately lead to the loss of overall structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, and -300ER Series Airplanes
We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, and -300ER series airplanes. The original NPRM would have required doing an inspection to identify the part number of the motor operated valve (MOV) actuators of the main and center fuel tanks; replacing certain MOV actuators with new MOV actuators; and measuring the electrical resistance of the bond from the adapter plate to the airplane structure, and doing corrective actions if necessary. The original NPRM also would have required revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. The original NPRM resulted from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. This action revises the original NPRM by adding airplanes to the applicability. This action also revises the original NPRM by removing the requirement for revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent electrical current from flowing through an MOV actuator into a fuel tank, which could create a potential ignition source inside the fuel tank. This condition, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model MD-90-30 Airplanes
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Model MD-90-30 airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking of the left and right upper center skin panels of the horizontal stabilizer, and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a crack found in the upper skin panel at the aft inboard corner of a right horizontal stabilizer. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracks in the horizontal stabilizer upper center skin panel. Uncorrected cracks might ultimately lead to the loss of overall structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
This establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
