Federal Aviation Administration July 30, 2012 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of three teleconferences of the Systems Working Group of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC). The teleconferences will take place on: Tuesday August 14, 2012, Tuesday September 18, 2012, and Tuesday October 23, 2012. All teleconferences will begin at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time and will last approximately one hour. Individuals who plan to participate should contact Susan Lender, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), (the Contact Person listed below) by phone or email for the teleconference call in number. The purpose of these three teleconferences is to assist the FAA early in its development of regulations to protect occupants of commercial suborbital and orbital spacecraft. Although the FAA has not yet targeted a date for proposing regulations to protect the health and safety of crew and space flight participants, the FAA believes that the development of sound and appropriate regulations for human space flight can only be achieved with a deliberate, multi-year effort. Moreover, the FAA believes that early industry input into this regulatory effort before any formal proposal by the FAA is critical. Thus, the FAA would like to engage with COMSTAC on a periodic basis, approximately once per month, on specific topics. The topics for the first three teleconferences are as follows: (1) What Level of Safety Should FAA Target? We will discuss whether the FAA should regulate to one or multiple levels of space flight safety, what level or levels of safety the FAA should attempt to achieve, and whether the level or levels of safety should be quantified. We will also discuss what level of care, short of a fatality, the FAA should be concerned with. (2) What Should FAA Oversight Look Like? Aircraft-like certification is not feasible at this time, due to current technology and the FAA's statutory mandate only to pursue minimal regulations that take into consideration the evolving standards of safety in the commercial space flight industry. 51 U.S.C. 50905(c)(3). We will discuss what a licensing process should look like in terms of FAA oversight, whether such oversight could or should be called a ``certification,'' and for how long informed consent should remain in effect. (3) What Types of Requirements and Associated Guidance Material Should FAA Develop? In general, the FAA favors space transportation regulations that are performance or process based. We will discuss the level of empirical or analytical data necessary to justify any performance-based human space flight regulation, the possible use of Advisory Circulars to add clarity to regulations, and what place government and industry standards should have in FAA licensing. Interested members of the public may submit relevant written statements for the COMSTAC working group members to consider under the advisory process. Statements may concern the issues and agenda items mentioned above or additional issues that may be relevant for the U.S. commercial space transportation industry. Interested parties wishing to submit written statements should contact Susan Lender, DFO, (the Contact Person listed below) in writing (mail or email) by August 7, 2012, for the August 14 teleconference, September 11, 2012, for the September 18 teleconference, and October 16, 2012, for the October 23 teleconference. This way the information can be made available to COMSTAC members for their review and consideration before each teleconference. Written statements should be supplied in the following formats: one hard copy with original signature or one electronic copy via email. The FAA may schedule up to 10 more teleconferences in the coming months to allow the U.S. commercial space transportation industry to share views with the FAA on a number of specific topics related to commercial human space flight safety. An agenda will be posted on the FAA Web site at https://www.faa.gov/ go/ast. Individuals who plan to participate and need special assistance should inform the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Alpha Aviation Concept Limited Model R2160 Airplanes. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as possible installation of non-conforming air filter elements that are not fitted with metallic mesh and could internally collapse resulting in disruption of the powerplant operation. We are issuing this proposed AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these products.

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Gulfstream Aerospace LP (Type Certificate previously held by Israel Aircraft Industries, Ltd.) Model Astra SPX, 1125 Westwind Astra, and Gulfstream 100 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report indicating that sponge rubber padding was found between wheel well fuel lines and electrical harnesses. This AD requires inspecting for the presence of sponge rubber padding and for proper separation of the fuel lines and electrical harnesses in the wheel well area, and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion or chafing of the fuel lines, which could result in fuel leakage and possible fire in the wheel well area.

This action proposes a policy, based on Federal law, concerning through-the-fence access to a federally obligated airport from an adjacent or nearby property, when that property is used as a residence. This proposed policy limits application of the FAA's previously published interim policy (76 FR 15028; March 18, 2011) to commercial service airports that certified existing residential through-the-fence access agreements. In addition, this notice proposes to rescind applicability of the interim policy with regard to certain general aviation airports consistent with section 136 of Public Law 112-95 and describes how the FAA will interpret provisions of this law pertaining to residential through-the-fence access. When the FAA adopted its interim policy on access to airports from residential property, the FAA announced its intent to initiate another policy review in 2014. This supplemental policy review will no longer be necessary.

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. (previously Utah State University); Firefly Aviation Helicopter Services (previously Erickson Air-Crane Co.); California Department of Forestry; Garlick Helicopters, Inc.; Global Helicopter Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC (previously Western International Aviation, Inc.); International Helicopters, Inc.; Precision Helicopters, LLC; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; San Joaquin Helicopters (previously Hawkins and Powers Aviation, Inc.); S.M.&T. Aircraft (previously US Helicopters, Inc., UNC Helicopter, Inc., Southern Aero Corporation, and Wilco Aviation); Smith Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.; Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc. (previously Jamie R. Hill and Southwest Florida Aviation); Tamarack Helicopters, Inc. (previously Ranger Helicopter Services, Inc.); US Helicopter, Inc. (previously UNC Helicopter, Inc.); West Coast Fabrication; and Williams Helicopter Corporation (previously Scott Paper Co.) Model HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P Helicopters; and Southwest Florida Aviation Model UH-1B (SW204 and SW204HP) and UH-1H (SW205) Helicopters. This AD requires inspecting each affected tail rotor blade (blade) forward tip weight retention block (tip block) and the aft tip closure (tip closure) for adhesive bond voids and removing any blade with an excessive void from service. This AD also requires modifying certain blades by installing shear pins and tip closure rivets. This AD was prompted by reports of missing tip blocks or tip closures, resulting in minor to substantial damage to blades installed on Bell Model 212 and 412 helicopters. The actions are intended to prevent loss of a tip block or tip closure, loss of a blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.