[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5151-5171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2083]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Parts 23 and 91
[Docket No. 27806; Amendment No. 23-49, 91-247]
RIN 2120-AE59
Airworthiness Standards; Systems and Equipment Rules Based on
European Joint Aviation Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the systems and equipment airworthiness
standards for normal, utility, acrobatic, and commuter category
airplanes. This amendment completes a portion of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and the European Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA)
effort to harmonize the Federal Aviation Regulations and the Joint
Aviation Requirements (JAR) for airplanes certified in these
categories. This amendment will provide nearly uniform systems and
equipment standards for airplanes certificated in the United States
under 14 CFR part 23 and in JAA countries under Joint Aviation
Requirements 23, simplifying international airworthiness approval.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 11, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Earsa Tankesley, Aerospace Engineer, Standards Office (ACE-100), Small
Airplane Directorate, Federal Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th
Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106, telephone (816) 426-6932.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This amendment is based on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) No.
94-21 (59 FR 37620, July 22, 1994). All comments received in response
to Notice 94-21 have been considered in adopting this amendment.
This amendment completes part of an effort to harmonize the
requirements of part 23 and JAR 23. The revisions to part 23 in this
amendment pertain to systems and equipment airworthiness standards.
Three other final rules are being issued in this Federal Register that
pertain to airworthiness standards for flight, powerplant, and
airframe. These related rulemakings are also part of the harmonization
effort. Interested persons should review all four final rules to ensure
that all revisions to part 23 are recognized.
The harmonization effort was initiated at a meeting in June 1990 of
the JAA Council (consisting of JAA members from European countries) and
the FAA, during which the FAA Administrator committed the FAA to
support the harmonization of the U.S. regulations with the JAR that
were being developed. In response to the commitment, the FAA Small
Airplane Directorate established an FAA Harmonization Task Force to
work with the JAR 23 Study Group to harmonize part 23 with the proposed
JAR 23. The General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) also
established a JAR 23/part 23 committee to provide technical assistance.
The FAA, JAA, GAMA, and the Association Europeenne des
Constructeurs de Material Aerospatial (AECMA), an organization of
European airframe manufacturers, met on several occasions in a
continuing harmonization effort.
Near the end of the effort to harmonize the normal, utility, and
acrobatic category airplane airworthiness standards, the JAA requested
and received recommendations from its member countries on proposed
airworthiness standards for commuter category airplanes. Subsequent JAA
and FAA meetings on this issue resulted in proposals that were
reflected in Notice 94-21 to revise portions of the part 23
[[Page 5152]]
commuter category airworthiness standards. Accordingly, this final rule
adopts the systems and equipment airworthiness standards for all part
23 airplanes.
In January 1991, the FAA established the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ARAC) (56 FR 2190, January 22, 1991). At an FAA/JAA
Harmonization Conference in Canada in June 1992, the FAA announced that
it would consolidate the harmonization effort within the ARAC
structure. The FAA assigned to ARAC the rulemakings related to JAR/part
23 harmonization, which ARAC assigned to the JAR/FAR 23 Harmonization
Working Group. The proposals for systems and equipment airworthiness
standards contained in Notice 94-21 were a result of both the working
group's efforts and the efforts at harmonization that occurred before
the formation of the working group.
The JAA submitted comments to the FAA on January 20, 1994, in
response to the four draft proposals for harmonization of the part 23
airworthiness standards. The JAA submitted comments again during the
comment period of the NPRM. At the April 26, 1995, ARAC JAR/FAR 23
Harmonization Working Group meeting, the JAA noted that many of the
comments in the January 20 letter had been satisfied or were no longer
relevant. The few remaining items concern issues that are considered
beyond the scope of this rulemaking and, therefore, will be dealt with
at future FAA/JAA Harmonization meetings.
Discussion of Comments
General
Interested persons were invited to participate in the development
of these final rules by submitting written data, views, or arguments to
the regulatory docket on or before November 21, 1994. Six commenters
responded to Notice 94-21. Two of these commenters, the Civil Aviation
Authority (CAA) and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA), submitted
comments that were identical; therefore, the responses to both
commenters are the same. Minor technical and editorial changes have
been made to the proposed rules based on relevant comments received and
after further review by the FAA.
One general comment was received from Transport Canada. It
expressed concurrence with the notice. The comment also noted that the
proposals (the comment did not identify the specific sections) are
applicable to JAR Very Light Aircraft (VLA) standards for night
operations and that it will consider adding these proposals to the
Canadian standards for VLA approved for night and Instrument Flight
Rule (IFR) operations. It suggests that the FAA may wish to consider
this as well.
Discussion of Comments to Specific Sections of Parts 23 and 91
Section 23.677 Trim Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.677(a) would clarify the need to mark the lateral
and directional trim indicators with the neutral trim position. Since
trim indicators on most airplanes are currently marked with the neutral
position of the trimming device, this proposal would standardize the
cockpit markings for all airplanes.
Revised paragraph (a) would also add a requirement for the pitch
trim indicator to be marked with the proper pitch trim range for the
takeoff of the airplane. Some takeoff accidents, including some
involving fatalities, have occurred because the pitch trim was not set
to the proper range needed for the airplane takeoff.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section. On
reviewing the published notice, the FAA discovered the phrase ``center
or gravity'' should have read ``center of gravity.''
The proposals are adopted with the above correction.
Section 23.691 Artificial Stall Barrier System
The requirements of Sec. 23.201(c) provide criteria for the in-
flight demonstration of wings level stall. The requirements also
specify the means of identifying when a stall has occurred. Amendment
No. 23-45 (58 FR 42136, August 6, 1993) revised Sec. 23.201(c) by
adding the activation of an artificial stall barrier as an acceptable
means of identifying when a stall has occurred. Proposed new
Sec. 23.691 would provide standards for artificial stall barrier
systems if such a system is used to show compliance with
Sec. 23.201(c).
Two comments were received on this proposal in which the JAA and
the CAA note that the proposal has not been fully discussed by JAA
specialists and recommend that the proposal be withdrawn. The JAA also
provides a list of 12 issues to be considered if the FAA proceeds with
the adoption of the proposal.
The FAA has reviewed the handling of this proposal from the time
that it was identified in the original 1990 FAA comments on an early
draft of JAR 23. This item was first presented to the JAA specialists
for review in 1991 and since that time it has been thoroughly
coordinated with the JAA. The JAA's current JAR 23 Notice of Proposed
Amendment list contains an item for the inclusion of 23.691 in JAR 23,
based on the text in a draft of this final rule. The FAA understands
that the JAA expects to adopt the item following the finalization of
this rule. Under these circumstances, the FAA does not find it
necessary to defer adoption for further consideration.
Moreover, the FAA has reviewed each of the 12 issues that the JAA
provided for FAA's consideration, and prepared a response which has
been included in the Rules Docket. Since the issues are beyond the
scope of the proposal, the FAA has not included them in this final rule
publication.
In the course of the FAA's review, however, the FAA noted that the
word ``necessary'' in the introductory paragraph of Sec. 23.691 should
be changed to ``used,'' to make it clear that the equipment
requirements of this section are applicable if a stick pusher system is
used in the airplane to show compliance with Sec. 23.201(c).
Section 23.691 is adopted with the above change.
Section 23.697 Wing Flap Controls
Proposed new Sec. 23.697(c) would provide safety standards for the
wing flap control levers installed in airplanes that use wing flap
settings other than fully retracted when showing compliance with
Sec. 23.145.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.701 Flap Interconnection
Section 23.701 (a)(1) and (a)(2) would be revised to clarify the
requirements for flap systems installed on part 23 airplanes.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.703 Takeoff Warning System
This proposed new section would require a takeoff warning system on
some commuter category airplanes. The requirement would be applicable
if the certification flight evaluation showed that an unsafe takeoff
condition would result if lift devices or longitudinal trim devices are
set to any position outside the approved takeoff range. If the
evaluation shows that no unsafe condition would result at any setting
of these devices, a takeoff warning system would not be required. For
those airplanes on which a warning system must be installed, the
proposal would provide requirements for the installation of the system.
[[Page 5153]]
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.723 Shock Absorption Tests
To correct a grammatical error in the rules, paragraph (b) of this
section would be revised by changing the word ``reserved'' in the
phrase ``reserved energy absorption capacity'' to ``reserve.''
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.729 Landing Gear Extension and Retraction System
This proposal would revise Sec. 23.729(e) to clarify that a landing
gear indicator is required for each gear. This proposal would also add
a new Sec. 23.729(g) requiring that if the landing gear bay is used as
the location for equipment other than landing gear, that equipment must
be designed to minimize damage from items such as a tire burst, or
rocks, water, and slush that may enter the landing gear bay.
One comment was received on this section, which suggested that the
current requirements do not properly include a standard for amphibious
operation. The comment specifically identified the warning horn or
similar aural device as confusing and a source of pilot error during
operations of an amphibian airplane. The commenter provided a
suggestion for a landing gear position indicator on an amphibian
airplane that would assist in clarifying this confusion.
Although this comment has merit, the proposed rule did not consider
such a requirement, and no action has been taken to include the
suggested landing gear position indicator for amphibian airplanes in
this final rule. This comment will be retained and the suggestion for
an amphibian landing gear indicator will be presented at a future
harmonization meeting for specialist consideration and possible future
inclusion in part 23/JAR 23.
Although not proposed in the notice, the text of paragraph (g) has
been revised to identify sources of equipment damage that should be
considered in the application of this requirement.
Section 23.729 is adopted with the above changes.
Section 23.735 Brakes
Section 23.735(a) would be revised to state clearly that wheel
brakes must be provided. A proposed new Sec. 23.735(c) would require
the brake system to be designed so that the brake manufacturer's
specified brake pressures are not exceeded during the landing distance
determined in accordance with Sec. 23.75. Proposed new Sec. 23.735(e),
applicable to commuter category airplanes, would require establishing
the minimum rejected takeoff brake kinetic energy capacity rating of
each main wheel brake assembly.
One comment was received on the proposal for Sec. 23.735(e), which
noted that the factor, ``0.0443'' is not defined for the kinetic energy
formula. The commenter recommends that V be stated in units such as,
feet-per-second (or mph, or knots, as required). The commenter notes
that the recommended clarification should reduce possible future
misunderstanding and confusion, as well as improper brake capacity
calculations.
The FAA agrees. The units for ``V'' in the definition of the
kinetic energy formula were inadvertently omitted from the proposal for
this section. To correct this omission, the definition is being revised
to read: ``V=Ground speed, in knots, associated with the maximum value
of V1 selected in accordance with Sec. 23.51(c)(1).''
The proposal is adopted with the above change.
Section 23.745 Nose/Tail Wheel Steering
Proposed new Sec. 23.745 would provide requirements that apply if
nose/tail wheel steering is installed.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.775 Windshields and Windows
Section 23.775(a) would be revised to allow internal glass panels
of windshields and windows to be constructed of nonsplintering
material, as well as nonsplintering glass. Section 23.775(c) would be
revised to clarify that the requirement of this section applies to
pressurized airplanes if certification for operation up to and
including 25,000 feet is requested.
Section 23.775(h), introductory text, and paragraph (h)(1) would be
added to require windshield panes of commuter category airplanes that
are directly in front of the pilots to withstand the impact of a two-
pound bird strike. This requirement is based on a Joint Aviation
Authority recommendation to add windshield bird strike protection for
commuter category airplanes.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.783 Doors
Proposed paragraph (b) would add a requirement that passenger doors
must not be located near any propeller disk or any other potential
hazard that could endanger persons using the door. The propeller disk
remains the prominent hazard but other items, such as hot deicer
surfaces or sharp objects on the airplane structure, are also hazards.
Proposed new paragraph (g) would require lavatory doors, if
installed, that would not trap occupants inside a closed and locked
lavatory compartment.
No comments were received on the changes proposed for this section,
and they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.785 Seats, Berths, Litters, Safety Belts, and Shoulder
Harnesses
Seat requirements of part 23 would be clarified by moving the seat
provisions from current Sec. 23.1307(a), which requires a seat or berth
for each occupant, to the introductory text of Sec. 23.785. The notice
proposed to reference the requirements of Sec. 23.1413, for a metal-to-
metal latching device for seat belts and shoulder harnesses, in
Sec. 23.785(b). These proposed changes were intended to combine related
seat requirements in one section. The JAA and CAA comments note that
the phrase ``with metal-to-metal latching device'' is also reflected in
Sec. 23.1413, but with different applicability.
The FAA agrees. The proposed changes to this section were made to
clarify the seat requirements by including, or referencing, all of the
seat requirements in one section. The notice proposal to add the phrase
``with metal-to-metal latching devices as required by Sec. 23.1413'' to
paragraph (b) would provide this clarification for normal, utility, or
acrobatic category airplanes. However, because this paragraph is not
applicable to all categories of airplanes, this change, along with the
retention of Sec. 23.1413 could be confusing.
To accomplish the originally intended clarification of the seat
requirements, and to correct the applicability differences noted by the
commenters, Sec. 23.1413 is being removed and the phrase, ``with metal-
to-metal latching device'' is being added to Secs. 23.785(b) and
23.785(c). Also, to make Sec. 23.785(c) clearer, it has been divided
into two sentences.
Section 23.785 is amended by adopting the introductory text and the
revision of paragraphs (b) and (c) as identified above.
[[Page 5154]]
Section 23.787 Baggage and Cargo Compartments
Section 23.787 would be revised by extending the present
requirements for cargo compartments to baggage compartments. As
proposed, future baggage compartments on all airplane categories would
be required to: be placarded for their maximum weight capacity; have a
means to prevent the baggage from shifting; and have a means to protect
controls, wiring, lines, and equipment or accessories that are located
in the compartment and whose damage or failure would affect safe
operation of the airplane. This revision would result in the commuter
category requirements of Sec. 23.787(g) being redundant, and that
requirement is being removed.
Proposed revisions to this section would also move the requirements
of paragraphs (d) and (f) to a proposed new Sec. 23.855, which would
address cargo and baggage compartment fire protection. Proposed new
paragraph (c) of this section would require flight crew emergency exits
on airplanes that are used only for the carriage of cargo to meet the
requirements of Sec. 23.807.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.791 Passenger Information Signs
This proposed new section would require at least one illuminated
sign to notify passengers when seat belts should be fastened on those
airplanes in whit the flightcrew members cannot observe the other
occupants' seats or where the flightcrew members' compartment is
separated from the passenger compartment. One comment was received on
this proposal, which noted the JAA's support of the proposal to require
all airplanes, where the flightcrew members cannot observe the
passenger seats, to be equipped with a ``fasten seat belt'' sign. The
JAA also identified its intent to take NPA action to propose the same
requirement.
Section 23.791 is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.807 Emergency Exits
Proposed new Sec. 23.807(a)(4) would provide the same protection
from any propeller disk and other potential hazard for a person who
uses emergency exits as that provided by proposed Sec. 23.783(b) for a
person who uses a passenger door.
The proposed revision of Sec. 23.807(b) would provide that the
inside handles of emergency exits that open outward must be designed so
that the emergency exit is protected against inadvertent operation.
The proposed revisions to Sec. 23.807(b)(5) and new
Sec. 23.807(b)(6) would apply to acrobatic and utility category
airplanes that are approved for maneuvers, such as spinning. The
proposed rule would require that emergency exits for these category
airplanes allow the occupants to abandon the airplane at certain speeds
related to such maneuvers.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.841 Pressurized Cabins
The proposed revision to Sec. 23.841(a) would extend the cabin
pressure requirements of current paragraph (a), which now apply to
airplanes certificated for operation above 31,000 feet, to airplanes
certificated for operation over 25,000 feet.
No comments were received on this proposal, and it is adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.853 Passenger and Crew Compartment Interiors
This proposal would revise the section heading from ``Compartment
interiors'' to ``Passenger and crew compartment interiors'' to clarify
the content of the section.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.855 Cargo and Baggage Compartment Fire Protection
This proposed new section would require the following:
Proposed paragraph (a) would require all sources of heat that are
capable of igniting the contents of each cargo and baggage compartment
to be shielded and insulated to prevent such ignition.
Proposed paragraph (b) would require cargo and baggage compartments
to be constructed of materials that meet the appropriate provisions of
Sec. 23.853(d)(3). Currently these requirements apply to commuter
category airplanes and to the materials used in the compartments of
these airplanes. The proposed new requirement would expand this
applicability to the cargo and baggage compartments of all part 23
airplanes. In effect, the proposed new requirement would require
materials that are self-extinguishing rather than flame resistant as
currently required under Sec. 23.787(d).
Proposed new paragraph (c) would add new fire protection
requirements for cargo and baggage compartments for commuter category
airplanes. The proposed rule would require one of the following
alternatives: (1) Either the compartment must be located where pilots
seated at their duty station would easily discover the fire or the
compartment must be equipped with a smoke or fire detector system to
provide a warning at the pilot's station. Access to the compartment
with a fire extinguisher must also be provided; (2) If the cargo or
baggage compartment is inaccessible to the flightcrew, it must be
equipped with a fire detector system that provides a warning at the
pilot's station, and the compartment must have ceiling and sidewall
floor panels constructed of materials that have been subjected to and
meet the vertical self-extinguishing tests of appendix F of part 23;
(3) The Compartment must be constructed and sealed to contain any fire.
Two comments were received on this proposal. The JAA and the CAA
comment that proposed paragraph (b) would extend the self-extinguishing
standards of Sec. 23.853(d)(3) to the baggage and cargo compartments of
all airplanes. JAR 23.855 requires this self-extinguishing standard for
commuter category only. The commenters noted that the proposed
applicability of this standard to all airplanes has not been agreed to
for JAR 23.
There were no objections to the proposal or suggestions for
changes, and Sec. 23.855 is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.867 Electrical Bonding and Protection Against Lightning and
Static Electricity
This proposed revision would change the heading that precedes
Sec. 23.867 from ``Lightning Evaluation'' to ``Electrical Bonding and
Lightning Protection.'' It would also revise the section heading from
``Lightning protection of structures'' to ``Electrical bonding and
protection against lightning and static electricity.'' The proposed
revisions more accurately clarify the content of the section.
No comments were received on this proposal, and it is adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1303 Flight and Navigation Instruments
The introductory text of Sec. 23.1303 would be revised to clarify
that the section contains the minimum required instruments. Also,
Sec. 23.1303(d) would add a requirement for those airplanes whose
performance must be based on weight, altitude, and temperature to be
equipped with a free air temperature indicator. A new sentence added to
Sec. 23.1303(e)(2) would state that nuisance overspeed warnings should
not occur at lower speeds where pilots might ignore the warning. A new
paragraph (f) would propose requirements for attitude instruments
[[Page 5155]]
that include a means for flightcrew members to adjust the relative
position of the attitude reference symbol and the horizon line.
Finally, a new paragraph (g) would be added to identify certain
specific instruments required for a commuter category airplane.
Two comments were received, which note that the additional
instruments proposed for commuter category airplanes are not included
in JAR 23. The JAA and the CAA also note that consideration of this
proposal is being deferred by the JAA pending the publication of JAR-
OPS and a review of the proposal by JAA specialists. (JAR-OPS are the
JAR operations requirements issued by JAA.)
The requirement for Sec. 23.1303 is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1307 Miscellaneous Equipment
This proposal would remove Sec. 23.1307(a); these requirements are
being added to Sec. 23.785. The discussion of Sec. 23.785 above
addresses this change.
Also, the provisions of Sec. 23.1307(b) are being removed from
Sec. 23.1307 as proposed. These requirements are stated in
Secs. 23.1361, 23.1351, and 23.1357, respectively, and are being
removed to prevent confusion. The designation of paragraph (c) would be
removed since it would no longer be necessary.
Two comments were received on this proposal. In these comments, the
JAA and the CAA note that paragraph (c), adopted by Amendment 24-43, is
pending a review by the JAA specialist for JAR 23.
The proposal is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1309 Equipment, Systems, and Installation
Proposed new Sec. 23.1309(a)(4) would correct an omission that
occurred when the FAA issued Amendment No. 23-41 (55 FR 43306, October
26, 1990). To correct this oversight, and to continue the single fault
provision of this paragraph, Sec. 23.1309(a)(4) was proposed.
Two comments were received on this proposal. The JAA and the CAA
note that, although the proposal for Sec. 23.1309(a)(4) is not included
in JAR 23, they support it, and will be considered for adoption in JAR
23.
Section 23.1309(a)(4) is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1311 Electronic Display Instrument Systems
This proposal would revise Sec. 23.1311 to remove redundant
requirements and to clarify which secondary instruments are required
and the visibility requirements for these instruments.
No comments were received on the proposal, and it is adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1321 Arrangement and Visibility
The proposed revision to Sec. 23.1321(d) would remove the wording
that limits the instrument location to airplanes certificated for
flight under instrument flight rules or airplanes weighing more than
6,000 pounds. Instruments are for the pilot and should be located near
that pilot's vertical plane of vision without regard to what flight
rules are approved for the airplane's operation or the maximum weight
of the airplane.
No comments were received on the proposal, and it is adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1323 Airspeed Indicating System
The proposed new Sec. 23.1323(c) would add a requirement that each
airspeed indicating system design and installation should provide
positive drainage of moisture from the system.
To better organize the requirements that are applicable to the
airspeed systems on all part 23 airplane categories and those that
would be additional requirements for the airspeed systems of commuter
category airplanes, the FAA proposed to redesignate existing paragraphs
(c) and (e), respectively, as paragraphs (e) and (d). By this
redesignation, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) would apply to all
airplanes, and paragraphs (e) and (f) would include additional
requirements applicable to commuter category airplanes.
The proposal for redesignated paragraph (e) would also remove the
words ``in flight and'' from the first sentence of that paragraph.
Proposed new Sec. 23.1323(f) would provide that, on those commuter
airplanes where duplicate airspeed indicators are required, the
airspeed pitot tubes must be located far enough apart so that both
tubes would not be damaged by a single bird strike.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1325 Static Pressure System
Current Sec. 23.1325(g) exempts from the requirements of
Sec. 23.1325(b)(3) airplanes that are prohibited from flight in
instrument meteorological conditions in accordance with
Sec. 23.1559(b). The notice proposed to revise Sec. 23.1325(g) by
adding airplanes that are prohibited from flight in icing conditions to
the airplanes that are currently exempted from the requirements of
Sec. 23.1325(b)(3).
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1326 Pitot Heat Indication Systems
Proposed new Sec. 23.1326 would require the installation of a pitot
tube heat indicating system on those airplanes required to be equipped
with a heated pitot tube.
The comments received from the JAA and the CAA show that this
existing requirement in JAR 23 is applicable to commuter category
airplanes only. They state that the FAA proposal would be applicable to
all airplanes and would result in a continuous indication of pitot heat
non-selection in every case. The JAA and the CAA do not support the
applicability of this section to all airplanes.
The FAA does not agree that the proposal would be applicable to all
airplanes. The proposal would apply only to these airplanes that are
required, by Sec. 23.1323(d), to be equipped with a heated pitot tube.
By this applicability, airplanes that are approved for instrument
flight, or for flight in icing conditions, would be required to be
equipped with a heated pitot tube and a heated pitot tube indicator.
These are the flight conditions where the pilot needs to be alerted if
the pitot heat has not been turned on or if the heater fails. By this
applicability, an airplane owner who has installed a heated pitot tube
as optional equipment may continue to operate the airplane without a
heated pitot tube indicator.
The preamble of the NPRM discusses the safety benefits that would
be provided by this change.
The proposal is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1329 Automatic Pilot System
Section 23.1329(b), as adopted by Amendment No. 23-24 (58 FR 18958,
April 9, 1993), does not state clearly that stick controlled airplanes
must be equipped with the same autopilot quick release controls that
are required for airplanes with control wheels. The proposed revision
of Sec. 23.1329(b) would make it clear that a quick release control
must be installed on each control stick of an airplane that can be
operated from either pilot seat.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1337 Powerplant Instruments Installation
This proposal would revise the heading of this section to
accurately reflect the powerplant instrument
[[Page 5156]]
installation requirements that it contains. The difference between this
section and Sec. 23.1305 is clarified by this change.
Section 23.1337(b) would be revised by removing the wording that
authorizes installation of only those fuel indicators marked in gallons
and pounds. Section 23.1337(b) would also be revised by adding the word
``usable'' to the first sentence of this section. Proposed new
Sec. 23.1337(b)(4) would require a ``means to indicate'' the amount of
usable fuel in each tank when the airplane is on the ground.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1351 General
The proposal would revise current Sec. 23.1351 by removing portions
of paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) and by removing paragraph (b)(4). The
requirements proposed for removal are applicable to alternators that
depend upon the battery for initial excitation or for stabilization.
Revised Sec. 23.1351(c)(3) would require an automatic means for
reverse current protection.
Section 23.1351(f) would be revised by adding a provision that
would require the ground power receptacle to be located where its use
will not result in a hazard to the airplane or to people on the ground
using the receptacle.
No comments were received on the proposals. The proposals are
adopted as proposed, except that paragraph (c)(3) has been revised to
clarify that protection for any generator/alternator and the airplane
electrical system must be provided.
Section 23.1353 Storage Battery Design and Installation
Proposed new Sec. 23.1353(h) would require that, in the event of a
complete loss of the primary electrical power generating system,
airplane battery capacity must be sufficient to supply at least 30
minutes of electrical power to those loads essential to the continued
safe flight and landing of the airplane.
No comments were received on this proposal, and it is adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1359 Electrical System Fire Protection
Proposed new Sec. 23.1359 would require smoke and fire protection
for electrical system installations. Proposed Sec. 23.1359(a) would
state that electrical systems must meet the applicable requirements of
Secs. 23.863 and 23.1182.
Proposed Sec. 23.1359(b) would require that the electrical systems
components installed in designated fire zones and used during emergency
procedures be fire resistant. This provision is needed to clarify the
requirements for electrical system components that may be installed in
the designated fire zones identified in Sec. 23.1181.
Finally, Sec. 23.1359(c) would provide burn criteria for electrical
wire and cables. A revision to appendix F of part 23 that would add
appropriate wire testing criteria was also included in this proposal.
No comments were received on the proposals, and they are adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1361 Master Switch Arrangementt
To harmonize with the JAR this proposal would revise
Sec. 23.1361(c) by making an editorial change to remove the last two
words of the paragraph that read ``in flight.'' This change will not
alter the meaning of the requirement.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1365 Electrical Cables and Equipment
This proposal would revise Sec. 23.1365(b) and would add three new
paragraphs.
Section 23.1365(b) would be revised in relation to proposed new
Sec. 23.1359(c), which would require self-extinguishing insulated
electrical wires and cables. The proposed revisions to Sec. 23.1365(b)
would remove the reference to electrical cables from the flame
resistance requirement since the cables would be required to have self-
extinguishing insulation under Sec. 23.1359(c). The proposed revision
retains the requirement for electrical cables and associated equipment
to not emit dangerous quantities of toxic fumes when they overheat. The
phrase ``at least flame resistant'' in Sec. 23.1365(b) would also be
revised by removing the words ``at least.''
The three paragraphs that would be added by this proposal would
require: (1) The identification of electrical cables, terminals, and
connectors; (2) the protection of electrical cables from damage by
external sources; and (3) installation criteria for cables that cannot
be protected by a circuit protection device.
No comments were received on the proposals, and they are adopted as
proposed.
Section 23.1383 Taxi and Landing Lights
The landing light requirements of Sec. 23.1383 would be revised by
adding taxi lights to this section.
Current Sec. 23.1383(a), which requires the lights to be
acceptable, would be deleted because it is unnecessary to state this.
The paragraphs would be redesignated accordingly.
Current Sec. 23.1383(b)(3) requires that a landing light must be
installed to provide enough light for a night landing. Proposed
Sec. 23.1383(c) would revise ``night landing'' to ``night operation''
since the requirements would also cover taxiing and parking. Proposed
new paragraph (d) would require the lights to be installed so that they
do not cause a fire hazard.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1401 Anticollision Light System
This proposal would revise Sec. 23.1401 to require the installation
of an anticollision light system on all part 23 airplanes.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1413 Safety Belts and Harnesses
The proposals in the notice did not include a revision that would
remove this section. However, comments received on the notice proposal
for Sec. 23.785 showed that the proposed change, along with the
retention of this section could be confusing and, thereby, not
accomplish the FAA's intent to clarify the seat requirement.
Section 23.1413 is being removed, and the phrase ``with metal-to-
metal latching device'' is being added to Secs. 23.785(b) and 23.785(c)
to accomplish the intended clarification identified in this notice.
This change will not add a substantive requirement.
Section 23.1431 Electronic Equipment
This proposal would add three new paragraphs to Sec. 23.1431.
Proposed new paragraph (c) would provide that airplanes required to be
operated by more than one flightcrew member be evaluated to determine
if the flightcrew members can converse without difficulty when they are
seated at their duty stations. Proposed new paragraph (d) would require
installed communication equipment to use ``off-on'' transmitter
switching that will ensure that the transmitter is turned off when it
is not being used. Proposed new paragraph (e) would require that, if
provisions for communication headsets are provided, the applicant must
demonstrate that flightcrew members will receive all warnings when a
headset is being used. The
[[Page 5157]]
demonstration must be made under actual cockpit noise conditions.
The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) submitted the only comment
on this proposal. ALPA expressed concern over the cockpit noise
conditions that would be used in the determination of compliance with
proposed paragraphs (c) and (e).
This notice preamble identified an earlier harmonization
consideration to include text in JAR 23 and this proposal that would
have required compliance under actual cockpit noise conditions. The
preamble explained that this text was not included because it may be
misinterpreted and result in demonstrations being conducted under more
severe noise conditions than are needed. ALPA understood this
explanation to mean that the FAA had made a determination that
compliance demonstrations should not be conducted under the actual
cockpit noise conditions that exist when the airplane is being
operated. ALPA recommends that the FAA re-evaluate its position.
The FAA has reviewed the record of earlier harmonization
discussions where the concerns about noise conditions were first
considered. During these discussions, which included industry
representatives, it was decided that any requirement for testing under
noise conditions could be interpreted to require testing under
conditions that were more severe than needed. Accordingly, it was
decided that such text should not be included in either JAR or part 23.
The FAA agreed with the position reached in these discussions;
therefore, these proposals did not include any requirements for testing
under noise conditions, and the explanation was placed in the notice to
identify why such requirements were not included.
Earlier harmonization and this comment make it clear that the
proposals, with or without the requirements for testing under noise
conditions, may be misinterpreted. ALPA's interpretation that the FAA
had determined that the demonstrations of compliance with these
requirements should not be conducted under actual cockpit noise
conditions, is not correct. The test for compliance with the
requirements should be done under the actual noise conditions.
To clarify the conditions under which these evaluations should be
conducted, not withstanding earlier harmonization agreements, these two
paragraphs are being revised to include the phrase, ``under actual
cockpit noise conditions when the airplane is being operated.''
The proposals for Sec. 23.1431 are adopted with the above-
identified revision of paragraphs (c) and (e).
Section 23.1435 Hydraulic Systems
Since the adoption of Amendment No. 23-43 (58 FR 18958, April 9,
1993), the FAA has received questions about the installation of
hydraulic accumulators that are permitted by Sec. 23.1435(c). These
questions have shown that applicants find Sec. 23.1435(c) difficult to
understand. The notice proposed a revision of Sec. 23.1435(c) to
clarify the type and size of a hydraulic accumulator or reservoir that
may be installed on the engine side of any firewall.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1447 Equipment Standards for Oxygen Dispensing Units
If radio equipment is installed, proposed new Sec. 23.1447(a)(4)
would require that flightcrew oxygen dispensing units be designed to
allow the use of communication equipment when oxygen is being used.
Revisions to Sec. 23.1447(d) would require the flightcrew oxygen
dispensing units to either be the quick donning type or be
automatically presented before the cabin pressure altitude exceeds
15,000 feet, if the airplane is certificated for operation above 25,000
feet. The passenger oxygen requirements of former paragraph (e) and
(e)(1) have not been revised, but are now contained in new paragraph
(e). Proposed paragraph (d) would be revised to provide the flightcrew
and the airplane passengers the same level of safety as required by
other airworthiness standards (14 CFR part 25). This proposed revision
is also consistent with the proposed revision of Sec. 23.841.
No comments were received on the proposals for this section, and
they are adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1451 Fire Protection for Oxygen Equipment
This proposed new section would specify fire protection for oxygen
equipment installations. Section 23.1451(a) and (b) would,
respectively, prohibit the installation of oxygen equipment in
designated fire zones and require that oxygen system components be
protected from the heat from designated fire zones. Proposed
Sec. 23.1451(c) would require oxygen equipment and lines to be
installed so that escaping oxygen cannot come in contact with grease,
fluids, or vapors that may be present.
No comments were received on the proposal for this section, and it
is adopted as proposed.
Section 23.1453 Protection of Oxygen Equipment From Rupture
Proposed new Sec. 23.1453 would clarify the rupture protection
needed for oxygen system installation. Rupture protection for oxygen
systems is currently required by the application of the structure load
requirements of part 23. The addition of Sec. 23.1453(a) would clarify
the application of these load requirements and would identify the need
to consider maximum temperatures and pressures that may be present.
Section 23.1453(b) would identify the protection to be provided for
high pressure oxygen sources and the pressure lines that connect such
sources to the oxygen system shutoff valves.
The comments received on this proposal from the JAA and the CAA
noted that the word ``high'' in paragraph (b) could lead to confusion
and require interpretation. Accordingly, they suggested that the words
``High pressure oxygen sources'' be revised to read as follows:
``Oxygen pressure sources.'' This is the same text that is used in JAR
23.
The FAA agrees with the suggested wording change. When the proposal
was originally drafted, the FAA was considering the oxygen source side
of the oxygen regulator, the high pressure side, and the passenger
dispensing side of the regulator, the low pressure side; thus, the word
``high'' was used.
The suggested change will not alter the requirement's applicability
and will be more clearly understood. It is also noted that the
suggested text change will more closely align with the same requirement
in Sec. 25.1453. Section 23.1453 is changed by revising the first four
words of proposed paragraph (b) to read, ``Oxygen pressure sources.''
This section is adopted with the above change.
Section 23.1461 Equipment Containing High Energy Rotors
This proposal would revise paragraph (a) of this section to clarify
that the requirements apply to high energy rotors included in an
auxiliary power unit (APU).
One comment was received on this proposal. The JAA and the CAA
noted that the JAA does not agree that the requirements of this section
are applicable to APU's. They suggest that the proposed changes to
paragraph (a) not be adopted.
In the preamble of the notice, the FAA identified policy issued
after this
[[Page 5158]]
section was adopted. That policy indicated that the section was
applicable to ``equipment such as APU's and constant speed drives,''
but this policy was not widely distributed to all FAA offices. The
proposal in the notice does not alter the policy applicability, but it
does clarify the policy.
Removing the proposed change would not alter the situation. The FAA
defines ``Equipment containing high energy rotors'' to include APU's
and constant speed drives. In cases where rotor containment has been
demonstrated by complying with JAA-APU or FAA TSO C77a, this compliance
will be examined by the FAA office responsible for the airplane
certification. If it is found that this demonstration also meets the
requirements of Sec. 23.1461, it will be accepted for the airplane's
compliance.
The proposal for Sec. 23.1461 is adopted as proposed.
Appendix F to Part 23--Test Procedure
This proposal would revise appendix F to provide the procedures
needed to test electrical wire to ensure that the wire meets the burn
requirements of Sec. 23.1359. It would also add procedures for meeting
the 45 degree and 60 degree angle burn test requirement proposed in
Secs. 23.855(c)(2) and 23.1359(c), respectively. Paragraph (b) would
clarify the specimen configuration to be used in the proposed testing
procedures.
No comments were received on the proposals, and they are adopted as
proposed.
Section 91.205 Powered Civil Aircraft With Standard Category U.S.
Airworthiness Certificates: Instrument and Equipment Requirements
Proposed new Sec. 91.205(b)(11) would require that airplanes
certificated under Sec. 23.1401 be equipped with an anticollision light
system for day visual flight rule (VFR) operations. Day VFR operations
are discussed under Sec. 23.1401 of the notice.
No comments were received on the proposed addition to this section,
and that addition is adopted as proposed.
Section 91.209 Aircraft Lights
Proposed new Sec. 91.209(b) would require that airplanes equipped
with an anticollision light system be operated with the anticollision
light system lighted during all types of operations, except when the
pilot determines that, because of operating conditions, it would be in
the interest of safety to turn the lights off.
One commenter believes that the proposal is unacceptable to
aircraft operators. This commenter contends that the midair collision
statistics are purely conjectural and that any safety benefits are
merely guesswork. The commenter also notes that this change would
affect an aircraft's dispatch capability, and questions why an airplane
that is perfectly capable of being flown should be grounded from
daytime flight because something, such as a lamp, is defective.
The FAA agrees that there will be incidents where an airplane will
be temporarily grounded from daylight operations until a failure in the
light system can be repaired. However, the additional safety cue
provided to pilots by operating anticollision light systems will
outweigh the cost of maintaining the light system.
The proposed revision of Sec. 91.209 is adopted as proposed.
Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, and Trade
Impact Assessment
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that Federal agencies
promulgate new regulations or modify existing regulations only if the
potential benefits to society justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the economic
effect of regulatory changes on small entities. Finally, the Office of
Management and Budget directs agencies to assess the effects of
regulatory changes on international trade. In conducting these
assessments, the FAA has determined that this rule: (1) Will generate
benefits exceeding its costs and is ``significant'' as defined in the
Executive Order 12866; (2) is ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Policies and Procedures; (3) will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities; and (4) will not constitute a
barrier to international trade. These analyses, available in the
docket, are summarized below.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
This section summarizes the costs and benefits of each provision of
the final rule. Many of the provisions in the final rule will impose
either no cost or a negligible cost. Such provisions are typically
administrative, editorial, clarifying, relieving, or conforming in
nature. In addition, the FAA holds that certain provisions have a
potential safety benefit that can be achieved with no incremental cost,
due primarily to the fact that this rule will apply to future
certificated airplanes and retrofitting will not be required. All
provisions of the final rule, including those with no or negligible
costs, are summarized below. Only those provisions with non-negligible
costs are further evaluated in the section that follows. It should be
noted that the various cost impacts are not additive since the
individual provisions often apply to different airplane types included
under part 23. The reader is directed to the full regulatory evaluation
in the docket for additional information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Incremental cost Benefit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 23.677 Trim systems Negligible.......... Safety.
Section 23.691 Artificial None................ Administrative.
stall barrier system.
Section 23.697 Wing flap $480 per Nominal safety and
controls. certification and relief.
$100 per airplane
for affected
airplanes.
Section 23.701 Flap None................ Clarification.
interconnection.
Section 23.703 Takeoff $240 per Nominal safety and
warning system. certification for relief.
evaluation. Where
necessary, $5,120
per certification,
$1,000 per airplane
and $100 per year.
Section 23.723 Shock None................ Editorial.
absorption tests.
Section 23.729 Landing gear para. (e). None..... Clarification.
extension and retraction
system.
para. (g). Minor; general
Negligible, general practice.
practice.
Section 23.735 Brakes...... para. (a). None..... Editorial
clarification.
para. (c). None..... Administrative.
para. (e). $240 per Minor safety.
certification.
Section 23.745 Nose/Tail None................ Minor. Avoids
wheel steering. special conditions.
Section 23.775 Windshields para. (a). None..... Relieving.
and windows.
para. (c). None..... Clarification.
[[Page 5159]]
para. (h). Up to Safety.
$350,000 per
certification.
Section 23.783 Doors....... para. (b). None..... Minor safety.
para. (g). $25 per Safety.
airplane.
Section 23.785 Seats, None................ Editorial
births, litters, safety organization.
belts and shoulder
harnesses.
Section 23.787 Baggage and para. (a)$1 per Minor safety.
cargo compartments. airplane.
para. (b). $60 per Safety.
certification and
up to $100 per
airplane.
para. (c). None..... Clarification.
Section 23.791 Passenger $60 per Safety.
information signs. clarification, up
to $200 per
airplane, and a
negligible effect
on operating costs.
Section 23.807 Emergency para. (a)(4). Minor safety.
exists. Expected negligible.
para. (b) and Clarification and
(b)(5). None. editorial.
para. (b)(6). Where Safety.
chosen, $10,000 per
certification and
$500 per airplane.
Section 23.841 Pressurized $1,000 per Safety.
cabins. certification and
$2,000 per airplane.
Section 23.853 Passenger None................ Editorial.
and crew compartment
interiors.
Section 23.855 Cargo and para. (a). Less than Minor safety.
baggage compartment fire $40 per airplane.
protection.
para. (b). Less than Safety.
$200 per airplane.
para. (c). Safety.
Potentially as high
as $1,800 per
certification,
$4,550 per
airplane, and $100
per year.
Section 23.867 Electrical None................ Editorial.
bonding and protection
against lightning and
static electricity.
Section 23.1303 Flight and Introduction. None.. Clarification.
navigation instruments.
para. (d). Safety.
Negligible.
para. (e)(2). None.. Minor safety.
para. (f). None..... Minor safety.
para. (g)(1). Up to Safety.
$2,000 per airplane.
para. (g)(2). None.. Minor safety.
para. (g)(3). Up to Safety.
$3,600 per
certification and
$7,000 per airplane.
Section 23.1307 None................ Editorial and
Miscellaneous equipment. conforming.
Section 23.1309 Equipment, None................ Minor safety.
systems, and installations.
Section 23.1311 Electronic None................ Clarifying,
display instrument systems. editorial, and
relieving.
Section 23.1321 Arrangement None................ Minor safety.
and visibility.
Section 23.1323 Airspeed None................ Minor safety.
indicating system.
Section 23.1325 Static None................ Relieving.
pressure system.
Section 23.1326 Pitot heat $2,800 per Safety.
indication system. certification,
$1,600 per airplane.
Section 23.1329 Automatic None................ Clarifying.
pilot system.
Section 23.1337 Powerplant Heading and para. Clarifying,
instruments installation. (b). None. relieving.
para. (b)(4). Safety.
Negligible.
Section 23.1351 General.... para. (b). None..... Administrative.
para. (c)(3). None.. Clarifying.
para. (f). None..... Minor safety.
Section 23.1353 Storage Where necessary, up Safety.
battery design and to $30 per five
installation. years capital, up
to $10 per year
operating, and $600
per certification.
Section 23.1359 Electrical para. (a). None..... Clarifying emphasis.
system fire protection.
para. (b). Clarifying.
Negligible.
para. (c). $240 per Safety.
certification.
Section 23.1361 Master None................ Editorial.
switch arrangement.
Section 23.1365 Electrical para. (b). None..... Conforming
cables and equipment. editorial.
para. (d). $4,400 Safety.
per certification
and $100 per
airplane.
para. (e). None..... Minor safety.
para. (f). Minor safety.
Negligible.
Section 23.1383 Taxi and None................ Editorial update.
landing lights.
Section 23.1401 Where necessary, Safety.
Anticollision light system. $2,400 per
certification and
$1,600 per airplane.
Section 23.1431 Electronic para. (c). Where Safety.
equipment. necessary, up to
$1,200 per
certification and
$1,600 per airplane.
para. (d). Minor safety.
Negligible.
Included above.
para. (e). None or Safety.
negligible.
[[Page 5160]]
Section 23.1435 Hydraulic None................ Clarifying.
systems.
Section 23.1447 Equipment para. (a)(4). Up to Safety.
standards for oxygen $2,000 per airplane.
dispensing units.
para.'s (d) and (e). Minor safety.
None.
Section 23.1451 Fire None................ Safety.
protection for oxygen
equipment.
Section 23.1453 Protection $960 per Safety.
of oxygen equipment from certification.
rupture.
Section 23.1461 Equipment None................ Clarifying.
containing high energy
rotors.
Appendix F to Part 23--Test None. Considered Minor safety.
Procedure. above.
Section 91.205 Powered None................ Safety, considered
civil aircraft with above.
standard category U.S.
airworthiness certificates:
Instrument and equipment
requirements.
Section 91.209 Aircraft $25 per year per Safety, considered
lights. airplane. above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of Provisions With Non-Negligible Projected Costs
This section describes and evaluates those provisions of the rule
that are expected to impose costs that are not negligible.
Section 23.697 Wing Flap Controls
New Sec. 23.697(c) provides safety standards for the wing flap
control lever installed in airplanes that use wing flap settings other
than fully retracted when showing compliance with Sec. 23.145. The FAA
estimates that an aerospace engineer could design the flap control
lever to meet the requirement in 8 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per
hour, totalling $480 per certification. The control lever itself would
impose an incremental cost, including installation, of approximately
$100 per airplane.
The nominal benefits of this provision will derive from the
increased safety afforded the pilot in positively selecting the proper
flap setting to maintain longitudinal control. In fact, if a flap
position other than fully retracted were needed to maintain
longitudinal control: (1) That position would be necessary to prevent
an unsafe condition, (2) the airplane would not be certificated under
that design, and (3) the airplane would have to be redesigned so that
intermediate flap positions would not be needed for control. Paragraph
(c) will allow the identification of an intermediate flap position and
the positive means of selecting that position. This alternative would
rectify the unsafe condition without requiring the manufacturer to
redesign the airplane.
Section 23.703 Takeoff Warning System
This new section requires that a takeoff warning system on some
commuter category airplanes. The requirement will apply if a flight
evaluation shows that an unsafe takeoff condition would result when
lift devices on longitudinal trim devices are set to any position
outside the approved takeoff range. If the evaluation shows that no
unsafe condition could result at any setting of these devices, a
takeoff warning system will not be required. For those airplanes on
which a warning system must be installed, the rule will provide
requirements for the installation of the system.
The FAA estimates that an evaluation to determine whether a takeoff
warning system is needed will cost $240 (4 hours of engineering at a
burdened rate of $60 per hour). Where needed, the integration design of
a warning system will cost $2,400 (40 hours at $60 per hour). In
addition, an incremental 4 hours of flight testing at a cost of $2,720
($500 per hour for two test pilots and $180 per hour for fuel) will be
needed to demonstrate the system's performance. The FAA estimates that
the system, including acquisition, wiring, micro switches, and labor,
will add approximately $1,000 to the cost of each airplane required to
have one. Maintenance of such a system will cost approximately $100 per
year.
The nominal benefit of this provision derive from the increased
safety provided by the takeoff warning system that would activate
whenever lift or longitudinal trim devices are not set within their
approved takeoff ranges. If an evaluation showed that positions of the
lift or longitudinal trim devices could create an unsafe condition on
takeoff, the manufacturer is required, under existing regulations, to
redesign the devices so that the unsafe positions could not be
obtained. The new section will provide relief by allowing the applicant
to install a warning system rather than redesigning the trim device(s).
Section 23.735 Brakes
New Sec. 23.735(e), applicable to commuter category airplanes,
requires establishing the minimum rejected takeoff brake kinetic energy
capacity rating of each main wheel brake assembly. Based on the
operating experience of airplanes used in passenger-carrying
operations, existing Sec. 23.45 requires the determination of the
accelerate-stop distance for commuter category airplanes. New
Sec. 23.735 is needed to ensure that the brakes will perform safely
under accelerate-stop conditions.
Under the final rule, manufacturers of commuter airplanes may
determine the kinetic energy absorption requirements either through a
conservation, rational analysis of the sequence of events expected
during a rejected takeoff, or by using the formula in new
Sec. 23.735(e)(2). The FAA estimates that the determination will cost
$240, based on four hours of engineering at a burdened rate of $60 per
hour. The potential benefits of the requirement derive from the added
safety that will be provided by establishing beforehand the minimum
necessity kinetic energy capacity rating of each main wheel brake
assembly under rejected takeoff conditions.
Section 23.775 Windshields and Windows
Introductory text and paragraph (h)(1) are added to require that
commuter category windshield panes that are directly in front of the
pilots be able to withstand the impact of a two pound bird at maximum
approach flap speed. By requiring full protection against the strike of
a two-pound bird at approach speed, additional protection will also be
provided if the airplane strikes a larger bird or strikes a bird at a
higher speed.
New Sec. 23.775(h)(2) further requires the panels of the windshield
to be so
[[Page 5161]]
arranged that, if one is damaged, other panels will remain to provide
visibility for continuous safe flight and landing.
The potential cost of Sec. 23.775(h) will vary depending on
circumstances of the affected manufacturer. Industry sources estimate
that the total nonrecurring cost per certification will range from
$250,000 to $350,000, consisting of: (1) Up to $200,000 for a bird
strike test article (``bird gun'') if the manufacturer does not have
one; and (2) up to $150,000 of time and materials cost for the actual
testing.
A manufacturer that has a bird strike test article will not incur
additional capital test costs. Most manufacturers will incur up to
$150,000 in time and materials costs for the actual testing, but even
these costs could be mitigated by the existing need of most
manufacturers to perform such tests for export sales to JAA member
countries.
Industry sources estimate that there will be no identifiable
increment in design or tooling costs since the windshield is an
integral part of the initial design. Similarly, little or no recurring
costs per airplane (incremental materials, installation, or weight) are
projected since it is reasonable to assume that the pressure load, as
compared to bird strike resistance, will be the controlling factor in
windshield design strength.
The benefit of the revision is the incremental protection against
bird strikes that would be afforded to commuter category airplanes. The
FAA has reviewed International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) data
on bird strikes that occurred on member country airplanes weighing
19,000 or fewer pounds from 1981 through 1989. These data shows that
approximately 550 strikes occurred and that one out of seven hits the
windshield. The data show that:
1. Almost 52 percent of the strikes occurred at altitudes of less
than 100 feet, and 26.7 percent occurred between 101 and 1000 feet.
2. Eighty-five percent of the strikes occurred at airspeeds of 150
knots or less.
3. Where bird types were reported, 27.6 percent of strikes involved
small birds and 58.6 involved medium size birds (2 pounds or less).
4. Incidents where the airplane was damaged showed that 16.9
percent resulted from small bird strikes and 64 percent resulted from
medium size bird strikes.
These data show that most bird strikes occur at takeoff and landing
airspeeds, and that birds weighing two pounds or less are struck most
often. The standards of the final rule are based on these statistics.
Few fatalities and injuries resulted from the bird strikes reported in
the ICAO data. Similarly, a review of NTSB accident records between
1982 and 1992 revealed no U.S. accidents resulting from bird strikes to
the windshields of commuter category airplanes. As a result, the FAA
cannot justify this provision solely on the basis of historical
accidents. Instead, the standards are based on the expert
recommendations of the ARAC. It is also noted that this standard will
be applied to JAA certifications and that U.S. manufacturers wishing to
export to JAA countries will be required to meet the standard.
Section 23.783 Doors
New paragraph (g) requires that the locks on lavatory doors, if
installed, be designed so that they will not trap occupants. Lavatory
door locks used in transport category airplanes (see Sec. 25.783) meet
the requirements of this rule. The FAA estimates that the incremental
cost of this provision would be no more than $25 per lock. The rule
will reduce the likelihood that occupants would be trapped in a locked
lavatory, both in emergency and non-emergency situations.
Section 23.787 Baggage and Cargo Compartments
The final rule extends to normal, utility, and acrobatic airplanes
the existing commuter requirement to prevent baggage from hazardous
shifting. The FAA estimates that an aerospace engineer can analyze the
subject loads that would need to be constrained in 1 hour, at a
burdened cost of $60 per hour. Tiedowns will cost approximately $50 per
baggage compartment, or no more than $100 per airplane. These
additional costs apply to normal, utility, and acrobatic airplanes
since commuter category airplanes are already subject to the
requirement under the existing rule.
The potential benefits of the provision include the reduced
likelihood: (1) That baggage compartments would be overloaded, (2) that
stowed baggage would shift dangerously, and (3) that essential co-
located equipment or wiring would be damaged.
Section 23.791 Passenger Information Signs
This new section requires at least one illuminated sign notifying
all passengers when seat belts should be fastened. The requirement will
apply only to airplanes where flightcrew members cannot observe
occupant seats or where the flightcrew compartment is separated from
the passenger compartment. The signs will have to be legible to all
seated passengers and to be operable from a crewmember station.
The FAA estimates that an aerospace engineer could design the
required sign in 1 hour, at a burdened rate of $60 per hour. The sign
would cost approximately $200 per airplane, including parts and
installation. Maintenance costs for bulb replacement will be
negligible. The weight penalty associated with the light system would
also be minor (no more than 2 pounds).
The safety benefits of the change will derive from the increased
likelihood that passengers will know when their seat belts should be
fastened.
Section 23.807 Emergency Exits
New Sec. 23.807(a)(4) provides the same hazard protection for a
person using an emergency exit as that provided by revised
Sec. 23.783(b) for a person who uses a passenger door. Emergency exits
will not be allowed to be located with respect to a propeller disk or
any other hazard in a manner that will endanger persons using that
exit.
The FAA holds that no incremental cost will be incurred to meet the
standards of the provision for newly certificated airplanes. No
comments to the NPRM were received on the potential costs and methods
of compliance that manufacturers would choose to comply with this
requirement.
Section 23.807(b)(5) revises the current egress requirements for
acrobatic airplanes. Section 23.807(b)(6) establishes similar egress
standards for utility category airplanes that are certificated for
spinning. Industry sources estimate that an aerobatic, quick-release
door will cost an incremental $10,000 in engineering design per
affected airplane model and an additional $500 per production airplane.
Little or no additional weight is expected. These costs will apply only
in cases where the manufacturer determines that the marketplace return
of a combination type certificate would outweigh the additional costs
of design and production.
Section 23.841 Pressurized Cabins
The revision to Sec. 23.841(a) extends the cabin pressure
requirements of current paragraph (a), which apply to airplanes
certificated for operation above 31,000 feet, to airplanes certificated
for operation above 25,000 feet. Current part 25, JAR 25, and proposed
JAR 23 include the same requirement. This revision is intended to
protect airplane occupants if a malfunction occurs at altitudes where
symptoms of hypoxia occur, usually above 25,000 feet.
[[Page 5162]]
For airplanes that will be certificated for maximum altitude
operation between 25,000 feet and 31,000 feet, the provision requires
two additional pressure altitude regulators and associated plumbing.
Industry sources estimate that the requirement will cost an incremental
$1,000 in engineering design per affected airplane model and $2,000 per
production airplane. Any additional weight will be negligible.
The benefits of the proposal derive from the incremental protection
against hypoxia afforded to occupants of airplanes certificated for
maximum altitudes between 25,000 and 31,000 feet. Due to the increasing
use of turbine engines, more part 23 airplanes are likely to be
approved for operation above 25,000 feet. In the absence of this rule,
an increasing number of occupants would be exposed to the potential for
harm in the event of a failure or malfunction of the pressure system on
these airplanes.
Section 23.855 Cargo and Baggage Compartment Fire Protection
Paragraph (a) requires all sources of heat within each cargo and
baggage compartment that are capable of igniting the compartment
contents to be shielded and insulated to prevent such ignition.
Existing Sec. 23.787(f) requires that cargo compartment lamps be
installed so as to prevent contact between the lamp bulb and cargo. The
final rule will clarify and extend this provision to include all
sources of heat for baggage as well as cargo compartments.
Lights and (rarely) heaters for pets are typically the only sources
of heat located in a baggage or cargo compartment. A wire cage, costing
no more than $20, around the heat source would meet these requirements.
The FAA estimates that the total cost of compliance per airplane will
be no more than $40 in those rare cases where such protection would not
have been provided anyway. The benefit of the proposed provision is a
reduction in the possibility of fire caused by the ignition of
compartment contents by lights or heaters.
Paragraph (b) requires cargo and baggage compartments to be
constructed of materials that meet the appropriate provisions of
Sec. 23.853(d)(3). Currently these requirements apply to commuter
category airplanes and to the materials used in the compartments of
these airplanes. The new requirement extends this applicability to the
cargo and baggage compartments of all part 23 airplanes. In effect, the
new requirement requires materials that are self-extinguishing, rather
than flame resistant, as currently required under Sec. 23.787(d).
Information provided by manufacturers shows that materials that
meet self-extinguishing flame requirements are available at a slightly
higher cost than materials that meet only flame resistant requirements.
The FAA conservatively estimates that the incremental costs of
complying with Sec. 23.855(b) will be less than $200 per airplane. The
safety benefits of this provision will be an increase in cargo and
baggage compartment fire protection.
New paragraph (c) adds new fire protection requirements for cargo
and baggage compartments for commuter category airplanes. The rule
requires one of the following three alternatives:
(1) The compartment must be located where pilots seated at their
duty station would easily discover the fire, or the compartment must be
equipped with a smoke or fire detector system to provide a warning at
the pilot's station. The compartment must also be accessible for fire
extinguisher application.
(2) The compartment may be inaccessible, but must be equipped with
a fire detector system that provides a warning at the pilot's station,
and the compartment must have ceiling and sidewall floor panels
constructed of materials that have been subjected to and meet the
vertical self-extinguishing tests of appendix F to part 23.
(3) The compartment must be constructed and sealed to contain any
fire.
The FAA cannot predict the designs of cargo and baggage
compartments for future airplanes. If manufacturers choose to use smoke
detectors, however, no more than 2 smoke detectors would be required
per airplane. An aerospace engineer can design the smoke detector
system in approximately 30 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per hour,
for a total cost of $1,800 per certification. Two detectors, including
wiring and installation, are estimated to cost about $4,550.
Maintenance costs for the smoke detectors will cost approximately $100
per year.
Materials that meet the vertical self-extinguishing tests of
appendix F (alternative 2 in the discussion above) will result in
incremental costs of less than $200 per airplane. For alternative 3,
the FAA estimates that it will cost $500 to construct a sealed
compartment, or a total of $1,000 for 2 compartments, if the
manufacturer chooses that method of complying with the proposed
requirement.
Irrespective of the individual compliance method, the benefits of
the provision will come from the increased likelihood that a cargo or
baggage compartment fire could either be extinguished or contained.
Section 23.1303 Flight and Navigation Instruments
Revised Sec. 23.1303(d) adds the requirement for a free air
temperature indicator for those airplanes whose performance must be
based on weight, altitude, and temperature. This requirement already
applies to turbine-powered airplanes. The final rule extends the
requirement to reciprocating engine-powered airplanes of more than
6,000 pounds. Manufacturers currently include free air temperature
indicators as standard equipment on all part 23 airplanes, and would
continue to do so in future designs in the absence of the requirement.
Since the provision formalizes current practice, any costs would be
negligible. Benefits will accrue from the requirement that the
information necessary to determine the performance envelope of the
airplane be available to the pilot.
New Sec. 23.1303(g) identifies specific instruments, and the limits
of those instruments, required for commuter category airplanes. New
Sec. 23.1303(g)(1) states that if airspeed limitations vary with
altitude, the airspeed indicators must show the variation of the
maximum operating limit speed (VMO) with altitude. Industry
sources indicate that an airspeed indicator with a VMO ``pointer''
would cost $1,000 more than one without. Since two airspeed indicators
are required on commuter airplanes, the incremental cost of this
requirement will be $2,000 per commuter category airplane produced. The
potential safety benefit of the requirement derives from the
requirement that the information necessary to determine the maximum
operating limit speed be available at all altitudes.
New Sec. 23.1303(g)(3) requires (for commuter category IFR-approved
airplanes with passenger seating configurations of 10 or more) a third,
independent, attitude indicator (AI). Industry sources estimate that an
aerospace engineer can design and document a third attitude instrument
system in 100 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per hour, totalling
$6,000 per certification. It is estimated that an AI will cost
approximately $8,000, including a standby battery, and that the
installation will cost $2,200 for 40 hours of a mechanic's time at a
burdened rate of $55 per hour. However, Sec. 23.1311(a)(5), discussed
below, deletes the requirement for a rate-of-turn indicator when an
independent attitude indicator is installed. The costs
[[Page 5163]]
associated with a rate-of-turn indicator include: 40 hours of design
and documentation costs, $1,000 per indicator, and 40 hours of
installation. Therefore, the incremental cost for an IFR-approved
airplane with a passenger seating capacity of 10 or more will be $3,600
per certification for 60 hours of engineering (100 hours for the AI,
minus 40 hours for the rate-of-turn indicator); and $7,000 per airplane
for the instrument ($8,000 for the AI, minus $1,000 for the rate-of-
turn indicator); and no additional cost for the installation (40 hours
for the AI, minus 40 hours for the rate-of-turn indicator).
The potential safety benefits of a third, independent attitude
indicator derive from the reduced potential for erroneous attitude
information. Currently, two attitude instruments are required for a ten
passenger, IFR-approved commuter category airplane. Service experience
has shown that a failure can occur whereby an attitude indicator can
appear to be working when it is actually providing incorrect
information. During such a failure, pilots may have difficulty
determining which instrument to follow, and hazardous flight attitudes
may result. A third attitude indicator will allow the crew to retain
reliable attitude information even in cases where one instrument is not
operating correctly.
Section 23.1326 Pitot Heat Indication System
New Sec. 23.1326 requires the installation of a pitot tube heat
indicating system on those airplanes required to be equipped with a
heated pitot tube. Heated pitot tubes ensure that moisture will not
freeze in the tube and block or partially block the airspeed system.
A pitot heat indicating system, including an in-line current
sensor, panel light, and associated wiring, costs approximately $500.
According to industry sources, an aerospace engineer can design and
document such a system in 20 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per hour,
totalling $1,200. A mechanic can install the system in 20 hours at a
burdened rate of $55 per hour, totalling $1,100. The estimated non-
recurring cost per certification, therefore, will total $2,800 ($1,200
for design, $500 for the certification airplane's indicator, and $1,100
for installation of that indicator). The estimated cost per production
airplane will be $1,600 ($500 for the system and $1,100 for
installation).
A pitot heat indicating system can advise the pilots of any
inoperative heating element in the pitot tube and that subsequent
inaccuracies could result. The provision will reduce the likelihood
that pilots would rely on inaccurate airspeed information resulting
from a blocked or partially blocked pitot tube.
Section 23.1353 Storage Battery Design and Installation
New Sec. 23.1353(h) requires that, in the event of a complete loss
of the primary electrical power generating system, airplane battery
capacity must be sufficient to supply at least 30 minutes of electrical
power to those loads essential to the continued safe flight and landing
of the airplane.
In some cases, manufacturers may need to install larger batteries
with greater capacities to comply with the requirements. The FAA
estimates that the size and capacity of a larger battery will add no
more than a few pounds (incremental operating costs of less than $10
per year) and $20 to $30 of additional cost for the battery.
On some airplanes, a ``load shedding'' procedure, where the pilot
would sequentially turn off certain equipment, could be required either
in place of or in addition to a larger battery. The procedure would be
provided in the pilot's operating handbook (POH). The FAA estimates
that an aerospace engineer can establish a load shedding procedure in
10 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per hour, for a total cost of $600
per affected certification.
Irrespective of the method of compliance, the provision will
increase the likelihood that sufficient electrical power will be
available to safely land the airplane in the event of an electrical
generating system failure.
Section 23.1359 Electrical System Fire Protection
Revised Sec. 23.1359(c) provides burn criteria for electrical wire
and cables. A revision to appendix F to part 23 adds appropriate wire
testing criteria. Demonstrating and documenting that electrical wires
and cables meet the requirements of this provision will take an
aerospace engineer approximately 4 hours at a burdened rate of $60 per
hour, for a total cost of $240 per certification. The requirement and
testing criteria increase the likelihood that necessary wires and
cables will continue to function in the event of a fire.
Section 23.1365 Electrical Cables and Equipment
Section 23.1365(d) adds a requirement for the identification of
electrical cables, terminals, and connectors. Different colored wires
and/or tags could be used in conjunction with a wiring diagram to
identify the cables, terminals, and connectors. The FAA estimates that
a draftsman can design and document this identification system in 80
hours at a burdened rate of $55 per hour, a total of $4,400 per
certification. Incremental installation costs will be approximately
$100 per airplane.
The increasing use of electrical systems in part 23 airplanes has
added to the difficulty of wiring installation. The requirement for
cable identification will increase the likelihood that cables are
correctly installed initially and will be correctly reinstalled as part
of later maintenance or modification.
Section 23.1401 Anticollision Light System
The final rule revises Sec. 13.1401 to require the installation of
an anticollision light system on all part 23 airplanes. Existing
Sec. 23.1401 requires an anticollision light system only if
certification for night operations is requested. Many manufacturers
currently install anticollision light systems on all airplanes they
produce.
Industry sources estimate that an aerospace engineer can design and
document an anticollision light system in 40 hours at a burdened rate
of $60 per hour, for a total of $2,400 per affected certification. The
system will cost $500 and will take a mechanic approximately 20 hours
to install at a burdened rate of $55 per hour, a total of $1,600 per
affected airplane ($500 + (20 hours x $55 per hour) = $1,600). The
weight penalty will be negligible. Only those future models that would
not otherwise have anticollision light systems will actually incur
incremental costs as a result of this provision.
The increasing speeds resulting from improved technology,
especially turbine engines, warrant the use of anticollision lights for
day operations as well as night. The reports of midair collisions for
1984 through 1990 document that 269 aircraft were involved in midair
collisions in which 108 fatalities occurred. After data were filtered
(to account for night operations, IFR conditions, and aircraft not
affected by this rule), 167 airplanes were involved in collisions that
occurred in daytime VFR conditions. The reports do not reveal whether
the airplanes were using anticollision lights at the time of the
accidents.
The FAA holds that requiring the installation of anticollision
lights on all newly certificated airplanes, and requiring their use
during day operations (revised Sec. 91.209), will reduce the number of
daylight midair accidents. Even if the requirement were
[[Page 5164]]
only 25 percent effective, the accident history indicates that
approximately 17 fatalities could be avoided during a similar 6-year
period.
Section 23.1431 Electronic Equipment
The final rule adds three new paragraphs to Sec. 23.1431. New
paragraph (c) states that airplanes required to be operated by more
than one flightcrew member must be evaluated to determine if the
flightcrew members, when they are seated at their duty stations, can
converse without difficulty under the actual cockpit noise conditions
when the airplane is being operated. If the required evaluation shows
that the noise level does not impair conversation, no further action
would be required. If the evaluation shows that conversation would be
difficult, however, an intercommunication system will be required.
The FAA estimates that an evaluation of cockpit noise could be
conducted in conjunction with other certification testing, therefore,
no incremental costs are associated with the evaluation. An aerospace
engineer could design an intercom system in 20 hours at a burdened rate
of $60 per hour, for a total of $1,200 per affected certification. The
FAA estimates that the addition of an intercom system will cost
approximately $500 per airplane. A mechanic could install the system in
approximately 20 hours at a burdened rate of $55 per hour. The total
incremental production cost for an affected airplane, therefore, will
be $1,600 ($500 + (20 hours x $55 per hour)).
New paragraph (d) requires that, if the communication equipment
that is installed includes any means of switching from the receive mode
to the transmit mode, the equipment must use ``off-on'' transmitter
switching that turns the transmitter off when it is not being used. The
cost of this feature is included in the $500 cost of the intercom,
described above.
NTSB investigations of at least two commuter accidents determined
that excessive cockpit noise levels probably adversely affected the
ability of the flight crews to communicate. (Bar Harbor Airlines,
Flight 1808, August 25, 1985, 8 fatalities; and Henson Airlines, Flight
1517, September 23, 1985, 14 fatalities.) As a result, the Board
recommended (Recommendation No. A-86-113) that the FAA require the
installation and use of crew interphone systems in the cockpit of
airplanes operating under part 135. The benefit of the new requirement
derives from the increased likelihood that flightcrew members will be
able to converse without difficulty and that the safety hazard of
miscommunication will be reduced.
Section 23.1447 Equipment Standards for Oxygen Dispensing Units
New Sec. 23.1447(a)(4) requires that if radio equipment is
installed in an airplane, flightcrew oxygen dispensing units must be
designed to allow use of the communication equipment when oxygen is
being used.
Industry sources estimate that an oxygen mask with an integral
microphone costs $1,000 more than an oxygen mask without a microphone.
The costs per affected airplane, therefore, will be $2,000 for two
masks. The benefit of the requirement is that it will allow flightcrew
communication under all operating conditions, including operations when
oxygen is required.
Section 23.1453 Protection of Oxygen Equipment From Rupture
This new section clarifies the rupture protection needed for oxygen
system installation. Rupture protection for oxygen systems is currently
required by the application of the structures load requirements of part
23. The addition of Sec. 23.1453(a) clarifies the application of these
load requirements and identifies the need to consider maximum
temperatures and pressures that may be present. Section 23.1453(b)
identifies the protection to be provided for oxygen pressure sources
and the lines that connect these sources to the oxygen system shutoff
valves.
Industry sources estimate that an aerospace engineer could analyze
and document the loads on each element of the oxygen system in 16 hours
at a burdened rate of $60 per hour, for a total cost of $960. The
routing of oxygen pressure sources and lines to protect them from
unsafe temperatures and crash landings would be part of an airplane's
basic design and will not impose incremental costs.
Section 91.209 Aircraft Lights
New Sec. 91.209(b) requires airplanes equipped with an
anticollision light system to operate those lights during all
operations, including daytime VFR.
The incremental cost of this provision consists of light bulb
replacement. The FAA estimates that a light bulb for an anticollision
light system costs approximately $50 and that this provision would
necessitate an incremental bulb replacement every two years.
Accordingly, the cost is projected to equal $25 per year, per affected
operating airplane. The FAA holds that any grounding of an airplane due
to a faulty bulb or light system will be rare and quickly corrected.
The cost of such grounding will be negligible, when compared with the
safety benefits of operating anticollision light systems.
In summary, the FAA holds that the benefits of the rule, though not
directly quantifiable, will exceed the expected costs. Each of the
provisions, as well as the entire final rule, will be cost beneficial.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily or
disproportionately burdened by Government regulations. The RFA requires
a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a proposed or final rule would
have a significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial,
on a substantial number of small entities. FAA Order 2100.14A,
Regulatory Flexibility Criteria and Guidance, establishes threshold
cost values and small entity size standards for complying with RFA
review requirements in FAA rulemaking actions. The Order defines
``small entities'' in terms of thresholds, ``significant economic
impact'' in terms of annualized costs thresholds, and ``substantial
number'' as a number which is not less than eleven and which is more
than one-third of the small entities subject to the proposed or final
rule.
Order 2100.14A specifies a size threshold for classification as a
small manufacturer as 75 or fewer employees. There are approximately 8
small part 23 airplane manufacturers. The annualized cost threshold for
significant impact, expressed in 1995 dollars, is $18,700. No part 23
airplane manufacturer's annualized cost will exceed this cost
threshold.
Order 2100.14A specifies a size threshold for classification as a
small operator as 9 aircraft owned. The annualized cost threshold for
significant impact, expressed in 1995 dollars, are $67,000 for air
carriers whose fleet has a seating capacity of fewer than 60 and $4,700
for an unscheduled operator. No part 23 airplane operator's annualized
cost will exceed this cost threshold.
The amendments in the final rule, therefore, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Trade Impact Assessment
The rule will not constitute a barrier to international trade,
including the export of U.S. airplanes to foreign countries and the
import of foreign airplanes into the United States. Instead,
[[Page 5165]]
the systems airworthiness standards have been harmonized with those of
the Joint Aviation Authorities and will result in cost savings to
manufacturers in the United States and in JAA member countries.
Federalism Implications
The regulations adopted herein do not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Conclusion
The FAA is revising the airworthiness standards to provide systems
and equipment standards for normal, utility, acrobatic, and commuter
category airplanes that are substantively the same as the standards
that will be proposed for the same category airplanes by the Joint
Aviation Authorities in Europe. The revision will reduce the regulatory
burden on the United States and European airplane manufacturers by
relieving them of the need to show compliance with different standards
each time they seek certification approval of an airplane in the United
States or in a country that is a member of the JAA.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and based on the
findings in the Regulatory Evaluation, the FAA has determined that this
regulation is significant under Executive Order 12866. In addition, the
FAA certifies that this regulation, will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small
entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This
final rule is considered significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). A regulatory evaluation of
the rule has been placed in the docket. A copy may be obtained by
contacting the person identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 23
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.
14 CFR Part 91
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR parts 23 and 91 as follows:
PART 23--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, ACROBATIC, AND
COMMUTER CATEGORY AIRPLANES.
1. The authority citation for part 23 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.
2. Section 23.677(a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.677 Trim systems.
(a) Proper precautions must be taken to prevent inadvertent,
improper, or abrupt trim tab operation. There must be means near the
trim control to indicate to the pilot the direction of trim control
movement relative to airplane motion. In addition, there must be means
to indicate to the pilot the position of the trim device with respect
to both the range of adjustment and, in the case of lateral and
directional trim, the neutral position. This means must be visible to
the pilot and must be located and designed to prevent confusion. The
pitch trim indicator must be clearly marked with a position or range
within which it has been demonstrated that take-off is safe for all
center of gravity positions and each flap position approved for
takeoff.
* * * * *
3. A new Sec. 23.691 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.691 Artificial stall barrier system.
If the function of an artificial stall barrier, for example, stick
pusher, is used to show compliance with Sec. 23.201(c), the system must
comply with the following:
(a) With the system adjusted for operation, the plus and minus
airspeeds at which downward pitching control will be provided must be
established.
(b) Considering the plus and minus airspeed tolerances established
by paragraph (a) of this section, an airspeed must be selected for the
activation of the downward pitching control that provides a safe margin
above any airspeed at which any unsatisfactory stall characteristics
occur.
(c) In addition to the stall warning required Sec. 23.07, a warning
that is clearly distinguishable to the pilot under all expected flight
conditions without requiring the pilot's attention, must be provided
for faults that would prevent the system from providing the required
pitching motion.
(d) Each system must be designed so that the artificial stall
barrier can be quickly and positively disengaged by the pilots to
prevent unwanted downward pitching of the airplane by a quick release
(emergency) control that meets the requirements of Sec. 23.1329(b).
(e) A preflight check of the complete system must be established
and the procedure for this check made available in the Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM). Preflight checks that are critical to the safety of the
airplane must be included in the limitations section of the AFM.
(f) For those airplanes whose design includes an autopilot system:
(1) A quick release (emergency) control installed in accordance
with Sec. 23.1329(b) may be used to meet the requirements of paragraph
(d), of this section, and
(2) The pitch servo for that system may be used to provide the
stall downward pitching motion.
(g) In showing compliance with Sec. 23.1309, the system must be
evaluated to determine the effect that any announced or unannounced
failure may have on the continued safe flight and landing of the
airplane or the ability of the crew to cope with any adverse conditions
that may result from such failures. This evaluation must consider the
hazards that would result from the airplane's flight characteristics if
the system was not provided, and the hazard that may result from
unwanted downward pitching motion, which could result from a failure at
airspeeds above the selected stall speed.
4. Section 23.697(c) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.697 Wing flap controls
* * * * *
(c) If compliance with Sec. 23.145(b)(3) necessitates wing flap
retraction to positions that are not fully retracted, the wing flap
control lever settings corresponding to those positions must be
positively located such that a definite change of direction of movement
of the lever is necessary to select settings beyond those settings.
5. Section 23.701 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.701 Flap interconnection.
(a) * * *
(1) Be synchronized by a mechanical interconnection between the
movable flap surfaces that is independent of the flap drive system; or
by an approved equivalent means; or
(2) Be designed so that the occurrence of any failure of the flap
system that would result in an unsafe flight
[[Page 5166]]
characteristic of the airplane is extremely improbable; or
* * * * *
6. A new Sec. 23.703 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.703 Takeoff warning system.
For commuter category airplanes, unless it can be shown that a lift
or longitudinal trim device that affects the takeoff performance of the
aircraft would not give an unsafe takeoff configuration when selection
out of an approved takeoff position, a takeoff warning system must be
installed and meet the following requirements:
(a) The system must provide to the pilots an aural warning that is
automatically activated during the initial portion of the takeoff role
if the airplane is in a configuration that would not allow a safe
takeoff. The warning must continue until--
(1) The configuration is changed to allow safe takeoff, or
(2) Action is taken by the pilot to abandon the takeoff roll.
(b) The means used to activate the system must function properly
for all authorized takeoff power settings and procedures and throughout
the ranges of takeoff weights, altitudes, and temperatures for which
certification is requested.
Sec. 23.723 [Amended]
7. Section 23.723(b) is amended by changing the word ``reserved''
to ``reserve''.
8. Section 23.729 is amended by revising paragraph (e) and by
adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.729 Landing gear extension and retraction system.
* * * * *
(e) Position indicator. If a retractable landing gear is used,
there must be a landing gear position indicator (as well as necessary
switches to actuate the indicator) or other means to inform the pilot
that each gear is secured in the extended (or retracted) position. If
switches are used, they must be located and coupled to the landing gear
mechanical system in a manner that prevents an erroneous indication of
either ``down and locked'' if each gear is not in the fully extended
position, or ``up and locked'' if each landing gear is not in the fully
retracted position.
* * * * *
(g) Equipment located in the landing gear bay. If the landing gear
bay is used as the location for equipment other than the landing gear,
that equipment must be designed and installed to minimize damage from
items such as a tire burst, or rocks, water, and slush that may enter
the landing gear bay.
9. Section 23.735 is amended by redesignating paragraph (c) as
paragraph (d), by revising the introductory text of paragraph (a), and
by adding new paragraphs (c) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.735 Brakes.
(a) Brakes must be provided. The landing brake kinetic energy
capacity rating of each main wheel brake assembly must not be less than
the kinetic energy absorption requirements determined under either of
the following methods:
* * * * *
(c) During the landing distance determination required by
Sec. 23.75, the pressure on the wheel braking system must not exceed
the pressure specified by the brake manufacturer.
* * * * *
(e) In addition, for commuter category airplanes, the rejected
takeoff brake kinetic energy capacity rating of each main wheel brake
assembly must not be less than the kinetic energy absorption
requirements determined under either of the following methods--
(1) The brake kinetic energy absorption requirements must be based
on a conservative rational analysis of the sequence of events expected
during a rejected takeoff at the design takeoff weight.
(2) Instead of a rational analysis, the kinetic energy absorption
requirements for each main wheel brake assembly may be derived from the
following formula--
KE=0.0443 WV\2\N
where,
KE=Kinetic energy per wheel (ft.-lbs.);
W=Design takeoff weight (lbs.);
V=Ground speed, in knots, associated with the maximum value of V1
selected in accordance with Sec. 23.51(c)(1);
N=Number of main wheels with brakes.
10. A new Sec. 23.745 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.745 Nose/tail wheel steering.
(a) If nose/tail wheel steering is installed, it must be
demonstrated that its use does not require exceptional pilot skill
during takeoff and landing, in crosswinds, or in the event of an engine
failure; or its use must be limited to low speed maneuvering.
(b) Movement of the pilot's steering control must not interfere
with the retraction or extension of the landing gear.
11. Section 23.775 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c);
by redesignating paragraphs (d) and (e) as paragraphs (e) and (d); by
revising the newly designated paragraph (e); and by adding a new
paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.775 Windshields and windows.
(a) The internal panels of windshields and windows must be
constructed of a nonsplintering material, such as nonsplintering safety
glass.
* * * * *
(c) On pressurized airplanes, if certification for operation up to
and including 25,000 feet is requested, an enclosure canopy including a
representative part of the installation must be subjected to special
tests to account for the combined effects of continuous and cyclic
pressurization loadings and flight loads, or compliance with the fail-
safe requirements of paragraph (d) of this section must be shown.
* * * * *
(e) The windshield and side windows forward of the pilot's back
when the pilot is seated in the normal flight position must have a
luminous transmittance value of not less than 70 percent.
* * * * *
(h) In addition, for commuter category airplanes, the following
applies:
(1) Windshield panes directly in front of the pilots in the normal
conduct of their duties, and the supporting structures for these panes,
must withstand, without penetration, the impact of a two-pound bird
when the velocity of the airplane (relative to the bird along the
airplane's flight path) is equal to the airplane's maximum approach
flap speed.
(2) The windshield panels in front of the pilots must be arranged
so that, assuming the loss of vision through any one panel, one or more
panels remain available for use by a pilot seated at a pilot station to
permit continued safe flight and landing.
12. Section 23.783 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and by
adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.783 Doors.
* * * * *
(b) Passenger doors must not be located with respect to any
propeller disk or any other potential hazard so as to endanger persons
using the door.
* * * * *
(g) If lavatory doors are installed, they must be designed to
preclude an occupant from becoming trapped inside the lavatory. If a
locking mechanism is installed, it must be capable of being unlocked
from outside of the lavatory.
[[Page 5167]]
13. Section 23.785 is amended by adding introductory text and by
revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.785 Seats, berths, litters, safety belts and shoulder
harnesses.
There must be a seat or berth for each occupant that meets the
following:
* * * * *
(b) Each forward-facing or aft-facing seat/restraint system in
normal, utility, or acrobatic category airplanes must consist of a
seat, a safety belt, and a shoulder harness, with a metal-to-metal
latching device, that are designed to provide the occupant protection
provisions required in Sec. 23.562. Other seat orientations must
provide the same level of occupant protection as a forward-facing or
aft-facing seat with a safety belt and a shoulder harness, and must
provide the protection provisions of Sec. 23.562.
(c) For commuter category airplanes, each seat and the supporting
structure must be designed for occupants weighing at least 170 pounds
when subjected to the inertia loads resulting from the ultimate static
load factors prescribed in Sec. 23.561(b)(2) of this part. Each
occupant must be protected from serious head injury when subjected to
the inertia loads resulting from these load factors by a safety belt
and shoulder harness, with a metal-to-metal latching device, for the
front seats and a safety belt, or a safety belt and shoulder harness,
with a metal-to-metal latching device, for each seat other than the
front seats.
* * * * *
14. Section 23.787 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.787 Baggage and cargo compartments.
(a) Each baggage and cargo compartment must:
(1) Be designed for its placarded maximum weight of contents and
for the critical load distributions at the appropriate maximum load
factors corresponding to the flight and ground load conditions of this
part.
(2) Have means to prevent the contents of any compartment from
becoming a hazard by shifting, and to protect any controls, wiring,
lines, equipment or accessories whose damage or failure would affect
safe operations.
(3) Have a means to protect occupants from injury by the contents
of any compartment, located aft of the occupants and separated by
structure, when the ultimate forward inertial load factor is 9g and
assuming the maximum allowed baggage or cargo weight for the
compartment.
(b) Designs that provide for baggage or cargo to be carried in the
same compartment as passengers must have a means to protect the
occupants from injury when the baggage or cargo is subjected to the
inertial loads resulting from the ultimate static load factors of
Sec. 23.561(b)(3), assuming the maximum allowed baggage or cargo weight
for the compartment.
(c) For airplanes that are used only for the carriage of cargo, the
flightcrew emergency exits must meet the requirements of Sec. 23.807
under any cargo loading conditions.
15. A new Sec. 23.791 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.791 Passenger information signs.
For those airplanes in which the flightcrew members cannot observe
the other occupants' seats or where the flightcrew members' compartment
is separated from the passenger compartment, there must be at least one
illuminated sign (using either letters or symbols) notifying all
passengers when seat belts should be fastened. Signs that notify when
seat belts should be fastened must:
(a) When illuminated, be legible to each person seated in the
passenger compartment under all probable lighting conditions; and
(b) Be installed so that a flightcrew member can, when seated at
the flightcrew member's station, turn the illumination on and off.
16. Section 23.807 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)
introductory text and (b)(5) and by adding new paragraphs (a)(4) and
(b)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.807 Emergency exits.
(a) * * *
(4) Emergency exits must not be located with respect to any
propeller disk or any other potential hazard so as to endanger persons
using that exit.
(b) Type and operation. Emergency exits must be movable windows,
panels, canopies, or external doors, openable from both inside and
outside the airplane, that provide a clear and unobstructed opening
large enough to admit a 19-by-26-inch ellipse. Auxiliary locking
devices used to secure the airplane must be designed to be overridden
by the normal internal opening means. The inside handles of emergency
exits that open outward must be adequately protected against
inadvertent operation. In addition, each emergency exit must--
* * * * *
(5) In the case of acrobatic category airplanes, allow each
occupant to abandon the airplane at any speed between VSO and
VD; and
(6) In the case of utility category airplanes certificated for
spinning, allow each occupant to abandon the airplane at the highest
speed likely to be achieved in the maneuver for which the airplane is
certificated.
* * * * *
Sec. 23.841 [Amended]
17. Section 23.841 is amended in paragraph (a) by removing the
number ``31,000'' and replacing it with ``25,000''.
18. Section 23.853 is amended by revising the section heading to
read as follows:
Sec. 23.853 Passenger and crew compartment interiors.
* * * * *
19. A new Sec. 23.855 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.855 Cargo and baggage compartment fire protection.
(a) Sources of heat within each cargo and baggage compartment that
are capable of igniting the compartment contents must be shielded and
insulated to prevent such ignition.
(b) Each cargo and baggage compartment must be constructed of
materials that meet the appropriate provisions of Sec. 23.853(d)(3).
(c) In addition, for commuter category airplanes, each cargo and
baggage compartment must:
(1) Be located where the presence of a fire would be easily
discovered by the pilots when seated at their duty station, or it must
be equipped with a smoke or fire detector system to give a warning at
the pilots' station, and provide sufficient access to enable a pilot to
effectively reach any part of the compartment with the contents of a
hand held fire extinguisher, or
(2) Be equipped with a smoke or fire detector system to give a
warning at the pilots' station and have ceiling and sidewall liners and
floor panels constructed of materials that have been subjected to and
meet the 45 degree angle test of Appendix F of this part. 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. The compartment must be
constructed to provide fire protection that is not less than that
required of its individual panels; or
(3) Be constructed and sealed to contain any fire within the
compartment.
[[Page 5168]]
20. Section 23.867 is amended by revising the heading that precedes
the section and the section heading to read as follows:
Electrical Bonding and Lighting Protection
Sec. 23.867 Electrical bonding and protection against lightning and
static electricity.
* * * * *
21. Section 23.1303 is amended by revising the introductory text;
by amending paragraph (d) by inserting the words ``reciprocating
engine-powered airplanes of more than 6,000 pounds maximum weight and''
between the words ``For'' and ``turbine''; by amending paragraph (e)
concluding text by adding a line to read, ``The lower limit of the
warning device must be set to minimize nuisance warning;'' at the end
of the paragraph and by adding new paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 23.1303 Flight and navigation instruments.
The following are the minimum required flight and navigation
instruments:
* * * * *
(f) When an attitude display is installed, the instrument design
must not provide any means, accessible to the flightcrew, of adjusting
the relative positions of the attitude reference symbol and the horizon
line beyond that necessary for parallax correction.
(g) In addition, for commuter category airplanes:
(1) If airspeed limitations vary with altitude, the airspeed
indicator must have a maximum allowable airspeed indicator showing the
variation of VMO with altitude.
(2) The altimeter must be a sensitive type.
(3) Having a passenger seating configuration of 10 or more,
excluding the pilot's seats and that are approved for IFR operations, a
third attitude instrument must be provided that:
(i) Is powered from a source independent of the electrical
generating system;
(ii) Continues reliable operation for a minimum of 30 minutes after
total failure of the electrical generating system;
(iii) Operates independently of any other attitude indicating
system;
(iv) Is operative without selection after total failure of the
electrical generating system;
(v) Is located on the instrument panel in a position acceptable to
the Administrator that will make it plainly visible to and usable by
any pilot at the pilot's station; and
(vi) Is appropriately lighted during all phases of operation.
Sec. 23.1307 [Amended]
22. Section 23.1307 is amended by removing paragraphs (a) and (b);
and by removing the designation from paragraph (c).
23. Section 23.1309(a)(4) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1309 Equipment, systems, and installations.
(a) * * *
(4) In a commuter category airplane, must be designed to safeguard
against hazards to the airplane in the event of their malfunction or
failure.
* * * * *
24. Section 23.1311 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1311 Electronic display instrument systems.
(a) Electronic display indicators, including those with features
that make isolation and independence between powerplant instrument
systems impractical, must:
(1) Meet the arrangement and visibility requirements of
Sec. 23.1321.
(2) Be easily legible under all lighting conditions encountered in
the cockpit, including direct sunlight, considering the expected
electronic display brightness level at the end of an electronic display
indictor's useful life. Specific limitations on display system useful
life must be contained in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
required by Sec. 23.1529.
(3) Not inhibit the primary display of attitude, airspeed,
altitude, or powerplant parameters needed by any pilot to set power
within established limitations, in any normal mode of operation.
(4) Not inhibit the primary display of engine parameters needed by
any pilot to properly set or monitor powerplant limitations during the
engine starting mode of operation.
(5) Have an independent magnetic direction indicator and either an
independent secondary mechanical altimeter, airspeed indicator, and
attitude instrument or individual electronic display indicators for the
altitude, airspeed, and attitude that are independent from the
airplane's primary electrical power system. These secondary instruments
may be installed in panel positions that are displaced from the primary
positions specified by Sec. 23.1321(d), but must be located where they
meet the pilot's visibility requirements of Sec. 23.1321(a).
(6) Incorporate sensory cues for the pilot that are equivalent to
those in the instrument being replaced by the electronic display
indicators.
(7) Incorporate visual displays of instrument markings, required by
Secs. 23.1541 through 23.1553, or visual displays that alert the pilot
to abnormal operational values or approaches to established limitation
values, for each parameter required to be displayed by this part.
(b) The electronic display indicators, including their systems and
installations, and considering other airplane systems, must be designed
so that one display of information essential for continued safe flight
and landing will remain available to the crew, without need for
immediate action by any pilot for continued safe operation, after any
single failure or probable combination of failures.
(c) As used in this section, ``instrument'' includes devices that
are physically contained in one unit, and devices that are composed of
two or more physically separate units or components connected together
(such as a remote indicating gyroscopic direction indicator that
includes a magnetic sensing element, a gyroscopic unit, an amplifier,
and an indicator connected together). As used in this section,
``primary'' display refers to the display of a parameter that is
located in the instrument panel such that the pilot looks at it first
when wanting to view that parameter.
Sec. 23.1321 [Amended]
25. Section 23.1321 is amended by removing the words ``certificated
for flight under instrument flight rules or of more than 6,000 pounds
maximum weight'' from paragraph (d) introductory text.
26. Section 23.1323 is amended by removing paragraph (d);
redesignating paragraph (e) as (d) and paragraph (c) as (e); by
removing the words ``in flight and'' from the first sentence of
redesignated paragraph (e); and by adding new paragraphs (c) and (f) to
read as follows:
Sec. 23.1323 Airspeed indicating system.
* * * * *
(c) The design and installation of each airspeed indicating system
must provide positive drainage of moisture from the pitot static
plumbing.
* * * * *
(f) For commuter category airplanes, where duplicate airspeed
indicators are required, their respective pitot tubes must be far
enough apart to avoid damage to both tubes in a collision with a bird.
[[Page 5169]]
Sec. 23.1325 [Amended]
27. Section 23.1325 is amended by inserting the words ``or icing''
between the words ``meteorological'' and ``conditions'' in paragraph
(g).
28. A new Sec. 23.1326 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1326 Pitot heat indication systems.
If a flight instrument pitot heating system is installed to meet
the requirements specified in Sec. 23.1323(d), an indication system
must be provided to indicate to the flight crew when that pitot heating
system is not operating. The indication system must comply with the
following requirements:
(a) The indication provided must incorporate an amber light that is
in clear view of a flightcrew member.
(b) The indication provided must be designed to alert the flight
crew if either of the following conditions exist:
(1) The pitot heating system is switched ``off.''
(2) The pitot heating system is switched ``on'' and any pitot tube
heating element is inoperative.
Sec. 23.1329 [Amended]
29. Section 23.1329(b) is amended by adding the parenthetical
phrase ``(both stick controls, if the airplane can be operated from
either pilot seat)'' between the words, ``or on the stick control,''
and the word ``such''.
30. Section 23.1337 is amended by revising the section heading, by
revising the introductory text of paragraph (b), by redesignating
paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) as paragraph (b)(5) and (b)(6),
respectively, and by adding a new paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1337 Powerplant instruments installation.
* * * * *
(b) Fuel quantity indication. There must be a means to indicate to
the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during
flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly marked
to indicate those units must be used. In addition:
* * * * *
(4) There must be a means to indicate the amount of usable fuel in
each tank when the airplane is on the ground (such as by a stick
gauge);
* * * * *
31. Section 23.1351 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(4), by
redesignating paragraph (b)(5) as (b)(4), by adding a sentence to the
end of paragraph (f) that reads, ``The external power connection must
be located so that its use will not result in a hazard to the airplane
or ground personnel'', and by revising paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), and
(c)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1351 General.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Electric power sources must function properly when connected in
combination or independently.
(3) No failure or malfunction of any electric power source may
impair the ability of any remaining source to supply load circuits
essential for safe operation.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Automatic means must be provided to prevent damage to any
generator/alternator and adverse effects on the airplane electrical
system due to reverse current. A means must also be provided to
disconnect each generator/alternator from the battery and other
generators/alternators.
* * * * *
32. Section 23.1353(h) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1353 Storage battery design and installation.
* * * * *
(h) In the event of a complete loss of the primary electrical power
generating system, the battery must be capable of providing at least 30
minutes of electrical power to those loads that are essential to
continued safe flight and landing. The 30 minute time period includes
the time needed for the pilots to recognize the loss of generated power
and take appropriate load shedding action.
33. A new Sec. 23.1359 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1359 Electrical system fire protection.
(a) Each component of the electrical system must meet the
applicable fire protection requirements of Secs. 23.863 and 23.1182.
(b) Electrical cables, terminals, and equipment in designated fire
zones that are used during emergency procedures must be fire-resistant.
(c) Insulation on electrical wire and electrical cable must be
self-extinguishing when tested at an angle of 60 degrees in accordance
with the applicable portions of Appendix F of this part, or other
approved equivalent methods. The average burn length must not exceed 3
inches (76 mm) and the average flame time after removal of the flame
source must not exceed 30 seconds. Drippings from the test specimen
must not continue to flame for more than an average of 3 seconds after
falling.
Sec. 23.1361 [Amended]
34. Section 23.1361(c) is amended by removing the last two words
``in flight''.
35. Section 23.1365 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and by
adding new paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1365 Electrical cables and equipment.
* * * * *
(b) Any equipment that is associated with any electrical cable
installation and that would overheat in the event of circuit overload
or fault must be flame resistant. That equipment and the electrical
cables must not emit dangerous quantities of toxic fumes.
* * * * *
(d) Means of identification must be provided for electrical cables,
terminals, and connectors.
(e) Electrical cables must be installed such that the risk of
mechanical damage and/or damage cased by fluids vapors, or sources of
heat, is minimized.
(f) Where a cable cannot be protected by a circuit protection
device or other overload protection, it must not cause a fire hazard
under fault conditions.
36. Section 23.1383 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1383 Taxi and landing lights.
Each taxi and landing light must be designed and installed so that:
(a) No dangerous glare is visible to the pilots.
(b) The pilot is not seriously affected by halation.
(c) It provides enough light for night operations.
(d) It does not cause a fire hazard in any configuration.
37. Section 23.1401 is amended by revising the introductory text of
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1401 Anticollision light system.
(a) General. The airplane must have an anticollision light system
that:
* * * * *
Sec. 23.1413 [Amended]
38. Section 23.1413 is removed.
39. Section 23.1431 is amended by adding new paragraphs (c), (d),
and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1431 Electronic equipment.
* * * * *
(c) For those airplanes required to have more than one flightcrew
member, or whose operation will require more than one flightcrew
member, the cockpit must be evaluated to determine if the flightcrew
members, when seated at their duty station, can converse without
difficulty under the actual cockpit noise conditions when the airplane
is being
[[Page 5170]]
operated. If the airplane design includes provision for the use of
communication headsets, the evaluation must also consider conditions
where headsets are being used. If the evaluation shows conditions under
which it will be difficult to converse, an intercommunication system
must be provided.
(d) If installed communication equipment includes transmitter
``off-on'' switching, that switching means must be designed to return
from the ``transmit'' to the ``off'' position when it is released and
ensure that the transmitter will return to the off (non transmitting)
state.
(e) If provisions for the use of communication headsets are
provided, it must be demonstrated that the flightcrew members will
receive all aural warnings under the actual cockpit noise conditions
when the airplane is being operated when any headset is being used.
40. Section 23.1435(c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1435 Hydraulic systems.
* * * * *
(c) Accumulators. A hydraulic accumulator or reservoir may be
installed on the engine side of any firewall if--
(1) It is an integral part of an engine or propeller system, or
(2) The reservoir is nonpressurized and the total capacity of all
such nonpressurized reservoirs is one quart or less.
41. Section 23.1447 is amended by revising paragraphs (d) and (e)
and by adding a new paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1447 Equipment standards for oxygen dispensing units.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) If radio equipment is installed, the flightcrew oxygen
dispensing units must be designed to allow the use of that equipment
and to allow communication with any other required crew member while at
their assigned duty station.
* * * * *
(d) For a pressurized airplane designed to operate at flight
altitudes above 25,000 feet (MSL), the dispensing units must meet the
following:
(1) The dispensing units for passengers must be connected to an
oxygen supply terminal and be immediately available to each occupant
wherever seated.
(2) The dispensing units for crewmembers must be automatically
presented to each crewmember before the cabin pressure altitude exceeds
15,000 feet, or the units must be of the quick-donning type, connected
to an oxygen supply terminal that is immediately available to
crewmembers at their station.
(e) If certification for operation above 30,000 feet is requested,
the dispensing units for passengers must be automatically presented to
each occupant before the cabin pressure altitude exceeds 15,000 feet.
* * * * *
42. A new Sec. 23.1451 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1451 Fire protection for oxygen equipment.
Oxygen equipment and lines must:
(a) Not be installed in any designed fire zones.
(b) Be protected from heat that may be generated in, or escape
from, any designated fire zone.
(c) Be installed so that escaping oxygen cannot come in contact
with and cause ignition of grease, fluid, or vapor accumulations that
are present in normal operation or that may result from the failure or
malfunction of any other system.
43. A new Sec. 23.1453 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1453 Protection of oxygen equipment from rupture.
(a) Each element of the oxygen system must have sufficient strength
to withstand the maximum pressure and temperature, in combination with
any externally applied loads arising from consideration of limit
structural loads, that may be acting on that part of the system.
(b) Oxygen pressure sources and the lines between the source and
the shutoff means must be:
(1) Protected from unsafe temperatures; and
(2) Located where the probability and hazard of rupture in a crash
landing are minimized.
44. Section 23.1461(a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.1461 Equipment containing high energy rotors.
(a) Equipment, such as Auxiliary Power Units (APU) and constant
speed drive units, containing high energy rotors must meet paragraphs
(b), (c), or (d) of this section.
* * * * *
45. Appendix F to part 23 is amended by revising the introductory
paragraph, by amending paragraph (c) to change the reference from
paragraph (e) to paragraph (g), by amending paragraph (d) to change the
reference from paragraph (f) to paragraph (h), by redesignating current
paragraph (f) as paragraph (h), and by revising paragraph (b) and
adding new paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as follows:
Appendix F To Part 23 Test Procedure
Acceptable test procedure for self-extinguishing materials for
showing compliance with Secs. 23.853, 23.855 and 23.1359.
* * * * *
(b) Specimen configuration. Except as provided for materials
used in electrical wire and cable insulation and in small parts,
materials must be tested either as a section cut from a fabricated
part as installed in the airplane or as a specimen simulating a cut
section, such as: a specimen cut from a flat sheet of the material
or a model of the fabricated part. The specimen may be cut from any
location in a fabricated part; however, fabricated units, such as
sandwich panels, may not be separated for a test. The specimen
thickness must be no thicker than the minimum thickness to be
qualified for use in the airplane, except that: (1) Thick foam
parts, such as seat cushions, must be tested in \1/2\ inch
thickness; (2) when showing compliance with Sec. 23.853(d)(3)(v) for
materials used in small parts that must be tested, the materials
must be tested in no more than \1/8\ inch thickness; (3) when
showing compliance with Sec. 23.1359(c) for materials used in
electrical wire and cable insulation, the wire and cable specimens
must be the same size as used in the airplane. In the case of
fabrics, both the warp and fill direction of the weave must be
tested to determine the most critical flammability conditions. When
performing the tests prescribed in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this
appendix, the specimen must be mounted in a metal frame so that (1)
in the vertical tests of paragraph (d) of this appendix, the two
long edges and the upper edge are held securely; (2) in the
horizontal test of paragraph (e) of this appendix, the two long
edges and the edge away from the flame are held securely; (3) the
exposed area of the specimen is at least 2 inches wide and 12 inches
long, unless the actual size used in the airplane is smaller; and
(4) the edge to which the burner flame is applied must not consist
of the finished or protected edge of the specimen but must be
representative of the actual cross section of the material or part
installed in the airplane. When performing the test prescribed in
paragraph (f) of this appendix, the specimen must be mounted in
metal frame so that all four edges are held securely and the exposed
area of the specimen is at least 8 inches by 8 inches.
* * * * *
(f) Forty-five degree test. A minimum of three specimens must be
tested and the results averaged. The specimens must be supported at
an angle of 45 degrees to a horizontal surface. The exposed surface
when installed in the aircraft must be face down for the test. The
specimens must be exposed to a Bunsen or Tirrill burner with a
nominal \3/8\ inch I.D. tube adjusted to give a flame of 1\1/2\
inches in height. The minimum flame temperature measured by a
calibrated thermocouple pyrometer in the center of the
[[Page 5171]]
flame must be 1550 deg.F. Suitable precautions must be taken to avoid
drafts. The flame must be applied for 30 seconds with one-third
contacting the material at the center of the specimen and then
removed. Flame time, glow time, and whether the flame penetrates
(passes through) the specimen must be recorded.
(g) Sixty-degree test. A minimum of three specimens of each wire
specification (make and size) must be tested. The specimen of wire
or cable (including insulation) must be placed at an angle of 60
degrees with the horizontal in the cabinet specified in paragraph
(c) of this appendix, with the cabinet door open during the test or
placed within a chamber approximately 2 feet high x 1 foot x 1
foot, open at the top and at one vertical side (front), that allows
sufficient flow of air for complete combustion but is free from
drafts. The specimen must be parallel to and approximately 6 inches
from the front of the chamber. The lower end of the specimen must be
held rigidly clamped. The upper end of the specimen must pass over a
pulley or rod and must have an appropriate weight attached to it so
that the specimen is held tautly throughout the flammability test.
The test specimen span between lower clamp and upper pulley or rod
must be 24 inches and must be marked 8 inches from the lower end to
indicate the central point for flame application. A flame from a
Bunsen or Tirrill burner must be applied for 30 seconds at the test
mark. The burner must be mounted underneath the test mark on the
specimen, perpendicular to the specimen and at an angle of 30
degrees to the vertical plane of the specimen. The burner must have
a nominal bore of three-eighths inch, and must be adjusted to
provide a three-inch-high flame with an inner cone approximately
one-third of the flame height. The minimum temperature of the
hottest portion of the flame, as measured with a calibrated
thermocouple pyrometer, may not be less than 1,750 deg.F. The
burner must be positioned so that the hottest portion of the flame
is applied to the test mark on the wire. Flame time, burn length,
and flaming time drippings, if any, must be recorded. The burn
length determined in accordance with paragraph (h) of this appendix
must be measured to the nearest one-tenth inch. Breaking of the wire
specimen is not considered a failure.
* * * * *
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
46. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1301(7), 1303, 1344, 1348, 1352 through
1355, 1401, 1421 through 1431, 1471, 1472, 1502, 1510, 1522, and
2121 through 2125; Articles 12, 29, 21, and 32(a) of the Convention
on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180); 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.; E.O. 11514; 49 U.S.C. 106(g).
47. Section 91.205 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (b)(11)
through (b)(16) as paragraphs (b)(12) through (b)(17), respectively,
and by adding a new paragraph (b)(11) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S.
airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(11) For small civil airplanes certificated after March 11, 1996,
in accordance with part 23 of this chapter, an approved aviation red or
aviation white anticollision light system. In the event of failure of
any light of the anticollision light system, operation of the aircraft
may continue to a location where repairs or replacement can be made.
* * * * *
48. Section 91.209 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 91.209 Aircraft lights.
No person may:
(a) During the period from sunset to sunrise (or, in Alaska, during
the period a prominent unlighted object cannot be seen from a distance
of 3 statute miles or the sun is more than 6 degrees below the
horizon)--
(1) Operate an aircraft unless it has lighted position lights;
(2) Park or move an aircraft in, or in dangerous proximity to, a
night flight operations area of an airport unless the aircraft--
(i) Is clearly illuminated;
(ii) Has lighted position lights; or
(iii) is in an area that is marked by obstruction lights;
(3) Anchor an aircraft unless the aircraft--
(i) Has lighted anchor lights; or
(ii) Is in an area where anchor lights are not required on vessels;
or
(b) Operate an aircraft that is equipped with an anticollision
light system, unless it has lighted anticollision lights. However, the
anticollision lights need not be lighted when the pilot-in-command
determines that, because of operating conditions, it would be in the
interest of safety to turn the lights off.
Issued in Washington DC, on January 29, 1996.
David R. Hinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-2083 Filed 2-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
