[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 110 (Monday, June 9, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31476-31479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14885]
[[Page 31475]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Aviation Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
14 CFR Parts 27 and 29
Harmonization of Miscellaneous Rotorcraft Regulations; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 110 / Monday, June 9, 1997 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 31476]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 27 and 29
[Docket No. 28929; Notice No. 97-8]
RIN 2120-AG23
Harmonization of Miscellaneous Rotorcraft Regulations
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes changes to the type certification
requirements for normal and transport category rotorcraft. The change
would amend the airworthiness standards to require a cockpit indication
of autopilot operating mode to the pilots for certain autopilot
configurations, to clarify the burn test requirements for electrical
wiring for transport category rotorcraft, and to provide a new
requirement for an electrical wire burn test for normal category
rotorcraft. The proposed rule would also add a 1.33 fitting factor
structural strength requirement to the attachment of litters and
berths. The proposed changes to 14 CFR parts 27 and 29 (parts 27 and
29) are harmonized with the European Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR)
27 and 29.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 8, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Office of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules
Docket (AGC-200), Docket No. 28929; Room 915G, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591. Comments submitted must be marked Docket No.
28929. Comments may also be sent electronically to the following
internet address: [email protected] Comments may be examined in
Room 915G weekdays between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except on Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Carroll Wright, Regulations Group, ASW-111, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service, FAA, Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0111,
telephone (817) 222-5120.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Comments relating to the environmental, energy,
federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the
proposals in this notice are also invited. Substantive comments should
be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments must identify the regulatory
docket or notice number and be submitted in triplicate to the Rules
Docket at the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES.
All comments received, as well as a report summarizing each
substantive public contact with FAA personnel on this rulemaking, will
be filed in the docket. The docket is available for public inspection
before and after the comment closing date.
All comments received on or before the closing date will be
considered before taking action on this proposal. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent practicable. The proposals contained
in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must include a preaddressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 28929.'' The postcard will be date stamped and mailed to
the commenter.
Availability of NPRM's
Using a modem and suitable communications software, an electronic
copy of this document may be downloaded from the FAA regulations
section of the Fedworld electronic bulletin board service (telephone:
703-321-3339), the Federal Register's electronic bulletin board service
(telephone: 202-512-1661), or the FAA's Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
Committee Bulletin Board service (telephone: 202-267-5948).
Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov
or the Federal Register's webpage at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su__docs
for access to recently published rulemaking documents.
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Communications must
identify the notice number of this NPRM.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should request from the above office a copy of Advisory Circular
No. 11-2A, NPRM Distribution System, that describes the application
procedure.
Background
The FAA has established an Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC). By a notice in the Federal Register (60 FR 4221, January 20,
1995), the FAA announced the establishment of the Harmonization of
Miscellaneous Rotorcraft Regulations Working Group. The Working Group
was tasked to recommend to ARAC new or revised requirements for pilot
indication of autopilot operating mode; burn test for electrical wire;
seats, berths, and litters; and other rotorcraft issues. Specifically,
the working group received the following tasks:
1. Review Secs. 1329 and 29.1329 and supporting policy and guidance
material for the purpose of determining the course of action to be
taken for rulemaking and/or policy relative to the issue of requiring
pilot indication of autopilot operating mode similar to parts 23 and 25
requirements.
2. Review parts 27 and 29 to determine if clarification is needed
for the burn test requirements for transports category and whether a
new requirement for burn test for electrical wire for normal category
rotorcraft is needed. Consider whether Sec. 29.1351(d)(3) should be
deleted and if new Secs. 27.1365(c) and 29.1359(c) should be created to
specify electrical wire insulation burn test requirements.
3. Review Secs. 27.785(f)(2) and 29.785(f)(2) to determine if these
sections should be revised to specify whether the 1.33 fitting factor
for seats should also apply to berths and litters.
4. Review and make recommendations regarding the disharmonizations
introduced by the new Rotorcraft 30 Second/2 Minute One-Engine
Inoperative Power Ratings (OIE) (59 FR 47764; September 16, 1994) and
the Crash Resistant Fuel Systems (CRS) in Normal and Transport Category
Rotorcraft (59 FR 50380; October 3, 1994) final rules.
The working group included representatives from four major
rotorcraft manufacturers (normal and transport) and representatives
from Aerospace Industries Association of American, Inc. (AIA),
Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Material Aerospatial
(AECMA), Helicopter Association International (HAI), the European Joint
Aviation Authorities (JAA), and the FAA Rotorcraft Directorate. This
broad participation is consistent with FAA policy to involve all known
interested parties as early as practicable in the rulemaking process.
The working group presented its findings to the ARAC, which
recommended to the FAA the certain miscellaneous changes be made to the
airworthiness standards for both parts 27 and 29.
[[Page 31477]]
The FAA has evaluated and accepted the ARAB recommendations and
proposes the change contained in this notice.
General Discussion of the Proposals
The following changes are proposed to the airworthiness standard
for normal and transport category rotorcraft.
Sections 27.625 and 29.625 Fitting Factors
A new paragraph (d) would be added to Secs. 27.625 and 29.625 to
require that the 1.33 fitting factor, specified in Secs. 27.785 and
29.785 for the attachment of seats, also applies to the attachment for
litters and berths. The 1.33 fitting factor is necessary to ensure that
fittings subject to wear and tear under normal use and subject to
frequent removal and replacement in the aircraft will retain adequate
strength to perform their intended function under crash landing
conditions. The need for this factor for seat attachments and
associated harnesses has been substantiated by service experience and
is recognized in 14 CFR parts 23, 25, 27, and 29 and in the equivalent
JAR. Also, the need for the 1.33 factor for the attachment of litters,
berths, and associated harnesses is included in parts 23 and 25 and JAR
23 and 25 but is not currently included in parts 27 and 29 or JAR 27
and 29. This proposed change would provide the same level of safety for
passengers in litters and berths as in seats and would harmonize the
fitting factor requirement of parts 23, 25, 27, 29 and the JAR.
Sections 27.785 and 29.785 Seats, Berths, Litters, Safety Belts, and
Harnesses
Since the requirements for litters and berths are specified in
Secs. 27.785(k) and 29.785(k), a new sentence to paragraph (k)(2) is
proposed to clarify the requirement for applying the 1.33 fitting
factor. This proposed revision would clarify that the 1.33 fitting
factor for the attachment of seats specified in proposed
Secs. 27.625(d) and 29.625(d) also applies to the attachment of litters
and berths.
Sections 27.975 and 29.975 Fuel Tank Vents
This proposed revision would remove the phrase ``unless a rollover
is shown to be extremely remote'' from Secs. 27.975(b) and
29.975(a)(7). The JAA states that the phrase ``unless a rollover is
shown to be extremely remote'' results in weakening the desired
requirement, so that a postcrash fire could occur on an aircraft not
equipped with rollover protection. The FAA agrees that the intent of
this rule is to prevent postcrash fires due to rollover and concludes
that the phrase does not contribute to the desired result. Also, this
proposed revision would resolve a difference between parts 27 and 29
and JAR 27 and 29 introduced by the Crash Resistant Fuel Systems final
rule noted earlier.
Sections 27.1329 and 29.1329 Automatic Pilot System
A new paragraph (f) would be added to Secs. 27.1329 and 29.1329 to
require display of the autopilot mode to the pilots. Current parts 23
and 25 require that ``If the automatic pilot system can be coupled to
airborne navigation equipment, means must be provided to indicate to
the flight crew the current mode of operation. Selector switch position
is not acceptable as a means indication.'' Airplane accidents occurred
prior to adoption of the requirement of the display of the autopilot
mode in parts 23 and 25 due to the pilot not being aware of the current
autopilot mode. This type of accident could occur in rotorcraft. Safety
will be enhanced by requiring that the autopilot mode be displayed to
the pilots of rotorcraft. This would harmonize parts 27 and 29 with the
corresponding JAR.
Section 27.1365 Electric Cables
A new paragraph (c) to Sec. 27.1365 is proposed that would add a
burn test to require self-extinguishing insulation on electrical wire
and cable installed in normal category rotorcraft. Most European and
U.S. rotorcraft manufacturers currently use electrical wire that meets
the proposed burn test requirements. This proposal would require that
compliant wire be used.
Section 29.923 Rotor Drive System and Control Mechanism Tests
The proposed revision to Sec. 29.923(a) would add the words, ``and
(p),'' after the words ``paragraphs (b) through (n).'' The ``and p''
was inadvertently omitted by the OEI final rule, Amendment 29-35. This
change is proposed to correct the oversight and to harmonize part 29
with the JAR requirement.
Section 29.1351 General
The proposal would delete the burn test requirements of
Sec. 29.1351(d)(1)(iii) and the reference to Sec. 25.1359(d) contained
in it. Section 25.1359(d) was removed from part 25 by Amendment 25-72
(55 FR 29756; July 20, 1990). The proposal would move the electrical
wire burn test requirements to a new Sec. 29.1359(c) and cite the
correct reference, part 25, Appendix F, Part I(a)(3). The proposed
change is administrative and will not alter the current requirements.
Section 29.1359 Electrical System Fire and Smoke Protection
As discussed in the previous paragraph, new Sec. 29.1359(c) would
contain the electrical wire burn test requirements. The proposal would
add paragraph (c) to this section to place the requirement under a more
appropriate heading. The proposed change is administrative and will not
alter the current requirements.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no requirements for information collection associated
with this proposed rule that would require approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. Sec. 3501 et seq.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies
to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess
the effects of regulatory changes on international trade. In conducting
these analyses, the FAA has determined that this proposed rule: (1)
would generate benefits that justify its costs and is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Executive Order;
(2) is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and
Procedures; (3) would not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities; and (4) would lessen restraints on
international trade. These analyses, available in the docket, are
summarized below.
Economic Evaluation
Overall, the proposed changes would result in net cost savings by
promoting harmonization between the U.S. regulations and the JAR and by
eliminating unnecessary duplication of certification requirements. The
costs and benefits of the changes regarding the fitting factor for the
attachment of berths and litters, removal of the phrase ``unless a
rollover is shown to be extremely remote'' (in Secs. 27.975(b) and
29.975(a)(7)), autopilot operating mode, and burn test for electrical
wire in normal category rotorcraft, are
[[Page 31478]]
summarized below. All other revisions involve clarification or
administrative changes.
The fitting factor requirement would not impose incremental costs
on most rotorcraft manufacturers. One small manufacturer of part 27
rotorcraft indicated additional nonrecurring testing and analysis costs
of $2,000 to substantiate the 1.33 factor in an initial new type
certification; most likely, this additional cost would not be incurred
in subsequent type certifications. Although there have been no
identifiable accidents involving litters attributable to insufficient
attachment strength, even one minor injury would far exceed the
relatively low costs. Codification of the 1.33 fitting factor, which is
inherent in most current designs, would ensure that all future designs
include this standard, increasing the minimum level of safety.
There would be no incremental costs or benefits associated with
removal of the phrase ``unless a rollover is shown to be extremely
remote'' in Secs. 27.975(b) and 29.975(a)(7) since rotocraft currently
meet the minimum fuel spillage requirements under roll-over conditions.
The autopilot display requirement would impose no or insignificant
incremental costs on rotocraft manufacturers since new autopilot
systems employed in rotocraft are similar to those in airplanes and the
mode indicator is typically integral to such systems. Codification of
this requirement would ensure that all future rotocraft designs comply
with this standard.
Most U.S. and European manufacturers currently use electrical wire
that meets the burn test requirements for transport category rotocraft
since they produce both part 27 and part 29 rotocraft. However, the few
manufacturers that product normal category rotocraft only would likely
experience additional costs. One manufacturer estimates additional
nonrecurring testing/design costs at $5,000 per type certification and
additional wiring costs of $500 per rotocraft. At an estimated
production of seven rotocraft per year, the incremental recurring costs
would total $3,500 per year for 10 years, or $35,000 total
(nondiscounted 1995 dollars), under one type certification. Another
manufacturer estimates additional wiring costs of approximately $350
per rotocraft and no additional nonrecurring costs. At an estimated
production of 20 rotocraft per year, the incremental recurring costs
would total $7,000 per year for 10 years, or $70,000 total
(nondiscounted 1995 dollars), under one type certification.
There have been several accidents (and more numerous Service
Difficulty Reports) related directly or indirectly to shorted or
burned-through electrical wiring; i.e., the insulation offered
insufficient protection. Examination of National Transportation Safety
Board accident and incident data for the period 1983 through 1995
indicates one accident (in June 1994) caused primarily by a short in
the electric wiring that burned a hole in the main fuel line. The post-
impact fire destroyed the normal category helicopter. There is a strong
possibility that the proposed burn test requirements could have
prevented this accident. Benefits in terms of averted equipment damage
and just one or two minor injuries from an accident involving a part 27
rotocraft would easily exceed the incremental costs of this proposal.
Codification of this requirement would ensure that all future designs
comply, increasing the minimum level of safety.
Based on the findings of no significant incremental costs coupled
with the benefits of harmonization savings and higher levels of safety,
the FAA has determined that the proposed rule would be cost-beneficial.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
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, prescribes standards for
complying with RFA requirements in FAA rulemaking actions. The Order
defines ``small entities'' in terms of size, ``significant economic
impact'' in terms of annualized costs, and `'substantial number'' as a
number that is not less than 11 and which is more than one-third of the
small entities subject to a proposed or final rule.
The proposed rule would affect manufacturers of future type-
certificated normal and transport category rotocraft. For aircraft
manufacturers, Order 2100.14A defines a small entity as one with 75 or
fewer employees and a significant economic impact as annualized costs
of at least $19,500 (1995 dollars). The FAA has determined that the
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small manufacturers since (1) no part 29 and only
two part 27 rotorcraft manufacturers have 75 or fewer employees, and
(2) the annualized incremental costs of the rule are less than $19,500.
International Trade Impact Analysis
The proposed rule would not constitute a barrier to international
trade, including the export of American rotorcraft to foreign countries
and the import of foreign rotorcraft into the United States. Instead,
the proposed changes on rotorcraft certification procedures, harmonized
with those of the JAA, would lower dual certification costs, thereby
enhancing free trade. Each applicant for a new type certificate for
normal and transport category rotorcraft, whether the applicant be U.S.
or foreign, will be required to show compliance with this rule.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, including the findings in the
Regulatory Flexibility Determination and the International Trade Impact
Analysis, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), in
conjunction with the FAA, has determined that this proposed regulation
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and,
therefore, is not subject to centralized regulatory review by the OIRA.
In addition, the FAA certifies that his 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 proposal is considered to be nonsignificant under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979). An initial regulatory evaluation of the proposal, including a
Regulatory Flexibility Determination and Trade Impact Analysis, 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 27
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Rotorcraft, Safety.
14 CFR Part 29
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Rotorcraft, Safety.
The Proposed Amendments
In consideration of the foregoing, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR
parts 27 and 29 as follows:
[[Page 31479]]
PART 27--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT
1. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.
2. In Sec. 27.625, a new paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 27.625 Fitting factors.
* * * * *
(d) Each seat, berth, litter, safety belt and harness attachment to
the structure must be shown by analysis, tests, or both, to be able to
withstand the inertia forces prescribed in Sec. 27.561(b)(3) multiplied
by a fitting factor of 1.33.
3. Section 27.785 is amended by revising the heading and by adding
a new sentence to the end of paragraph (k)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.785 Seats, berths, litters, safety belts, and harnesses.
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(2) * * * The fitting factor required by Sec. 27.625(d) shall be
applied.
Sec. 27.975 [Amended]
4. In Sec. 27.975, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the words
``, unless a rollover is shown to be extremely remote''.
5. In Sec. 27.1329, a new paragraph (f) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 27.1329 Automatic pilot system.
* * * * *
(f) If the automatic pilot system can be coupled to airborne
navigation equipment, means must be provided to indicate to the pilots
the current mode of operation. Selector switch position is not
acceptable as a means of indication.
6. In Sec. 27.1365, a new paragraph (c) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 27.1365 Electric cables.
* * * * *
(c) Insulation on electrical wire and cable installed in the
rotorcraft must be self-extinguishing when tested in accordance with
Appendix F, Part I(a)(3) of part 25 of this chapter.
PART 29--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: TRANSPORT CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT
7. The authority citation for part 29, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.
8. In Sec. 29.625, a new paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 29.625 Fitting factors.
* * * * *
(d) Each seat, berth, litter, safety belt and harness attachment to
the structure must be shown by analysis, tests, or both, to be able to
withstand the inertia forces prescribed in Sec. 29.561(b)(3) multiplied
by a fitting factor of 1.33.
9. Section 29.785 is amended by revising the heading and by adding
a new sentence to the end of paragraph (k)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 29.785 Seats, berths, litters, safety belts, and harnesses.
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(2) * * * The fitting factor required by Sec. 29.625(d) shall be
applied.
Sec. 29.923 [Amended]
10. In Sec. 29.923, the first sentence of the introductory text of
paragraph (a) is revised by adding the phrase ``and (p)'' immediately
following the reference to paragraph (n).
Sec. 29.975 [Amended]
11. In Sec. 29.975, paragraph (a)(7) is amended by removing the
words ``, unless a rollover is shown to be extremely remote''.
12. In Sec. 29.1329, a new paragraph (f) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 29.1329 Automatic pilot system.
* * * * *
(f) If the automatic pilot system can be coupled to airborne
navigation equipment, means must be provided to indicate to the pilots
the current mode of operation. Selector switch position is not
acceptable as a means of indication.
13. In Sec. 29.1351, paragraph (d)(1)(iii) is removed.
Sec. 29.1351 General.
14. In Sec. 29.1359, a new paragraph (c) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 29.1359 Electrical system fire and smoke protection.
* * * * *
(c) Insulation on electrical wire and cable installed in the
rotorcraft must be self-extinguishing when tested in accordance with
Appendix F, Part I(a)(3) of part 25 of this chapter.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 30, 1997.
Thomas E. McSweeney,
Director, Aircraft Certification Service, AIR-1.
[FR Doc. 97-14885 Filed 6-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
