Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
February 1, 2006
Part V
Department of
Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5554 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Privacy Act
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, Anyone is able to search the
Federal Aviation Administration SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. electronic form of all comments
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, received into any of our dockets by the
14 CFR Parts 23, 25, 27, and 29 except Federal holidays. name of the individual submitting the
[Docket No. FAA–2006–23657; Notice No. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comment (or signing the comment, if
06–02] Richard E. Jennings, Aircraft submitted on behalf of an association,
Certification Service, Aircraft business, labor union, etc.). You may
RIN 2120–AI06 Engineering Division, AIR–130, 1895 review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) Phoenix Blvd., Suite 450, Atlanta, GA Statement in the Federal Register
Protection for Aircraft Electrical and 30349. Telephone (770) 703–6090. Or, published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
via e-mail at: Richard.Jennings@faa.gov. 19477–78) or you may visit http://
Electronic Systems
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: dms.dot.gov.
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT. We Invite Your Comments Proprietary or Confidential Business
The FAA invites interested persons to Information
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM). participate in this rulemaking by Do not file in the docket information
submitting written comments, data, or that you consider to be proprietary or
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to add views. We also invite comments relating confidential business information. Send
certification standards to protect aircraft to the economic, environmental, energy, or deliver this information directly to
electrical and electronic systems from or federalism impacts that might result the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF). from adopting the proposals in this INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
This action is necessary due to the document. The most helpful comments document. You must mark the
vulnerability of aircraft electrical and reference a specific portion of the information that you consider
electronic systems and the increasing proposal, explain the reason for any proprietary or confidential. If you send
use of high-power radio frequency recommended change, and include the information on a disk or CD ROM,
transmitters. The intended effect of this supporting data. mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
action is to create a safer operating We will file in the docket all and also identify electronically within
environment for civil aviation by comments we receive, as well as a the disk or CD ROM the specific
protecting aircraft and their systems report summarizing each substantive information that is proprietary or
from the adverse effects of HIRF. public contact with FAA personnel confidential.
DATES: Send your comments to reach us
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are
on or before May 2, 2006. The docket is available for public aware of proprietary information filed
inspection before and after the comment with a comment, we do not place it in
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, closing date. If you wish to review the
identified by Docket Number FAA– the docket. We hold it in a separate file
docket in person, go to the address in to which the public does not have
2006–23657, using any of the following the ADDRESSES section of this preamble
methods: access, and place a note in the docket
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday that we have received it. If we receive
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:// through Friday, except Federal holidays.
dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions a request to examine or copy this
You may also review the docket using information, we treat it as any other
for sending your comments. the Internet at the web address in the
• Government-wide rulemaking Web request under the Freedom of
ADDRESSES section. Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We
site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov Before acting on this proposal, we
and follow the instructions for sending process such a request under the DOT
will consider all comments we receive procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
your comments. on or before the closing date for
• Mail: Docket Management Facility; comments. We will consider comments Availability of NPRMs
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 filed late if it is possible to do so You can get an electronic copy of this
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, without incurring expense or delay. We NPRM using the Internet by:
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– may change this proposal in light of the • Searching the DOT electronic
001. comments we receive. docket Web page (http://dms.dot.gov/
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. If you want the FAA to acknowledge search);
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on receipt of your comments on this • Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
the plaza level of the Nassif Building, proposal, include with your comments Policies Web page at http://
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday which the docket number appears. We • Accessing the Government Printing
through Friday, except Federal holidays. will stamp the date on the postcard and Office’s Web page (http://
For more information, see the mail it to you. www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Readers should note that the FAA is You can also get a copy by sending a
this document. publishing elsewhere in today’s Federal request to the Federal Aviation
Privacy: We will post all comments Register a notice of availability of a draft Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
we receive, without change, to http:// Advisory Circular. The Advisory 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
dms.dot.gov, including any personal Circular describes one way, but not the
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5555
Subtitle I, section 106 describes the communication systems, navigation (1) A greater dependence on electrical
authority of the FAA Administrator. radios, and intercom followed by and electronic systems performing
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, illumination of the low rotor revolutions functions required for the continued
describes in more detail the agency’s per minute (RPM) and clutch lights. He safe flight and landing of the aircraft;
authority. This rulemaking is further noted that engine noise dropped (2) The reduced electromagnetic
promulgated under the authority to idle level and the engine and rotor shielding afforded by some composite
described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart RPM indicators dropped. The pilot materials used in aircraft designs;
III, section 44701(a)(1). Under that entered autorotation and landed the (3) The increase in susceptibility of
section the FAA is charged to promote helicopter successfully with damage electrical and electronic systems to
safe flight of civil aircraft in air only to the main rotor. Following HIRF because of increased data bus or
commerce by prescribing minimum landing, the pilot reported all cockpit processor operating speeds, higher
standards in the interest of safety for indications were normal. The accident density integrated circuits and cards,
appliances and for the design, material, investigation division of Portugal’s and greater sensitivities of electronic
construction, quality of work, and Instituto Nacional da Aviação Civil equipment;
performance of aircraft, aircraft engines, stated that the probable cause of the (4) Expanded frequency usage,
and propellers. By prescribing standards incident was severe electromagnetic and especially above 1 gigahertz (GHz);
to protect aircraft electrical and RF interference. (5) The increased severity of the HIRF
electronic systems from high-intensity The FAA has issued three environment because of an increase in
radiated fields, this proposed regulation airworthiness directives (ADs) in the number and power of RF
is within the scope of the response to HIRF effects between 1991 transmitters; and
Administrator’s authority. (6) The adverse effects experienced by
and 1998. In AD 91–03–05, Airship
some aircraft when exposed to HIRF.
Industries Skyship Model 600 Airships,
Background
the FAA required the installation of a History
Statement of the Problem modified ignition control unit because In 1987, the FAA contracted with the
The electromagnetic HIRF of the previously described dual-engine Department of Defense Electromagnetic
environment results from the failure that occurred when the ignition Compatibility Analysis Center (ECAC)
transmission of electromagnetic energy control units were exposed to HIRF. (currently the Joint Spectrum Center) to
from radar, radio, television, and other In AD 96–21–13, LITEF GmbH research and define the U.S. HIRF
ground-based, shipborne, or airborne Attitude and Heading System Reference environment to be used for the
radio frequency (RF) transmitters. This (AHRS) Unit Model LCR–92, LCR–92S, certification of aircraft and the
environment has the capability of and LCR–92H, the FAA stated there are development of Technical Standard
adversely affecting the operation of indications of an unusual AHRS Orders. In February 1988, the FAA and
aircraft electric and electronic systems. reaction to certain RF signals that could the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA)
Although the HIRF environment did cause the AHRS to give misleading roll tasked the Society of Automotive
not pose a significant threat to earlier and pitch information. As a result, the Engineers (SAE) and the European
generations of aircraft, in the late 1970s FAA required either (1) the installation Organization for Civil Aviation
designs for civil aircraft were first of a placard adjacent to each primary Equipment (EUROCAE) to develop
proposed that included flight-critical attitude indicator stating that flight is guidance material and acceptable means
electronic controls, electronic displays, limited to day visual flight rules (VFR) of compliance (AMC) documents to
and electronic engine controls, such as operations only, or, if the primary support FAA and JAA efforts to develop
those used in military aircraft. These attitude instruments have been HIRF certification requirements. In
systems are more susceptible to the deactivated, installation of a placard response, one SAE panel reviewed and
adverse effects of operation in the HIRF stating that flight is limited to VFR revised the assumptions used for
environment. Accidents and incidents operations only, or (2) a modification ECAC’s definition of a HIRF
on civil aircraft with flight-critical and inspection of the AHRS wiring environment and published several
electrical and electronic systems have cables, a repetitive inspection of the iterations of that HIRF environment for
also brought attention to the need to cable shielding, and an insertion of a fixed-wing aircraft based on revised
protect these critical systems from high- statement in the aircraft flight manual assumptions. Another SAE panel
intensity radiated fields. regarding unannounced heading errors prepared advisory material to support
On April 15, 1990, an Airship that could occur after switching the FAA’s rulemaking efforts.
Industries Airship-600 traversed the operation from DG to MAG or operation Because of efforts undertaken by the
beam of a highly directional RF of the ± switch in flight with any bank FAA and the JAA to harmonize the
broadcast from a Voice of America angle. JAA’s airworthiness requirements and
antenna and suffered a complete loss of In AD 98–24–05, HOAC-Austria the FAA’s airworthiness regulations in
power in both engines that resulted in Model DV–20 Katana Airplanes, the the early 1990s, the FAA and the JAA
a collision with trees and terrain during FAA required the replacement of engine agreed that the proposed HIRF
a forced landing in North Carolina. The electronic modules to prevent certification requirements needed
National Transportation Safety Board electromagnetic interference in the further international harmonization
stated in its investigation of the accident modules. The FAA required the before a rule could be adopted.
that the lack of HIRF certification replacement of the modules because As a result, the FAA established the
standards for airships was a factor in the electromagnetic interference could Electromagnetic Effects Harmonization
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
accident. cause the airplane’s engine to stop due Working Group (EEHWG) under the
On March 2, 1999, a Robinson R–44 to an interruption in the ignition system Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
helicopter passed within 1,000 meters of resulting in loss of control. Committee on Transport Airplane and
the main beam of a high frequency (HF), Concern for the protection of Engine Issues (57 FR 58843, December
high energy broadcast transmission electrical and electronic systems in 11, 1992) and tasked it to develop, in
antenna in Portugal. The pilot reported aircraft has increased substantially in coordination with the JAA, HIRF
strong interference in the aircraft’s recent years because of— certification requirements for aircraft.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5556 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
The EEHWG expanded the existing Development of the HIRF Environments restricted airspace. Once the five highest
HIRF environments developed by the The HIRF environment was originally peak and five highest average power
ECAC with the SAE committee to categorized into the rotorcraft severe, transmitters were identified and
include HIRF environments appropriate fixed-wing severe, certification, and confirmed operational, the NAWCAD
for aircraft certificated under parts 23, normal HIRF environments. Each of recalculated their electromagnetic field
25, 27, and 29. these four HIRF environments was strengths, in V/m. Finally, the
developed based on specific NAWCAD created each U.S. HIRF
In 1994, the FAA tasked the Naval Air
assumptions dealing with distance environment using the transmitters with
Warfare Center Aircraft Division
between the aircraft and transmitter, the highest calculated field strength in
(NAWCAD) to conduct a HIRF
appropriate for the class of aircraft each of the 17 frequency bands for peak
electromagnetic field survey study to
under consideration. The EEHWG and average power. JAA-member
support the efforts of the EEHWG. The nations undertook similar efforts to
EEHWG also received HIRF investigated the likelihood that fixed
wing aircraft and rotorcraft operate in develop the European HIRF
electromagnetic environment data on environments.
European transmitters from European the vicinity of high power transmitters.
The EEHWG also investigated testing To create the harmonized HIRF
governments. The EEHWG converted environments, the EEHWG compared
the U.S. and European data into a set of practicality and availability of test
facilities for the HIRF environment the U.S. and European HIRF
harmonized HIRF environments, environments and selected the
prepared draft advisory circular/ levels. The EEHWG used these factors to
select the levels for the HIRF transmitters with the highest field
advisory material joint (AC/AMJ), and strength values for each of the 17
also prepared a harmonized FAA draft environments used in the proposal.
The U.S. HIRF environments were frequency bands for peak and average
HIRF NPRM and JAA draft HIRF Notice power.
calculated by the NAWCAD based on
of Proposed Amendment (NPA). The harmonized HIRF environments
the assumptions agreed on by the
In November 1997, the EEHWG are based on the individual U.S. and
EEHWG, using unclassified and
adopted a set of HIRF environments European HIRF environments and form
classified data on government and
agreed on by the FAA, the JAA, and the an estimate of the international
civilian transmitters, such as
industry participants. The HIRF electromagnetic field strength, in V/m,
electromagnetic effects databases,
environments contained in these over a frequency range from 10 kHz to
technical manuals, and information
proposed rules reflect the HIRF 40 GHz. The FAA, JAA, and other
provided by transmitter operators.
environments adopted by the EEHWG. In developing the U.S. rotorcraft governmental and international
In addition, the information contained severe, fixed-wing severe, certification, agencies, such as the International Civil
in this NPRM is based on the draft and normal HIRF environments, the Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the
NPRM/NPA document. NAWCAD reviewed the Joint Spectrum International Telecommunications
Center’s HIRF data and updated the Union, plan to monitor the future
Current Requirements transmitter information to ensure the growth of the harmonized HIRF
most current licensed and authorized environment.
Currently, §§ 23.1309, 25.1309, The following general assumptions
27.1309, and 29.1309 provide general transmitters were used. A subset of data
were used to develop the HIRF
certification requirements applicable to was created that contained the licensing
environments:
the installation of all aircraft systems information and equipment descriptions (1) The HIRF environment was
and equipment, but they do not include on the 25 highest radiated power divided into 17 frequency bands,
specific certification requirements for transmitters in each of the following 17 ranging from 10 kHz to 40 GHz.
HIRF frequency bands for each of the (2) The main-beam illumination and
protection against HIRF. AC 23.1309–
HIRF environments: 10 to 100 kilohertz maximum-beam gain of the transmitting
1C, ‘‘Equipment, Systems, and
(kHz), 100 to 500 kHz, 500 kHz to 2 antenna were used.
Installations in Part 23 Airplanes,’’
megahertz (MHz), 2 to 30 MHz, 30 to 70 (3) The duty cycle of pulsed
states that § 23.1309 is not intended to
MHz, 70 to 100 MHz, 100 to 200 MHz, transmitters was used to calculate the
include certification requirements for
200 to 400 MHz, 400 to 700 MHz, 700 average power; however, the
protection against HIRF. Because of the MHz to 1 GHz, 1 to 2 GHz, 2 to 4 GHz,
lack of specific HIRF certification modulation of a transmitted signal was
4 to 6 GHz, 6 to 8 GHz, 8 to 12 GHz, not considered. The duty cycle was
requirements, special conditions to 12 to 18 GHz, and 18 to 40 GHz.
address HIRF have been imposed on defined as the product of pulse width
The NAWCAD then selected the five and pulse repetition frequency and
applicants seeking issuance of a type transmitters with the highest peak and
certificate (TC), amended TC, or applied only to pulsed systems.
the five transmitters with the highest (4) Constructive ground reflections
supplemental type certificate (STC) average radiated power in each (direct and reflected waves) of HF
since 1986. Applicants have the option frequency band to develop the HIRF signals were assumed to be in phase.
of demonstrating compliance using the environments. The NAWCAD (5) The noncumulative field strength
external HIRF environment defined in performed further analysis and was calculated; however, simultaneous
HIRF special conditions or a system investigation to confirm the transmitters illumination by more than one antenna
bench test level of 100 volts per meter were operating and producing the was not considered.
(V/m), whichever is less. The FAA radiated power indicated in their (6) Near-field corrections were used
issued additional interim guidance for licensing information. If one of the for aperture and phased-array antennas.
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
the certification of aircraft operating in transmitters was located in prohibited (7) Field strengths were calculated at
HIRF environments in FAA Notice or restricted airspace, the NAWCAD minimum distances dependent on the
N8110.71, Guidance for the Certification noted that information, removed the locations of the transmitter and the
of Aircraft Operating in High-Intensity transmitter from consideration as a aircraft.
Radiated Field (HIRF) Environments, potential HIRF transmitter, and selected (8) The field strength was calculated
dated April 2, 1998, with a cancellation the next lower radiated power for each frequency band using the
date of April 2, 1999. transmitter not in prohibited or maximum field strength for all
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5557
transmitters within that band for peak range was defined as the line-of-sight (15) Certain transmitters have the
and average power, given in V/m. The distance at which the aircraft capability to reduce power or restrict
field strength values were expressed in encounters the maximum illumination scanning coverage if aircraft operate in
root-mean-square (rms) units measured from an elevation-limited antenna’s close vicinity. This capability was
during the peak of the modulation cycle, main beam. If the transmitter’s assumed to be operating for calculating
as many laboratory instruments indicate maximum antenna elevation angle was illumination and power density.
amplitude. The true peak field strength not available, 90 degrees was assumed.
values will be higher by a factor of the (12) Transmitters located in (16) Transmitter losses into the
square root of two. prohibited areas, restricted areas, or antenna were estimated at 3 decibels in
(9) The peak field strength was based warning areas (ICAO danger areas) were the U.S. HIRF environment, unless
on the transmitter’s maximum not included. transmitter data were available.
authorized peak power, maximum (13) Proposed special-use airspace For further information on the
antenna gain, and system losses. (SUA) boundaries were defined for development of the HIRF environments,
(10) The average field strength was selected high-power transmitters. The consult NAWCAD Technical
based on the transmitter’s maximum size of the proposed SUA was derived Memorandum, Report No.
authorized peak power, maximum duty from transmitter data and, therefore, NAWCADPAX–98–156–TM, High-
cycle, maximum antenna gain, and varied from transmitter site to
intensity Radiated Field External
system losses. transmitter site. For transmitters located
(11) The aircraft’s altitude and the Environments for Civil Aircraft
within a proposed SUA, the transmitter
transmitter’s maximum antenna field strength was assessed at the Operating in the United States of
elevation were taken into account. The boundary of the proposed SUA. America (Unclassified), dated November
slant range was defined as the line-of- (14) Transmitters with experimental 12, 1998. A copy of the NAWCAD
sight distance between the transmitter licenses and non-airport mobile tactical Technical Memorandum is available in
and the aircraft. The adjusted slant military transmitters were excluded. the docket.
4 The ship-based environment consisted of all transmitters located on all commercial and military ships located at sea or in harbors near air-
ports. The transmitters considered included air search radar, fire control radar, satellite, HF, and UHF/VHF communications, TACAN, weather
radar, surface search radar, MLS, and ATCRBS interrogator.
5 The air-to-air environment consisted only of those transmitters on military aircraft because the transmitters on civilian aircraft were considered
in the mobile airport environment. For military aircraft on intercept courses all non-hostile transmitters were assumed to be operational, and for all
military aircraft on intercept courses all transmitters were assumed to be operational.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5558 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
environment II also takes into account 700 GHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100 existing type certificate when the
1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2,000 200
high peak power microwave certification basis for the aircraft
2 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 200
transmitters that typically do not includes the proposed requirements.
6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,000 200
operate continuously at their maximum 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3,000 300
The applicability of the proposed
output levels. The EEHWG determined 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2000 200
requirements to an applicant for a
that the assumptions used for HIRF 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 change to an existing type certificate
environment II are most appropriate for would be governed by the provisions
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5559
contained in current § 21.101 In addition, rotorcraft would be equipment HIRF test level 4. An
Designation of applicable regulations required to meet additional HIRF example of an electrical or electronic
(generally referred to as the ‘‘changed certification standards because system whose failure would reduce the
product rule’’). Specifically, § 21.101 rotorcraft operating under VFR do not capability of the aircraft or the ability of
would apply when an applicant intends have to comply with the same minimum the flightcrew to respond to an adverse
to change a type certificate to obtain safe altitude restrictions for airplanes in operating condition is a cabin
approval for the installation of an § 91.119 and, therefore, may operate pressurization system.
electrical or electronic system on an closer to transmitters. Accordingly, for
existing aircraft model. Accordingly, an functions required during operation HIRF environments I, II, and III, and
electrical or electronic system that has under VFR whose failure would prevent equipment HIRF test levels 1, 2, 3, and
previously met HIRF special conditions the continued safe flight and landing of 4 would be found in proposed
may require additional testing for it to the rotorcraft, the electrical and appendixes to the affected parts.
be found in compliance with the HIRF electronic systems that perform such a Compliance With HIRF Certification
environments specified in this proposal. function, considered separately and in Requirements
The FAA specifically invites comments relation to other systems, would be
that discuss the effect (including any required to be designed and installed so Acceptable operation of a system or
potential costs) of § 21.101 on the ability that each function is not adversely equipment installation during exposure
of applicants to comply with the affected during and after the time the to a HIRF environment or equipment
proposed HIRF certification rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF HIRF test level could be shown through
requirements. environment III. Rotorcraft operating similarity with existing systems,
The hazard assessment conducted to under instrument flight rules (IFR) have analyses, testing, or any combination
show compliance with §§ 23.1309, to comply with more restrictive altitude acceptable to the FAA. However,
25.1309, 27.1309, and 29.1309 then limitations and, therefore, electrical and certification by similarity could not be
could be used to assist in determining electronic systems with functions used for a combination of new aircraft
the appropriate HIRF certification required for IFR operations would be design and new equipment design. In
requirements for the aircraft electrical required to not be adversely affected addition, service experience alone
and electronic systems. HIRF when the rotorcraft is only exposed to would not be acceptable because such
certification requirements in the HIRF environment I. experience may not include exposure to
proposed rule would be established The proposal would mandate that
HIRF environments. Acceptable system
only for aircraft electrical and electronic each electrical and electronic system
performance could be attained by
systems whose failure would: (1) that performs a function whose failure
Prevent the continued safe flight and would reduce significantly the demonstrating that the system under
landing of the aircraft; (2) significantly capability of the aircraft or the ability of consideration continued to perform its
reduce the capability of the aircraft or the flightcrew to respond to an adverse intended function. Deviations from the
the ability of the flightcrew to respond operating condition be designed and performance specifications of systems
to an adverse operating condition; or (3) installed so the system is not affected under consideration could be
reduce the capability of the aircraft or adversely when the equipment acceptable, but they would need to be
the ability of the flightcrew to respond providing these functions is exposed to assessed independently to ensure the
to an adverse operating condition. This equipment HIRF test level 1, 2, or 3. A effects of the deviations neither cause
resulting failure classification would system that is not adversely affected by nor contribute to conditions that would
determine which HIRF environment the any one of these test levels would be affect adversely aircraft operational
aircraft and/or electrical and electronic considered acceptable. Test levels 1 and capabilities. When deviations in
systems would be exposed to during 2 have equivalent energy, but provide performance occur as a consequence of
certification testing. different modulation applications. This the system’s or equipment’s exposure to
Under the proposed rule, electrical flexibility permits test laboratories to the HIRF environment or equipment
and electronic systems that perform a use existing test equipment. Test level 2 HIRF test level, an assessment of the
function whose failure would prevent allows an applicant to use equipment acceptability of the performance should
the continued safe flight and landing of test levels developed for the specific be made. This assessment should be
the aircraft must be designed and aircraft being certificated. Any one of supported by data and analyses.
installed so that— these test levels may be used to Because aircraft control system
(1) Each function is not affected demonstrate HIRF protection. Examples
adversely during and after the aircraft is failures and malfunctions could
of electrical and electronic systems
exposed to HIRF environment I; contribute more directly and abruptly to
whose failure would significantly
(2) Each electrical and electronic the continued safe flight and landing of
reduce the capability of the aircraft or
system automatically recovers normal an aircraft than display system failures
the ability of the flightcrew to respond
operation, in a timely manner, after the to an adverse operating condition are an and malfunctions, compliance with the
aircraft is exposed to HIRF environment instrument landing system (ILS) proposed rule for systems performing
I, unless this conflicts with other receiver or a VHF communications display functions would not require
operational or functional requirements receiver. aircraft level testing. Therefore, systems
of that system; and Lastly, under the proposed rule, each performing display functions could
(3) Each electrical and electronic electrical and electronic system that demonstrate compliance with the
system is not adversely affected during performs a function whose failure appropriate HIRF certification
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
and after the aircraft is exposed to HIRF would reduce the capability of the requirements in a laboratory using
environment II. aircraft or the ability of the flightcrew to generic HIRF attenuation curves for that
An example of an electrical or electronic respond to an adverse operating aircraft developed during previous HIRF
system whose failure would prevent the condition must be designed and aircraft level testing. The compliance
continued safe flight and landing of the installed so the system is not affected should address instructions for
aircraft is a full authority digital adversely when the equipment continued airworthiness of the HIRF
electronic engine control (FADEC). providing these functions is exposed to protection features.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5560 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Paperwork Reduction Act 104–4) requires agencies to prepare a • Value of statistical fatality avoided:
In accordance with the Paperwork written assessment of the costs, benefits, $3 million.
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. and other effects of proposed or final • Benefits/costs are evaluated from
rules that include a Federal mandate two perspectives: (1) The ‘‘base case’’—
3507(d)), the FAA has determined that
likely to result in the expenditure by a comparison of the costs and associated
there are no requirements for
State, local, or tribal governments, in the benefits of current industry practice to
information collection associated with
aggregate, or by the private sector, of those of the proposed rule, and (2) the
this proposed rule.
$100 million or more annually (adjusted ‘‘regulatory case’’—a comparison of the
International Compatibility for inflation). This portion of the costs and associated benefits of
In keeping with U.S. obligations preamble summarizes the FAA’s complying with current U.S. special
under the Convention on International analysis of the economic impacts of this conditions to those of the proposed rule.
Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to NPRM. We suggest readers seeking Current industry practice for
comply with International Civil greater detail read the full regulatory manufacturers of all airplanes
Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards evaluation, a copy of which we have certificated under part 25, for
and Recommended Practices to the placed in the docket for this rulemaking. manufacturers of the majority of parts
In conducting these analyses, FAA 23/29 aircraft, and for manufacturers of
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has determined that this proposal: (1) a sizeable minority of part 27 rotorcraft,
determined that there are no ICAO
Has benefits that justify its costs; (2) is is to comply with JAA’s (now EASA’s)
Standards and Recommended Practices
not an economically ‘‘significant HIRF interim standards (JAA’s version
that correspond to these proposed
regulatory action’’ as defined in section of special conditions), which are
regulations.
3(f) of Executive Order 12866; (3) is not equivalent to those of the NPRM. On the
Economic Evaluation, Regulatory ‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s other hand, manufacturers of the
Flexibility Determination, International Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) remaining aircraft (some part 23 and
Trade Impact Assessment, and would not have a significant economic part 29 aircraft and most part 27
Unfunded Mandate Assessment impact on a substantial number of small rotorcraft) currently meet only U.S.
Changes to Federal regulations must entities; (5) is consistent with the Trade special conditions, which are not as
undergo several economic analyses. Agreements Act of 1979 in that it stringent as those set forth in the NPRM.
First, Executive Order 12866 directs that appropriately adopts international These affected aircraft manufacturers
each Federal agency shall propose or standards as the basis of U.S. standards; would experience additional costs
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned and (6) would not impose an unfunded under the proposed rule.
mandate on state, local, or tribal
determination that the benefits of the • The proposed rule is assumed to be
intended regulation justify its costs. governments, or on the private sector.
100 percent effective in preventing
Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act Who Is Affected By This Rulemaking HIRF-related accidents.
of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the Manufacturers of transport category Alternatives Considered
economic impact of regulatory changes airplanes incur no incremental costs;
on small entities. Third, the Trade manufacturers of transport category Although earlier and current special
Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. rotorcraft and non-transport category condition levels of HIRF protection
2531–2533) prohibits agencies from aircraft incur varying costs. were considered, JAA’s HIRF standards
setting standards that create Occupants in affected aircraft receive were selected for this NPRM because of
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign safety benefits. both the proven high levels of
commerce of the United States. In protection demonstrated and the
developing U.S. standards, this Trade Assumptions and Standard Values potential cost savings resulting from
Act requires agencies to consider • Discount rate: 7%. harmonization of FAA and JAA/EASA
international standards and, where • Period of analysis: Costs—based on requirements.
appropriate, to be the basis of U.S. a 10-year production period. Benefits—
standards. Fourth, the Unfunded based on 25-year operating lives of Costs and Benefits of This Rulemaking
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. newly-certificated aircraft. Costs
Current Special
practice conditions
to NPRM to NPRM
In the first column (or, the base case, of parts 23 and 29 aircraft, since U.S. the remaining portion of parts 23/29
which reflects actual costs to industry), manufacturers of these compliant aircraft and relatively lower costs for the
there are no additional HIRF-protection aircraft currently meet JAA’s/EASA’s majority of part 27 rotorcraft that do not
costs for manufacturers of part 25 HIRF standards in order to market their currently meet JAA’s/EASA’s HIRF
airplanes and relatively low incremental aircraft in Europe. There are moderate standards (equivalent to the
costs for manufacturers of the majority incremental costs for manufacturers of requirements in this proposal) either
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5561
because (1) their aircraft do not yet have condition levels (essentially equivalent Fields (HIRF) Risk Analysis,’’ by EMA
complex electronic systems installed or to industry’s self-determined protection) Electro Magnetic Applications, Inc. of
(2) they have chosen not to market their and the NPRM’s more stringent Denver, Co. (report DOT/FAA/AR–99/
aircraft abroad. This ‘‘current practice to requirements. These regulatory costs 50, July 1999); the complete study is
proposed rule’’ is the base perspective equal $409.5 million, and represent the available in the docket for this
in this analysis. The total estimated ten- costs for more robust HIRF protection rulemaking. Using the study’s risk
year costs of $28.6 million (the sum of that industry would not have analysis results for airplanes certificated
column one) represent the true voluntarily incurred. under parts 23 and 25 and FAA
incremental impact on the industry. accident/incident data for rotorcraft
Benefits
However, most manufacturers of parts certificated under parts 27 and 29, the
23, 25, 27, and 29 aircraft believe that Estimated benefits of this proposal are FAA calculated the difference between
U.S. special conditions afford sufficient the accidents, incidents, and fatalities the expected number of accidents under
protection from HIRF. Therefore, in the avoided as a result of increased the proposed standards versus those
second column (or, the regulatory case, protection from HIRF-effects provided that could be expected if current U.S.
‘‘special conditions to NPRM’’), the to electric and electronic systems. special condition levels were
FAA shows the incremental compliance Quantified benefits are partly based on maintained in the future in lieu of the
costs between the current U.S. special a study titled ‘‘High-Intensity Radiated proposed standards.
Current Special
practice conditions
to NPRM to NPRM
Following FAA’s rationale as stated in Summary of Costs and Benefits on a substantial number of small
the cost section earlier, column one (the The incremental costs of meeting the entities. If an agency determines that it
base case) in the benefits table above NPRM requirements versus current will, the agency must prepare a
shows incremental benefits of $88.1 industry practice equal $28.6 million regulatory flexibility analysis as
million resulting from averted accidents and the associated benefits are $88.1 described in the Act. However, if an
in future compliant parts 23/27/29 million, for a benefit-to-cost ratio of 3.1 agency determines that a proposed or
aircraft; part 25 airplanes already meet to 1. Alternatively, the incremental costs final rule is not expected to have a
similar JAA standards, hence no of meeting the NPRM requirements significant economic impact on a
additional benefits attributable to part versus current U.S. special conditions substantial number of small entities,
25 airplanes accrue to society. Column equal $409.5 million and the benefits section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides
two in the table presents the regulatory are $3,940.4 million, for a benefit-to-cost that the head of the agency may so
case; it shows the additional benefits ratio of 9.6 to 1. From either certify and a regulatory flexibility
associated with going from industry’s perspective, the proposed rule is clearly analysis is not required. The
self-determined protection standards (or cost-beneficial. certification must include a statement
current special conditions) to the providing the factual basis for this
NPRM’s HIRF standards. Total Regulatory Flexibility Determination determination, and the reasoning should
regulatory incremental benefits equal The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 be clear.
$3,940.4 million and represent the value (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of The proposed rule would affect
of avoiding the following numbers of regulatory issuance that agencies shall manufacturers of parts 23, 25, 27, and
accidents over the 34-year analysis endeavor, consistent with the objective 29 aircraft produced under future new
period: (1) Part 23 airplanes, 24 of the rule and of applicable statutes, to type-certificates. For manufacturers, a
accidents; (2) part 25 airplanes, 22 fit regulatory and informational small entity is one with 1,500 or fewer
accidents; (3) part 27 rotorcraft, 41 requirements to the scale of the employees. None of the part 25 or part
accidents, and (4) part 29 rotorcraft, 14 business, organizations, and 29 manufacturers has 1,500 or fewer
accidents. The FAA believes that, based governmental jurisdictions subject to employees; consequently, none is
on the aforementioned risk assessment regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, considered a small entity. There are,
(by EMA Electro Magnetic Applications, the Act requires agencies to solicit and however, currently about four part 27
Inc.), this would be the potential result consider flexible regulatory proposals (utility rotorcraft) and ten part 23 (small
absent the proposed standards if all and to explain the rationale for their non-transport category airplanes)
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
airplanes certificated under part 25, the actions. The Act covers a wide-range of manufacturers, who have fewer than
majority of aircraft certificated under small entities, including small 1,500 employees and are considered
parts 23 and 29, and a sizeable minority businesses, not-for-profit organizations small entities.
of part 27 rotorcraft, currently or in the and small governmental jurisdictions. With respect to the part 27 entities,
future did not meet the JAA/EASA HIRF Agencies must perform a review to the incremental costs of this NPRM are
requirements (i.e., equivalent to those in determine whether a rulemaking action estimated at $875 per new-production
the NPRM). will have a significant economic impact rotorcraft. Part 27 rotorcraft at the small
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5562 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
end generally sell for about $200,000; and sales of 100 units annually, the statement under the National
thus the incremental cost would $20,000 total annual incremental cost Environmental Policy Act in the
represent only a fraction of one percent attributable to HIRF is between one- absence of extraordinary circumstances.
of each unit’s sales price and clearly less tenth/two-tenths of one percent of The FAA has determined this proposed
than one percent of the typical small annual sales ($20,000/$13,000,000), rulemaking action qualifies for the
manufacturer’s annual revenues. which does not constitute a significant categorical exclusion identified in
Consequently, the FAA does not economic impact. paragraph 308(c)(1) and involves no
consider the incremental cost to Based on there being no small extraordinary circumstances.
constitute a significant economic manufacturers of part 25 or part 29
impact. Further, most utility rotorcraft aircraft, and based on the described Executive Order 13132, Federalism
are engaged in specialized activities expense/revenue relationships for the The FAA has analyzed this NPRM
such as logging, offshore oil drilling, part 23 and part 27 small manufacturers, under the principles and criteria of
construction, etc., the demand for which the FAA certifies that this proposed rule Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
is highly price-inelastic; the would not have a significant economic have determined that this action would
manufacturers can readily pass on the impact on a substantial number of small not have a substantial direct affect on
relatively low incremental costs to entities. The FAA invites comments on the States, on the relationship between
purchasers of these highly-specialized the estimated small entity impact from the national Government and the States,
rotorcraft. interested and affected parties. or on the distribution of power and
The FAA contacted the ten part 23 responsibilities among the various
small airframe manufacturers actively International Trade Impact Assessment
levels of government, and therefore
producing airplanes. The majority of The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
would not have federalism implications.
these manufacture piston-engine prohibits Federal agencies from
airplanes, most of which do not include engaging in any standards or related Plain English
sophisticated electrical systems. Six of activities that create unnecessary
the ten companies are in the initial obstacles to the foreign commerce of the Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
stages of developing new airplane United States. Legitimate domestic Oct. 4, 1993) requires each agency to
models that will include full-authority- objectives, such as safety, are not write regulations that are simple and
digital-engine-controls (FADEC). About considered unnecessary obstacles. The easy to understand. We invite your
one-half of these, however, could not statute also requires consideration of comments on how to make these
yet estimate new development costs. international standards and where proposed regulations easier to
One manufacturer, sufficiently into the appropriate, that they be the basis for understand, including answers to
pre-certification process, did provide U.S. standards. questions such as the following:
estimates of incremental costs related to In accordance with the above statute, • Are the requirements in the
the FADECs (costs were based on data the FAA has assessed the potential proposed regulations clearly stated?
received from the engine supplier). effect of this proposed rule for aircraft • Do the proposed regulations contain
Additional non-recurring design/testing produced under the affected parts. This unnecessary technical language or
costs for engines in the new model rulemaking is consistent with the Trade jargon that interferes with their clarity?
would total $170,000 (recurring costs Agreements Act in that it adopts • Would the regulations be easier to
were not specified and thus assumed international standards as the basis of understand if they were divided into
not significant). Annualizing the cost at U.S. standards. more (but shorter) sections?
7% over a 10-year production period
equals $24,200. The company expects to Unfunded Mandates Reform Act • Is the description in the preamble
produce 100 airplanes annually, each The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act helpful in understanding the proposed
selling for $130,000; expected annual of 1995 (the Act) is intended, among regulations?
sales revenue therefore equals other things, to curb the practice of Please send your comments to the
$13,000,000. Thus, the $24,200 total imposing unfunded Federal mandates address specified in the ADDRESSES
annual incremental cost attributable to on State, local, and tribal governments. section.
HIRF represents less than two-tenths of Title II of the Act requires each Federal
Regulations That Significantly Affect
one percent of annual sales ($24,200/ agency to prepare a written statement
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
$13,000,000), which the FAA believes assessing the effects of any Federal
does not constitute a significant mandate in a proposed or final agency The FAA has analyzed this NPRM
economic impact. rule that may result in an expenditure under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Two other small airframe of $100 million or more (adjusted Concerning Regulations that
manufacturers were contacted for annually for inflation) in any one year Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
similar cost data. When the FAA by State, local, and tribal governments, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We
determined that the engine supplier in in the aggregate, or by the private sector; have determined that it is not a
both cases was the same company such a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under the
referred to in the previous paragraph, ‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ The executive order because it is not a
that supplier was queried in order to FAA currently uses an inflation- ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
save time. The incremental costs adjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu Executive Order 12866, and it is not
associated with HIRF-testing were of $100 million. This proposed rule likely to have a significant adverse effect
similar, but less, than those estimated in
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
does not contain such a mandate. The on the supply, distribution, or use of
the first case described, i.e., ranging requirements of Title II do not apply. energy.
from $120,000 to $140,000 per type
certification. Annualizing the upper-end Environmental Analysis List of Subjects
estimate of $140,000 at 7% over a 10- FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 14 CFR Part 23
year production run equates to about actions that are categorically excluded
$20,000. At a selling price of $130,000 from preparation of an environmental Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
per airplane (see first example above) assessment or environmental impact safety, Certification, Safety.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5563
14 CFR Part 25 (c) Each electrical and electronic (c) Equipment HIRF Test Level 1. (1)
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation system that performs a function whose From 10 kilohertz (kHz) to 400
safety, Certification, Safety. failure would reduce the capability of megahertz (MHz), use conducted
the airplane or the ability of the susceptibility tests with continuous
14 CFR Part 27 flightcrew to respond to an adverse wave (CW) and 1 kHz square wave
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation operating condition must be designed modulation with 90 percent depth or
safety, Certification, Rotorcraft, Safety. and installed so the system is not greater. The conducted susceptibility
adversely affected when the equipment current must start at a minimum of 0.6
14 CFR Part 29 providing the function is exposed to milliamperes (mA) at 10 kHz, increasing
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation equipment HIRF test level 4, as 20 decibels (dB) per frequency decade to
safety, Certification, Rotorcraft, Safety. described in appendix J to this part. a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
3. Add appendix J to part 23 to read (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
The Proposed Amendment as follows: conducted susceptibility current must
In consideration of the foregoing, the be at least 30 mA.
Appendix J to Part 23—HIRF (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
Federal Aviation Administration Environments and Equipment HIRF
proposes to amend parts 23, 25, 27, and radiated susceptibility tests at a
Test Levels minimum of 20 volts per meter (V/m)
29 of Title 14, Code of Federal
This appendix specifies the HIRF peak, with CW and 1 kHz square wave
Regulations (14 CFR) as follows:
environments and equipment HIRF test modulation with 90 percent depth or
PART 23—AIRWORTHINESS levels for electrical and electronic greater.
STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, systems under § 23.1308. The field (4) From 400 MHz to 8 gigahertz
ACROBATIC, AND COMMUTER strength values for the HIRF (GHz), use radiated susceptibility tests
CATEGORY AIRPLANES environments and equipment HIRF test at a minimum of 150 V/m peak with
levels are expressed in root-mean-square pulse modulation of 0.1 percent duty
1. The authority citation for part 23 units measured during the peak of the cycle with 1 kHz pulse repetition
continues to read as follows: modulation cycle. frequency. This signal must be switched
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, (a) HIRF environment I is specified in on and off at a rate of 1 Hz with a duty
44702, 44704. the following table: cycle of 50 percent.
(5) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
2. Add § 23.1308 to subpart F to read TABLE I.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT I radiated susceptibility tests at a
as follows: minimum of 28 V/m peak with 1 kHz
Field strength square wave modulation with 90
§ 23.1308 High-intensity Radiated Fields Frequency (volts/meter)
(HIRF) Protection. (cycles/second)
percent depth or greater. This signal
(a) Each electrical and electronic Peak Average must be switched on and off at a rate of
system that performs a function whose 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 percent.
10 kHz–2 MHz .......... 50 50 (d) Equipment HIRF Test Level 2. (1)
failure would prevent the continued 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use
safe flight and landing of the airplane 30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 50 50 conducted susceptibility tests with CW
must be designed and installed so that— 100 MHz–400 MHz ... 100 100 and 1 kHz square wave modulation with
(1) The function is not adversely 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 700 50
700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100
90 percent depth or greater. The
affected during and after the time the
1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2,000 200 conducted susceptibility current must
airplane is exposed to HIRF
2 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 200 start at a minimum of 0.6 mA at 10 kHz,
environment I, as described in appendix
6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,000 200 increasing 20 dB per frequency decade
J to this part; 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3,000 300 to a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
(2) The system automatically recovers 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 200 (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
normal operation, in a timely manner, 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 conducted susceptibility current must
after the airplane is exposed to HIRF be at least 30 mA.
environment I, as described in appendix (b) HIRF environment II is specified (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
J to this part, unless the system’s in the following table: radiated susceptibility tests at a
recovery conflicts with other minimum of 20 V/m peak with CW and
operational or functional requirements TABLE II.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT II 1 kHz square wave modulation with 90
of the system; and percent depth or greater.
(3) The system is not adversely Field strength (4) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
affected during and after the time the Frequency (volts/meter)
(cycles/second) radiated susceptibility tests at a
airplane is exposed to HIRF Peak Average minimum of 150 V/m peak with pulse
environment II, as described in modulation of 4 percent duty cycle with
appendix J to this part. 10 kHz–500 kHz ....... 20 20 a 1 kHz pulse repetition frequency. This
(b) Each electrical and electronic 500 kHz–2 MHz ........ 30 30 signal must be switched on and off at a
system that performs a function whose 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100
30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 10 10
rate of 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50
failure would significantly reduce the 100 MHz–200 MHz ... 30 10 percent.
capability of the airplane or the ability 200 MHz–400 MHz ... 10 10 (e) Equipment HIRF Test Level 3. Test
of the flightcrew to respond to an level 3 is HIRF environment II in table
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5564 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
at a minimum of 0.15 mA at 10 kHz, equipment HIRF test level 4, as milliamperes (mA) at 10 kHz, increasing
increasing 20 dB per frequency decade described in appendix K to this part. 20 decibels (dB) per frequency decade to
to a minimum of 7.5 mA at 500 kHz. 6. Add appendix K to part 25 to read a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
(2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, use as follows: (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
conducted susceptibility tests at a Appendix K to Part 25—HIRF conducted susceptibility current must
minimum of 7.5 mA. Environments and Equipment HIRF be at least 30 mA.
(3) From 100 MHz to 8 GHz, use Test Levels (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
radiated susceptibility tests at a radiated susceptibility tests at a
minimum of 5 V/m. This appendix specifies the HIRF
minimum of 20 volts per meter (V/m)
environments and equipment HIRF test
peak with CW and 1 kHz square wave
PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS levels for electrical and electronic
modulation with 90 percent depth or
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT systems under § 25.1317. The field
greater.
CATEGORY AIRPLANES strength values for the HIRF
environments and equipment HIRF test (4) From 400 MHz to 8 gigahertz
4. The authority citation for part 25 levels are expressed in root-mean-square (GHz), use radiated susceptibility tests
continues to read as follows: units measured during the peak of the at a minimum of 150 V/m peak with
modulation cycle. pulse modulation of 0.1 percent duty
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 44704. (a) HIRF environment I is specified in cycle with 1 kHz pulse repetition
the following table: frequency. This signal must be switched
5. Add § 25.1317 to subpart F to read on and off at a rate of 1 Hz with a duty
as follows: cycle of 50 percent.
TABLE I.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT I
§ 25.1317 High-intensity Radiated Fields (5) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
(HIRF) Protection. Field strength radiated susceptibility tests at a
Frequency (volts/meter) minimum of 28 V/m peak with 1 kHz
(a) Each electrical and electronic (cycles/second) square wave modulation with 90
system that performs a function whose Peak Average
percent depth or greater. This signal
failure would prevent the continued
10 kHz–2 MHz .......... 50 50 must be switched on and off at a rate of
safe flight and landing of the airplane
2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 percent.
must be designed and installed so that—
30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 50 50 (d) Equipment HIRF Test Level 2. (1)
(1) The function is not adversely 100 MHz–400 MHz ... 100 100 From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use
affected during and after the time the 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 700 50 conducted susceptibility tests with CW
airplane is exposed to HIRF 700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100 and 1 kHz square wave modulation with
environment I, as described in appendix 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2,000 200
90 percent depth or greater. The
K to this part; 2 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 200
6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,000 200 conducted susceptibility current must
(2) The system automatically recovers
8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3,000 300 start at a minimum of 0.6 mA at 10 kHz,
normal operation, in a timely manner,
12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 200 increasing 20 dB per frequency decade
after the airplane is exposed to HIRF
18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 to a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
environment I, as described in appendix
K to this part, unless the system’s (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
(b) HIRF environment II is specified conducted susceptibility current must
recovery conflicts with other
in the following table: be at least 30 mA.
operational or functional requirements
of the system; and (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
TABLE II.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT II radiated susceptibility tests at a
(3) The system is not adversely
affected during and after the time the minimum of 20 V/m peak with CW and
Field strength 1 kHz square wave modulation with 90
airplane is exposed to HIRF Frequency (volts/meter)
environment II, as described in (cycles/second) percent depth or greater.
appendix K to this part. Peak Average (4) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
(b) Each electrical and electronic radiated susceptibility tests at a
10 kHz–500 kHz ....... 20 20 minimum of 150 V/m peak with pulse
system that performs a function whose 500 kHz–2 MHz ........ 30 30
failure would significantly reduce the 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100
modulation of 4 percent duty cycle with
capability of the airplane or the ability 30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 10 10 a 1 kHz pulse repetition frequency. This
of the flightcrew to respond to an 100 MHz–200 MHz ... 30 10 signal must be switched on and off at a
adverse operating condition must be 200 MHz–400 MHz ... 10 10 rate of 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50
designed and installed so the system is 400 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 40 percent.
not adversely affected when the 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 1,300 160 (e) Equipment HIRF Test Level 3. Test
2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 3,000 120 level 3 is HIRF environment II in table
equipment providing these functions is
4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 160 II of this appendix reduced by
exposed to equipment HIRF test level 1, 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 400 170
2, or 3, as described in appendix K to 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 1,230 230
acceptable aircraft transfer function and
this part. 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 730 190 attenuation curves. Testing must cover
(c) Each electrical and electronic 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 150 the frequency band of 10 kHz to 8 GHz.
system that performs a function whose (f) Equipment HIRF Test Level 4. (1)
failure would reduce the capability of (c) Equipment HIRF Test Level 1. (1) From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
the airplane or the ability of the From 10 kilohertz (kHz) to 400 conducted susceptibility tests, starting
flightcrew to respond to an adverse megahertz (MHz), use conducted at a minimum of 0.15 mA at 10 kHz,
operating condition must be designed susceptibility tests with continuous increasing 20 dB per frequency decade
and installed so the system is not wave (CW) and 1 kHz square wave to a minimum of 7.5 mA at 500 kHz.
adversely affected when the equipment modulation with 90 percent depth or (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, use
providing the function is exposed to greater. The conducted susceptibility conducted susceptibility tests at a
current must start at a minimum of 0.6 minimum of 7.5 mA.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5565
(3) From 100 MHz to 8 GHz, use 9. Add appendix D to part 27 to read TABLE III.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT III—
radiated susceptibility tests at a as follows: Continued
minimum of 5 V/m.
Appendix D to Part 27—HIRF
Field strength
PART 27—AIRWORTHINESS Environments and Equipment HIRF Frequency (volts/meter)
STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY Test Levels (cycles/second)
ROTORCRAFT This appendix specifies the HIRF Peak Average
environments and equipment HIRF test 100 kHz–400 MHz .... 200 200
7. The authority citation for part 27 levels for electrical and electronic
continues to read as follows: 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 730 200
systems under § 27.1317. The field 700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 1,400 240
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, strength values for the HIRF 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 5,000 250
44702, 44704. environments and laboratory equipment 2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 6,000 490
HIRF test levels are expressed in root- 4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 7,200 400
8. Add § 27.1317 to subpart F to read 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,100 170
as follows: mean-square units measured during the
8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 5,000 330
peak of the modulation cycle. 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 330
§ 27.1317 High-intensity Radiated Fields (a) HIRF environment I is specified in 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 1,000 420
(HIRF) Protection. the following table:
(a) Each electrical and electronic (d) Equipment HIRF Test Level 1. (1)
system that performs a function whose TABLE I.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT I From 10 kilohertz (kHz) to 400
failure would prevent the continued megahertz (MHz), use conducted
safe flight and landing of the rotorcraft Field strength susceptibility tests with continuous
Frequency (volts/meter)
must be designed and installed so that— (cycles/second) wave (CW) and 1 kHz square wave
(1) The function is not adversely Peak Average modulation with 90 percent depth or
affected during and after the time the greater. The conducted susceptibility
rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF 10 kHz–2 MHz .......... 50 50 current must start at a minimum of 0.6
environment I, as described in appendix 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 milliamperes (mA) at 10 kHz, increasing
30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 50 50
D to this part; 20 decibels (dB) per frequency decade to
100 MHz–400 MHz ... 100 100
(2) The system automatically recovers 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 700 50 a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
normal operation, in a timely manner, 700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100 (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
after the rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2,000 200 conducted susceptibility current must
environment I, as described in appendix 2 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 200 be at least 30 mA.
D to this part, unless this conflicts with 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,000 200 (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
other operational or functional 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3,000 300 radiated susceptibility tests at a
requirements of that system; 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 200 minimum of 20 volts per meter (V/m)
18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 peak with CW and 1 kHz square wave
(3) The system is not adversely
affected during and after the time the modulation with 90 percent depth or
(b) HIRF environment II is specified greater.
rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF in the following table: (4) From 400 MHz to 8 gigahertz
environment II, as described in
(GHz), use radiated susceptibility tests
appendix D to this part; and TABLE II.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT II at a minimum of 150 V/m peak with
(4) Each function required during
pulse modulation of 0.1 percent duty
operation under visual flight rules is not Field Srength (Volts/ cycle with 1 kHz pulse repetition
adversely affected during and after the Frequency Meter) frequency. This signal must be switched
time the rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF (cycles/second)
Peak Average on and off at a rate of 1 Hz with a duty
environment III, as described in cycle of 50 percent.
appendix D to this part. 10 kHz–500 kHz ....... 20 20 (5) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
(b) Each electrical and electronic 500 kHz–2 MHz ........ 30 30 radiated susceptibility tests at a
system that performs a function whose 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 minimum of 28 V/m peak with 1 kHz
failure would significantly reduce the 30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 10 10 square wave modulation with 90
capability of the rotorcraft or the ability 100 MHz–200 MHz ... 30 10 percent depth or greater. This signal
of the flightcrew to respond to an 200 MHz–400 MHz ... 10 10
must be switched on and off at a rate of
adverse operating condition must be 400 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 40
1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 1,300 160 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 percent.
designed and installed so the system is (e) Equipment HIRF Test Level 2. (1)
2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 3,000 120
not adversely affected when the 4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 160 From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use
equipment providing these functions is 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 400 170 conducted susceptibility tests with CW
exposed to equipment HIRF test level 1, 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 1,230 230 and 1 kHz square wave modulation with
2, or 3, as described in appendix D to 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 730 190 90 percent depth or greater. The
this part. 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 150 conducted susceptibility current must
(c) Each electrical and electronic start at a minimum of 0.6 mA at 10 kHz,
system that performs a function whose (c) HIRF environment III is specified increasing 20 dB per frequency decade
failure would reduce the capability of in the following table: to a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
the rotorcraft or the ability of the (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
flightcrew to respond to an adverse TABLE III.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT III conducted susceptibility current must
operating condition, must be designed be at least 30 mA.
and installed so the system is not Field strength (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
Frequency (volts/meter)
adversely affected when the equipment (cycles/second) radiated susceptibility tests at a
providing these functions is exposed to Peak Average minimum of 20 V/m peak with CW and
equipment HIRF test level 4, as 1 kHz square wave modulation with 90
described in appendix D to this part. 10 kHz–100 kHz ....... 150 150 percent depth or greater.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
5566 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(4) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use failure would significantly reduce the TABLE II.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT II—
radiated susceptibility tests at a capability of the rotorcraft or the ability Continued
minimum of 150 V/m peak with pulse of the flightcrew to respond to an
modulation of 4 percent duty cycle with adverse operating condition must be Field strength
a 1 kHz pulse repetition frequency. This designed and installed so the system is Frequency (volts/meter)
signal must be switched on and off at a not adversely affected when the (cycles/second)
Peak Average
rate of 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 equipment providing these functions is
percent. exposed to equipment HIRF test level 1, 30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 10 10
(f) Equipment HIRF Test Level 3. Test 2, or 3, as described in appendix E to 100 MHz–200 MHz ... 30 10
level 3 is HIRF environment II in table this part. 200 MHz–400 MHz ... 10 10
II of this appendix reduced by (c) Each electrical and electronic 400 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 40
acceptable aircraft transfer function and system that performs such a function 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 1,300 160
attenuation curves. Testing must cover whose failure would reduce the 2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 3,000 120
the frequency band of 10 kHz to 8 GHz. capability of the rotorcraft or the ability 4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 160
(g) Equipment HIRF Test Level 4. (1) of the flightcrew to respond to an 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 400 170
From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 1,230 230
adverse operating condition must be 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 730 190
conducted susceptibility tests, starting designed and installed so the system is 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 150
at a minimum of 0.15 mA at 10 kHz, not adversely affected when the
increasing 20 dB per frequency decade equipment providing these functions is (c) HIRF environment III is specified
to a minimum of 7.5 mA at 500 kHz. exposed to equipment HIRF test level 4,
(2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, use in the following table:
as described in appendix E to this part.
conducted susceptibility tests at a 12. Add appendix E to part 29 to read
minimum of 7.5 mA. TABLE III.— HIRF ENVIRONMENT III
as follows:
(3) From 100 MHz to 8 GHz, use
Appendix E to Part 29—HIRF Field strength
radiated susceptibility tests at a Frequency (volts/meter)
minimum of 5 V/m. Environments and Equipment HIRF (cycles/second)
Test Levels Peak Average
PART 29—AIRWORTHINESS This appendix specifies the HIRF
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT environments and equipment HIRF test
10 kHz–100 kHz ....... 150 150
CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT 100 kHz–400 MHz .... 200 200
levels for electrical and electronic 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 730 200
10. The authority citation for part 29 systems under § 29.1317. The field 700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 1,400 240
continues to read as follows: strength values for the HIRF 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 5,000 250
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, environments and laboratory equipment 2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 6,000 490
44702, 44704. HIRF test levels are expressed in root- 4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 7,200 400
mean-square units measured during the 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,100 170
11. Add § 29.1317 to subpart F to read peak of the modulation cycle. 8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 5,000 330
as follows: (a) HIRF environment I is specified in 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 330
the following table: 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 1,000 420
§ 29.1317 High-intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF) Protection.
TABLE I.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT I (d) Equipment HIRF Test Level 1. (1)
(a) Each electrical and electronic From 10 kilohertz (kHz) to 400
system that performs a function whose megahertz (MHz), use conducted
failure would prevent the continued Field strength
Frequency (volts/meter) susceptibility tests with continuous
safe flight and landing of the rotorcraft (cycles/second) wave (CW) and 1 kHz square wave
must be designed and installed so that— Peak Average modulation with 90 percent depth or
(1) The function is not adversely
10 kHz–2 MHz .......... 50 50
greater. The conducted susceptibility
affected during and after the time the
2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 current must start at a minimum of 0.6
rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF
30 MHz–100 MHz ..... 50 50 milliamperes (mA) at 10 kHz, increasing
environment I, as described in appendix
100 MHz–400 MHz ... 100 100 20 decibels (dB) per frequency decade to
E to this part;
(2) The system automatically recovers 400 MHz–700 MHz ... 700 50 a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz.
700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100 (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the
normal operation, in a timely manner, 1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2,000 200
after the rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF conducted susceptibility current must
2 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3,000 200 be at least 30 mA.
environment I, as described in appendix 6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1,000 200
E to this part, unless this conflicts with (3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use
8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3,000 300
other operational or functional 12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2,000 200
radiated susceptibility tests at a
requirements of that system; 18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 minimum of 20 volts per meter (V/m)
(3) The system is not adversely peak, with CW and 1 kHz square wave
affected during and after the time the (b) HIRF environment II is specified modulation with 90 percent depth or
rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF in the following table: greater.
environment II, as described in (4) From 400 MHz to 8 gigahertz
appendix E to this part; and TABLE II.—HIRF ENVIRONMENT II (GHz), use radiated susceptibility tests
(4) Each function required during at a minimum of 150 V/m peak with
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
operation under visual flight rules is not Field strength pulse modulation of 0.1 percent duty
adversely affected during and after the Frequency (volts/meter) cycle with 1 kHz pulse repetition
(cycles/second) frequency. This signal must be switched
time the rotorcraft is exposed to HIRF Peak Average
environment III, as described in on and off at a rate of 1 Hz with a duty
appendix E to this part. 10 kHz–500 kHz ....... 20 20 cycle of 50 percent.
(b) Each electrical and electronic 500 kHz–2 MHz ........ 30 30 (5) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use
system that performs a function whose 2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 radiated susceptibility tests at a
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules 5567
minimum of 28 V/m peak with 1 kHz minimum of 20 V/m peak with CW and conducted susceptibility tests, starting
square wave modulation with 90 1 kHz square wave modulation with 90 at a minimum of 0.15 mA at 10 kHz,
percent depth or greater. This signal percent depth or greater. increasing 20 dB per frequency decade
must be switched on and off at a rate of (4) From 400 MHz to 8 GHz, use to a minimum of 7.5 mA at 500 kHz.
1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 percent. radiated susceptibility tests at a
(e) Equipment HIRF Test Level 2. (1) minimum of 150 V/m peak with pulse (2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, use
From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use modulation of 4 percent duty cycle with conducted susceptibility tests at a
conducted susceptibility tests with CW a 1 kHz pulse repetition frequency. This minimum of 7.5 mA.
and 1 kHz square wave modulation with signal must be switched on and off at a (3) From 100 MHz to 8 GHz, use
90 percent depth or greater. The rate of 1 Hz with a duty cycle of 50 radiated susceptibility tests at a
conducted susceptibility current must percent. minimum of 5 V/m.
start at a minimum of 0.6 mA at 10 kHz, (f) Equipment HIRF Test Level 3. Test
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 25,
increasing 20 dB per frequency decade level 3 is HIRF environment II in table
2006.
to a minimum of 30 mA at 500 kHz. II of this appendix reduced by
(2) From 500 kHz to 400 MHz, the acceptable aircraft transfer function and Dorenda D. Baker,
conducted susceptibility current must attenuation curves. Testing must cover Acting Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
be at least 30 mA. the frequency band of 10 kHz to 8 GHz. [FR Doc. 06–895 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am]
(3) From 100 MHz to 400 MHz, use (g) Equipment HIRF Test Level 4. (1) BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
radiated susceptibility tests at a From 10 kHz to 400 MHz, use
dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS4
VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:21 Jan 31, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01FEP4.SGM 01FEP4