69548 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices Accordingly, pursuant to Section b. Airman Certification Systems Issued in Washington, DC, on November 19(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act 7 and for the Working Group (ARAC). 18, 2014. reasons stated above, the Commission c. Airworthiness Assurance Working Lirio Liu, designates January 2, 2015, as the date Group (TAE). Designated Federal Officer, Aviation by which the Commission should either Rulemaking Advisory Committee. d. Engine Harmonization Working approve or disapprove, or institute [FR Doc. 2014–27602 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] Group (TAE). proceedings to determine whether to BILLING CODE 4910–13–P disapprove, the proposed rule change i. Engine Bird Ingestion. (File No. SR–ISE–2014–43). ii. Engine Endurance Testing For the Commission, by the Division of Requirements—Revision of Section DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 33.87. Federal Aviation Administration authority.8 e. Flight Test Harmonization Working Kevin M. O’Neill, Group (TAE)—Phase 2 Tasking. Twenty-Ninth Meeting: RTCA Special Deputy Secretary. 3. New Tasks: Committee 224, Airport Security [FR Doc. 2014–27571 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] Access Control Systems a. Transport Airplane Damage- BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Tolerance and Fatigue Evaluation AGENCY: Federal Aviation (TAE). Administration (FAA), U.S. Department b. Transport Airplane of Transportation (DOT). DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Crashworthiness and Ditching ACTION: Meeting notice of RTCA Special Federal Aviation Administration Evaluation (TAE). Committee 224, Airport Security Access c. Materials Flammability Working Control Systems. Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Group (TAE). Committee; Meeting SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice d. Aircraft Systems Information to advise the public of the twenty-ninth AGENCY: Federal Aviation Security Protection (ASISP) Working meeting of the RTCA Special Committee Administration (FAA), DOT. Group. 224, Airport Security Access Control ACTION: Notice of Aviation Rulemaking 4. ARAC Bylaws: Systems. Advisory Committee (ARAC) meeting. 5. Status Report From the FAA: DATES: The meeting will be held on SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice Attendance is open to the interested December 10th, 2014 from 10:00 a.m.– to advise the public of a meeting of the public but limited to the space 2:00 p.m. ARAC. available. Please confirm your ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at DATES: The meeting will be held on attendance with the person listed in the RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street NW., Suite December 18, 2014, starting at 1:00 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 910, Washington, DC 20036. section no later than December 11, 2014. Eastern Standard Time. Arrange oral FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Please provide the following presentations by December 11, 2014. RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., information: Full legal name, country of ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by citizenship, and name of your industry at the Federal Aviation Administration, telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) association, or applicable affiliation. If 800 Independence Avenue SW., 833–9434, or Web site at http:// you are attending as a public citizen, Washington, DC 20591, 5th floor, 5A/B/ www.rtca.org. please indicate so. C Conference Rooms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant For persons participating by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal telephone, please contact the person Renee Pocius, Federal Aviation Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Administration, 800 Independence 463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby CONTACT section by email or phone for Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, given for a meeting of Special the teleconference call-in number and telephone (202) 267–5093; fax (202) Committee 224. The agenda will include passcode. Callers outside the 267–5075; email [email protected]. the following: Washington metropolitan area are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant responsible for paying long-distance December 10th, 2014 to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal charges. • Welcome/Introductions/ Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. The public must arrange by December Administrative Remarks 2), we are giving notice of a meeting of 11, 2014 to present oral statements at • Review/Approve Previous Meeting the ARAC taking place on December 18, the meeting. The public may present Summary 2014, at the Federal Aviation written statements to the Aviation • Report from the TSA Administration, 800 Independence Rulemaking Advisory Committee by • Report on Safe Skies Document Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591. providing 25 copies to the Designated Distribution The Agenda includes: Federal Officer, or by bringing the • Request to RTCA Program 1. Request for Clarification: copies to the meeting. Management Committee for a. Avionics Systems Harmonization Working Group (TAE)—Phase 2 Low If you are in need of assistance or Consideration of Operational ES Airspeed Alerting. require a reasonable accommodation for Guidance Section Status ROD with NOTIC Wby2oa R..r kAeSiltCniaag tb1u Gi2sl0 irRto–yeu1 pMp7oAser: t tMhs oFadrinos mt(eAn ARacAntcCiev) e.C ontrol tliINhinsFittseOe rRdmpM rueAeentTtadiIOtneiNgro ,ntC hp,O elaNe shaT wesAeaCe dTclil.on aSngsit gaFancO lt Ri ats nhFtedeUn RpoiTnreHarglEs oRn •••• IATAnicndmtyiiveo O inadt nhIutdeae rlmP BDlsauo cfscoeiur no mNef seeNsnx ettx SMt eMeceteitoeintnig nR ge ports N1P device, can be made available if • Adjourn V VPT 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I). requested 10 calendar days before the Attendance is open to the interested SK4 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). meeting. public but limited to space availability. D mstockstill on VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1 AVIATION RULEMAKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECORD OF MEETING MEETING DATE: December 18, 2014 MEETING TIME: 1:25 p.m. LOCATION: Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, SW. 5th Floor Conference Room 5ABC Washington, DC 20591 PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) told the public of this Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) meeting in a Federal Register notice published November 21, 2014 (79 FR 69548). ATTENDEES: Committee Members Todd Sigler The Boeing Company, ARAC Chair Dr. Tim Brady Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU), ARAC Vice Chair Chris Baum* Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) Stacey Bechdolt* Regional Airline Association (RAA) Michelle Betcher Airline Dispatch Federation (ADF) Craig Bolt* Pratt & Whitney Transport Airplane and Engine (TAE) Subcommittee, Chair Mark Bury Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC−200 Doug Carr National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) Tom Charpentier Experimental Aviation Association (EAA) 1 Ambrose Clay National Organization to Insure a Sound Controlled Environment (NOISE) Brenda Courtney Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–2 Designated Federal Officer (DFO) Marie-Anne Dromoguet* Transport Canada – Civil Aviation (TCCA) Gail Dunham National Air Disaster Alliance/Foundation (NADA/F) Dan Elwell Airlines for America (A4A) Stéphane Flori* AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) Jens Hennig* General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) George Novak Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) David Oord Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Chris Oswald* Airport Council International – North America (ACI−NA) George Paul National Air Carrier Association (NACA) Phil Poynor National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI) Bob Robeson Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Aviation Policy and Plans, APO–300 Yvette Rose Cargo Airline Association (CAA) David Supplee* International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) Chris Witkowski Association of Flight Attendants Communications Workers of America (AFA−CWA) 2 Attendees Doug Anderson* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–7 Clark Badie* Honeywell Aerospace (Honeywell) Matt Brackman* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airworthiness Division, AIR–134 Jim Crotty Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–200 Sean Elliott Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Jeff Gardlin* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM−115 Katherine Haley Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–203 Matthew Hallett PAI Consulting Katrina Holiday Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–109 Sean Howe* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–7 Joe Jacobsen* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM−111 Ken Kerzner Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aircraft Maintenance Division, AFS–300 Mark Larsen* National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) Ron Little Delta Air Lines (Delta) Sharon Lyda* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM−115 3 Suzanne Masterson* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Northwest Mountain Region−Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–115 Doug Macnair Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Dorina Mihail* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) New England Region–Aircraft Certification Service Engine and Propeller Directorate, ANE–142 Dave Mikkelson* Allegiant Travel Company (Allegiant) Ed Nixon* Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation (Gulfstream) Alexander Olah NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots (NJASAP) Michael O’Donnell Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Engineering Division, AAS−1 Steve Paasch* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aircraft Engineering Division, AIR–130 Renee Pocius Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–024 Brenda Robeson Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Rulemaking, ARM–210 Mary Schooley* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Northwest Mountain Region–Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–111 Walt Sippel* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM−115 Peter Skaves* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Design, Manufacturing, and Airworthiness Division, AIR-100 Alan Strom* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) New England Region–Aircraft Certification Service Engine and Propeller Directorate, ANE–142 4 James Wilborn* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Northwest Mountain Region−Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–117 Ian Won* Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM−115 *Attended via teleconference. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION Mr. Dan Elwell, A4A, called the meeting to order at 1:25 p.m. and thanked the ARAC members and the public for attending. He invited the attendees to introduce themselves. Ms. Brenda Courtney, DFO, introduced Mr. Todd Sigler, Boeing, as the new ARAC Chair and Dr. Tim Brady, ERAU, as the new Vice Chair. Ms. Courtney expressed gratitude to Mr. Elwell for serving as ARAC Chair since August 2012. Mr. Sigler asked Ms. Courtney to read the required Federal Advisory Committee Act, Title 5, United States Code Appendix 2 (2007) statement. Ratification of Minutes Mr. Sigler stated the first item on the agenda is ratification of the minutes from the September 18, 2014, meeting. He asked for any revisions or amendments to the draft minutes circulated before the meeting. Without revisions or questions, the ARAC ratified the minutes. NEW TASKS Aircraft Systems Information Security/Protection (ASIS/P) Working Group Ms. Courtney introduced Mr. Steve Paasch, FAA, to give a briefing on the ASIS/P Working Group tasking. Mr. Paasch stated the ASISP is equivalent terminology for “cyber security.” He noted aircraft systems have become more integrated and technologically advanced. Mr. Paasch stated the FAA has issued special conditions addressing information security, most of which centered on standards under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 23 and 25. In addition, he added the FAA published a policy statement (PS−AIR−21.16−02, Establishment of Special Conditions for Cyber Security) that describes when the issuance of special conditions is required for certain aircraft designs. Mr. Paasch indicated the FAA has been working with Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA), who has issued documents on the information security elements of maintenance and continued airworthiness, design issues, and methods and technologies. 5 Mr. Paasch stated the tasking represents an effort to consolidate and refine recommendations across various types of aircraft under 14 CFR parts 23, 25, 27, and 29, in order to develop and modify policy. In addition, he noted the goal is to harmonize FAA policy with that of the European Aviation Safety Administration (EASA) and consolidate information to serve as a foundation for future advancements. Mr. Paasch stated the tasking is composed of six individual tasks. The tasks are for the ASISP Working Group to— 1. Provide recommendations on whether ASISP-related rulemaking, policy, and/or guidance on best practices are needed for parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. 2. Provide the rationale as to why or why not ASISP-related rulemaking, policy, and/or guidance on best practices are required for parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. 3. If it is recommended that ASISP-related policy and/or guidance on best practices are needed, recommend whether such policy and/or guidance should be 14 CFR part-- specific or applicable to all or several of parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. 4. If it is recommended that all ASISP-related policy and/or guidance on best practices is needed, recommend whether security-related industry standards from Aeronautical Radio Incorporated , Federal Information Processing Standards, International Standards Organization, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Aerospace Recommend Practices (ARP) 4754a and/or SAE ARP 4761 would be appropriate for use in such ASISP-related policy and/or guidance. 5. Develop a report containing recommendations on the findings and results of tasks 1 through 4. a. The recommendation report should document both majority and dissenting positions on the findings and the rationale for each position. b. Any disagreements should be documented, including the rationale for each position and the reasons for the disagreement. 6. The working group may be reinstated to assist the ARAC by responding to the FAA’s questions or concerns after the recommendation report has been submitted. Mr. Paasch noted a seventh task may be in order based on comments received. The seventh tasking would be to harmonize language with EASA and other civil aviation bodies. Mr. Ambrose Clay, NOISE, stated the background information included in the tasking notice suggest the scope of the tasking is related to preventing intrusion and corruption of the flight systems. He expressed his concern that a vulnerability of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), from a Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation standpoint, provides the opportunity for a “spoof” and subsequent jamming. Mr. Clay added it should be a priority to ensure a robust flight management system that can detect if an aircraft is misdirected or if a GPS signal is lost. Mr. Paasch replied the immediate tasking does look at signals to and on the aircraft, but does not ask for study of requirements on signals in space. He noted the tasking focuses on requirements within the aircraft design for protection from cyber security risks and attacks. 6 Mr. Clay stated if the aircraft systems are not robust, then danger exists in the event of spoofing or jamming. Mr. Paasch replied the tasking includes robust design of systems on the aircraft. Mr. Peter Skaves, FAA, stated another group addresses concerns on interaction with NextGen technology. He added Mr. Clay’s concerns are covered, even to a point of redundancy, just not by the ASIS/P Working Group. Mr. Chris Baum, ALPA, referenced the ongoing RTCA information security work and stated the RTCA Program Management Committee recently started an activity focused on the effect on aircraft systems from use of personal electronic devices in the passenger cabin. He added the finding may be a resource for the ASIS/P Working Group to consider. Ms. Yvette Rose, CAA, asked if the tasking schedule of 14 months is enough to complete analyses and produce a recommendation report. Mr. Paasch responded the ASIS/P Working Group would be divided into teams working concurrently, allowing the work to be completed in a timely manner. Mr. Sigler noted the ASIS/P Working Group is allowed to request an extension if necessary. Mr. Jens Hennig, GAMA, stated much work necessary to satisfy the tasking is already complete and the 14-month period would build upon this existing work. He explained the existence of this work makes the 14-month timeline reasonable. Mr. Paasch agreed with Mr. Hennig. Mr. Paasch stated Boeing submitted three comments (Attachments 1 and 2). He first addressed comments two and three, noting the two share a common point. He explained the language in comment two, “Boeing recommends adding a new task item to consider EASA requirement(s) for harmonization to avoid unnecessary regulatory differences” mirrors the FAA’s goal of regulatory harmonization with foreign civil aviation bodies. Mr. Chris Witkowski, AFA–CWA, asked if the tasking will set forth new requirements not shared by EASA or if it seeks harmonization with existing EASA requirements. Mr. Paasch responded the scope of work will not be limited by existing EASA requirements, although harmonization with those requirements is a key concern. In addition, he stated the ASIS/P Working Group will seek harmonization with other foreign civil aviation bodies. Mr. Paasch addressed Boeing’s first comment, which suggested the TAE Subcommittee manage the task. Mr. Paasch stated he disagrees with the comment because the tasking, as written, is to be addressed by representatives of several sectors of the aviation industry. He explained this range of representation would not be achieved if the TAE managed the task. Mr. Sigler stated Boeing made the comment with an understanding of TAE’s structure but not considering that working groups can report directly to the ARAC. He agreed with Mr. Paasch. Ms. Gail Dunham, NADA/F, asked if ASISP merited a subcommittee or a working group because of the breadth of the material. She also expressed her support for detailed documentation of minority and dissenting opinions in the completed recommendation report. Mr. Sigler explained the ARAC’s bylaws allow for the creation of subcommittees if there are several taskings on the same topic, but it is the FAA’s decision. Ms. Courtney added the decision to create a new subcommittee would be based on ARAC recommendations, but this usually occurs when numerous tasks exist, and that is not the current scenario with ASIS/P. 7 Ms. Rose asked if consideration of EASA regulations and guidance would best fit between task four and five or combined with task four because task 4’s language already includes a list of industry standards to consult. Mr. Paasch responded that making the EASA harmonization tasking separate would be better because it is a unique undertaking beyond industry standards. He agreed to move it after task four. Mr. Elwell asked if the title of the tasking could be amended for clarification and readability. Specifically, he advocated the addition of a backslash between “security” and “protection” in the title and acronym (ASIS/P). Mr. Paasch stated much work and compromise went into the finalization of the title, but the addition of the backslash was acceptable. Without objection, the ARAC accepted the tasking, with the changes as noted above. Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group (TAE): Transport Airplane Damage−Tolerance and Fatigue Evaluation (Attachments 3, 4 and 5 ) Mr. James Wilborn, FAA, introduced the tasking. Mr. Walt Sippel, FAA, stated the tasking builds upon previous work and is based on three elements: • Evaluate recommendations from the 2003 General Structures Harmonization Working Group (GSHWG) in regards to language in § 25.571. • Evaluate comments received in 2009 regarding increased use of composites by the aviation industry. • Provide a costs and benefits estimate of recommendations. Mr. Sippel stated the tasking authorizes 2 years for evaluation activity. He added the tasking supports and runs parallel to the FAA Aviation Safety Strategic Composite Plan. Mr. Sippel stated the tasking will necessitate consideration of existing language in parts 23, 27, and 29 on composite structures, in an effort to ensure consistency amongst the parts. He indicated, based on this reasoning, the FAA does not agree with Boeing’s comment to limit the scope to part 25. Mr. Sippel stated the GSHWG, in response to the 1995 ARAC taskings, made recommendations to add or revise requirements and guidance material for § 25.571. He noted FAA adopted one of these recommendations, the establishment of a limit of validity, in amendment 25−132. Mr. Sippel added two other recommendations remain open: setting inspection thresholds, including EASA harmonization, and creating requirements for demonstrating structural damage capability. Mr. Sippel stated in June 2009 the FAA sought public comments on whether future rulemaking is needed to address extensive use of composite materials in transport category airplane construction. He stated the feedback indicated a need for improved regulatory guidance material and possible rulemaking. 8 Mr. Sippel addressed comments received from Boeing, Airbus, and Bombardier. Mr. Sippel stated, in response to a Boeing comment, an “or” will be added to the first tasking statement in order to clarify the tasking is not seeking rule amendments unless the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group determines a new or amended regulation is needed. He added this amendment will also address the comment from Bombardier. Mr. Sippel addressed another comment from Boeing, which recommended adding a new task item to consider EASA aging aircraft regulations and promoting harmonization. He stated he believes the FAA may revise the tasking to capture the proposed harmonization task. Mr. Sippel stated he agrees with the Airbus comment regarding limits of validity as established under § 25.571, changing the phrase “up to the LOV” to “throughout the operational life of the airplane.” Mr. Sippel voiced disagreement with the second Airbus comment, in which Airbus stated references to bonding or bolting of repairs were too specific. He noted it is within the scope of the rule to include the language regarding bonding or bolting of repairs. Mr. Sigler asked if the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group, in its proposal to include consideration of parts 23, 27, and 29, had communicated with other respective directorates overseeing those regulated persons and if the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group envisions part 23, 27, and 29 industry participating on the working group. Mr. Sippel and Ms. Suzanne Masterson, FAA, noted communication with other directorates would exist, but only to determine the rationale in constructing existing language in parts 23, 27, and 29. Ms. Masterson noted part 23, 27, and 29 industry would not be included on the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group. Mr. Sigler asked the FAA consider membership from those industry groups if they request to participate. Ms. Dunham asked how long the tasking will take, the anticipated frequency of meetings, and the location of meetings. Mr. Sippel responded the tasking runs for a period of 2 years and he anticipates the working group meeting in person three times a year, based on availability, and by phone, as needed. He noted meeting locations likely would vary between the U.S. east and west coast to allow equivalent travel time and expenses. Ms. Rose asked if the TAE or the FAA developed the taskings. Mr. Sippel stated the FAA developed all the taskings. Ms. Rose asked if the cost/benefit analyses included in the taskings can be achieved with the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group or if additional subject matter experts were necessary. Ms. Masterson responded the expectation is for working group members to consult their respective companies for additional information to best complete the cost/benefit analyses. Mr. Bob Robeson, FAA, asked how much support the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group expects from the FAA Office of Aviation Policy and Plans (APO) . Mr. Sippel responded the plan is for APO to contribute to the discussions as much as possible. Mr. Robeson stated APO needs to discuss availability of resources as each of the proposed tasks on the agenda requires work from APO. Ms. Courtney stated the FAA would seek input from APO, particularly to explain to the Transport Airplane Metallic and Composite Structures Working Group what data they need to provide so the FAA can complete a cost/benefit analysis. 9