[Federal Register: December 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 246)]
[Notices]
[Page 68434-68435]
[DOCID:fr24de09-36]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61178; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2009-90]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Designation of NYSE Arca, Inc., as
the NYSE's Alternative Trading Facility in an Emergency

December 16, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On October 13, 2009, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Corporation'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposal to amend NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. Rule (``NYSE Arca Rule'')
2.100, ``Emergency Powers; Contingency Trading Facility,'' to allow
NYSE Arca to act, in an emergency, as the alternative trading facility
for the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') or a national securities
exchange otherwise designated by NYSE Arca as an affiliated entity (an
``Affiliated Exchange'').\3\ The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on November 12, 2009.\4\ The Commission
received no comments regarding the proposal. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The Commission today is approving a companion proposal filed
by the NYSE that allows the NYSE to designate NYSE Arca as its
alternative trading facility in the event of an emergency condition.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61177 (order approving File
No. SR-NYSE-2009-105). Any other Affiliated Exchange that seeks to
designate NYSE Arca as its alternative trading facility would be
required to file a proposed rule change with the Commission before
NYSE Arca could act as that Affiliated Exchange's alternative
trading facility. Because no other Affiliated Exchange has filed
such a proposal, the NYSE currently is the only Affiliated Exchange
that may designate NYSE Arca as its alternative trading facility.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60921 (November 3,
2009), 74 FR 58345 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    As described in greater detail in the Notice,\5\ NYSE Arca proposes
to amend NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 to: (1) Delete obsolete rule text; and
(2) authorize a qualified Corporation officer to declare an emergency
condition with respect to trading on or through the systems and
facilities of NYSE Arca.\6\ Under NYSE Arca Rule 2.100, no emergency
condition will be declared unless: (i) There exists a regional or
national emergency that would prevent the NYSE Arca from operating
normally; and (ii) such declaration is necessary so that the securities
markets in general, and NYSE Arca's systems and facilities, in
particular, may continue to operate in a manner consistent with the
protection of investors and in pursuit of the public interest.\7\ For
purposes of NYSE Arca Rule 2.100, an ``emergency'' is an emergency as
defined in Section 12(k)(7) of the Act,\8\ and NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 is
intended to be invoked only in such emergencies.\9\ NYSE Arca
contemplates that the authority provided in NYSE Arca 2.100 could be
exercised when, due to an emergency condition, the facilities of NYSE
Arca's corporate parent, NYSE Euronext, that are located at 11 Wall
Street are rendered inoperable.\10\ A qualified Corporation officer
will make reasonable efforts to contact the Commission prior to taking
action under NYSE Arca Rule 2.100.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See note 4, supra.
    \6\ For purposes of NYSE Arca Rule 2.100, a ``qualified
Corporation officer'' is the NYSE Euronext Chief Executive Officer
or his or her designee, or the NYSE Regulation, Inc. Chief Executive
Officer or his or her designee. If these individuals are unable to
act due to incapacitation, the most senior surviving officer of NYSE
Euronext or NYSE Regulation, Inc. will be a ``qualified Corporation
officer'' for purposes of NYSE Arca Rule 2.100. See NYSE Arca Rule
2.100(a)(3)(ii).
    \7\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(a)(2).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(k)(7). See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(a)(3)(i).
    \9\ See Notice, supra note 4, at note 5 and accompanying text.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event that an emergency condition is declared under NYSE
Arca Rule 2.100(a) with respect to trading on or through the systems
and facilities of an Affiliated Exchange, a qualified Corporation
officer may designate NYSE Arca to receive and process bids and offers
and to execute orders in Affiliated Exchange-listed securities for
members, member organizations, and sponsored participants of the
Affiliated Exchange (``Affiliated Participants'') on behalf of such
Affiliated Exchange.\12\ Quotes or orders of Affiliated Exchange-listed
securities entered or executed on or through the systems and facilities
of NYSE Arca would be reported to the Consolidated Quotation System or
the Consolidated Tape as bids, offers, or executions, respectively,
made on or through the systems and facilities of the Affiliated
Exchange.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(a)(3)(iv) and (b)(1). As noted
above, an Affiliated Exchange would need to file a proposed rule
change with the Commission before NYSE Arca could serve as the
alternative trading facility for such Affiliated Exchange.
Currently, the NYSE is the only exchange that has filed such a
proposal with the Commission. See note 3, supra.
    \13\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Affiliated Participants would be permitted to enter quotations and
to execute orders on or through the systems and facilities of NYSE Arca
regardless of whether they were ETP Holders or Sponsored Participants
of NYSE Arca at the time the emergency condition was declared.\14\
Affiliated Participants registered as Designated Market Makers
(``DMMs'') on their Affiliated Exchange would be considered ``Market
Makers'' pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 7.23 for the purpose of trading
Affiliated Exchange-listed securities on and through the systems and
facilities of NYSE Arca.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(3). NYSE Arca would, as needed,
designate any Affiliated Participants that are not NYSE Arca ETP
Holders as temporary members of NYSE Arca and permit Affiliated
Participants that do not have sponsored access to NYSE Arca to
obtain temporary access through an existing ETP Holder or an
Affiliated Participant that is granted temporary membership under
NYSE Arca Rule 2.100. See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(3)(i)(A) and (B).
The temporary memberships or access would be valid only until
regular trading resumes on or through the Affiliated Exchange's
systems or facilities. See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(3)(ii).
    \15\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(3)(i)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All trades in Affiliated Exchange-listed securities entered or
executed on or through the systems and facilities of NYSE Arca would be
subject to NYSE Arca Rules governing trading, and such rules would be
considered rules of the Affiliated Exchange for the purposes of such
transactions, except that: (1) The rules of the Affiliated Exchange
governing member firm conduct, including membership requirements and
net capital requirements, would continue to apply to its Affiliated
Participants; and (2) the Affiliated Exchange's listing requirements
for all listed securities would continue to apply.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Arca would conduct surveillance of trading in Affiliated
Exchange-listed securities on or through the systems and facilities of
NYSE Arca on behalf of the Affiliated Exchange.\17\ Affiliated
Participants would remain subject to the jurisdiction of their
Affiliated Exchange for any disciplinary actions related to the trading
of Affiliated Exchange-listed securities on or through the facilities
of NYSE Arca.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(5)(i).
    \18\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(5)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The authority granted pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 would remain
operative for up to 10 calendar days from the date that NYSE Arca
invokes such authority, and NYSE Arca may terminate actions taken
pursuant to

NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 at any time.\19\ NYSE Arca may request an
extension of this initial 10-day period for a specified amount of time
by filing a proposed rule change with the Commission pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, and the Commission must approve the NYSE
Arca's proposal before any such extension could take effect.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(2) and (3). NYSE Arca will
provide adequate prior notice to ETP Holders, Sponsored
Participants, and investors regarding its intention to terminate any
action taken under the rule. See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(3).
    \20\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Arca notes that NYSE Arca, like other self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs''), currently has the authority to halt trading
in all stocks eligible for trading on NYSE Arca in the event of
extraordinary market volatility.\21\ NYSE Arca believes that the NYSE
currently is the only SRO that monitors for the thresholds (i.e.,
specified declines in the Dow Jones Industrial Average Index\SM\
(``DJIA'') from the previous day's close) used in these SRO trading
halt rules. Accordingly, NYSE Arca proposes to establish a mechanism to
calculate the DJIA thresholds in the event that trading on the NYSE
becomes inoperable and NYSE Arca acts as the NYSE's alternative trading
facility, as contemplated by NYSE Arca Rule 2.100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See NYSE Arca Rule 7.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\22\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\23\ which requires, in part, that the rules
of a national securities exchange be designed to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposal is reasonably designed to
permit the NYSE to continue to operate in the event of an emergency, as
defined in Section 12(k)(7) of the Act, by allowing the NYSE's
corporate affiliate, NYSE Arca, to receive and process quotations in
NYSE-listed securities and to execute orders in NYSE-listed securities
on behalf of the NYSE in the event of an emergency condition.\24\ A
qualified Corporation officer would invoke the authority provided in
NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 only in an emergency, as defined in Section
12(k)(7) of the Act.\25\ NYSE Arca will make reasonable efforts to
consult with the Commission prior to taking action under NYSE Arca Rule
2.100.\26\ Any action taken under NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 would be
operative for up to 10 calendar days from the date that NYSE Arca
invokes its authority under the rule, and NYSE Arca may terminate
action taken under the rule at any time.\27\ To extend an action taken
pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 beyond the initial 10-calendar day
period, NYSE Arca must file a proposed rule change with the Commission
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) under the Act, and the Commission would
need to approve such an extension before it could take effect.\28\ In
addition, the Commission could, at any time, exercise its authority
under Section 12(k)(2) of the Act \29\ to terminate an action taken by
NYSE Arca under NYSE Arca Rule 2.100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Commission previously has approved proposals by other
national securities exchanges to establish back-up trading
arrangements. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51717
(May 19, 2005), 70 FR 30160 (May 25, 2005) (File No. SR-CBOE-2004-
59) (approving proposal by the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated to enter into back-up trading arrangements with other
exchanges); 51926 (June 27, 2005), 70 FR 38232 (July 1, 2005) (File
No. SR-Phlx-2004-65) (approving proposal by the Philadelphia Stock
Exchange (``Phlx'') to enter into back-up trading arrangements with
other exchanges); 40088 (June 12, 1998), 63 FR 33426 (June 18, 1998)
(File No. SR-Phlx-98-25) (approving the trading of Dell options
listed on the Phlx at the American Stock Exchange on a temporary
basis); and 27365 (October 19, 1989), 54 FR 43511 (October 25, 1989)
(File Nos. SR-Amex-89-26; CBOE-89-21; PSE-89-28; and Phlx-89-52)
(approving proposals to trade options listed on the Pacific Stock
Exchange on other exchanges following an earthquake).
    \25\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(a)(2) and (3)(i). See also note
10, supra, and accompanying text.
    \26\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(1).
    \27\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(2) and (3). NYSE Arca would
provide adequate prior notice to ETP Holders, Sponsored
Participants, and investors of its intention to terminate any action
taken pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 2.100. See NYSE Arca Rule
2.100(c)(3).
    \28\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(c)(2).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(k)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 also addresses surveillance and the
disciplinary procedures that would apply in the event that NYSE Arca
acts as the NYSE's alternative trading facility, as provided in the
rule. In particular, NYSE Arca will conduct surveillance of trading in
NYSE-listed securities on behalf of the NYSE.\30\ NYSE members, member
organizations, and sponsored participants will remain subject to the
NYSE's jurisdiction for any disciplinary actions related to the trading
of NYSE-listed securities on or through the systems and facilities of
NYSE Arca, and violations of NYSE Arca's rules will be referred to the
NYSE for prosecution according to the NYSE's disciplinary rules.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(5)(i).
    \31\ See NYSE Arca Rule 2.100(b)(5)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that NYSE Arca's proposal to delete
obsolete language from NYSE Arca Rule 2.100 is consistent with the Act
because it is designed to clarify the operation of NYSE Arca Rule
2.100. Finally, the Commission believes that NYSE Arca's proposal to
establish a mechanism to calculate the DJIA thresholds in the event
that trading on the NYSE becomes inoperable is consistent with the Act
because it designed to help to maintain a fair and orderly market.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\32\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSE Arca-2009-90)
is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\33\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-30543 Filed 12-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67828-67830]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26722]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0851; Special Conditions No. 25-763-SC]

Special Conditions: VT DRB Aviation Consultants, Airbus Model
A330-300 Airplanes; Dynamic Test Requirements for Single-Occupant,
Oblique (Side-Facing) Seats With or Without Airbag Devices or 3-Point
Restraints

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Airbus Model A330-
300 airplane. This airplane, as modified by VT DRB Aviation Consultants
(VT DRB), will have novel or unusual design features when compared to
the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for
transport-category airplanes. This design feature is single-occupant,
oblique (side-facing) seats with airbag devices or 3-point restraints.
The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special
conditions contain the additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on VT DRB on December 12, 2019. Send
comments on or before January 27, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2019-0851 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478).
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Sinclair, Airframe and Cabin
Safety Section, AIR-675, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay
issuance of the design approval and thus delivery of the affected
airplanes.
    In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been
published in the Federal Register for public comment in several prior
instances with no substantive comments received. Therefore, the FAA has
determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary, and
finds that, for the same reason, good cause exists for adopting these
special conditions upon publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested people to take part in this rulemaking
by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date for
comments. The FAA may change these special conditions based on the
comments received.

Background

    On October 12, 2018, VT DRB applied for a supplemental type
certificate for oblique (side-facing) single-occupant seats equipped
with airbag devices or 3-point restraints in Airbus Model A330-300
airplanes. The Airbus Model A330-300 airplane is a twin-engine,
transport-category airplane with a maximum takeoff weight of 533,518
pounds and seating for 297 passengers.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, VT DRB must show that the Airbus Model A330-300 airplane,
as changed, continues to meet the applicable provisions of the
regulations listed in Type Certificate No. A46NM or the applicable
regulations in effect on the

date of application for the change, except for earlier amendments as
agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (e.g., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Airbus Model A330-300 airplane
because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are
prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type
certificate to modify any other model included on the same type
certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature,
these special conditions would also apply to the other model under
Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Airbus Model A330-300 airplane must comply with the
fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the
noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Airbus Model A330-300 airplane will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design features:
    Single-occupant, oblique (side-facing) seats with airbag devices or
3-point restraints.

Discussion

    The FAA has been conducting and sponsoring research on appropriate
injury criteria for oblique (side-facing) seat installations. However,
the FAA research program is not complete and the FAA may update these
criteria as the FAA obtains further research results. To reflect
current research findings, the FAA issued policy statement PS-ANM-25-
03-R1, ``Technical Criteria for Approving Side-Facing Seats,'' November
12, 2012 to update injury criteria for fully side-facing seats, and
policy statement PS-AIR-25-27, ``Technical Criteria for Approving
Oblique Seats,'' July 11, 2018 to define injury criteria for oblique
(side-facing) seats. Refer to these policy statements for definitions
of variables used in the formulae shown in the conditions of this
document.
    The installation of these single occupant, oblique (side-facing)
seats is novel given that the Airbus Model A330-300 certification basis
does not adequately address protection of the occupant's neck and spine
for seat configurations that are positioned at an angle greater than 18
degrees from the airplane centerline.
    The installation of passenger seats at angles of 18 to 45 degrees
to the airplane centerline is unusual in transport category airplanes
due to the seat and occupant interface with the surrounding furniture
that introduces occupant alignment and loading concerns with or without
the installation of a 3-point or airbag restraint system, or both.
These special conditions are necessary to further address these
potential injuries to the occupant's neck and spine that were not
contemplated in 14 CFR 25.785.
    The FAA-sponsored research mentioned earlier has found that an
unrestrained flailing of the upper torso, even when the pelvis and
torso are nearly aligned, can produce serious spinal and torso
injuries. At lower impact severities, even with significant
misalignment between the torso and pelvis, these injuries did not
occur. Tests with an FAA H-III anthropomorphic test device (ATD) have
identified a level of lumbar spinal tension corresponding to the no-
injury impact severity. This level of tension is included as a limit in
the special conditions. The spine tension limit selected is
conservative with respect to other aviation injury criteria because it
corresponds to a no-injury loading condition.
    As noted in the special conditions for the airbag restraint system,
because an airbag restraint system is essentially a single-use device,
the airbag potentially could deploy under crash conditions that are not
sufficiently so severe as to require head-injury protection from the
airbag restraint system. Because an actual crash is frequently composed
of a series of impacts before the airplane comes to rest, this could
render the airbag restraint system useless if a larger impact follows
the initial impact. This situation does not exist with energy-absorbing
pads or upper-torso restraints, which tend to provide protection
according to the severity of the impact. Therefore, the installation of
the airbag restraint system should be such that the airbag restraint
system will provide protection when it is required, and will not expend
its protection when it is not needed.
    Because these airbag restraint systems may or may not activate
during various crash conditions, the injury criteria listed in the
special conditions and in Sec.  25.562 must be met in an event that is
slightly below the activation level of the airbag restraint system.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Airbus Model A330-300 airplane as modified by VT DRB. Should VT DRB
apply at a later date for a supplemental type certificate to modify any
other model included on Type Certificate No. A46NM to incorporate the
same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would
apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design feature
on one model of airplane. It is not a rule of general applicability and
affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these
features on the airplane.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Airbus Model A330-300 airplanes as
modified by VT DRB.
    In addition to the requirements of Sec.  25.562, passenger seats
installed at an angle between 18 degrees and 45 degrees from the
airplane longitudinal centerline must meet the following:
    Side-Facing Seats Special Conditions:
    1. Head Injury Criteria:
    Compliance with Sec.  25.562(c)(5) is required, except that, if the
ATD has no apparent contact with the seat/structure but has contact
with an airbag, a head-injury criterion (HIC) unlimited score in excess
of 1000 is acceptable, provided the HIC15 score (calculated in
accordance with 49 CFR 571.208) for that contact is less than 700.
    2. Body-to-Wall/Furnishing Contact:
    If a seat is installed aft of structure (e.g., an interior wall or
furnishing) that does not provide a homogenous contact surface for the
expected range of occupants and yaw angles, then

additional analysis and tests may be required to demonstrate that the
injury criteria are met for the area that an occupant could contact.
For example, if different yaw angles could result in different airbag
performance, then additional analysis or separate tests may be
necessary to evaluate performance.
    3. Neck Injury Criteria:
    The seating system must protect the occupant from experiencing
serious neck injury. The assessment of neck injury must be conducted
with the airbag device activated, unless there is reason to also
consider that the neck-injury potential would be higher for impacts
below the airbag-device deployment threshold.
    a. The Nij (calculated in accordance with 49 CFR
571.208) must be below 1.0, where Nij = Fz/
Fzc + My/Myc, and Nij
critical values are:

    i. Fzc = 1530 lb for tension
    ii. Fzc = 1385 lb for compression
    iii. Myc = 229 lb-ft in flexion
    iv. Myc = 100 lb-ft in extension

    b. In addition, peak Fz must be below 937 lb in tension
and 899 lb in compression.
    c. Rotation of the head about its vertical axis, relative to the
torso, is limited to 105 degrees in either direction from forward-
facing.
    d. The neck must not impact any surface that would produce
concentrated loading on the neck.
    4. Spine and Torso Injury Criteria:
    a. The lumbar spine tension (Fz) cannot exceed 1200 lb.
    b. Significant concentrated loading on the occupant's spine, in the
area between the pelvis and shoulders during impact, including rebound,
is not acceptable. During this type of contact, the interval for any
rearward (X direction) acceleration exceeding 20g must be less than 3
milliseconds as measured by the thoracic instrumentation specified in
49 CFR part 572, subpart E, filtered in accordance with SAE
International (SAE) recommended practice J211/1, ``Instrumentation for
Impact Test-Part 1-Electronic Instrumentation.''
    c. The occupant must not interact with the armrest or other seat
components in any manner significantly different than would be expected
for a forward-facing seat installation.
    5. Pelvis Criteria:
    Any part of the load-bearing portion of the bottom of the ATD
pelvis must not translate beyond the edges of the seat bottom seat-
cushion supporting structure.
    6. Femur Criteria:
    Axial rotation of the upper leg (about the z-axis of the femur per
SAE Recommended Practice J211/1) must be limited to 35 degrees from the
nominal seated position. Evaluation during rebound does not need to be
considered.
    7. ATD and Test Conditions:
    Longitudinal tests conducted to measure the injury criteria above
must be performed with the FAA Hybrid III ATD, as described in SAE
1999-01-1609, ``A Lumbar Spine Modification to the Hybrid III ATD for
Aircraft Seat Tests.'' The tests must be conducted with an undeformed
floor, at the most-critical yaw cases for injury, and with all lateral
structural supports (e.g. armrests or walls) installed.

    Note: The applicant must demonstrate that the installation of
seats via plinths or pallets meets all applicable requirements.
Compliance with the guidance contained in policy memorandum PS-ANM-
100-2000-00123, ``Guidance for Demonstrating Compliance with Seat
Dynamic Testing for Plinths and Pallets,'' dated February 2, 2000,
is acceptable to the FAA.

    Inflatable Airbag Restraint Systems Special Conditions:
    If inflatable airbag restraint systems are installed, the airbag
systems must meet the requirements of Airbus Model A330 special
conditions no. 25-395-SC, ``Seats with Inflatable Lapbelts.''

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on December 6, 2019.
James E. Wilborn,
Acting Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-26722 Filed 12-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 51 (Friday, March 17, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14125-14126]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05332]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9297; Special Conditions No. 25-648-SC]

Special Conditions: Textron Aviation Inc. Model 700 Airplane;
Airplane Electronic-System Security Protection From Unauthorized
External Access

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Textron Aviation
Inc. (Textron) Model 700 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or
unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology
envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport-category
airplanes. This design feature is airplane electronic systems and
networks that allow access from external sources (e.g., wireless
devices, Internet connectivity) to the airplane's internal electronic
components. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These
special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on Textron on March 17, 2017. We must
receive your comments by May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-9297
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/ gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Varun Khanna, FAA, Airplane and
Flightcrew Interface, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay
issuance of the design approval, and thus delivery, of the affected
airplane.
    In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been
subject to the public-comment process in several prior instances with
no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good
cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon
publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On November 20, 2014, Textron applied for a type certificate for
their new Model 700 airplane. The Textron Model 700 airplane is a twin-
engine, transport-category executive airplane with seating for 2
crewmembers and 12 passengers, and a maximum takeoff weight of 38,514
lbs.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.17, Textron must show that the Model 700 airplane meets the
applicable provisions of part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through
25-139, 25-141, and 25-143.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Textron Model 700 airplane because
of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Textron Model 700 airplane must comply with the fuel-
vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise-
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Textron Model 700 airplane will incorporate the following novel
or unusual design feature: A digital-systems network architecture
composed of several connected networks. This network architecture and
network configuration will have the capability to allow access to or by
external network sources, and may be used for or

interfaced with a diverse set of functions, including:
     Flight-safety-related control, communication, and
navigation systems (airplane-control domain);
     Operator business and administrative support (operator-
information domain); and
     Passenger information and entertainment systems
(passenger-entertainment domain).

Discussion

    The Textron Model 700 airplane allows connection to airplane
electronic systems and networks, and access from airplane external
sources (e.g., operator networks, wireless devices, Internet
connectivity, service-provider satellite communications, electronic
flight bags, etc.) to the airplane's previously isolated, internal,
electronic components. These airplane internal electronic components
include electronic equipment and systems, instruments, networks,
servers, software and electronic components, field-loadable software
and hardware applications, and databases. This proposed design may
otherwise result in network security vulnerabilities, if not
appropriately protected, from intentional or unintentional corruption
of data and systems required for the safety, operation, and maintenance
of the airplane. The existing regulations and guidance material did not
anticipate this type of system architecture, nor external wired and
wireless electronic access to airplane electronic systems. Furthermore,
regulations, and current system safety-assessment policy and
techniques, do not address potential security vulnerabilities that
could be caused by unauthorized access to airplane electronic systems
and networks.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Textron Model 700 airplane. Should Textron apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions
would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design feature
on one model of airplane. It is not a rule of general applicability.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would
significantly affect the certification of the airplane, the FAA has
determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and
impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special
conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. The FAA is
requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that
may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for
comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Textron Model 700 airplanes.

    1. The applicant must ensure that the airplane electronic
systems are protected from access by unauthorized sources external
to the airplane, including those possibly caused by maintenance
activity.
    2. The applicant must ensure that electronic system-security
threats are identified and assessed, and that effective electronic
system-security protection strategies are implemented to protect the
airplane from all adverse impacts on safety, functionality, and
continued airworthiness.
    3. The applicant must establish appropriate procedures to allow
the operator to ensure that continued airworthiness of the airplane
is maintained, including all post-type-certification modifications
that may have an impact on the approved electronic system-security
safeguards.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 10, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-05332 Filed 3-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


 [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 142 (Monday, July 25, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 44346-44347] [FR Doc No: 2011-18642]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1994-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Massachusetts; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major

disaster for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (FEMA-1994-DR), dated

June 15, 2011, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 15, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and

Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter

dated June 15, 2011, the President issued a major disaster declaration

under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and

Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford

Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts resulting from severe storms

and tornadoes on June 1, 2011, is of sufficient severity and

magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert

T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.

5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such

a major disaster exists in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby

authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such

amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and

administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public

Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout

the Commonwealth. Consistent with the requirement that Federal

assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the

Stafford Act for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other

Needs Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible

costs.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration

for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the

Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section

310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public

Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed

six months after the date of this declaration.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice

that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under

Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N. Russo, of FEMA is appointed

to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have been

designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Hampden and Worcester Counties for Individual Assistance.

    Hampden County for Public Assistance.

    All counties within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are

eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant

Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,

Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis

Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster

Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance

Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and

Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,

Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing

Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially

Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other

Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially

Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2011-18642 Filed 7-22-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


Note to Docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0924)

This note is to document conversations with several refiners that took
place under requests that the information relayed be kept confidential
per confidential business information practices.

On October 13, 2009. Kurt Gustafson of  EPA’s Office of Transportation
and Air Quality spoke separately with individuals from Suncor, Conoco
Phillips, and Valero refining regarding comments received in response to
EPA’s proposed Denver RVP rulemaking.