[4910-13] DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Ad ini!

tration 14 "FR Part 3# [Do$%et No& FAA-199'-4(31) Noti$e No& 9'-1#] RIN *1*0-A+#, Noi!e "erti-i$ation Standard! -or Pro.eller-Driven S all Air.lane! A+EN"/0 Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. A"TION0 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM . S1MMAR/0 T!e FAA is proposing c!anges to t!e noise certification standards for propeller"driven small airplanes. T!ese proposals are #ased on t!e $oint effort of t!e Federal Aviation Administration (FAA , t!e %uropean &oint Aviation Aut!orities (&AA , and Aviation Rulemaking Advisor' (ommittee (ARA( , to !armoni)e t!e *.+. noise certification regulations and t!e %uropean &oint Aviation Re,uirements (&AR for propeller" driven small airplanes. T!ese proposed c!anges -ould provide uniform noise certification standards for airplanes certificated in t!e *nited +tates and in t!e &AA countries. T!e !armoni)ation of t!e noise certification standards -ould simplif' air-ort!iness approvals for import and e.port purposes. DATE0 (omments must #e received on or #efore &anuar' /0, /000. ADDRESSES0 (omments on t!is proposed rulemaking s!ould #e mailed or delivered, in duplicate, to1 *.+. Department of Transportation Dockets, Docket No. FAA"/002"345/, 366 +event! +treet, +7., Room Pla)a 36/, 7as!ington, D( 86906.

(omments ma' also #e sent electronicall' to t!e follo-ing :nternet address1 0"NPRM"(MT+;faa.dot.gov. (omments ma' #e filed and<or e.amined in Room Pla)a 36/ #et-een /6 a.m. and 9 p.m. -eekda's e.cept Federal !olida's. FOR F1RT2ER INFORMATION "ONTA"T0 Me!met Marsan, Office of %nvironment and %nerg' (A%% , Federal Aviation Administration, 266 :ndependence Avenue, +7., 7as!ington, D( 8690/= telep!one (868 8>4"4465. S1PP3EMENTAR/ INFORMATION0 "o ent! Invited :nterested persons are invited to participate in t!e making of t!e proposed rule #' su#mitting suc! -ritten data, vie-s, or arguments as t!e' ma' desire. (omments relating to t!e environmental, energ', federalism, or economic impact t!at mig!t result from adopting t!e proposals in t!is notice are also invited. +u#stantive comments s!ould #e accompanied #' cost estimates. (omments must identif' t!e regulator' docket or notice num#er and #e su#mitted in triplicate to t!e Rules Docket address specified a#ove. All comments received, as -ell as a report summari)ing eac! su#stantive pu#lic contact -it! FAA personnel on t!is rulemaking, -ill #e filed in t!e docket. T!e docket is availa#le for pu#lic inspection #efore and after t!e comment closing date. All comments received on or #efore t!e closing date -ill #e considered #' t!e Administrator #efore taking action on t!is proposed rulemaking. ?ate"filed comments -ill #e considered to t!e e.tent practica#le. T!e proposals contained in t!is notice ma' #e c!anged in lig!t of t!e comments received. (ommenters -is!ing t!e FAA to ackno-ledge receipt of t!eir comments su#mitted in response to t!is notice must include a pre"addressed, stamped postcard -it! t!ose comments on -!ic! t!e follo-ing statement

is made1 @(omments to Docket No. FAA"/002"345/.@ T!e postcard -ill #e date stamped and mailed to t!e commenter. Availa4ilit5 o- t6e NPRM An electronic cop' of t!is document can #e do-nloaded using a modem and suita#le communications soft-are from t!e FAA regulations section of t!e Fed-orld electronic #ulletin #oard service (telep!one1 465"58/"5550 , t!e Aovernment Printing OfficeBs electronic #ulletin #oard service (telep!one1 868"9/8"/>>/ . :nternet users ma' reac! t!e FAACs -e# page at !ttp1<<---.faa.gov or t!e Aovernment Printing OfficeBs -e#page at !ttp1<<---.access.gpo.gov<nara for access to recentl' pu#lis!ed rulemaking documents. An' person ma' o#tain a cop' of t!is NPRM #' mail #' su#mitting a re,uest to t!e Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 266 :ndependence Avenue, +7., 7as!ington, D( 8690/, or #' calling (868 8>4"0>44. (ommunications must identif' t!e notice num#er of t!is NPRM. Persons interested in #eing placed on t!e mailing list for future NPRMCs s!ould re,uest from t!e FAACs Office of Rulemaking a cop' of Advisor' (ircular No. //"8A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distri#ution +'stem, t!at descri#es t!e application procedure.

7a$%8ro9nd (urrent Regulations *nder 30 *.+.(. 334/9, t!e Administrator of t!e Federal Aviation Administration is directed to prescri#e Dstandards to measure aircraft noise and sonic #oom=...and regulations to control and a#ate aircraft noise and sonic #oom.E Part 5> of Title /3 of t!e (ode of Federal Regulations contains t!e FAABs noise standards and regulations t!at appl' to t!e issuance of t'pe certificates for all t'pes of aircraft. T!e standards and re,uirements t!at appl' to propeller"driven small airplanes and propeller"driven commuter categor' airplanes are found in F 5>.96/ and Appendi. A of Part 5>. Appendi. A addresses Takeoff Noise Re,uirements for propeller"driven small airplane and propeller"driven commuter categor' airplane (ertification Tests on or after Decem#er 88, /022. T!is appendi. -as added to part 5> in /022 to re,uire actual takeoff noise tests instead of t!e level fl'over test t!at -as formerl' re,uired under Appendi. F, for airplanes for -!ic! certification tests -ere completed #efore Decem#er 88, /022. Appendi. A specifies t!e test conditions, procedures, and noise levels necessar' to demonstrate compliance -it! certification re,uirements for propeller driven small airplanes and propeller"driven, commuter categor' airplanes. Aovernment and :ndustr' (ooperation :n &une /006 t!ere -as a meeting of t!e &oint Aviation Aut!orities (&AA (ouncil, -!ic! consists of &AA mem#ers from %uropean countries, and t!e FAA. T!e FAA Administrator committed FAA to support t!e !armoni)ation of t!e FAA regulations -it! t!e &oint Aviation Regulations (&AR . T!e &oint Aviation Regulations are #eing developed for use #' t!e %uropean aut!orities t!at are mem#er countries of t!e &AA.

:n &anuar' /00/, t!e FAA esta#lis!ed t!e Aviation Rulemaking Advisor' (ommittee to serve as a forum for t!e FAA to o#tain input from outside t!e Aovernment on ma$or regulator' issues facing t!e agenc'. T!e FAA announced t!e rene-al of ARA( on Fe#ruar' /0, /005 (92 FR 0856 and on Marc! /, /009 (>6 FR ///>9 . One area t!at ARA( deals -it! is noise certification issues. T!ese issues involve t!e !armoni)ation of /3 (FR part 5> (part 5> -it! &AR part 5>, t!e associated guidance material including e,uivalent procedures, and t!e interpretation of t!e regulations. On Ma' 5, /003, t!e ARA( esta#lis!ed t!e FAR<&AR Garmoni)ation 7orking Aroup for Propeller"Driven +mall Airplanes (90 FR 88229 . T!e 7orking Aroup -as tasked -it! revie-ing t!e applica#le provisions of su#parts A and F, and appendices F and A of part 5>, and !armoni)ing t!em -it! t!e corresponding applica#le provisions of &AR 5>. T!e 7orking Aroup -as asked to consider t!e current international standards and recommended practices, as issued under :nternational (ivil Aviation Organi)ation (:(AO , Anne. />, Holume /, and its associated Tec!nical Manual, as t!e #asis for development of t!ese !armoni)ation proposals. T!e 7orking Aroup -as also asked to recommend a process -!ere#' su#se,uent :(AO Anne. /> c!anges could #e properl' incorporated into &AR 5> and part 5>. T!e 7orking Aroup revie-ed /> items related to noise limits and measurement procedures in t!e regulations. For si. of t!ese items, t!e 7orking Aroup recommended t!at part 5> #e amended to !armoni)e t!e regulations -it! &AR 5>. For four of t!ese items, t!e 7orking Aroup recommended t!at &AR 5> #e amended to !armoni)e t!ose regulations -it! part 5>. For t!e si. remaining items, t!e 7orking Aroup found t!at no !armoni)ation is necessar'. T!e 7orking Aroup also recommended c!anges to !armoni)e FAA and &AA interpretive and advisor' material relating to noise limits for propeller"driven small airplanes. T!is NPRM reflects t!e si. recommendations t!at address c!anges to part 5>. 5

Di!$9!!ion o- Pro.o!al! T!e proposed c!anges to appendi. A -ould affect t!e provisions t!at esta#lis! noise measurement procedures (sec. A5>./64 , corrections to test results (sec. A5>.86/ and specific aircraft noise limits t!at are tied to aircraft -eig!t (sec. A5>.56/ . +ection A5>./64 Noise Measurement Procedures. (urrentl', section A5>./64 prescri#es specific procedures for t!e placement of microp!ones, s'stem cali#ration and consideration of am#ient noise. T!e proposed c!anges -ould affect t!e microp!one re,uirements of paragrap! (a . (urrentl', microp!ones are re,uired to #e oriented in a kno-n direction so t!at t!e ma.imum sound received arrives as nearl' as possi#le in t!e direction for -!ic! t!e microp!ones are cali#rated, and t!e microp!one sensing elements must #e placed four feet (/.8 m a#ove ground level. T!e proposed c!ange to section A5>./64(a -ould re,uire t!e microp!one to #e a pressure"t'pe microp!one -it! a protective grid t!at is /8.4 mm in diameter. T!e microp!one -ould !ave to #e mounted in an inverted position so t!at t!e diap!ragm is 6.4 mm a#ove and parallel to a -!ite"painted metal circular plate. T!e plate -ould !ave to #e 36 cm in diameter and at least 8.9 mm t!ick. T!e plate -ould !ave to #e placed !ori)ontall' and flus! -it! t!e surrounding ground surface -it! no cavities #elo- t!e plate. T!e microp!one -ould !ave to #e located t!ree",uarters of t!e distance from t!e center to t!e edge of t!e plate along a radius normal to t!e line of flig!t of t!e test airplane. T!e proposed c!anges, -!ic! -ould make t!e *.+. regulations consistent -it! t!e &AR, are supported #' numerous studies, tec!nical papers, and discussions -it! interested groups. T!e tec!nical data indicate t!at an inverted microp!one t!at measures reflected noise from a metal plate at ground level produces more consistent and relia#le data. A microp!one t!at is four feet a#ove t!e ground is muc! more likel' to #e affected #' varia#le 6

ground reflections t!at can interact -it! t!e noise produced #' t!e aircraft #eing measured. T!e microp!one !eig!t reduction and t!e metal plate su#stantiall' eliminate t!ese variations. Go-ever, studies also s!o- t!at measurements using t!e inverted microp!one and metal plate tec!ni,ue produce consistentl' !ig!er noise levels t!an t!ose produced under t!e current procedure, -it! t!e difference #eing a#out 5 dI(A . T!erefore, to maintain t!e present level of noise stringenc', a corresponding c!ange to section A5>.56/(# is necessar' as discussed #elo-. +ection A5>.86/ (orrections to Test Results. (urrent section A5>.86/ prescri#es corrections to #e made to test results to account for t!e effects of differences #et-een t!e conditions referenced in t!e prescri#ed procedures and e.isting conditions during an actual test. (urrent section A5>.86/(# re,uires atmosp!eric a#sorption correction for noise data o#tained -!en t!e test conditions are outside t!ose specified in appendi. A, figure A/. Noise data collected outside t!e prescri#ed range of figure A/ are re,uired to #e corrected to 44 degrees F and 46 percent relative !umidit' #' an FAA approved met!od. T!e FAA is proposing to c!ange t!e 44 degrees F reference temperature to 90 degrees F, to #e consistent -it! t!e am#ient temperature re,uirement in current section A5>.///(# (8 t!at is used for performance calculations. I' making t!e reference temperatures consistent for a#sorption and performance, dela's and confusion t!at !ave #een caused #' t!e inconsistenc' in t!e current rule -ould #e eliminated. T!e c!ange -ould #ring part 5> in line -it! Anne. />. (urrent section A5>.86/(c re,uires t!at !elical tip Mac! num#er and po-er corrections must #e made if t!e propeller is a varia#le pitc! t'pe or if t!e propeller is a fi.ed pitc! t'pe and t!e test po-er is not -it!in five percent of t!e reference po-er. T!e proposed

c!ange -ould provide an additional e.ception #' stating t!at a correction is not necessar' if t!e !elical tip Mac! num#er meets one of t!e follo-ing1 /. T!e num#er is at or #elo- 6.46 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.6/3 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. 8. T!e num#er is a#ove 6.46 and at or #elo- 6.26 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.664 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. 5. T!e num#er is a#ove 6.26 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.669 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. For mec!anical tac!ometers, if t!e !elical tip Mac! num#er is a#ove 6.2 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.662 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. T!ese additional proposed e.ceptions are #ased on an anal'sis of noise data from nine *.+."manufactured aircraft. T!is anal'sis indicated t!at t!e proposed values are -ell -it!in t!e T'pe / sound level meter as defined in :nternational %lectrotec!nical (ommission (:%( Pu#lication No. >9/, -!ic! !as #een incorporated #' reference in part 5>. Adding t!is e.emption -ould simplif' some tests -it!out degrading t!e results. (urrent section A5>.86/(d (/ re,uires t!at t!e measured sound levels must #e corrected from t!e test da' meteorological conditions #' adding an increment e,ual to t!e result gained from t!e follo-ing e,uation1 Delta (M J ( " 6.4 GT </666. :n t!is e,uation, GT is t!e !eig!t in feet of t!e test aircraft -!en directl' over t!e noise measurement point, and is t!e rate of a#sorption for t!e test da' conditions at 966 G) as referenced in +ociet' of Automotive %ngineers (+A% Pu#lication Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP 2>>A -!ic! !as #een incorporated #' reference in part 5>. 8

T!e e,uation in section A5>.86/(d (/ is an appro.imation. T!e accurac' of t!e calculations can #e improved #' adopting t!e e.act form of t!e e,uation. T!erefore, t!e FAA proposes to c!ange t!e e,uation to t!e e.act form -!ic! reads as follo-s1 Delta (M J (GT " 6.4 GR </666. :n t!is e,uation GT is t!e !eig!t in feet under test conditions, GR is t!e !eig!t in feet under reference conditions -!en t!e aircraft is directl' over t!e noise measurement point, and is t!e same as in t!e current rule, t!at is, t!e rate of a#sorption for t!e test da' conditions at 966 G) as specified in +A% ARP 2>>A. T!e proposed e,uation -ould #ring appendi. A a#sorption calculations in line -it! t!e rest of part 5> a#sorption calculations and Anne. />. (urrent section A5>.86/(d (3 re,uires t!at t!e measured sound levels in deci#els must #e corrected for engine po-er #' alge#raicall' adding an increment e,ual to1 Delta (5 J /4 log (PR <PT -!ere PT and PR are t!e test and reference engine po-ers respectivel'. T!e FAA proposes t!at t!e alge#raic correction for engine po-er #e c!anged to1 Delta (5 J K5 log (PR <PT -!ere PR and PT are t!e test and reference engine po-ers respectivel' o#tained from t!e manifold pressure<tor,ue gauges and engine rpm. *nder t!is proposal, t!e value of K5 -ould #e determined from approved data from t!e test airplane. :n t!e a#sence of flig!t test data and at t!e discretion of t!e Administrator a value of K5 J /4 could still #e used as under t!e current rule. T!e onl' difference #et-een t!e current formula and t!e proposed formula is t!e po-er correction constant. T!e current regulation re,uires t!e use of /4 for t!is constant. 9

T!e K5 J /4 value is an average value t!at -as derived from FAA tests on seven aircraft -!ere t!e variation -as from /.9 to 50.5. Alt!oug! t!e use of an average value simplifies t!e test plan, it could penali)e an applicant -!o can prove lo-er values of K5 #' test data. T!erefore, t!e FAA proposes a formula t!at allo-s t!e applicant to use a lo-er value for K5 -!en it !as test data to support t!at value, or to continue to use a value of /4 -it! t!e AdministratorBs approval -!en test data is not availa#le. T!e proposed formula is also consistent -it! t!e &AR.

10

+ection A5>.56/ Aircraft Noise ?imits. (urrent section A5>.56/(# states t!at t!e noise level must not e.ceed 45 dI(A up to and including aircraft -eig!ts of /,586 pounds (>66 kg. , and t!at for -eig!ts greater t!an /,586 pounds t!e noise limit increases at t!e rate of / dI </>9 pounds up to 29 dI(A at 5,566 pounds, after -!ic! it is constant at 29 dI(A up to and including /0,666 pounds. As previousl' discussed, considerations of microp!one location, configuration, and resulting noise limits are interrelated. +ince t!e proposed c!anges to t!e noise measurement procedures of section A5>./64(a -ould result in increases in t!e measured noise levels of a#out 5 dI(A , t!e FAA proposes to increase t!e limits in section 5>.56/(# from 45 dI(A to 4> dI(A and from 29 dI(A to 22 dI(A . T!is c!ange -ould account for t!e revised microp!one !eig!t and configuration re,uirements. T!e increased limit is not e.pected to result in an' increase or decrease in t!e noise stringenc' re,uirements of t!e current rule. :n addition to t!e dI(A c!anges discussed, t!e FAA is proposing a c!ange to t!e interpolation re,uirement of section A5>.56/(# . For -eig!ts greater t!an /,586 pounds, t!e allo-a#le dI(A -ould increase D-it! t!e logarit!m of airplane -eig!t at t!e rate of 0.25 dI(A per dou#ling of -eig!t until t!e limit of 22 dI(A is reac!ed ...,E rat!er t!an at t!e rate of / dI</>9 pounds up to 29 dI(A at 5,566 pounds, as under t!e current rule. T!is c!ange -ould !armoni)e interpolation under t!e FAA regulation -it! t!e compara#le &AA regulation -it!out c!ange in noise stringenc' of t!e present Appendi. A.

11

Pa.er:or% Red9$tion A$t T!ere are no re,uirements for information collection associated -it! t!is proposed rule t!at -ould re,uire approval under t!e Paper-ork Reduction Act of /009 (33 *+( F 596/ et se,. International "o .ati4ilit5 :n keeping -it! *.+. o#ligations under t!e (onvention on :nternational (ivil Aviation, it is FAABs polic' to compl' -it! :(AO +tandards and Recommended Practices to t!e ma.imum e.tent practica#le. For t!is NPRM, t!e FAA !as revie-ed part 5> Appendi. A and :(AO Anne. /> Holume :, (!apter /6. T!e revie- s!o-ed t!at t!e follo-ing t-o items -ere left un!armoni)ed1 (/ For fi.ed pitc! t'pe propellers, part 5> section A5>.86/ specifies a simplified data correction procedure if t!e engine test po-er is -it!in 9L of t!e reference po-er. T!e Anne. /> does not !ave a corresponding simplification and, (8 T!e part 5> section A5>./// allo-s t!e use of ma.imum continuous installed po-er during t!e second segment of t!e flig!t pat!. T!e po-er definition in Anne. /> for t!e second segment is defined as ma.imum po-er in (!apter /6 section /6.9.8. T!e ma.imum installed po-er is t'picall' lo-er t!an t!e ma.imum po-er and applica#le onl' to older engines. T!e a#ove t-o un!armoni)ed items onl' effect a small percentage of t!e airplanes in t!e fleet and t!erefore are not significant enoug! to #e considered as !armoni)ation issues. Re89lator5 Eval9ation S9 ar5

Four principal re,uirements pertain to t!e economic impacts of c!anges to t!e Federal Regulations. First, %.ecutive Order /82>> directs Federal agencies to promulgate ne- regulations or modif' e.isting regulations after consideration of t!e e.pected #enefits to societ' and t!e e.pected costs. +econd, t!e Regulator' Fle.i#ilit' Act of /026 re,uires 12

agencies to anal')e t!e economic impact of regulator' c!anges on small entities. T!ird, t!e Office of Management and Iudget directs agencies to assess t!e effect of regulator' c!anges on international trade. Finall', Pu#lic ?a- /63"3 re,uires federal agencies to assess t!e impact of an' federal mandates on state, local, tri#al government, and t!e private sector. :n conducting t!ese anal'ses, t!e FAA !as determined t!at t!is rule1 (/ -ould generate cost savings t!at -ould e.ceed an' costs= (8 is not DsignificantE as defined under section 5 (f of %.ecutive Order /82>> and Department of TransportationBs (DOT policies and procedures (33 FR //653, Fe#ruar' 8>, /040 = (5 -ould not !ave a significant impact on a su#stantial num#er of small entities= and (3 -ould not impose restraints on international trade. Finall', t!e FAA !as determined t!at t!e proposal -ould not impose a federal mandate on state, local, or tri#al governments, or t!e private sector of M/66 million per 'ear. T!ese anal'ses, availa#le in t!e docket, are summari)ed #elo-. T!e #enefit of t!e proposed rule is t!at it -ould !armoni)e t!e *.+. noise certification regulations -it! t!e %uropean &oint Aviation Re,uirements for propeller"driven small airplanes. T!e proposed c!anges -ould provide nearl' uniform noise certification standards for airplanes certificated in t!e *nited +tates and #' t!e %uropean &oint Aviation Aut!orities (&AA . T!is is e.pected to reduce t!e num#er of noise tests t!at need to #e conducted. T!e costs to implement t!e proposal are negligi#le, if an'. T!ere are no additional costs imposed #' t!is proposal.

13

Re89lator5 Fle;i4ilit5 Deter ination T!e Regulator' Fle.i#ilit' Act of /026 (RFA -as enacted #' (ongress to ensure t!at small entities are not unnecessaril' and disproportionatel' #urdened #' government regulations. T!e RFA re,uires a Regulator' Fle.i#ilit' Anal'sis if a rule -ould !ave a significant economic impact on a su#stantial num#er of small entities. Iecause t!e costs imposed #' t!is rule -ould #e negligi#le, t!e Agenc' concludes t!at t!e proposed rule -ould not !ave a significant economic impact on a su#stantial num#er of small entities. International Trade I .a$t State ent T!e FAA !as determined t!at t!e proposed rule -ould promote t!e sale of foreign products and services in t!e *nited +tates and t!e sale of *.+. products and services in foreign countries. T!is determination is #ased on t!e FAABs determination t!at t!e rule -ould align *.+. standards and &AA mem#er standards for noise certification for propeller"driven small airplanes. Environ ental Anal5!i! FAA Order /696./D defines FAA actions t!at ma' #e categoricall' e.cluded from preparation of a National %nvironmental Polic' Act (N%PA environmental assessment (%A or environmental impact statement (%:+ . :n accordance -it! FAA Order /696./D, appendi. 3, paragrap! 3($ , regulations, standards, and e.emptions (e.cluding t!ose, -!ic! if implemented ma' cause a significant impact on t!e !uman environment ,ualif' for a categorical e.clusion. T!e FAA proposes t!at t!is rule ,ualifies for a categorical e.clusion #ecause no significant impacts to t!e environment are e.pected to result from its finali)ation or implementation. :n accordance -it! FAA Order /696./D, paragrap! 58, t!e FAA proposes t!at t!ere are no e.traordinar' circumstances -arranting preparation of an environmental assessment for t!is proposed rule. 14

Federali!

I .li$ation!

T!e proposed regulations -ould not !ave su#stantial direct effects on t!e states, on t!e relations!ip #et-een national government and t!e states, or on t!e distri#ution of po-er and responsi#ilities among various levels of government. T!us, in accordance -it! %.ecutive Order /8>/8, it is determined t!at suc! a regulation -ould not !ave federalism implications -arranting t!e preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 1n-9nded Mandate! Title :: of t!e *nfunded Mandates Reform Act of /009 (t!e Act , enacted as Pu#. ?. /63"3 on Marc! 88, /009, re,uires eac! Federal agenc', to t!e e.tent permitted #' la-, to prepare a -ritten assessment of t!e effects of an' Federal mandate in a proposed or final agenc' rule t!at ma' result in t!e e.penditure #' +tate, local, and tri#al governments, in t!e aggregate, or #' t!e private sector, of M/66 million or more (ad$usted annuall' for inflation in an' one 'ear. +ection 863(a of t!e Act, 8 *.+.(. /953(a , re,uires t!e Federal agenc' to develop an effective process to permit timel' input #' elected officers (or t!eir designees of +tate, local, and tri#al governments on a proposed Dsignificant intergovernmental mandate.E A Dsignificant intergovernmental mandateE under t!e Act is an' provision in a Federal agenc' regulation t!at -ould impose an enforcea#le dut' upon +tate, local, and tri#al governments, in t!e aggregate, of M/66 million (ad$usted annuall' for inflation in an' one 'ear. +ection 865 of t!e Act, 8 *.+.(. /955, -!ic! supplements section 863(a , provides t!at #efore esta#lis!ing an' regulator' re,uirements t!at mig!t significantl' or uni,uel' affect small governments, t!e agenc' s!all !ave developed a plan t!at, among ot!er t!ings, provides for notice to potentiall' affected small governments, if an', and for a meaningful and timel' opportunit' to provide input in t!e development of regulator' proposals. 15

T!is rule does not contain a Federal intergovernmental or private sector mandate t!at e.ceeds M/66 million a 'ear, t!erefore t!e re,uirements of t!e Act do not appl'. 3i!t o- S94<e$t! in 14 "FR Part 3# Agriculture, Aircraft, Noise (ontrol. T6e Pro.o!ed A end ent! :n consideration of t!e foregoing, t!e Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend /3 (FR part 5> as follo-s1 PART 3# - NOISE STANDARDS0 AIR"RAFT T/PE AND AIR=ORT2INESS "ERTIFI"ATION /. T!e aut!orit' citation for part 5> continues to read as follo-s1 A1T2ORIT/0 38 *.+.(. 358/ et se,.= 30 *.+.(. /6>(g , 36//5, 3346/"33468, 33463, 334/9= sec. 569, Pu#. ?. 0>"/05, 03 +tat. 96, 94= %.O. //9/3, 59 FR 3834, 5 (FR, /0>>"/046 (omp., p. 068.

8. Appendi. A of part 5> is amended #' revising sections A5>./64(a , A5>.86/(# , including Figure A/, A5>.86/(c , A5>.86/(d (/ , A5>.86/(d (3 , and A5>.56/(# , including Figure A8, to read as follo-s1 APP%ND:N A TO PART 5> "" TAK%OFF NO:+% R%O*:R%M%NT+ FOR PROP%??%R"DR:H%N +MA?? A:RP?AN% AND PROP%??%R"DR:H%N (OMM*T%R (AT%AORP A:RP?AN% (%RT:F:(AT:ON T%+T+ ON OR AFT%R D%(%MI%R 88, /022 Q Q Q Q Q

+ec. A5>./64 Noise Measurement Procedures.

16

(a T!e microp!one must #e a pressure t'pe, /8.4 mm in diameter, -it! a protective grid, mounted in an inverted position suc! t!at t!e microp!one diap!ragm is 6.4 mm a#ove and parallel to a -!ite"painted metal circular plate. T!is -!ite"painted metal plate s!all #e 36 cm in diameter and at least 8.9 mm t!ick. T!e plate s!all #e placed !ori)ontall' and flus! -it! t!e surrounding ground surface -it! no cavities #elo- t!e plate. T!e microp!one must #e located t!ree",uarters of t!e distance from t!e center to t!e #ack edge of t!e plate along a radius normal to t!e line of flig!t of t!e test airplane. Q Q Q Q Q

+ec. A5>.86/ (orrections to Test Results. Q Q Q Q Q

(# Atmosp!eric a#sorption correction is re,uired for noise data o#tained -!en t!e test conditions are outside t!ose specified in Figure A/. Noise data outside t!e applica#le range must #e corrected to 90 F and 46 percent relative !umidit' #' an FAA approved met!od.

17

MEASUREMENT WINDOW FOR NO ABSORPTION CORRECTION Figure G1

100

(09L<59.>F
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 RELATIVE UMIDIT!, " 20 10 0

(09L<26.>F

(26L<59.>F

(36L<90F

(36L<26.>F

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Temperature, F

(c Gelical tip Mac! num#er and po-er corrections must #e made as follo-s1 (/ (orrections for !elical tip Mac! num#er and po-er corrections must #e made if "" (i T!e propeller is a varia#le pitc! t'pe= or (ii T!e propeller is a fi.ed pitc! t'pe and t!e test po-er is not -it!in 9 percent of t!e reference po-er. (8 No corrections for !elical tip Mac! num#er variation need to #e made if t!e propeller !elical tip Mac! num#er is1 (i At or #elo- 6.46 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.6/3 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. (ii A#ove 6.46 and at or #elo- 6.26 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.664 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. 18

(iii A#ove 6.26 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.669 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. For mec!anical tac!ometers, if t!e !elical tip Mac! num#er is a#ove 6.2 and t!e test !elical tip Mac! num#er is -it!in 6.662 of t!e reference !elical tip Mac! num#er. (d Q Q Q (/ Measured sound levels must #e corrected from test da' meteorological conditions to reference conditions #' adding an increment e,ual to Delta (M J (GT " 6.4 GR </666

-!ere GT is t!e !eig!t in feet under test conditions, GR is t!e !eig!t in feet under reference conditions -!en t!e aircraft is directl' over t!e noise measurement point and is t!e rate of a#sorption for t!e test da' conditions at 966 G) as specified in +A% ARP 2>>A, entitled D+tandard Halues of Atmosp!eric A#sorption as a function of Temperature and Gumidit' for use in %valuating Aircraft Fl'over NoiseE as incorporated #' reference under F 5>.>. Q Q Q Q Q

(3 Measured sound levels in deci#els must #e corrected for engine po-er #' alge#raicall' adding an increment e,ual to Delta(5 J K5 log (PR<PT -!ere PR and PT are t!e test and reference engine po-ers respectivel' o#tained from t!e manifold pressure<tor,ue gauges and engine rpm. T!e value of K5 s!all #e determined from approved data from t!e test airplane. :n t!e a#sence of flig!t test data and at t!e discretion of t!e Administrator, a value of K5 J /4 ma' #e used. 19

+ec. A5>.56/ Aircraft Noise ?imits. Q Q Q Q Q

(# T!e noise level must not e.ceed 4> dI(A up to and including aircraft -eig!ts of /,586 pounds (>66 kg . For aircraft -eig!ts greater t!an /,586 pounds, t!e limit increases from t!at point -it! t!e logarit!m of airplane -eig!t at t!e rate of 0.25 dI (A per dou#ling of -eig!t, until t!e limit of 22 dI (A is reac!ed, after -!ic! t!e limit is constant up to and including /0,666 pounds (2,>/2 kg . Figure A8 s!o-s noise level limits vs airplane -eig!t.

20

NOISE 3E>E3S v! AIRP3ANE =EI+2T FI+1RE +*

06.66 22.66 2>.66

Noi!e 3evel@ d7?AA

23.66 28.66 26.66 42.66 4>.66 43.66 48.66 46.66

>

0 /6 // /8 /5 /3 /9 /> /4 /2 /0

Air.lane =ei86t ?Po9nd! ; 1@000A

:ssued in 7as!ington, D(, on Novem#er 0, /002.

&ames D. %rickson, Director of %nvironment and %nerg'.

21