[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13095-13096]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-6707]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Policy Statement No. ANM-98-2]
Passenger Capacity Increases and Compliance With Type
Certification Requirements for Transport Airplane Emergency Evacuation
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of policy statement and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the FAA's policy with respect to
passenger capacity increases and compliance with the type certification
requirements for transport airplane emergency evacuation. This notice
advises the public of FAA policy and gives all interested persons an
opportunity to present their views on the policy statement.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 16, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Send all comments on this policy statement to the individual
identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeff Gardlin, FAA Propulsion/Mechanical/Cabin Safety Branch, ANM-112,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98055-
4056; telephone (425) 227-2136.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to comment on this policy statement
by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may
desire. Commenters should identify the Policy Statement Number of this
notice and submit comments, in duplicate, to the address specified
above. All communications received on or before the closing date for
comments will be considered by the Transport Standards Staff.
Discussion
The requirement for full-scale evacuation demonstrations was
introduced into the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) in 1965 by a
change to the operating rules. The rule change followed both a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and a public hearing. The primary basis for this
change was the identification of deficiencies in ``equipment,
procedures, and training'' discovered during evacuation testing.
The rule applied to all passenger carrying airplanes with more than
44 passengers, and any subsequent increase in passenger capacity of
those airplanes of more than five percent. In addition, a new
demonstration was required for a ``major change'' in the cabin interior
that would affect passenger evacuation. The time limit for the
evacuation demonstration was two minutes, using one half of the
available exits.
In 1967, the requirement for a full-scale evacuation demonstration
was added to the type certification requirements of 14 CFR part 25.
This demonstration, conducted by the airframe manufacturer, was done to
help ensure comparable evacuation capability of each new model, and
with the knowledge that much larger transport (widebody) airplanes were
under development. At that time, the existing design requirements were
not considered adequate to minimize variation in evacuation capability.
The introduction of the full-scale evacuation demonstration requirement
in part 25 was coupled with a change to the operating rules so that
both demonstrations were required to be completed within 90 seconds.
The proposal leading to this rule is clear that the reduction in the
total time was implemented to take advantage of advances in emergency
equipment, specifically escape slides. The manufacturer's demonstration
did not have to be repeated for changes in interior arrangement, or
increases in passenger capacity of five percent or less, provided that
these changes could be substantiated analytically.
In 1978, after numerous evacuation demonstrations had been
conducted, the type design requirements were amended again. This
amendment allowed the use of analysis and tests to substantiate the
evacuation performance of an airplane, and removed the previous
explicit five percent limit on passenger increase. The primary
prerequisite for this methodology was that there be sufficient test
data to support an analysis.
In July 1986, the FAA Administrator established policy limiting the
use of analysis to passenger capacity increases of five percent or
less, due to the absence of any agreed industry standard on when an
analysis was appropriate. This policy was applied while analytical
methodologies were refined, such that the FAA could have confidence in
approval of larger passenger capacity increases by a combination of
analysis and test. The development of improved methodologies was
undertaken.
In 1989, the FAA issued Advisory Circular (AC) 25.803-1, Emergency
Evacuation Demonstrations, to provide specific demonstration test
criteria, and discuss the use of analysis. The AC stated that a full-
scale demonstration should be conducted for passenger capacity
increases of greater than 5% because of the continued absence of an
industry standard on when analysis could be used. However, the AC also
acknowledged that it described one means, but not the only means, of
complying with the relevant regulation, and therefore did not foreclose
applicants from proposing to substantiate compliance by analysis, even
for larger capacity increases. In actual practice, there have been
approvals for increases in passenger capacity of greater than five
percent under specific circumstances (i.e., the
[[Page 13096]]
resultant passenger capacity is still well below the theoretical
maximum).
The Performance Standards Working Group, under the auspices of the
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) on emergency evacuation
issues, was tasked to develop a standardized protocol to determine when
an analysis is appropriate. One of the primary objectives of this
effort was to reduce the number and severity of injuries that can occur
in full-scale evacuation demonstrations. Although ARAC was unable to
reach a consensus, it has submitted the group's final document to the
FAA in the form of a draft advisory circular. The document submitted to
the FAA does not include any limitation on passenger capacity increase
with respect to analysis. While the FAA's action here is consistent
with the ARAC document with respect to passenger capacity increases, it
does not reflect each ARAC participant's views.
The FAA has now determined that standardized methodologies have
been developed and there are sufficient data now available, such that a
limitation on the use of analysis based only on an increase in
passenger capacity is no longer necessary. This position is supported
by the aviation industry. In addition, the FAA has also received a
letter from a noted independent researcher endorsing the use of
analysis in the general case, and not tied to an arbitrary limit on the
increase in passenger capacity. Analytical techniques are used to
substantiate various certification requirements, including those with
safety of flight ramifications, and in all cases the key element in
their use is the underlying data to support the analysis. The FAA has
determined that evacuation demonstrations should be treated no
differently and, where sufficient data are available, analysis is an
option. Since the existing advisory circular has been interpreted by
the public as effectively prohibiting the use of a combination of
analysis and test in cases where the passenger capacity is increased by
greater than five percent, the FAA is issuing a formal notice that
analysis in such cases may be acceptable. Full-scale demonstrations
will still be required when sufficient data are not available to
support a combination of analysis and test.
While the FAA is seeking public comment on this policy, it is the
FAA intention to immediately apply this policy to two specific
certification programs in progress during the period of public comment
and disposition of comments. It is the FAA position that for the Boeing
777-300 and the Airbus A330/340, there are currently sufficient full-
scale evacuation data available to support analysis. The Boeing 777-300
involves a fuselage stretch and the addition of a pair of exits with an
increase in demonstrated passenger capacity from 440 to 550. The Airbus
A330/340 involve a fuselage stretch and increasing the size of a pair
of exits with an increase in demonstrated passenger capacity from 361
to 440. In both these cases, a wealth of full-scale evacuation data are
available to support analysis and the FAA is confident that the use of
analysis is well within the intent of the regulation. Therefore, in
accordance with the regulation, conduct of additional full-scale
evacuation demonstrations is not required to demonstrate compliance, if
a satisfactory analysis is produced. The FAA intends to publish a
revised proposed advisory circular that reflects this policy.
Resolution of the public comment will be considered in determining
whether the policy should be refined for future projects, and so
reflected in the advisory circular.
Issued in Renton, WA, on March 6, 1998.
Ronald T. Wojnar,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 98-6707 Filed 3-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M