Appendix A Checklist for rules documents ILLUSTRATION 1. Headings 1. Headings. a. CFR title number and name. b. Chapter or subtitle designation and name. c. Agency document designation, if any. d. Part(s) number and name. e. Additional heading. 2. Preamble. a. Introduction-purpose of the rule, effect on CFR. b. Proposed rule history. c. Results of public participation. d. Effective date (discussion). e. Words of issuance (effective date may appear here). 3. Body text. a. Table of contents (table of sections), if required. b. Authority citation. c. Effective date (may appear here). d. Amendatory language. e. Text. 4. Signature. a. One manually signed original, two certified copies or duplicate originals (three certified copies if two-sided document). b. Printed name of signer and title of signer. c. Date signed, optional. 5. Highlight attached. Title 14-Aeronautics and Space CHAPTER I-FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Docket No. 12006, Amendments 25-34 PART 25-AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: The purpose of these amendments to Parts 25 and 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations is to provide additional security on certain large passengercarrying turbojet-powered airplanes operated under Part 121 by requiring that each ventral exit and tailcone exit be designed and constructed so that it cannot be opened during flight. These amendments also apply to air travel clubs certificated under Part 123 and to air taxi operators certificated under Part 135, when conducting operations governed by those parts with the large airplanes. Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of these amendments by a notice of proposed rulemaking (notice 72-15) issued June 20, 1972, and published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on June 24, 1972 (37 FR 12507), and due consideration has been given to all comments received in response to the notice, insofar as they relate to matters within the scope of the notice. Except for editorial changes, and except as specifically discussed hereinafter, these amendments and the reasons therefor are the same as those contained in the notice. Several commentators objected to the requirement in proposed § 25.809 (j) (1) and § 121.310(k) (1) that means must be provided so that takeoff cannot be started if either the ventral exit or tailcone exit is not locked. They based their objection on the possible catastrophic results of a nalfunction or failure in the currently available means that could be used to implement this requirement, for example, systems providing for the locking of brakes or throttles by electrical signals from the stair lock. In this regard, a number of means were suggested by commentators to assure that the ventral exit could not be opened during flight, but that it still would be available for use as an emergency exit. The FAA agrees with those comments, and, accordingly, the proposal that means be provided so that takeoff cannot be started if the ventral exit or tailcone exit is not locked is not adopted in this amendment. However, under the rule as adopted, when the airplane becomes airborne the design and construction characteristics of each ventral exit and tailcone exit must be such that it cannot be opened during flight. Certain comments contended that altering the design of an aircraft is not an effective means of overcoming the d. Effective date discussion e. Words of issuance and effective date problems of hijacking, because simple devices can be overcome by the hijacker and more complicated devices create additional risk in the operation of the aircraft. One comment pointed out that it is patently impossible to add a lock to an emergency exit without statistically reducing the reliability of that exit. However, the FAA does not believe that, because a device installed in compliance with the rule may be simple in design, it will necessarily also be simple for a hijacker to overcome it. Nor does the FAA believe that compliance with the rule, as adopted, will reduce the reliability of the exits in an emergency. One commentator recommended that the rule specify that the ventral exit be available for normal and emergency ground operations. The FAA does not agree that a rule change in this respect is necessary, since the amendment as adopted herein in no way conflicts with other rules dealing with the availability of exits for emergency egress in an actual emergency. Several commentators recommended that an appropriately worded placard be installed in a conspicuous location near the means of opening each ventral exit and tailcone exit, stating that the exit cannot be opened during flight. The FAA agrees, and this requirement is added to the proposed amendments. One commentator suggests that the proposed rule should not be applied to air travel clubs, because the makeup of their membership and their financial structure makes it highly unlikely that they would be subjected to the kind of hijacking and extortion the proposed rule is intended to prevent. The FAA does not agree. The proposal was intended to prevent all hijacking of certain large aircraft engaged in operations required to be conducted in accordance with Part 121 and the amendment is applicable to all such operations. One commentator objected to the rule, stating that it is unnecessary since the proper response to any hijacker is to refuse all of his demands for ransom, whatever the cost. The FAA does not agree. As stated in the notice, every possible step must be taken to deter persons from boarding aircraft for the purpose of hijacking them and escaping by parachute. The purpose of these amendments is to make it clear that any attempt to hijack a large passengercarrying turbojet-powered airplane and escape therefrom by parachute will be a futile effort. While the notice proposed to make the amendment to § 121.310 effective 6 months after the effective date of the rule, the rule as adopted provides for an 8-month compliance period to allow additional time for design, manufacture, and installation, where modifications are needed to conform to the rule. In consideration of the foregoing, and for the reasons given in notice 72-15, Parts 25 and 121 of Chapter I of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended, effective December 31, 1972, as follows: 4. Special problems. (1) “Shall" and "may": If a discretionary right, privilege, or power is conferred, use "may." If a right, privilege, or power is abridged, use "may not." If an obligation to act is imposed, use "shall." Avoid the common practice of using a negative subject with an affirmative "shall." Don't say "A person shall not. . .," say “A person may not. . ." (2) "Any," "each," "every," etc. (technically known as "pronominal indefinite adjectives") should be used only where necessary. When their use is necessary, follow these conventions: (a) If a right, privilege, or power is conferred use "a" or "any" e.g., "any person may ** **"'). (b) If an obligation to act is imposed, use "each" (e.g., "each applicant shall ***'). (c) If a right, privilege, or power is abridged, or an obligation to abstain from acting is imposed, use "No * * may" * *") or "A * * * (e.g., "No operator may may not." (3) "Such": Although the word "such" is commonly used in legal writing as a "demonstrative" (a word pointing at something already referred to), this use is not considered to be best practice, because it is a stilted "legalistic" way of saying something better expressed by "the," "that," "these," "it," "them," etc., and it is easily confused with the more appropriate uses of the word as a synonym, when followed by "a" or "as" for "that kind of." 5. Provisos. Do not use provisos. They are archaic, confusing, and consistently misused. To introduce an exception, limitation, or condition, say "except that," "but," or "however," or simply start a new sentence or paragraph. 6. "Legalese" and "gobbledygook." These forms of stilted and foggy drafting are often used because the drafter thinks that common words lack dignity; that polysyllables lend distinction; that precision is unsafe (leave loopholes in the form of ambiguity); that simple writing is hard work (correct). However, the frequency of these forms is reduced by emphasis on plain language and plain English. Also, they may be very expensive when used by causing a flood of inquiries, endless interpretations, repeated amendment, poor compliance, and adverse court decisions. is issued by or for a subordinate administration, bureau, service, or similar unit within a department or overall agency, write the name of the subordinate unit on the next line. CFR designation - Write the CFR title and part number(s) concerned, in brackets, on the line below, for example: "[44 CFR Part 18]." If the part number has not yet been assigned, write the title and chapter, such as "[44 CFR Chapter II]." The CFR desig. nation enables readers to distinguish promptly between a proposal document and a notice document. |