issue-1996-01-09•Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-09
Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-09
issue-1996-01-09Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-09Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-275 Indefinite Suspension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights Between the United States and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 629-631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-275]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. 26903 Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 66-2]
RIN 2120-AF72
Indefinite Suspension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Between the United States and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
(Serbia and Montenegro)
AGENCY: Federal aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of suspension of effectiveness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action suspends indefinitely the provisions of SFAR No.
66-2. SFAR No. 66-2 prohibits, with certain exceptions, the takeoff
from, landing in, or overflight of the territory of the United States
by any aircraft on a flight to or from the territory of Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). In addition, the SFAR
prohibits the landing in, takeoff from, or overflight of the territory
of the United States by any aircraft on a flight from or to any
intermediate destination, if the flight's origin or ultimate
destination is Serbia and Montenegro. Presidential Determination No.
96-7 suspends the sanctions previously imposed under Executive Order
12810 with respect to Yugoslavia to achieve a negotiated settlement of
the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina and directs the Department of
Transportation to suspend the effectiveness of Order No. 92-6-27.
Accordingly, the Administrator is suspending indefinitely the
effectiveness of the provisions of SFAR No. 66-2.
DATES: Effective on January 2, 1996. SFAR No. 66-2 in 14 CFR Part 91 is
suspended indefinitely.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia R. Lane, Airspace and Air Traffic Law Branch, AGC-230, Office
of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202-267-3491.
[[Page 630]]
SUPPLEMENTARY
Availability of Document
any person may obtain a copy of this document by submitting a
request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public
Affairs, Public Inquiry Center, APA-230, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling 202-267-3484. Communications must
identify the number of this SFAR. Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future rules should also request a copy of the
Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, which describes the applications
procedure.
Background
The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the United
States and the safety of U.S.-registered aircraft and U.S. operators
throughout the world. Section 40101(d)(1) of Title 49, United States
Code, requires the Administrator of the FAA to consider the regulation
of air commerce in a manner that best promotes safety and fulfills the
requirements of national security as being in the public interest. In
addition, 49 U.S.C. 40105(b)(A) requires the Administrator to exercise
his authority consistently with the obligations of the United States
Government under an international agreement.
One such international agreement is the Charter of the United
Nations (the Charter) 59 Stat. 1031; 3 Bevans 1153 (1945)). Under
Article 25 of the Charter, ``the members of the United Nations agree to
accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in
accordance with the present Charter.'' Article 48(1) of the Charter
further provides, in pertinent part, that ``[t]he action required to
carry out the decisions of the Security Council for the maintenance of
international peace and security shall be taken by all members of the
United Nations * * * ''.
On May 30, 1992, acting under Chapter VII of the charter, the
Security Council adopted Resolution 757, mandating an embargo of
certain air traffic with Serbia and Montenegro. Paragraph 7(a) of
Resolution 757 requires all states to deny permission to any aircraft
to takeoff from, land in, or overfly their territory if the aircraft is
destined to land in or has taken off from the territory of Serbia and
Montenegro. An exception to this prohibition is made for flights that
have been approved on the grounds of urgent humanitarian need by the
Security Council Committee established by Security Council Resolution
724 (1991).
The United States Government has taken several actions to restrict
air transportation between the United States, Serbia and Montenegro in
accordance with Security Council Resolution 757. Section 2(d) of
Executive Order 12810, issued by the President on June 5, 1992,
prohibits ``[a]ny transaction by a United States person, or involving
the use of U.S.-registered vessels and aircraft, relating to
transportation to or from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia
and Montenegro) * * * or the sale in the United States by any person
holding authority under the Federal Aviation Act * * * of any
transportation by air which includes any stop in the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).'' Section 2(e) of the Executive
Order further prohibits:
The granting of permission to any aircraft to takeoff from, land
in, or overfly the United States, if the aircraft, as part of the
same flight or a continuation of that flight, is destined to land in
or has taken off from the territory of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).
Executive Order 12810 cites the Presidents' authority under the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.),
the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), Section 1114 of
the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49 U.S.C. app. 1514),
Section 301 of Title 3, United States Code (3 U.S.C. 301), and Section
5 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended (22
U.S.C. 287(c)). In particular, the United Nations Participation Act
provides that:
[N]otwithstanding the provisions of any other law, whenever the
United States is called upon by the [UN] Security Council to apply
measures which said Council has decided * * * to be employed to give
effect to its decisions under the [United Nations] Charter, the
president may, to the extent necessary to apply such measures,
through any agency which he may designate, and under such orders,
rules, or regulations as may be prescribed by him, investigate,
regulate, or prohibit in whole or in part, economic relations of
rail, sea, [and] air * * * between any foreign country or to any
nation thereof or any person therein and the United States or any
person subject to the jurisdiction thereof * * *
On June 12, 1992, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation
issued Order 92-6-27, which implements Executive Order 12810 by
amending all Department of Transportation (DOT) certificates issued
under Section 401 of the Act, all permits issued under Section 402 of
the Act, and all exemptions from Section 401 and 402 accordingly.
On June 23, 1992, the FAA published SFAR No. 66, prohibiting the
takeoff from, landing in, or overflights of the territory of the United
States by an aircraft on a flight to or from the territory of the
Serbia and Montenegro (57 FR 28031). SFAR No. 66 also prohibited the
landing in takeoff from, or overflight of the territory of the United
States by any aircraft on a flight from or to any intermediate
destination, if the flight is destined to land in or takeoff from
Serbia and Montenegro. After SFAR No. 66 expired on June 19, 1993, the
FAA reinstated the prohibition against certain flights between the
United States and the Serbia and Montenegro through the issuance of
SFAR No. 66-1 (58 FR 45220). SFAR No. 66-1 became effective on August
26, 1993, and expired on August 26, 1994.
On May 31, 1995, the FAA replaced SFAR No. 66-1 with SFAR No. 66-2.
SFAR No. 66-2 prohibits, with certain exceptions, the takeoff from,
landing in or overflight of the territory of the United States by an
aircraft on a flight to or from the territory of Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) 60 FR 28476). In addition, SFAR No.
66-2 prohibits the landing in, takeoff from, or overflight of the
territory of the United States by any aircraft on a flight from or to
any intermediate destination, if the flights' origin or ultimate
destination is Serbia and Montenegro. SFAR No. 66-2 expires on June 2,
1997.
On October 27, 1995, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia petitioned the FAA for an exemption from SFAR No. 66-2 to
permit the operation of an aircraft carrying delegates from both the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Bosnian Serb-Controlled Areas of
the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to operate to, within, and from
the United States to and from a point within Bosnia and Montenegro.
Pursuant to the Department of Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets
Control, the FAA granted the petition which permitted the transporting
of the delegation from Belgrade to and from the Peace Conference at
Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio, for the purpose of
conducting negotiations.
On January 2, 1996, the President transmitted Presidential
Determination No. 96-7, which suspends the sanctions previously imposed
with respect to Yugoslavia to the United States Congress. The President
determined that suspension was necessary to achieve a negotiated
settlement of the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina that is acceptable to
the parties. On January 2, 1996, the Department of Transportation
suspended the effectiveness of the conditions contained in Order No.
92-
[[Page 631]]
6-27. A copy of Presidential Determination No. 96-7 has been placed in
the docket for this action.
Indefinite Suspension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights
Between the United States and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
(Serbia and Montenegro)
On the basis of the above, and in support of Presidential
Determination No. 96-7, I am ordering an indefinite suspension of the
provisions of SFAR No. 66-2. For the reasons stated above, I find that
notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. Further, I find that good cause exists
for making this rule effective immediately upon issuance. I also find
that this action is fully consistent with my obligations under 49
U.S.C. Section 40105(b)(1) to ensure that I exercise my duties
consistently with the obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
Regualtory Evaluation
This amendment is relieving in nature and suspends indefinitely the
restrictions of flights between the United States, Serbia and
Montenegro. In addition, the cost to circumnavigate the territory by
U.S.-registered aircraft is removed by this action. Accordingly, this
action will impose no additional burden on commercial or private
operators.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains no information collection requests requiring
approval of the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).
International Trade Impact Assessment
SFAR No. 66-2 does not prohibit U.S. and foreign air carriers from
engaging in the sale of air transportation to or from Serbia and
Montenegro, nor does it impose any restrictions on commercial carriers
beyond those imposed by DOT Order 92-6-27. The FAA, therefore,
determined that SFAR No. 66-2 would not create a competitive advantage
or disadvantage for foreign companies in the sale of aviation products
or services in the United States, nor for domestic firms in the sale of
aviation products or services in foreign countries. Accordingly, the
suspension of SFAR No. 66-2 also will not create a competitive
advantage or disadvantage for foreign companies in the sale of aviation
products or services in foreign countries.
Federalism Determination
The amendment set forth herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612 (52 FR 4168; October 30, 1987),
it is determined that this regulation does not have federalism
implications warranting the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Conclusion
For the reasons set forth above, the FAA has determined that this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866. This action is considered a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
Because this amendment is relieving in nature, the FAA certifies that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Aircraft, Airmen Airports, Air traffic control, Aviation safety,
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Freight, Montenegro, Serbia.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, the FAA is suspending
indefinitely the provisions of SFAR 66-2.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722,
46306, 46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506, 46507, 47122, 47508,
47528-47531; articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 stat. 1180).
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 3, 1996.
David R. Hinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-275 Filed 1-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-273 Airworthiness Directives; Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engines
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 627-629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-273]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-ANE-67; Amendment 39-9460, AD 95-26-02]
Airworthiness Directives; Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to certain Textron Lycoming reciprocating engines
installed on certain aircraft identified by registration numbers. This
action supersedes priority letter AD 94-14-13 that currently requires
engines certified to operate on 91 octane or higher aviation gasoline
(avgas) to undergo a teardown and analytical inspection for detonation
damage, and engines certified to operate on 80 octane avgas to undergo
inspection for evidence of possible internal engine damage. This action
revises incorrect engine model numbers and aircraft registration
numbers listed in the priority letter AD. This amendment is prompted by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) receiving more accurate
information concerning which aircraft were fueled with the contaminated
mixture at the affected airports. The actions specified by this AD are
intended to prevent detonation due to low octane, which can result in
severe engine damage and subsequent failure.
DATES: Effective January 24, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 24, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before March 11, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-ANE-67, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299.
The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from
Textron Lycoming, Reciprocating Engine Division, 652 Oliver St.,
Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone (717) 327-7278, fax (717) 327-7022.
This information may be examined at the FAA, New England Region, Office
of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Locke Easton, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine and Propeller Standards Staff, FAA, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park; telephone (617) 238-7113,
fax (617) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 23, 1994, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) issued priority letter airworthiness directive
(AD) 94-14-13, applicable to Textron Lycoming (formerly Avco Lycoming)
O-235-12C, O-235-L, O-320-A, O-320-B2C, O-320-E, O-320-E2A, O-320-E2D,
O-320-E20, O-320-D2J, O-320-D3G, O-320-H2AD, IO-320-B, IO-320-B, IO-
320-C, LO-320-A4K, LO-320-D1D, O-360-A, O-360-A4M, O-360-F, IO-360-A,
IO-360-BIB, IO-360-C, LO-360-A1A, LO-360-A1D, LIO-360-A1A, LIO-360-
A3B6D, TIO-360-C, TVO-435-AIA, O-540-E, O-540-C, O-540-J, IO-540-C, IO-
540-D, IO-540 E 290, IO-540-K, TIO-540-F, TIO-540-J, TIO-540-S, 165D-
540-B 380, and R-680 series reciprocating engines, installed on the
following U.S. registered aircraft: N1010F, N106RE, N1068M, N110MP,
N1285X, N1317P, N1344V, N14006, N15851, N1666C, N177DT, N1920F, N1928Q,
N20HT, N20NC, N20ND, N207X, N2040Q, N2128W, N2165M, N2185K, N2232Z,
N22874, N2300R, N2346G, N2394Q, N24395, N24627, N24860, N250M, N2555V,
N25562, N2578L, N2603Y, N26602, N28FG, N2811R, N2815F, N2817Q, N2819A,
N2848Q, N28683, N2927M, N2964K, N3060M, N32388, N33696, N34242, N36358,
N3737U, N37500, N3945K, N40ES, N40VF, N400JM, N4222J, N4293Y, N4316T,
N4320F, N4497U, N4515P, N4602S, N4674S, N4687P, N47SG, N4796V, N47964,
N48ES, N494FL, N5199U, N52015, N5217L, N5254K, N5344K, N5418W, N54228,
N54661, N5547Q, N55521, N56GS, N56884, N59850, N6005Z, N6045M, N61569,
N6239H, N62801, N6286W, N6297V, N63R, N6370P, N6412D, N64120, N6480D,
N6483Q, N6493Q, N65425, N671A, N67615, N67975, N68SC, N68937, N6905V,
N7ZX, N70416, N71RJ, N711PG, N714ZU, N7157V, N7195G, N7213P, N7230F,
N7230Q, N7248H, N73064, N733WH, N734TA, N7361R, N737CM, N737NV, N738GX,
N738KC, N738KF, N738KK, N738RC, N738ZL, N739RF, N75381, N755GA, N756RV,
N757SK, N757SX, N757TU, N7724M, N777EE, N78887, N78901, N7894V, N792BW,
N804EH, N8070P, N8094Q, N81RP, N81203, N8144G, N8149E, N8184X, N8201B,
N82182, N8223W, N8264W, N8286W, N8306D, N8372L, N8494E, N8537J, N8579H,
N8691Y, N8810P, N8961P, N9114H, N9140J, N9157S, N9296P, N9407K, N9444R,
N9451B, N95WT, N9574L, N96TB, N96134, N9666V, N9673L, N9728U, N9783L,
N9808J and N9864C. That action requires teardown and analytical
inspection for engines certified to operate on 91 or higher octane
aviation gasoline (avgas), and differential compression test and
examination of the oil filter for engines certified to operate on 80
octane avgas. That action was prompted by reports of reports of
aviation gasoline (avgas) being contaminated by Jet A fuel. After
investigation, the source of the contamination has been determined to
be the refiner of the avgas. Through its distribution system, the
refiner inadvertently caused Jet A fuel to be loaded into distribution
tanks intended for avgas. Contaminated avgas from these distribution
tanks was then shipped to local fuel distributors. The FAA has
determined that aircraft with certain Textron Lycoming engines
installed were fueled with this contaminated mixture between May 22 and
June 2, 1994, at Sacramento Executive (SAC) airport, or between May 18
and June 2, 1994, at Sacramento Metro (SMF) airport. The list of U.S.
[[Page 628]]
registered aircraft specified in the applicability paragraph of this AD
is based on investigation of fueling records secured from the two
affected airports, which the FAA has determined to represent the
population of affected engines. That condition, if not corrected, could
result in detonation due to low octane, which can result in severe
engine damage and subsequent failure.
This AD requires engines certified to operate on 91 octane or
higher avgas to undergo a teardown and analytical inspection for
detonation damage, and engines certified to operate on 80 octane avgas
to undergo inspection for evidence of possible internal engine damage.
Engineering analysis of operating these engines with avgas contaminated
with Jet A fuel indicates that actual damage to the engine may range
from unnoticeable to very severe, according to the duration of run,
engine power level, and level of contamination. Damage may be
characterized by increased operating temperatures resulting in damaged
intake valves and burned pistons, and excessive loads imposed by
detonation. Since internal damage may not be assessed by any other
method, engines certified to operate on 91 octane or higher avgas must
undergo a teardown and analytical inspection and any parts showing
signs of detonation damage must be replaced. Investigation revealed the
lowest octane level of the contaminated fuel to be 83 octane, therefore
engines certified to operate on 80 octane avgas need not undergo a
teardown and analytical inspection unless evidence of internal engine
damage is present by the required differential compression test and
examination of the oil filter for metal particles. The refiner has
advised the FAA that it may pay for any reasonable expense associated
with the inspection and/or disassembly in accordance with the
mechanic's and manufacturer's recommendations.
Since the issuance of that priority letter AD, the FAA has received
more accurate information concerning which aircraft were fueled with
the contaminated mixture at the affected airports. This AD therefore
corrects certain engine model numbers and aircraft registration numbers
for aircraft that were fueled with the contaminated mixture.
The FAA has reviewed and approved the technical contents of: Avco
Lycoming Service Bulletin (SB) No. 398, dated April 30, 1976, that
specifies that reciprocating engines operated with lower octane than
that approved for the engine or contaminated with Jet A fuel should
undergo a teardown and analytical inspection as the engine could
sustain damage that cannot be assessed by any other method; and Avco
Lycoming Service Instruction (SI) No. 1191, dated March 31, 1972, that
describes procedures for differential compression tests.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other engines of this same type design, this AD
supersedes priority letter AD 94-14-13 to revise incorrect engine model
numbers and aircraft registration numbers listed in the priority letter
AD. The actions are required to be accomplished in accordance with the
service documents described previously.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-ANE-67.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further that this
action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is determined
that this emergency regulation otherwise would be significant under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final regulatory evaluation will
be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
95-26-02 Textron Lycoming: Amendment 39-9460. Docket No. 95-ANE-67.
Supersedes AD 94-14-13.
Applicability: Textron Lycoming (formerly Avco Lycoming) O-235-
12C, O-235-L, O-320-A, O-320-B2C, O-320-E, O-320-E2A, O-320-E2D, O-
320-E20, O-320-D2J, O-320-D3G, O-320-H2AD, IO-320-B, IO-320-B, IO-
320-C, LO-320-A4K, LO-320-D1D, O-360-A, O-360-A4M, O-360-F, IO-360-
A,
[[Page 629]]
IO-360-BIB, IO-360-C, LO-360-A1A, LO-360-A1D, LIO-360-A1A, LIO-360-
A3B6D, TIO-360-C, TVO-435-AIA, O-540-E, O-540-C, O-540-J, IO-540-C,
IO-540-D, IO-540 E 290, IO-540-K, TIO-540-F, TIO-540-J, TIO-540-S,
and R-680 series reciprocating engines, installed on the following
U.S. registered aircraft: N1004V, N1010F, N106RE, N1068M, N110MP,
N1285X, N1317P, N1344V, N14006, N15851, N1666C, N177DT, N1920F,
N1928Q, N20HT, N20NC, N20ND, N207X, N2040Q, N2128W, N2165M, N2185K,
N2232Z, N22874, N2300R, N2346G, N2394Q, N24395, N24627, N24860,
N250M, N2555V, N25562, N2578L, N2603Y, N26602, N28FG, N2811R,
N2815F, N2817Q, N2819A, N2848Q, N28683, N2927M, N2964K, N3060M,
N32388, N33696, N34242, N36358, N3737U, N37500, N3945K, N40ES,
N40VF, N400JM, N4222J, N4293Y, N4316T, N4320F, N4497U, N4515P,
N46GS, N4602S, N4674S, N4687P, N47SG, N4796V, N47964, N48ES, N494FL,
N5199U, N52015, N5217L, N5254K, N5344K, N5418W, N54228, N54661,
N5547Q, N55521, N56884, N59850, N6005Z, N6045M, N61569, N6239H,
N62801, N6286W, N6297V, N63R, N6370P, N6412D, N6480D, N6483Q,
N6493Q, N65425, N671A, N67615, N67975, N68SC, N68937, N6905V, N7ZX,
N70416, N71RJ, N711PG, N714ZU, N7157V, N7195G, N7213P, N7230F,
N7230Q, N7248H, N73064, N733WH, N734TA, N7361R, N737CM, N737NV,
N738GX, N738KC, N738KF, N738RC, N738ZL, N739RF, N75381, N755GA,
N756RV, N757SK, N757SX, N757TU, N7724M, N777EE, N78887, N78901,
N7894V, N792BW, N804EH, N8070P, N8094Q, N81RP, N81203, N8144G,
N8149E, N8184X, N8201B, N82182, N8223W, N8264W, N8306D, N8372L,
N8494E, N8537J, N8579H, N8691Y, N8810P, N8961P, N9140J, N9157S,
N9296P, N9407K, N9444R, N9451B, N95WT, N9574L, N96TB, N96134,
N9666V, N9673L, N9728U, N9783L, N9808J and N9864C.
Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each engine
identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of
whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area
subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been
modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the
requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the
authority provided in paragraph (c) to request approval from the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This approval may address
either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe
condition, or different actions necessary to address the unsafe
condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an
assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe
condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any
modification, alteration, or repair remove any engine from the
applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent detonation due to low octane, which can result in
severe engine damage and subsequent failure, accomplish the
following:
(a) For engines that are certified to operate on only 91 or
higher octane aviation gasoline (avgas) within the next 2 hours time
in service (TIS) after the effective date of this airworthiness
directive (AD) perform an engine teardown and analytical inspection,
and replace with serviceable parts as necessary in accordance with
Avco Lycoming Service Bulletin (SB) No. 398, dated April 30, 1976.
(b) For engines that are certified to operate on 80 octane
avgas, within the next 2 hours TIS after the effective date of this
AD conduct a differential compression test on all cylinders in
accordance with Avco Lycoming Service Instruction (SI) No. 1191,
dated March 31, 1972, and examine the oil filter by cutting the oil
filter apart and spreading the filter paper out to look for metal
particles. If metal particles are present, or if one or more
cylinders shows unacceptable compression as specified in Avco
Lycoming SI No. 1191, dated March 31, 1972, perform an engine
teardown and analytical inspection, and replace with serviceable
parts as necessary in accordance with Avco Lycoming SB No. 398,
dated April 30, 1976.
(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards
Staff. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Staff.
Note: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the Engine and Propeller Standards
Staff.
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(e) The actions required by this AD shall be done in accordance
with the following Avco Lycoming service documents:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document No. Page Revision Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB No. 398.................... 1 Original.... April 30, 1976.
Total pages: 1............
SI No. 1191................... 1-2 Original.... March 31, 1972.
Total pages: 2............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies may be obtained from Textron Lycoming, Reciprocating
Engine Division, 652 Oliver St., Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone
(717) 327-7278, fax (717) 327-7022. Copies may be inspected at the
FAA, New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
(f) This amendment supersedes priority letter AD 94-14-13,
issued June 23, 1994.
(g) This amendment becomes effective on January 24, 1996.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 5, 1995.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-273 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-272 Airworthiness Directives; Textron Lycoming O-235 Series Reciprocating Engines
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 625-627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-272]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 94-ANE-63; Amendment 39-9458; AD 95-03-10]
Airworthiness Directives; Textron Lycoming O-235 Series
Reciprocating Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule, request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document publishes in the Federal Register an amendment
adopting airworthiness directive (AD) 95-03-10 that was sent previously
to all known U.S. owners and operators of Textron Lycoming O-235 series
reciprocating engines by individual letters. This AD requires a one-
time inspection within the next 5 hours time in service to determine
the part number (P/N) and revision letter of the push rod installed on
the engine. All push rods with P/N 73806 and revision letters ``V'' or
``W'' must be replaced with serviceable parts. This amendment is
prompted by reports of several failures of push rods. The actions
specified by this AD are intended to prevent engine roughness and power
loss, which could result in loss of the aircraft.
DATES: Effective January 24, 1996, to all persons except those persons
to whom it was made immediately effective by priority letter AD 95-03-
10, issued on February 7, 1995, which contained the requirements of
this amendment.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 24, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before March 11, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 94-ANE-63, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299.
The applicable service information may be obtained from Textron
Lycoming, 652 Oliver Street, Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone (717)
327-7278, fax (717) 327-7022. This information may be examined at the
FAA, New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Minniti, Aerospace Engineer, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, 10 Fifth St., Valley Stream, NY 11581; telephone (516)
256-7510, fax (516) 568-2716.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 7, 1995, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) issued priority letter airworthiness directive
(AD) 95-03-10, applicable to Textron Lycoming O-235 series
reciprocating engines, which requires a one-time inspection within the
next 5 hours time in service to determine the part number (P/N) and
revision letter of the push rod installed on the engine. All push rods
with P/N 73806 and revision letters ``V'' or ``W'' must be replaced
with serviceable parts. That action was prompted by reports of several
failures of push rods, P/N 73806, installed in Textron Lycoming O-235
series reciprocating engines. The manufacturer's investigation has
determined that the failures initiated from scoring on the inner
diameter (I.D.) of the push rod tube. The scoring was introduced during
the extrusion of the tube at the supplier. These push rods were
installed in engines shipped from the factory between February 22,
1993, and September 2, 1994, or were installed as serviceable parts on
or after February 22, 1993. This condition, if not corrected, could
result in engine roughness and power loss, which could result in loss
of the aircraft.
Since publication of the priority letter AD, the FAA has received
reports of confusion regarding whether a previous AD, 80-25-02 R2, also
applicable to pushrod P/N 73806, remains in effect. This final rule AD
clarifies in a note that compliance with AD 80-25-02 R2 is still
mandatory.
The FAA has reviewed and approved the technical contents of Textron
Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 552, dated November 1, 1994,
that lists by serial number engines shipped from the factory between
February 22, 1993, and September 2, 1994, and describes procedures for
inspection of push rods to determine if they require replacement.
Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop
on other engines of the same type design, the FAA issued priority
letter AD 95-03-10 to prevent engine roughness and power loss, which
could result in loss of the
[[Page 626]]
aircraft. The AD requires a one-time inspection within the next 5 hours
time in service to determine the P/N and revision letter of the push
rod installed on the engine. All push rods with P/N 73806 and revision
letters ``V'' or ``W'' must be replaced with serviceable parts. Textron
Lycoming has determined that it is not possible to visually inspect the
push rod tube for I.D. scoring that can cause the part to fail. The
actions are required to be accomplished in accordance with the service
bulletin described previously.
Since it was found that immediate corrective action was required,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment thereon were
impracticable and contrary to the public interest, and good cause
existed to make the AD effective immediately by individual letters
issued on February 7, 1995, to all known U.S. owners and operators of
Textron Lycoming O-235 series reciprocating engines. These conditions
still exist, and the AD is hereby published in the Federal Register as
an amendment to Section 39.13 of part 39 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to make it effective to all persons.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 94-ANE-63.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further that this
action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is determined
that this emergency regulation otherwise would be significant under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final regulatory evaluation will
be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
95-03-10 Textron Lycoming: Amendment 39-9458 Docket 94-ANE-63.
Applicability: Textron Lycoming O-235 series reciprocating
engines, shipped from the factory between February 22, 1993, and
September 2, 1994, and identified by serial number in Textron
Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 522, dated November 1,
1994; and all Textron Lycoming O-235 series reciprocating engines
that have had push rods, part number (P/N) 73806, installed as
service parts on or after February 22, 1993. These engines are
installed on but not limited to the following aircraft: Piper PA-11,
-12, -18, -22, -28, -38; Cessna 152, A152; Beech 77; Taylorcraft F-
21; and Gulfstream American AA1 series aircraft.
Note 1: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each engine
identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of
whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area
subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been
modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the
requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the
authority provided in paragraph (b) to request approval from the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This approval may address
either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe
condition, or different actions necessary to address the unsafe
condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an
assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe
condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any
modification, alteration, or repair remove any engine from the
applicability of this AD.
Note 2: This amendment does not supersede AD 80-25-02 R2, which
also applies to pushrod P/N 73806. AD 80-25-02 R2 continues in
effect and must be complied with.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent engine roughness and power loss, which could result
in loss of the aircraft, accomplish the following:
(a) Within 5 hours time in service (TIS) after the effective
date of this AD, inspect push rods for P/N and revision letter. All
push rods with P/N 73806 and revision letter ``V'' or ``W'' must be
replaced with serviceable parts in accordance with Textron Lycoming
MSB No. 522, dated November 1, 1994.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification
Office. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office.
Note: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the New York Aircraft Certification
Office.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to a location where
the inspection required by this AD can be accomplished.
[[Page 627]]
(d) The actions required by this AD shall be done in accordance
with the following MSB:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document No. Page Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Textron Lycoming MSB No. 522......... 1-2 November 1, 1994.
Total pages: 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies may be obtained from Textron Lycoming, 652 Oliver
Street, Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone (717) 327-7278, fax (717)
327-7022. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, New England Region,
Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive
Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(e) This amendment becomes effective January 24, 1996, to all
persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by priority letter AD 95-03-10, issued February 7, 1995,
which contained the requirements of this amendment.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 8, 1995.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-272 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-270 Airworthiness Directives; Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc. M-4, M-5, M-6, M-7, MX-7, MXT-7 Series and Models MT-7-235 and M-8-235 Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 623-625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-270]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-CE-97-AD; Amendment 39-9476; AD 95-26-18]
Airworthiness Directives; Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc. M-4,
M-5, M-6, M-7, MX-7, MXT-7 Series and Models MT-7-235 and M-8-235
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
applies to certain Maule Aerospace Technology (Maule) M-4, M-5, M-6, M-
7, MX-7, MXT-7 series and Models MT-7-235, and M-8-235 airplanes. This
action requires a one-time inspection of certain wing lift struts for
internal corrosion and replacement of the struts if corrosion is
detected. An accident involving a wing separating from a Maule airplane
in flight prompted this action. The actions specified by this AD are
intended to prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut, which, if not
detected and corrected, could cause the wing to separate from the
airplane.
DATES: Effective January 26, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 26, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before February 28, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket 95-CE-97-AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th
Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
Service information that applies to this AD may be obtained from
Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc., 2099 GA. Hwy., 133 South, Moultrie,
Georgia 31768, telephone (912) 985-2045. This information may also be
examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Central Region,
Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket 95-CE-
97-AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or
at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Lorenzen, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, Campus Building, 1701
Columbia Avenue, suite 2-160, College
[[Page 624]]
Park, Georgia 30337-2748; telephone (404) 305-7357; facsimile (404)
305-7348.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA received a report involving a wing
separating from a Maule airplane while it was in flight. Investigation
of the accident revealed that the right forward unsealed wing lift
strut failed 8 to 12 inches above the lower fitting. Upon examination
of the lift strut, investigators found internal corrosion. This
condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in failure of
the wing lift strut and separation of the wing from the airplane,
causing loss of the airplane.
Maule Service Bulletin (SB) No. 11, Issued: October 30, 1995,
specifies procedures for inspecting the wing lift strut for internal
corrosion and replacing the wing lift strut.
After examining the circumstances and reviewing all available
information related to the accident described above, including the
referenced service bulletin, the FAA has determined that AD action
should be taken in order to prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut,
which could cause the wing to separate from the airplane.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop in other Maule Model M-4, M-5, M-6, M-7, MX-7, MXT-7
series and Models M-7-235 and M-8-235 airplanes of the same type design
equipped with unsealed wing lift struts, this AD requires inspecting
the wing lift struts for internal corrosion damage and replacing the
wing lift struts if corrosion damage is detected. This action shall be
accomplished in accordance with Maule SB No. 11, dated October 30,
1995. In future rulemaking actions, the FAA may impose additional
procedures on the unsealed wing lift struts and require additional
modifications.
The compliance time for this AD is presented in calendar time
instead of hours time-in-service. The FAA has determined that a
calendar time for compliance is the most desirable method because the
unsafe condition described by this AD is caused by corrosion. Corrosion
can occur on airplanes regardless of whether the airplane is in service
or on the ground.
Since a situation exists (wing lift strut corrosion and possible
loss of a wing) that requires the immediate adoption of this
regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for public prior
comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting immediate flight safety and, thus, was not
preceded by notice and opportunity to comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified above. All communications
received on or before the closing date for comments will be considered,
and this rule may be amended in light of the comments received. Factual
information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions is
extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the AD action and
determining whether additional rulemaking action would be needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 95-CE-97-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket
(otherwise, an evaluation is not required). A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding a new airworthiness directive
(AD) to read as follows:
95-26-18 Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc.: Amendment 39-9476;
Docket No. 95-CE-97-AD.
Applicability: M-4, M-5, M-6, M-7, MX-7, MXT-7 Series and Models
MT-7-235, and M-8-235 Airplanes (all serial numbers), certificated
in any category that are equipped with part number (P/N) 2079E rear
wing lift struts and P/N 2080E front wing lift struts.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability revision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it. Compliance: Required within the next 30 calendar days
after the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished.
Note 2: The compliance times and inspection intervals indicated
in this AD take precedence over the compliance times and inspection
intervals called for in the Maule Service Bulletin (SB) No. 11,
Issued: October 30, 1995.
Note 3: The paragraph structure of this AD is as follows:
[[Page 625]]
Level 1: (a), (b), (c), etc.
Level 2: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Level 3: (i), (ii), (iii), etc.
Level 2 and Level 3 structures are designations of the Level 1
paragraph they immediately follow.
To prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut, which, if not
detected and corrected, could cause the wing to separate from the
airplane, accomplish the following:
(a) Inspect the two rear wing lift struts, (P/N 2079E) and the
two front wing lift struts (P/N 2080E) for internal corrosion in
accordance with the INSTRUCTIONS and INSPECTION PROCEDURE sections
specified in Maule SB No. 11, Issued: October 30, 1995.
(1) If evidence of corrosion damage is found, prior to further
flight, accomplish one of the following:
(i) Replace the damaged strut with an airworthy strut of the
same part number that has been treated internally with corrosion
preventative in accordance with the INSPECTION PROCEDURE section
specified in Maule SB No. 11, Issued October 30, 1995, or
(ii) Replace the damaged strut with a sealed wing lift strut, P/
N 2200E or P/N 2201E, as applicable, in accordance with the
instructions specified in PART II of the INSTRUCTIONS section of
Maule SB No. 11, Issued October 30, 1995.
(2) If no evidence of corrosion damage is found, prior to
further flight, treat the strut internally with corrosion
preventative in accordance with the NOTE in the INSPECTION PROCEDURE
section in Maule SB No. 11, Issued October 30, 1995.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an equivalent level of safety may be
approved by the Manager, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,
Campus Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue, suite 2-160, College Park,
Georgia 30337-2748. The request shall be forwarded through an
appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then
send it to the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office.
Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office.
(c) The inspection and possible replacements required by this AD
shall be done in accordance with Maule Service Bulletin No. 11,
Issued: October 30, 1995. This incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Maule
Aerospace Technology, Inc., 2099 GA Hwy., 133 South, Moultrie,
Georgia, 31768. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Central Region,
Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th
Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., 7th Floor, suite 700,
Washington, DC.
(d) This amendment (39-9476) becomes effective on January 26,
1996.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on December 22, 1995.
Dwight A. Young,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-270 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-269 Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream Model 4101 Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 622-623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-269]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 94-NM-237-AD; Amdt. 39-9468; AD 95-26-10]
Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream Model 4101 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), applicable to certain Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, that
currently requires repetitive purging of the hydraulic system and
installation of a spoiler actuator that has been previously certified.
That AD was prompted by a report of damage to the locking mechanisms on
some pistons of the spoiler actuators. The actions specified by the AD
are intended to prevent uncommanded extension of the lift spoiler in
the event of loss of hydraulic pressure in the spoiler actuator. This
amendment establishes an increased life limit for certain spoiler
actuators, and provides an optional terminating action for the
requirements of that AD. This amendment also limits the applicability
of the rule to fewer airplanes.
DATES: Effective February 8, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin
J41-A27-034, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994, as listed in the
regulations, is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
February 8, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin
J41-A27-034, dated June 9, 1994, as listed in the regulations, was
approved previously by the Director of the Federal Register as of
September 6, 1994 (59 FR 43025, August 22, 1994).
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029, Dulles
International Airport, Washington, DC 20041-6029. This information may
be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol
Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-2148; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 94-17-12,
amendment 39-9007 (59 FR 43025, August 22, 1994), which is applicable
to certain Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, was published in the Federal
Register on September 8, 1995 (60 FR 46792). The action proposed to
continue to require repetitive purging of the hydraulic system and
installation of an actuator that has been previously certified marked
with an ``R'' after the serial number. The action also proposed to
establish an increased life limit for certain spoiler actuators, and
provide an optional terminating action for the requirements of the AD.
Additionally, the action proposed to limit the applicability of the
rule to fewer airplanes.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the single comment received.
The commenter supports the proposed rule.
After careful review of the available data, including the comment
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
The FAA estimates that approximately 17 airplanes of U.S. registry
will be affected by this AD.
The repetitive purging and installation actions that are currently
required by AD 94-17-12 take approximately 6 work hours per airplane to
accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on
these figures, the cost impact on U.S. operators of the actions
currently required is estimated to be $6,120, or $360 per airplane.
Replacement of the spoiler actuator at the newly established life
limit will add no new costs to affected operators. In fact, it will
reduce the economic burden for most operators, since: (1) Repetitive
purging of the actuators will be eliminated, and (2) replacement of the
actuators will not have to be accomplished as often as was previously
required. Additionally, some of the replacement actuators will be
provided to operators free of charge by the manufacturer.
Further, since this AD is applicable to fewer airplanes than was AD
94-17-12, the cost impact of the AD will be reduced by the amount of
labor and parts costs that would previously have been applied to those
additional airplanes.
The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action: (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9007 (59 FR
43025, August 22, 1994), and by adding
[[Page 623]]
a new airworthiness directive (AD), amendment 39-9468, to read as
follows:
95-26-10 Jetstream Aircraft, Limited: Amendment 39-9468. Docket 94-
NM-237-AD. Supersedes AD 94-17-12, Amendment 39-9007.
Applicability: Model 4101 airplanes; having constructors numbers
41004 through 41015 inclusive, 41018 through 41026 inclusive, 41028
through 41030 inclusive, and 41032; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (d) of this AD to request approval from the
FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the current
configuration eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions
necessary to address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such
a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent uncommanded extension of the lift spoiler in the
event of loss of hydraulic pressure in the spoiler actuator,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within 21 days after September 6, 1994 (the effective date
of AD 94-17-12, amendment 39-9007), remove the spoiler actuators in
accordance with Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41-A27-034, dated
June 9, 1994, or Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41-A27-034,
Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994. Following removal of the
actuators, accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the service bulletin.
Thereafter, repeat the requirements of this paragraph at intervals
not to exceed 500 landings.
(1) Prior to further flight, purge the hydraulic system to
ensure that there is no contamination.
(2) Prior to further flight, install a spoiler actuator that has
been previously certified and marked with an ``R'' after the serial
number on the nameplate of the actuator.
(b) For spoiler actuators having Lucas Aerospace part number (P/
N) TY1763-01A or P/N TY1763-01B: Prior to the accumulation of 5,000
total hours time-in-service on the spoiler actuator, or within 30
days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later,
replace the actuator with a new or serviceable part, in accordance
with Jetstream Service Bulletin J41-A27-034, Revision 1, dated
October 28, 1994. Thereafter, prior to the accumulation of 5,000
hours time-in-service on the spoiler actuator, replace the actuator
with a new or serviceable part, in accordance with the service
bulletin. Such replacement constitutes terminating action for the
repetitive purging and repetitive installation requirements of
paragraph (a) of this AD.
(c) Installation of improved spoiler actuators (Modification JM
41381) on the left and right wings, in accordance with Jetstream
Service Bulletin J41-27-037, dated November 7, 1994, constitutes
terminating action for the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this AD.
(d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,
who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(f) The actions shall be done in accordance with Jetstream Alert
Service Bulletin J41-A27-034, dated June 9, 1994, or Jetstream Alert
Service Bulletin J41-A27-034, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994.
The incorporation by reference of Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin
J41-A27-034, dated June 9, 1994, was approved previously by the
Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51 as of September 6, 1994 (59 FR 43025, August 22,
1994). The incorporation by reference of Jetstream Alert Service
Bulletin J41-A27-034, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994, is
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from
Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029, Dulles International
Airport, Washington, DC 20041-6029. Copies may be inspected at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(g) This amendment becomes effective on February 8, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 18, 1995.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-269 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-268 Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton Standard Propellers Models 14RF-9, 14RF-19, 14RF-21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF- 15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 617-622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-268]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-ANE-73; Amendment 39-9477, AD 96-01-01]
Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton Standard Propellers Models
14RF-9, 14RF-19, 14RF-21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-
15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British
Aerospace 6/5500/F
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to Hamilton Standard Propeller Models 14RF-9, 14RF-19,
14RF-21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-
19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F. This
action supersedes priority letter AD 95-18-06R1, that was issued on
August 30, 1995, that currently requires ultrasonic shear wave
inspection on all Hamilton Standard 14RF-9 propeller blades, and
ultrasonic shear wave inspection on certain Hamilton Standard Propeller
Models 14RF-19, 14RF-21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15,
14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace
6/5500/F propeller blades. This action requires that all blades of
applicable Hamilton Standard propellers be calibrated for ultrasonic
transmissibility before conducting the ultrasonic shear wave
inspection. This action improves the crack detection capability of the
ultrasonic shear wave inspection. This action also decreases the
repetitive inspection interval for the 14RF-9, 14SF-5, -7, -11, -15, -
17, -19, and -23 from 1,250 flight cycles to 500 flight cycles. This
action also establishes a new ultrasonic shear wave inspection interval
of 1,000 flight cycles for the 14RF-19 and 2,500 flight cycles for the
14RF-21 and the 6/5500/F. This AD also removes 14SFL11 propellers from
service. This AD is prompted by reports that the existing ultrasonic
shear wave inspection may not detect cracks as originally determined
with some blades due to geometric differences. The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent separation of a propeller blade due to
cracks initiating in the blade taper bore, that can result in aircraft
damage, and possible loss of the aircraft.
DATES: Effective January 19, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 19, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before January 29, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-ANE-73, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299.
The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from
Hamilton Standard, One Hamilton Road, Windsor Locks, CT 06096-1010;
telephone (203) 654-6876. This information may be examined at the FAA,
New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Walsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803,
telephone (617) 238-7152, fax: (617) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 30, 1995, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) issued priority letter airworthiness directive
(AD) 95-18-06R1 applicable to Hamilton Standard Propeller Models 14RF-
9, 14RF-19, 14RF-21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15,
14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace
6/5500/F propellers, which requires ultrasonic shear wave inspection on
all Hamilton Standard 14RF-9 propeller blades, and ultrasonic shear
wave inspection on certain Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-19, -21; and
14SF-5, -7, -11, L11, -15, -17, -19, and -23; and Hamilton Standard/
British Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades. That AD action was
prompted by a report of a Hamilton Standard 14RF-9 propeller blade
installed on an Embraer EMB-120 aircraft that had separated inflight.
Since the issuance of that priority letter AD, the FAA and Hamilton
Standard have been working to improve the crack detection capability of
the ultrasonic inspection method as well as working to refine the crack
growth rate prediction methodology. The results of this work form the
basis for the new inspection method and the change in repetitive
inspection interval. This AD will require that propeller blades be
calibrated for ultrasonic transmissibility before conducting an
ultrasonic shear wave inspection, thereby improving the detection
capability of the ultrasonic shear wave inspection technique. This
action will also decrease the repetitive inspection interval for the
14RF-9, 14SF-5, -7, -11, -15, -17, -19, and -23 from 1,250 flight
cycles to 500 flight cycles. This action will further establish a new
ultrasonic shear wave inspection interval of 1,000 flight cycles for
the 14RF-19 and 2,500 flight cycles for the 14RF-21 and the 6/5500/F
propeller models. This AD also requires removal of the life limited
14SFL11 propellers currently in service, approximately four propellers.
These 14SFL11 propellers will be replaced with the Hamilton Standard
Model 247F propellers. The actions specified by this AD are intended to
prevent the separation of a propeller blade due to cracks initiating in
the blade taper bore, that can result in aircraft damage, and possible
loss of aircraft control.
This AD references two ultrasonic inspection methods, one that can
be accomplished without removing the lead from the taper bore which
permits an on wing inspection and a second inspection that requires the
blade be removed and inspected at an FAA approved facility. The
inspection that is conducted without removing the lead from the taper
bore cannot be accomplished on some blades because of ultrasonic
transmissibility problems caused by the lead wool absorbing the signal.
These blades must be removed and inspected at an FAA approved facility
where the lead wool will be extracted.
The FAA has reviewed and approved the technical contents of the
following Hamilton Standard Alert Service Bulletins (ASB's): No. 14RF-
9-61-A91, No. 14RF-19-61-A55, No. 14RF-21-61-A73, No. 14SF-61-A93, and
No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, all dated December 7, 1995, and No. 14RF-9-61-A91,
Rev 1, No. 14RF-19-61-A55, Rev 1, No. 14RF-21-61-A73, Rev 1, No. 14SF-
61-A93, Rev 1, and No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, Rev 1, all dated December 15,
1995, that describe procedures for ultrasonic shear wave inspections of
the blade taper bores for cracks after the lead wool has
[[Page 618]]
been removed. The Rev. 1 ASB's permit the installation of a plastic
cone in the taper bore that will enhance resistance to corrosion and
mechanical damage. Inspection procedures are the same.
In addition the FAA has approved ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, No. 14RF-
19-61-A57, No. 14RF-21-61-A75, No. 14SF-61-A95, and No. 6/5500/F-61-
A43, all dated December 18, 1995, and No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1, No.
14RF-19-61-A57, Rev 1, No. 14RF-21-61-A75, Rev 1, No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev
1, and No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, Rev 1, all dated December 21, 1995, that
describe ultrasonic shear wave inspection that can be accomplished
without removing the lead from the taper bore which permits an on-wing
inspection of the blade taper bores for cracks. The Rev. 1 ASB's do not
require immediate removal of the blades that cannot be inspected for
cracks due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal. These
blades may be removed at any time within the applicable compliance
period. Inspection procedures are the same.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other propellers of this same type design, this AD
supersedes priority letter AD 95-18-06R1 to require all Hamilton
Standard Model 14RF-9, -19, -21; and 14SF-5, -7, -11, -15, -17, -19,
and -23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller
blades be calibrated for ultrasonic transmissibility before conducting
an ultrasonic shear wave inspection. The actions and inspection
intervals for each propeller model are required to be accomplished in
accordance with the service bulletins described previously.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-ANE-73.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further that this
action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is determined
that this emergency regulation otherwise would be significant under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final regulatory evaluation will
be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-01-01 Hamilton Standard: Amendment 39-9477. Docket No. 95-ANE-73.
Supersedes AD 95-18-06R1.
Applicability: Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-9, -14RF-19, 14RF-
21; and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19,
and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F
propellers installed on but not limited to Embraer EMB-120, EMB-
120RT; Aerospatiale ATR42-100, ATR42-300, ATR42-320, ATR72, ATR72-
210; deHavilland DHC-8-100 series, DHC-8-200 series, DHC-8-300
series; SAAB-SCANIA SF 340B; Canadair CL-215T, CL-415;
Construcciones Aeronauticas SA (CASA) CN-235 series; and British
Aerospace ATP aircraft.
Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each
propeller identified in the preceding applicability provision,
regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in
the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For propellers that
have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of
the requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use
the authority provided in paragraph (n) to request approval from the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This approval may address
either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe
condition, or different actions necessary to address the unsafe
condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an
assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe
condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any
modification, alteration, or repair remove any propeller from the
applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent separation of a propeller blade due to cracks
initiating in the blade taper bore, that can result in aircraft
damage, and possible loss of aircraft control, accomplish the
following:
(a) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF-9 propeller blades, with
Serial Numbers less than 882038 and listed in Hamilton Standard
Alert Service Bulletins (ASB's) No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated December
18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995,
installed on but not limited to Embraer EMB-120 and EMB-120RT series
aircraft, accomplish the following:
[[Page 619]]
(1) Within the next 150 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A91, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-
9-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1,
dated December 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last
inspection or 150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must be
inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A91, dated December 7, 1995,
or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev 1 dated December 15, 1995, within the next
150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-9-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1,
dated December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-
61-A91 dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev 1 dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-9-61-A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev 1,
dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service, and replaced
with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(b) For Hamilton Standard Models 14SF-5, -7, -11, -15, and -23
propeller blades with Serial Numbers less than 882038 and listed in
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or
No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, installed on but
not limited to Aerospatiale ATR42-100, ATR42-300, ATR42-320, ATR72
and deHavilland DHC-8-100, DHC-8-200, DHC-8-300 series aircraft,
accomplish the following:
(1) Within the next 150 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishments Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev 1,
dated December 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last
inspection or 150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must be
inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or
No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the next 150
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-
A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev 1, dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev 1,
dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and replaced
with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(c) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF-9 propeller blades with
Serial Numbers less than 882038 and not listed in Hamilton Standard
ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-
A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, installed on but not limited to
Embraer EMB 120 and EMB 120RT series aircraft, accomplish the
following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-61-A95, Rev 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standards ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A91, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-
9-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev 1,
dated December 21, 1995, within 300 flight cycles since last
inspection or 150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must be
inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-61-A91, dated December 7, 1995,
or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the
next 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-9-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A95, dated
December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-9-
61-A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91 Rev. 1, dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-9-61-A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-9-61-A91, Rev. 1,
dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and replaced
with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(d) For Hamilton Standard Models 14SF-5, -7, -11, -15, -17, -19,
and -23 propeller blades with Serial Numbers less than 882038 and
not listed in ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No.
14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, installed on but not
limited to Aerospatiale ATR42-100, ATR42-300, ATR42-320, ATR72,
ATR72-210 and deHavilland DHC-8-100, DHC-8-200, DHC-8-300 series
aircraft, accomplish the following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95 Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standards ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-
61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated
December 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last inspection or
300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-
[[Page 620]]
A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, due to the lead wool absorbing
the ultrasonic signal, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-
A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1, dated
December 15, 1995, within the next 300 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1,
dated December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-
A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1, dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1,
dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and replaced
with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(e) For all Hamilton Standard Models 14SF-17, and -19 propeller
blades with Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed on but not
limited to Canadair CL-215T and CL-415 series aircraft, accomplish
the following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standards ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-
61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated
December 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last inspection or
300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must be
inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93 dated December 7, 1995, or
No. 14SF-61-A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the next
300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95 Rev. 1,
dated December 21, 1995, must be removed from service and inspected
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton
Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-
61-A93 Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-93, Rev. 1,
dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and replaced
with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(f) For all Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-19 propeller blades
with Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed on but not limited
to SAAB-SCANIA SF 340B series aircraft, accomplish the following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-19-61-A57, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A57, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standards ASB's No. 14RF-19-61-A55, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A55, Rev. 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-
19-61-A57, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A57 Rev. 1,
dated December 21, 1995, within 1,000 flight cycles since last
inspection or 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A95, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF-61-A95 Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal inspect
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton
Standard ASB's No. 14SF-61-A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF-
61-A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the next 300 flight
cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's 14RF-19-
61-A57, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A57, Rev. 1,
dated December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-19-
61-A55, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A55, Rev. 1, dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-19-61-A55, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A55, Rev.
1, dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and
replaced with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(g) For all Hamilton Standard Model 14RF-21 propeller blades
with Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed on but not limited
to Construcciones Aeronautic SA (CASA) CN-235 series aircraft,
accomplish the following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-21-61-A75, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-61-A75, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-19-61-A55, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A55, Rev. 1, dated December 15,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-
19-61-A57, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-19-61-A57, Rev. 1,
dated December 21, 1995, within 1,000 flight cycles since last
inspection or 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-21-61-A75, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-61-A75, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must be
inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-21-61-A73, dated December 7, 1995,
or No. 14RF-21-61-A73, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the
next 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-21-61-A75, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF-21-61-A75, Rev.
1, dated December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 14RF-21-
61-A73, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-21-61-A73, Rev. 1, dated
December 15, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 2,500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No.
14RF-21-61-A73, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF-21-61-A73, Rev.
1, dated December 15, 1995, must be removed from service and
replaced with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(h) For all Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F
propeller blades, with Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed on
but not limited to British Aerospace ATP series aircraft, accomplish
the following:
(1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after the effective date
of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks
[[Page 621]]
in the blade taper bore in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, Rev. 1, dated December
21, 1995.
(2) For propeller blades that have been previously inspected in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, dated
December 7, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, Rev. 1, dated December 18,
1995, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/
5500/F-61-A43, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, Rev. 1, dated December 21,
1995, as applicable within 2,500 flight cycles since last inspection
or 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(3) Propeller blades that cannot be inspected for cracks in
accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, dated
December 18, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, Rev. 1, dated December
21, 1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, must
be inspected in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, dated December 7, 1995,
or No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, Rev. 1, dated December 18, 1995, within the
next 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/
5500/F-61-A43, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A43, Rev.
1, dated December 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/5500/F-
61-A41, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, Rev. 1,
dated December 18, 1995.
(5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave
inspections at intervals not to exceed 2,500 flight cycles in
accordance with the applicable SB's.
(6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications
that exceed the limits specified in Hamilton Standard ASB's No. 6/
5500/F-61-A41, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 6/5500/F-61-A41, Rev.
1, dated December 18, 1995, must be removed from service and
replaced with a serviceable part prior to further flight.
(i) For all currently installed Hamilton Standard Model 14SFL11
propellers installed on Aerospatiale ATR72-210 series aircraft
remove all 14SFL11 propellers from service within the next 150
flight cycles, after the effective date of this AD, and replace with
serviceable Hamilton Standard 247F propellers.
(j) The ultrasonic inspection of the propeller blade taper bore
must be performed by a Level II inspector who is qualified under the
guidelines established by the American Society of Nondestructive
Testing or MIL-STD-410 or FAA approved equivalent, and must be
trained by Hamilton Standard approved personnel on how to do this
inspection procedure. The individual returning the aircraft to
service is required to verify that the ultrasonic inspection was
accomplished in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph.
(k) For repetitive inspections, propeller blades may be
evaluated to determine if the lead wool is absorbing the ultrasonic
signal at any time during the 500 flight cycle repetitive inspection
interval to determine if the lead wool removal is required to
complete the ultrasonic shear wave inspection.
(l) For the purpose of this AD, a flight cycle is defined as one
takeoff and the next landing of an aircraft. In addition, each touch
and go is defined as a flight cycle, and each water load pickup for
amphibian aircraft operation is defined as a flight cycle.
(m) Propeller blades removed from service after inspections
performed in accordance with AD 95-18-06R1, and subsequently
inspected in accordance with the requirements of this AD and found
to be serviceable, may be returned to service.
(n) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification
Office. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send
it to the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office.
Note: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the Boston Aircraft Certification
Office.
(o) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(p) The ultrasonic shear wave inspections and removal and
replacement of propeller blades shall be done in accordance with the
following Hamilton Standard Alert Service Bulletins:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document No. Revision Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 14RF-9-61-A91; Total Pages:40. ........ Dec. 7, 1995.
No. 14RF-9-61-A91; Total Pages: 42 1 Dec. 15, 1995.
No. 14RF-19-61-A55; Total Pages: ........ Dec. 7, 1995.
40.
No. 14RF-19-61-A55; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 15, 1995.
42.
No. 14RF-21-61-A73; Total Pages: ........ Dec. 7, 1995.
40.
No. 14RF-21-61-A73; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 15, 1995.
42.
No. 14SF-61-A93; Total Pages: 40.. ........ Dec. 7, 1995.
No. 14SF-61-A93, Total Pages: 42.. 1 Dec. 15, 1995.
No. 6/5500/F-61-A41; Total Pages: ........ Dec. 7, 1995.
40.
No. 6/5500/F-61-A41; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 18, 1995.
42.
No. 14RF-9-61-A95; Total Pages: 36 ........ Dec. 18, 1995.
No. 14RF-9-61-A95; Total Pages: 36 1 Dec. 21, 1995.
No. 14RF-19-61-A57; Total Pages: ........ Dec. 18, 1995.
35.
No. 14RF-19-61-A57; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 21,1995.
35.
No. 14RF-21-61-A75, Total Pages: ........ Dec. 18, 1995.
35.
No. 14RF-21-61-A75; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 21,1995.
35.
No. 14SF-61-A95; Total Pages: 37.. ........ Dec. 18, 1995.
No. 14SF-61-A95; Total Pages: 37.. 1 Dec. 21, 1995.
No. 6/5500/F-61-A43; Total Pages: ........ Dec. 18, 1995.
35.
No. 6/5500/F-61-A43; Total Pages: 1 Dec. 21, 1995.
35.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies may be obtained from Hamilton Standard, One Hamilton
Road, Windsor Locks, CT 06096-1010; telephone (203) 654-6876. This
information may be inspected at the FAA, New England Region, Office
of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(q) This amendment supersedes priority letter AD 95-18-06R1,
issued August 30, 1995.
(r) This amendment becomes effective on January 19, 1996.
[[Page 622]]
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 26, 1995.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-268 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-259 Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, A Division of Textron Canada Ltd. Model 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 Helicopters
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 613-617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-259]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 613]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-SW-33-AD; Amdt. 39-9484; AD 96-01-08]
Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, A Division of
Textron Canada Ltd. Model 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 Helicopters
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing priority letter
airworthiness directive (AD) 95-23-02, applicable to certain serial-
numbered Bell Helicopter Textron, A Division of Textron Canada Ltd.
(BHT) Model 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 helicopters, that currently
requires an initial check of both surfaces of each tail rotor blade
(blade) for cracks; an inspection of the blade skin if a crack of a
specified size or location is found in the paint; and replacement of
the blade if a crack is found in the blade skin. This AD requires the
same actions as required by the priority letter AD, but corrects some
affected serial numbers (S/N) that were incorrectly stated in that AD.
This amendment is prompted by two incidents in which a crack developed
in the stainless steel blade skins on BHT Model 230 helicopters, which
are similar in design to the Models 222, 222B and 222U helicopters. The
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of a blade
due to a fatigue crack, loss of the tail rotor and tail rotor gear box,
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
DATES: Effective January 24, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before March 11, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:
Rules Docket No. 95-SW-33-AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Charles Harrison, Aerospace
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0170, telephone (817) 222-5447, fax (817) 222-
5960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 3, 1995, the FAA issued priority
letter AD 95-23-02, applicable to certain serial-numbered BHT Models
222, 222B, 222U, and 230 helicopters, to require an initial check of
both surfaces of each blade for cracks; an inspection of the blade skin
if a crack of a specified size or location is found in the paint; and
replacement of the blade if a crack is found in the blade skin. That
action was prompted by two incidents in which a crack developed in the
stainless steel blade skins on BHT Model 230 helicopters. In one of
these incidents, the blade failed during flight. Subsequent
investigation revealed fatigue cracks originating from sanding marks on
the blade skin. The cracks were located just outboard of the stainless
steel blade doubler. That condition, if not corrected, could result in
failure of a blade due to a fatigue crack, loss of the tail rotor and
tail rotor gear box, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
Since the issuance of that AD, the FAA has discovered that an error
was made in the applicability paragraph of the priority letter AD,
which incorrectly stated the S/N of one of the affected models. The
Model 230 helicopters affected by the AD include S/N 23001 through
23038. The priority letter AD incorrectly stated S/N 23001 through
23034.
Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop
on other BHT Models 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 helicopters of the same
type design, this AD supersedes priority letter AD 95-23-02 to require,
before further flight, an initial visual check of both painted surfaces
of each blade for cracks. If a crack of a specified size and location
is found in the paint, removal of the paint and a visual inspection
using a 10-power or higher magnifying glass is required before further
flight. If this closer inspection reveals a crack in the blade skin,
replacement of the blade with an airworthy blade is required. If no
crack is found in the blade skin, the area from which the paint was
removed is coated with a light-weight oil or an equivalent corrosion
preventive compound, and then repetitive visual checks are required at
intervals not to exceed 3 hours time-in-service (TIS). The initial
visual check that is required before further flight and the repetitive
checks may be performed by a pilot, but must be entered into the
aircraft records showing compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD in
accordance with sections 43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Federal
Aviation Regulations. This AD allows a pilot to perform this check
because it involves only a visual check for cracking in the painted
surface of the blade skin, and can be performed equally well by a pilot
or a mechanic.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for public
comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before
[[Page 614]]
and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for
examination by interested persons. A report that summarizes each FAA-
public contact concerned with the substance of this AD will be filed in
the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 95-SW-33-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the National
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD), Amendment 39-9484, to read as follows:
AD 96-01-08 Bell Helicopter Textron, a Division of Textron Canada
Ltd.: Amendment 39-9484. Docket No. 95-SW-33-AD. Supersedes Priority
Letter AD 95-23-02, issued November 3, 1995, Docket No. 95-SW-31-AD.
Applicability: Model 222 helicopters, serial numbers (S/N) 47006
through 47089, and Model 222B helicopters, S/N 47131 through 47156,
with tail rotor blades, part numbers (P/N) 222-016-001-101, -107, -
111, and -113; Model 222U helicopters, S/N 47501 through 47574, with
tail rotor blades, P/N 222-016-001-107 and -111; and Model 230
helicopters, S/N 23001 through 23038, with tail rotor blades, P/N
222-016-001-111, installed, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For helicopters that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (g) to request approval from the FAA. This
approval may address either no action, if the current configuration
eliminates the unsafe condition, or different actions necessary to
address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request
should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any helicopter from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required before further flight, unless accomplished
previously. To prevent failure of a tail rotor blade (blade) due to
a fatigue crack (see Figure 1), loss of the tail rotor and tail
rotor gear box, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter,
accomplish the following:
(a) Clean the painted surfaces of the blades in an area
approximately 6 inches spanwise on either side of the doubler tip.
Visually check both surfaces of each blade for cracks by pushing the
blade tip away from the surface being checked until it contacts the
flapping stop and then holding the blade firmly against the stop.
Pay particular attention to the area reaching from the doubler tip
to 1 inch outboard, centering on an area 2 inches aft of the blade
leading edge (see Figure 2).
(b) The visual check required by paragraph (a) may be performed
by an owner/operator (pilot) holding at least a private pilot
certificate, and must be entered into the aircraft records showing
compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD in accordance with sections
43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
(c) If the visual check described in paragraph (a) reveals any
crack outboard of the doubler tip (Station 14.250), or any chordwise
crack inboard of the doubler tip that is longer than 1 inch (see
Figure 3), accomplish the following:
(1) Remove the paint from the skin in the cracked area using the
following procedures (see Figure 4):
Note 2: Paint cracking that follows the contour of the doubler
is common and is of no concern.
(2) Using a 180 or 220 grit abrasion paper, sand by hand with
spanwise strokes until greenish- or yellow-colored primer or bare
metal begins to be exposed.
(3) Using spanwise or circular sanding motions, continue hand-
sanding the remaining greenish- or yellow-colored primer in the
cracked area using a 320 or 400 grit paper until sufficient metal
has been exposed to allow inspection (see area indicated in Figure
4).
(d) Inspect the blade skin for cracks in the area that was
exposed in accordance with paragraph (c) using a 10-power or higher
magnifying glass.
(1) If no crack is found in the blade skin, coat the bare metal
area with a lightweight oil or an equivalent corrosion preventive
compound.
(2) If any crack is discovered, remove the blade and replace it
with an airworthy blade.
(e) Perform the requirements of this AD upon installation of a
replacement blade.
(f) Perform the visual checks of paragraph (a) of this AD and
the subsequent inspections, if appropriate, at intervals not to
exceed 3 hours TIS.
Note 3: A lightweight oil or equivalent corrosion preventive
compound may be applied after accomplishing the repetitive
requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD.
(g) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used when approved by the Manager, Rotorcraft Certification Office,
Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. Operators shall submit their requests
through an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may concur or
comment and then send it to the Manager, Rotorcraft Certification
Office.
Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Rotorcraft Certification Office.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
[[Page 615]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR09JA96.000
[[Page 616]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR09JA96.001
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
[[Page 617]]
(h) Special flight permits to accomplish the requirements of
this AD will not be issued.
(i) This amendment becomes effective on January 15, 1996.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December 21, 1995.
Eric Bries,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-259 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-228 Secondary Direct Food Additives Permitted in Food for Human Consumption
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 631-632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-228]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 173
[Docket No. 95F-0244]
Secondary Direct Food Additives Permitted in Food for Human
Consumption
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the food
additive regulations for n-butoxypoly(oxyethylene)poly(oxypropylene)
glycol intended for use in sugar beet processing to replace the
existing limitation on molecular weight with a limitation on viscosity.
This action responds to a petition filed by Union Carbide Corp.
DATES: Effective January 9, 1996; written objections and requests for a
hearing by FEbruary 8, 1996. The Director of the Office of the Federal
Register approves the incorporation by reference in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of a certain publication in
Sec. 173.340 (21 CFR 173.340), effective January 9, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to the Dockets Management Branch
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, rm. 1-23, 12420 Parklawn Dr.,
Rockville, MD 20857.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mitchell A. Cheeseman, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-217), Food and Drug Administration,
200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3083.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal
Register of August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40384), FDA announced that a food
additive petition (FAP 5A4473) had been filed by Union Carbide Corp.,
P.O. Box 670, Bound Brook, NJ 08805. The petition proposed to amend the
food additive regulations in Sec. 173.340 Defoaming agents (21 CFR
173.340) to redefine the limitations for n-
butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxypropyleneglycol intended for use as a
defoaming agent in sugar beet processing from molecular weight to
viscosity.
FDA has evaluated data in the petition and other relevant material.
The agency concludes that the proposed technical amendment concerning
n-butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxypropyleneglycol raises no safety issue,
and that Sec. 173.340 should be amended as set forth below. FDA also
concludes that the appropriate syntax for the chemical name of the
additive is
n-butoxypoly(oxyethylene)poly(oxypropylene)glycol.
In accordance with Sec. 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition
and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its
decision to approve the petition are available for inspection at the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment
[[Page 632]]
with the information contact person listed above. As provided in 21 CFR
171.1(h), the agency will delete from the documents any materials that
are not available for public disclosure before making the documents
available for inspection.
The agency has previously considered the potential environmental
effects of this action, as announced in the notice of filing for FAP
5A4473 (60 FR 40384). FDA has received no new information or comments
that would affect the agency's previous determination that this action
will not have a significant impact on the human environment and that
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required.
Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may at
any time on or before February 8, 1996, file with the Dockets
Management Branch (address above) written objections thereto. Each
objection shall be separately numbered, and each numbered objection
shall specify with particularity the provisions of the regulation to
which objection is made and the grounds for the objection. Each
numbered objection on which a hearing is requested shall specifically
so state. Failure to request a hearing for any particular objection
shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection.
Each numbered objection for which a hearing is requested shall include
a detailed description and analysis of the specific factual information
intended to be presented in support of the objection in the event that
a hearing is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis
for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to
a hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents shall be
submitted and shall be identified with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in
response to the regulation may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173
Food additives, Incorporation by reference.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is amended as follows:
PART 173--SECONDARY DIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN FOOD FOR
HUMAN CONSUMPTION
1.-The authority citation for 21 CFR part 173 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348).
2. Section 173.340 is amended in the table in paragraph (a)(4) by
revising the entry for ``n-butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxypropylene
glycol'' under the headings `` Substance'' and ``Limitations'' to read
as follows:
Sec. 173.340 Defoaming agents.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4)- * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Substance Limitations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
n-Butoxypoly(oxyethylene)- Viscosity range, 4,850-
poly(oxypropylene)glycol 5,350 Saybolt Universal
Seconds (SUS) at 37.8
deg.C (100 deg.F). The
viscosity range is
determined by the method
``Viscosity Determination
of n-
butoxypoly(oxyethylene)-
poly(oxypropylene)
glycol'' dated April 26,
1995, developed by Union
Carbide Corp., P.O. Box
670, Bound Brook, NJ
08805, which is
incorporated by reference
in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies of the
material incorporated by
reference are available
from the Division of
Petition Control, Center
for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition (HFS-
215), Food and Drug
Administration, 200 C St.
SW., Washington, DC 20204,
and may be examined at the
Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition's
Library, 200 C St. SW.,
rm. 3321, Washington, DC,
or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800
North Capitol St. NW.,
suite 700, Washington, DC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Dated: December 21, 1995.
Fred R. Shank,
Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 96-228 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-113 Mortgagee Review Board; Streamlined Final Rule
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 684-685]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-113]
[[Page 683]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Housing and Urban Development
_______________________________________________________________________
Office of the Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________
24 CFR Part 25
Mortgagee Review Board; Streamlined Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 684]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of the Secretary
24 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FR-3979-F-01]
RIN 2501-AC09
Mortgagee Review Board; Streamlined Final Rule
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule further streamlines HUD's regulations on the
Mortgagee Review Board (MRB). This rule is part of HUD's efforts to
comply with the President's regulatory reform initiatives by producing
concise regulations that are easy to use and understand. This rule will
not change the substantive requirements of the MRB regulations, but it
will eliminate provisions that are redundant of the MRB statute.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emmett N. Roden, Assistant General
Counsel for Administrative Proceedings, Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, S.W., Room
10251, Washington, D.C. 20410, telephone (202) 708-2350. The telephone
number for the hearing impaired (TDD) is (202) 708-9300. These are not
toll-free numbers.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Mortgagee Review Board (MRB or the
Board) final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 1,
1995 (60 FR 39236). The August 1, 1995 final rule streamlined the
hearing procedures to allow the Board to delegate its hearing authority
to a hearing official. This new process is much less time-consuming and
expensive, and it is consistent with the President's regulatory reform
initiatives expressed in Executive Order 12866 and the President's
memorandum of March 4, 1995 to all Federal departments and agencies.
However, HUD has determined that it can further streamline the
regulations by removing language that is redundant of the MRB statute
(12 U.S.C. 1708(c)-(d)). For example, the statute fully describes the
types of administrative actions that the Board may take against
mortgagees, the Board's authority to request the Secretary to issue
cease and desist orders to mortgagees, and the requirement to notify
GNMA of withdrawal actions. Since these statutory provisions are nearly
self-explanatory and widely accessible, it is unnecessary to repeat
them in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Therefore, this rule removes several redundant provisions from the
MRB regulations. This rule revises Sec. 25.3 to remove the following
definitions: administrative action, cease and desist order, letter of
reprimand, notice of charges, party, probation, reasonable cause,
suspension, and withdrawal. The rule revises Sec. 25.5 (Administrative
actions) and removes Sec. 25.12 (Cease and desist orders). The rule
also revises Sec. 25.14 concerning the requirement to notify GNMA of
withdrawal actions, and removes Sec. 25.15 concerning annual reports to
the Secretary. In place of the redundant statutory language, this rule
includes the references to the appropriate statutory provisions.
Although the statutory provisions are accessible and are referenced
in the new rule text, HUD seeks to ensure that this rule is easy to
use. Therefore, HUD intends to provide mortgagees with a copy of the
MRB statute along with the copies of the updated regulatory text that
HUD routinely provides.
This rule also amends the regulations to correct three minor
errors. First, this rule corrects a typographical error in
Sec. 25.9(l); the word ``inquiries'' should appear instead of
``inquires.'' Second, this rule corrects Sec. 25.9(p) to refer to
prudent ``mortgagees'' rather than ``lenders.'' HUD had intended to use
the term ``mortgagees'' in this paragraph, in conformance with the
definition of that term in Sec. 25.3. Third, this rule restores
language in Sec. 25.5(d) regarding the effect of a suspension upon
Title I lenders that was inadvertently deleted from Sec. 202.9(a)(3) in
the August 1, 1995 final rule.
Justification for Final Rulemaking
HUD generally publishes a rule for public comment before issuing a
final rule for effect, in accordance with its regulations on rulemaking
(24 CFR part 10). However, part 10 provides exceptions from the general
rule if HUD finds good cause to omit advance notice and public
participation. The good cause requirement is satisfied when prior
public procedure is ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest'' (24 CFR 10.1). HUD finds that good cause exists to
publish this rule for effect without first soliciting public comment.
Since this rule does not alter any rights or responsibilities of
parties affected by the rule nor any substantive requirements of the
rule, such prior public procedure is unnecessary.
Findings and Other Matters
National Environmental Policy Act
In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council
on Environmental Quality and 24 CFR 50.20(k) of HUD regulations, the
policies and procedures contained in this rule relate only to
administrative decisions, which do not constitute development decisions
and do not affect the physical condition of a project area or building.
Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of
the National Environmental Policy Act.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the Secretary hereby certifies that this rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The rule streamlines the Mortgagee Review Board regulations by removing
language from the Code of Federal Regulations that is redundant of
language that appears in the United States Code. It will have no
adverse or disproportionate economic impact on small businesses.
Executive Order 12606, The Family
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this final rule does not
have potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance,
and general well-being. No significant change in existing HUD policies
or programs will result from promulgation of this rule, as those
policies and programs relate to family concerns. Therefore, the rule is
not subject to review under the Order.
Executive Order 12612, Federalism
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Section 6(a)
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that the policies
contained in this rule will not have substantial direct effects on
States or their political subdivisions, or the relationship between the
Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. As a result,
the final rule is not subject to review under the Order.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 25
Administrative practice and procedure, Loan programs--housing and
community development, Organization and functions (Government
agencies).
[[Page 685]]
Accordingly, 24 CFR part 25 is amended as follows:
PART 25--MORTGAGEE REVIEW BOARD
1. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1708 (c)-(d)), 1709(s), 1715b, and 1735
(f)-14; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
2. Section 25.3 is amended by removing the definitions for the
following terms: ``administrative action'', ``cease and desist order'',
``letter of reprimand'', ``notice of charges'', ``party'',
``probation'', ``reasonable cause'', ``suspension'', and
``withdrawal''; and by revising the definitions for the terms
``lender'', ``loan correspondent'', and ``mortgagee'', to read as
follows:
Sec. 25.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Lender. A financial institution as defined in Sec. 202.2(a) of this
title.
Loan correspondent. A financial institution as defined in
Sec. 202.2(b) of this title.
Mortgagee. For purposes of the regulations in this part, the term
``mortgagee'' includes:
(1) The original lender
under the mortgage, as that term is defined at sections 201(a) and
207(a)(1) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1707(a), 1713(a)(1));
(2) A lender or loan correspondent as defined in this section;
(3) A branch office or subsidiary of the mortgagee, lender, or loan
correspondent; or
(4) Successors and assigns of the mortgagee, lender, or loan
correspondent, as are approved by the Commissioner.
* * * * *
3. Section 25.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 25.5 Administrative actions.
(a) General. The Board is authorized to take the following
administrative actions: letter of reprimand, probation, suspension,
withdrawal, or settlement agreement. These actions are described at 12
U.S.C. 1708(c)(3), and as further set out in this section.
(b) Letter of reprimand. A letter of reprimand shall be effective
upon receipt of the letter by the mortgagee. Failure to comply with a
directive in the letter of reprimand may result in any other
administrative action under this part that the Board finds appropriate.
(c) Probation. Probation shall be effective upon receipt of the
notice of probation by the mortgagee. Failure to comply with the terms
of probation may result in any other administrative action under this
part that the Board finds appropriate.
(d) Suspension. A suspension shall be based upon adequate evidence
and shall be effective upon receipt of the notice of suspension by the
mortgagee. During the period of suspension, HUD will not endorse any
mortgage originated by the suspended mortgagee unless prior to the date
of suspension a firm commitment has been issued relating to any such
mortgage, or a Direct Endorsement underwriter has approved the
mortgagor for any such mortgage. During the period of suspension, a
lender or loan correspondent may not originate new title I loans under
their Title I Contracts of Insurance or apply for a new Contract of
Insurance.
(e)(1) Withdrawal. During the period of withdrawal, HUD will not
endorse any mortgage originated by the withdrawn mortgagee unless prior
to the date of withdrawal a firm commitment has been issued relating to
any such mortgage, or a Direct Endorsement underwriter has approved the
mortgagor for any such mortgage. During the period of withdrawal, a
lender or loan correspondent may not originate new title I loans under
their Title I Contracts of Insurance or apply for a new Contract of
Insurance. The Board may limit the geographical extent of the
withdrawal, or limit its scope (e.g., to either the single family or
multifamily activities of a withdrawn mortgagee). Upon the expiration
of the period of withdrawal, the mortgagee may file a new application
for approval under 24 CFR part 202.
(2) Effective date of withdrawal. (i) If the Board determines that
immediate action is in the public interest or in the best interests of
the Department, then withdrawal shall be effective upon receipt of the
Board's notice of withdrawal.
(ii) If the Board does not determine that immediate action is
necessary according to paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section, then
withdrawal shall be effective either:
(A) Upon the expiration of the 30-day period specified in
Sec. 25.8, if the mortgagee has not requested a hearing; or
(B) Upon receipt of the Board's decision under Sec. 25.8, if the
mortgagee requests a hearing.
4. Section 25.9 is amended by revising paragraphs (l) and (p) to
read as follows:
Sec. 25.9 Grounds for an administrative action.
* * * * *
(l) Failure of a mortgagee to respond to inquiries from the Board;
* * * * *
(p) Business practices which do not conform to generally accepted
practices of prudent mortgagees or which demonstrate irresponsibility;
* * * * *
Sec. 25.12 [Removed]
5. Section 25.12 is removed.
Sec. 25.13 [Redesignated as Sec. 25.12]
6. Section 25.13 is redesignated as Sec. 25.12.
7. Section 25.14 is redesignated as Sec. 25.13, and is revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 25.13 Notifying GNMA of withdrawal actions.
When the Board issues a notice of violation that could lead to
withdrawal of a mortgagee's approval, or is notified by GNMA of an
action that could lead to withdrawal of GNMA approval, the Board shall
proceed in accordance with 12 U.S.C. 1708(d).
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control
Number 2502-0450.)
Sec. 25.15 [Removed]
8. Section 25.15 is removed.
Sec. 25.16 [Redesignated as Sec. 25.14]
9. Section 25.16 is redesignated as Sec. 25.14.
Sec. 25.18 [Redesignated as Sec. 25.15]
10. Section 25.18 is redesignated as Sec. 25.15.
Dated: December 15, 1995.
Henry G. Cisneros,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-113 Filed 1-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-32-P
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.