32318 Federal Register I Vol. 61, No. 122 I Monday, June 24, 1996 I Rules and Regulations

equipped with footrest assembly

installed on aircraft of U.S. regu;lry

would be affected by this AD. that it

would take approximately"¥~ work

hours per seat to accomplish the

required actions. and that the avernge

labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$30 per seal. Based on these figures. the

total cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $225.000.

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effect5 on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States. or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

level .• of government. Therefore. in

accordance with Executive Order 12612.

it is detennined that this fmal 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 (l) is not a

"Significant regulatory action" under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

"significant rule" under the 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 is

COntained 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-A1RWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 V.S.C. 106{g};40113. 44701.

§39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new au-v.'orthiness

directive: 4

96-12-09 PTCS~••ting Products Division, BI

E Aerospace:Amendment 39-96SI.

DocketNo. 95_ANE_25.

Applicability: PTCSeating Products

Division. B/EAl1rospace(PTC)Model 950

series p~nger :;calequipped with footrest

assembly.

Note:This ADapplies to each seat

Identified in the preceding applicability

provision. regan:llessof whether it has been

modified. altered. or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD.For

~"ats equipped with foolrest assembly that

have been modified, altered, or repaired so

that the performance of the requirements of

this ADIs alTected.Ihe owner/operator must

usI1lhe aulhority provided in pardgraph (b)

to rl1questapproval from Ihe FAA.This

approval may address either no'action, if the

current configuration eliminales 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 eITectof the changed

configuration on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD.In no case does the

presem:e of any modification. a1leration.or

repair remow any seat from ,he applicability

oftllis AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated. unless

accomplished previously_To prevt'nt injul)'

to hands during operatlon of the PTCModel

950 series passenger seats equipped with

footrest assembly. accomplish the following:

(a)Within nine cakndar monlhs after lhe

effective date of this AD,

(I) Removescat footrest assembly arms, PI

N 98440-1 ur -2.1n accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of PTC

Aerospace Service Bulletin (SB)25-1192.

Revision A. dated March 16. 1992_

(2)Install conW!rslonkit. PIN 122966-1. In

accon:lancewith Section 2. Accomplishment

Instructions ofPTC Seating Products

Division, BIEAerospace SB25-1330, dated

July 27, 1994.

(b)An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment ofthe compliance time that

provides an aoceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager.Boston

Aircraft Certification Office.The request

should be forwarded through an appropriale

FAAPrincipal MaIntenance Inspector, whO

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager,BoSlonAircmftCertiflcation Office.

Note: Information conc"rning the existence

of approved alternative method~of

compliance with this airworthiness directive.

if any. may be obtained fromthe Boston

AircrafrCertification Office.

(c)The removal of seat footrest assembly

anns and replacement of the conversion kit

shall be done In accoroance with PTC

Aerospace Service Bulletin {SB)25-1192,

Revision A. dated March 16. 1992.pages 1_

5. and PTCSeating Products Division. BJE

Aerospace SB 25_1330,dated July 27. 1994.

pages 1-12. This Incorporation by reference

was approved by the Directorof the Federal

Registerin accon:lancewith 5 V.S.C.552(a)

and 1 CFRpart 51.Copies may be obtained

from B/EAerospace.PTCSeating Products

DiviSion,607 Bantam Road.Litchfield, CT

06759. CopiesIll"ybe inspected at the FAA,

New England Region.Officeof Ihc Assistant

ChiefCounse!. 12New Engiand Executive

Park. Burlington. MA:or at the OlTict'of the

Federal Register.800 North Capilal Street.

NW..suite 700.Washington. DC.

(d)This amendment becomes eITectiveJuly

29.1996.

Issued In Burlington, Massachusetts on

June 4. 1996_

James C.Jones,

AcringManager. Engineand Propeller

Directorale.A/rcrafl Certification Service.

[FRDoc-96-15555 Filed 6-21-96; 8:45 am}

BILLING COOE 4310_1341

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95-NM-233-AD; Amendment

39-9680; AD74-08-09 RZ]

R1N212D-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Transport

Category Airplanes

AGENCY:Federal Aviation

Administration. DOT.

ACTION:Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment revises an

existing air.vorminess directive (AD).

applicable to all transport category

airplanes. that currently requires

installation of placards prohibiting

smoking in the lavatory and disposal of

cigarettes in the lavatory waste

receptacles: establishment of a

procedure to announce to airplane

occupants that smoking is prohibited in

the lavatories: inslallation of ashtrays at

certain locations: and repetitive

inspections to ensure that lavatory

waste nx:eptacle doors operate correctly.

That AD was prompted by fires

occurring in lavatories. which were

caused by, among other things. the

improper disposal of smoking materials

in lavatory waste receptacles. The

actions specified by that AD are

intended to prevent such fire~. This

amendment revises the existing AD to

allow dispatch relief in the event a

lavatory door ashtray is missing.

EFFECTIVEOATE:July 29, 1990.

AODRESSES:Information pertaining to

this rulemaking may be examined at the

Federal Avialion Administration (FAA).

Transport Airplane Directorate. Rules

Docket. 1601 Lind Avenue, SW..

Renton. Washington.

FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT:

Norman Martenson. Manager.

Standardization Branch, ANM-113,

FAA. Transpon Airplane Directorate.

160l Lind Avenue, SW.. Renton.

Washington 98055-4056; telephone

(206) 227-2113: fax (206) 227-\l49.

SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Fedeml

Aviation Regulations (14 erR part 39)

by revising AD 74-08-09 R1,

amendment 39-9214 (60 FR 21429. May

2, 1995). which is applicable to all

transport calegory airplanes, was

published in the Federal Regi~ter on
Federal Register I Vol. 61. No. 122 I Monday, June 24, 1996 I Rules and Regulations 32319

January 19, 1996 (61 FR 1306). AD 74-

08-09 RI currently requires:

1. installation of placards prohibiting

smoking in the lavatory and disposal of

cigarenes in the lavatory waste

receptacles:

2. establishment of a procedure to

announce to airplane occupants that

smoking is prohibited in the lavatories;

3. inslaUation of ashtrays at certain

locations; and

4. repetitive inspections to ensure that

lavatory waste receptacle doors operate

correctly.

That AD also provides for an

alternative action regarding the

requirement to install specific placards

at certain locations.

The proposal specified the F'AA's

intent to revise AD 74-08-09 RI by

adding a provision that would allow for

dispatch relief in the event a lavatory

door ashtray is missing from the

airplane.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received,

Support for Ihe Proposal

F'ive commenters support the

proposal.

Request To Revise Terminology of

Dispatch Relief Provision

One commenter reques15 that

proposed paragraph (d) be revised 10

change the tenninology used in the

provision for dispatch relief. The

commenter requests that the provision

specify rhe time for continued dispatch

in terms of "flight days." rather than

merely "days." The commenter states

that the definition of "flight day" is

recognized by the FAA in documents

such as the Master Minimum

Equipment Ust (MMEL). and using this

terminology in the proposed rule would

further clarify the requirements.

The fAA does not concur. Use of the

tenn "night day" rather than "(calendar)

day'· for compliance terms in this AD

could delay the re-installation of the

ashttay on the airplane for an unduly

long period of time. Moreover, the

MMEL for most affected transport

airplanes specifies "calendar days" in

its description of me "Maximum Times

Between Deferral and Repair:·· therefore,

this tenn used as a compliance time is

appropriate and should be familiar to

affected operators.

The FAA's imem is that. if the

ashtray(s) is removed, the airplane

should be allowed to continue to

operate for the minimum amount of

lime that it would take. under normally

scheduled operations, to reach a main

base where the ashtray can be replaced.

The FAA has determined that the tenns

of the dispatch relief proviSions, as

proposed. will allow such normal

operation to occur (without schedule

interruptions) and the ashtray to be

replaced in a timely manner.

Reque51 To Revise Number of Days of

Dispatch Relief

Several commenters request that the

dispatch relief provision of proposed

paragraph (d) be revised to account for

the various types and configurations of

transport aircraft that are affected. and

to ensure that no airplane is grounded

because of the absence of "a component

that does not affect the airworthiness of

the airplane."

The commemers point out that as

proposed. the rule would allow

operation of a single· lavatory airplane

for three days with its only lavatory

door ashtray missing. This group of

airplanes could include certain Boeing

Model 737 airplanes, McDonnell

Douglas Model DC-9 airplanes. Fokker

Model 100 airplanes. and regional

airplanes that seat 100 or fewer

passengers. However, other similarlyconfigured models (i.e" certain Model

737"s and Model DC-9's) that have 100

or fewer sealS. but are equipped with

two lavatories, could not be dispatched

if both of the airplane's two lavatory

door ashtrays were missing.

The commenters request that the

proposal be revised to allow single- or

dual-lavatory airplanes to continue to

operate for three days if one or both

ashtrays are missing. The commenters

assert that operating a dual-lavatory,

100-seat airplane without ashtrays for

three days is no less safe than operating

a single. lavatory 100·seat airplane that

has its only ashtray missing for three

days. The commenters maintain that the

proposed rule should not discriminate

between these two configurations.

Further, the commenters note that

airplanes equipped with multiple

lavatories (and. thus, multiple lavatory

door ashtrays) could not be dispatched

if more than one lavatory door ashtray

is missing; the commemers contend that

this feature of the proposed rule

potentially could ground wide-body

airplanes such as McDonnell Douglas

Model DC-IO's. Lockheed Model L~

1011's. and Boeing Model 74Ts, and

thereby interrupt flighl schedules. These

commenters also request that the

proposal be revised to provide airplanes

with three or more lavatories additional

dispatch relief in the event lhat more

than one lavatory door ashtray is

missing. F'or these airplanes. they

suggest the following revised wording:

"I. At multiple or cJusler lavatories

co-located (two or more adjacent

lavamries). the airplane may be operated

for a period of 10 days if the lavatory

door a:o;;htraysare missing, provided that

the remaining ashtray(s) can be seen

readily from the cabin side of the

lavatory door(s) with the missing door

ashtray.

2_At single lavatoty locations, the

airplane may be operated for a period of

3 days if one lavatory door ashtray is

missing, provided other lavatory door

ashtrays are installed [and can be seen

readily from the cabin side of the

lavatory door(s) with the missing door

ashtray)."

The FAA does not concur with the

commenters' requests, and does not

consider that additional dispatch relief

is appropriate.

First. contrary to the commenters'

description of the lavatory door ashtray

as a component that does not affect the

airvmrthiness of the airplane. the FAA

has determined that the ashtrays serve

an important safety function and,

therefore. mUSt be consideted tequired

equipment. This AD was issued as a

result of numerous fifes that occurred in

the lavatory paper and linen receptacles

on transport category airplanes, which

were caused by smoking materials

deposiled by passengers or crew. Such

fires can be a significant threat to the

safety of all persons on the airplane

because of the emission of toxic smoke

and the possibility of the fire

progressing to critical components. The

F'AA has determined that the

requirements of this AD are necessary in

order to ensure adequate,

comprehensive fire protection aboard

transport category airplanes. The

requirement for an ashtray Oil or near

the lavatory door ensures that there is a

safe, convenient, and obviOus place to

dispose of smoking materia! (especially,

in cases where the CUITentregulations

imposing a "no smoking policy'· aboard

the airplane are not adhered to either by

passengers, crew, or maintenance

personnel).

Second. in developing the time

intervals for allowing continued

operation of an airplane with fewer than

the required number of lavatory door

ashtrays, the FAA considered not only

the safety Implications (associated with

operating an airplane without a

component that affeclS the

aitworthiness of the airplane), but

experiences obtained from working bOlh

with operators and with the MMEL

system. The F'AA's reasoning behind the

dispatch relief specified in this rule is

based on several factors:

I. With respect LO airplanes equipped

with a single lavatory, which are
32320 Federal Register / VoL 61, No. 122 I Monday, June 24, 1996 I Rules and Regulations

normally smaller transports thai operate

on shorter routes_ the FAA considers

that those airplanes can operate safely

in today's environment. without a

lavatory door ashtray. for the time that

it takes to gel the airplane back to a

maintenance base for reinstallation of

the ashtray. For those airplanes. the

FAA generally def"mes that amount of

time as three day>.

2. With respect to airplanes equipped

with two or more lavatories, which aTe

normally larger transports thai operate

on longer routes. the FAA considered

worst-case situations. for example.

where an airplane may be scheduled to

do a double or triple turn-around From

two international points. [n such a

situation, it could take as long as 10

days to get the airplane back to its main

base where a missing ashtray could be

re-installed.

3. Additionally, the 10-day period of

dispatch relief for multiple-lavatory

airplanes with one ashtray missing is

the same interval as the standard

definition "Category C" item in the

MMEL for repair intervals (relative to

inoperative systems or components) for

almost all transport category airplanes;

Category C is the ·'category of choice"

for approximately 85% to 90% of all

items in the MMEL Therefore. the FAA

considers that this time period could be

easily managed by air carrier

maintenance programs and should not

pose a problem for operators,

Third. regarding airplanes equipped

with multiple lavatories, the FAA

considers that affected operators should

examine why more than one lavatory

door ashtray could be missing from

these airplanes. It is understandable that

occasionally, through carelessness,

damage, or deliberate pilfering, an

ashtray could be removed from an

airplane: however, this should be a

highly unusual event. Having two (or

more) lavatory door ashtrays missing

from a single airplane should be

extremely remote. If this is occurring

regularly. operators should examine

their current policy and practices

regarding ashtray maintenance.

The FAA fmds no reasonable

justification for allowing dispatch relief

for periods of time longer than those as

proposed. or for allowing more than one

lavatory door ashtray to be missing on

an airplane that is equipped with more

than one lavatory. The FAA finds that

the dispatch relief provided by this final

rule not only will ensure safety, but will

impose no undue economic burden on

any operator.

Request To Allow Ashtrays To Be

Relocated

These same commenters requ!'St that

the proposal be revised to give operators

of larger airplanes the flexibility to

move remaining ashtrays to different

parts of the cabin if one ashtray is

missing_

In response to this request, the FAA

points out that paragraph (cl of the AD,

as well as pan 25 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (FAR) (25 CFR 25),

already permit a configuration where

one ashtray may serve more than one

lavatory door if the ashtray can be seen

readily from the cabin side of the

lavatory door served. Further, nothing

prohibits an operator from moving or

relocating ashtrays within tre cabin to

meet this requirement. Therefore. no

revision to the AD Is necessary with

regard to this request.

Request To Include a Provision for

Alternative Methods of Compliance

One commenter requests that the

proposal be revised to include a

provision that would allow operators to

request the use of alternative methods of

compliance (AMOC) with the AD. The

commenter notes that most other AD's

include such a provision. and that the

FAA's own policy guidance stipulates

that AD's should include an AMOC

provision, The commemer requests that

the proposal be revised to meet that

policy.

The FAA does not concur that an

AMOC provision is appropriate for this

particular AD. As the commenter

correctly points out, the FAA·s normal

policy (reference FAA Document FAAALR-M-8040.1, "Airworthiness

Directives") is that an AMOC provision

"should be provided for in each AD,"

and the majority of AD's issued do

contain such a provision. For typical

AD·s. the FAA Is not aware. at the time

of AD issuance, of the range of

alternative methods that may exist for

complying with the AD; it is for this

reason that induding an AMOC

provision in those AD's is appropriate.

However. this AD is an exception: It

has existed more or less in its current

form for over 20 years and, during that

time, the FAA has not been presented

with a single acceptable alternative

method of compliance with il. All

suggestions -and requests that have been

submitted to the FAA (mainly in the

form of requests for exemption from the

AD requirements) have been found to be

unacceptable in that they would provide

neither an equivalent nor an acceptable

level of safety to that provided by the

requirements of the AD itself.

In light of this. the FAA has

determined that including an AMOC

provision in this AD at this time would

not be productive.

The FAA points out that paragraph (I)

of the AD does provide operators a

means for some alternarive actions. It

permits an adjustment of the time

interval for the required repetitive

inspections of the waste receptacle

enclosure doors and disposal doors. if

data are presented to the FAA to justify

such an adjustment. [However, the FAA

points out that the majority of U.s.

operators of transport category airplanes

are conducting these inspections at the

specified I ,OOO-hourinterval (some are

conducting the inspections more

frequently). and many have found

discrepancies during the 1,000-hour

inspections. In light of this, the FAA

continues to conclude that the currently

required inspection interval is

appropriate, since it ensures that any

discrepancy will be identified and

corrected in a timely manner.]

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above. the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interesr require the

adoption of the mil" as proposed.

Cost Impact

Since this action only provides for an

alternative method of complying with

an existing role, it does not add any new

additional economic burden on affected

operators. In fact, the dispatch relief

provided by this AD will allow

operators to continue to operate

airplanes without the required number

of ashtrays for a longer period of time

than was previously permitted. This

will result in a reduction in costs to

affected operators, since it will

eliminate potential Interruptions in

service or special scheduling at

maintenance bases that otherwise would

be necessary in order to reinstaH

missing ashtrays.

The current costs associated with this

AD are reiterated below for the

convenience of affected operators.

The costs associated wilh the

currently required placard installations

entail approximately I work hour per

airplane. at an average labor rate of S60

per work hour. The cost of required

parts is negligible. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

installation requirements of this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be S60 per

airplane.

The costs associated with the

currently required inspections entail

approximately 1.5 work hours per

airplane per inspection, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures. the total cost impact of
Federal Register I Vo1. 61. No. 122 I Monday. June 24, 1996 I Rules and Regulations 32321

the inspection requirements of this AD

on US operators is estimated to be S90

per airplane per inspection.

Regulatory Impact

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 prepaJ<ltion

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 signiflcant 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 eFR Part 39

Air transportation. Aircraft. Aviation

safety. Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

A-ccordingly. pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator. the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 efR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39-A1RWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority cltalion for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§39.13 {Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39-9214 (60 FR

21429. May 2. 1995). and by adding a

new airwonhiness directive (AD).

amendment 39-9680. to read as follows:

74-.(18-09 R2 Transport Category Aircraft

AmEndment 39-9680. Docket 95-NM233-AD. Revise~ AD 74-08-09 RI.

Amcndmunt39_9214.

ApplicabiIily: All transport category

airplanes. CErtificated In any category. that

have one or more lavatories equipped with

paper Orlinen waste receptacles.

Note I The following is a partial list of

aircrafl. some or all models of which are type

certificated in the lransport category and

have lavatories equipped •.••~th paper or linen

waste receptacle:;:

Aerospatiale Models ATR42 and ATR72

serie;; airplanes;

Airbus Models A300. A310. A300-600. A320.

A330. and A340 series airplanes:

Boeing Models 707, 720, 727, 737, 747. 757,

and 767 series airplanes:

Boeing Model B-377 airplanes:

British Aircrart Models BAC 1-11 series,

BAe·146 series, alld ATP airplanes;

CASA Model C-212 series airplanes:

Convair Models CV-SSO. 600, 640, 880. and

990 series airplanes:

Convair Models 240. 340. and 440 series

airplanes:

Curtiss·Wright Model CW 46;

de Havilland Models DHC-7 and DHC-8

series airplanes:

Fairchild Models F-27 and C-82 series

airplanes;

Fairrhild-Hiller Model FH-227 series

airplanes;

Fokker Models F27 and F28 series airplanes;

Grumman Model G-159 series airplanes:

Gulfstream Model 1159 series airpl.anes:

Hawker Siddeley Model HS-748;

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes:

Lockheed Models L-IOII. L-188, L-I049,

and 382 series airplanes;

Martin Model M-404 airplanes:

McDonnell Douglas Models DC-'3, -4, "6, -7.

-8. -9. and ·10 series airplanes:

Model MD-88 airplanes; and Model MO-II

series airplanes:

Nihon Model YS-II:

Saab Models SF340A and SAAR 340B series

airplanes:

Short Brothers and Harlin Model SC-7 series

airplanes:

Short Brothers Models. S03-30 and S03-60

series airplanes.

Compliance: Required as indicated. unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent possible fires that could result

from smoking materials being dropped Into

lavlltory paper or linen waste receplac!eS.

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 60 days after Aug,-!st 5. 1974 (the

effective date of AD 74-08-09, amendment

39-1917). or bdore the accumulation of any

time in service on a new production aircraft

after delivery. whichever occurs later. excepl

that new production aircraft may be flown In

acco·rdance with Sections 21.197 llnd 2\.199

of Ihe Federai Aviation Regulations (14 C;:FR

21.197 and 21.199) to a base where

compliance may be accomplished.

accomplish the requirements of parngraphs

(a){l) and (aH2) of this AD.

(I) lnsta.11a placard either on each side of

each lavatory door over lJie door knob. or on

each side of eacl.! lavatory dOOl".or adjacent

to each side of each lavalory door_ The

placards must either cO,ntaln the legible

words. "No Smoking in Lavatory·' or "No

Smoking:" or comaln ':No Smoking·'

symbology In Ileu of words: or contain both

wording and symbology: to indicate that

smoking is prohibited in the lav!J.lory. 'f:he

placards muSI be of sufficient size and

contrast and be located so as to be

conspicuous to lavatory userS_ And

(2)lnsta.11 a placard on Of near each

lavatory paper or linen waste disposal

receptacle door. containing the legible words

or symbology Indicating ··No Cigarel{e

Disposal."

(b) Within 30 days after August 6.1974.

establish a procedure thai requires thaI nO

laler than a time immediately after Ihe "No

Smoking·' sign is extinguished following

takeoff. an announcement be made by a

crewmember to inform all aircraft occupants

that smoking is prohibited in the aircraft

lavatories: except that. irthe aircraft is not

equipJl<'d wilh a "No Smoking" sign. the

required procedure must be provide that the

announcement be made prior to each takeoff.

(c) Except as provided by paragraph (d) of

this AD: Within 180 days afler Augusl 6.

1974. or before the accumulation of any lime

in service on a new produclion aircraft,

which ••""r occurs later. except lhat new

production aircraft may be nown in

accordance with se<:;tlons21.197 and 21.199

oflhe Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199} to a base where

compliance may be accomplished, install a

self-contained. removable ashtray on or near

the entry side of each lavatory door. One

ashtray may serve mote than one laV1'llor)'

door ifthe ashlray can be seen readily from

the cabin side of each lavatory door served.

(d) The airplane may be operated for a

period of 10 days with a I8vatory door

ashtray missing. provided that no more than

one such ashtray Is missing. For airplanes on

which only one lavalory door ashtray is

installed. the airplane may be operated for a

period of 3 days if Ihe lavatory door ash..,..••y

is missing.

Note 2: This AD permits a lavatory door

ashtray 10 be missing. although the FAAapproved Master Minimum Equipmenl List

(MMEL) may nOI allow such provision. In

any case. the provisions of this AD prevail.

(e) Within 30 days after August 6. 1974,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000

hours time-in-servlce from the last

inspections. a~complish the following:

(I) Inspect all lavatory paper and linen

waste receptacle enclosure access doors and

disposal doors for proper operation. fit.

seaiing. and iatching for the containment of

possible lrash fires.

(2) Correct all def~15 found during the

inspections required by paragraph (e){l) of

this AD.

(I] Upon lhe request of an operator. the

FA.""Principal Maintenance Inspe<:tor may

adjust the LOOO·hour repetitive inspection

interval specified in paragraph (e) of this AD

to permit compliance al an established

inspection period of the operator if the

request contains data to Justify the requested

change in the inSJl<'ction interva!.

(g}Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of Ihe Federal Aviatlon Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operatE the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

Can be accompllshed.

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

July 29. 1996.
32322 Federal Register I VoL 61, No. 122 I Monday, June 24, 1996 I Rules and Regulations

ASO FL E5 Chlenand, FL [New]

Chienand White Farms Airport, FL

(Lat. 29"30'45"N, long. 82"52'30"W)

That airspace eXlending upward rrom 700

feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile

radius or White Fam,s Airport, excluding

that airspace within the Cross City, FL. Class

E airspace area.

pan 71) establishes Class E airspace at

Chiefland, FL, (0 accommodate a VORl

DME-A SlAP and for IFR operations at

White Farms Airport. The operating

status of the airport will be changed

from VFR to include IFR operations

concurrent with publication of this

SlAP.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation only involves an established

body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are

necessary to keep them operationally

current. It. therefore, (I) 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)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. Since this is a

routine matter that will only affect air

traffic procedures and air navigation, il

is certified that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria oflhe Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 eFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, (he

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as fol.lows:

PART 71--{AMENDED)

I. The authority citation for 14 CFR

Part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g):40103, 40113.

40120: EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-

1963 Camp .. p. 389: 14CFR 11.69.

§71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CfR 71.1 of Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated August 17. 1995, and effective

September 16. 1995. is amended as

follows:

ParagJdph 6005 Class E ainpace areas

extending upward from 700 feet aboV£'Ihe

surface oflhe earrh.

Issued in Renton, Washington. on June 11.

1996.

James V.Devany.

Acting Manager. Transport Airplane

Directorate. Aircraft Cenification Service.

[FR Doc. 96-15957 Filed 6-21-96; 8:45 ami

BILLING CODE 491D_13-O

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96-ASO-3]

Establishment of Class E Airspace;

Chiefland, FL

AGENCY:Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA). DOT.

ACTION; Final rule.

SUMMARY;This amendment establishes

Class E airspace at Chiefland. FL A

White Farms Airpon at Chiefland, FL,

has a VORIDME-A Standard Instrument

Approach Procedure (SlAP). Controlled

airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface (AGL) is needed

to accommodate this SlAP and for

instrument night rules (IFR) operations

at the airport. The operating status of

the airport will change from VFR to

include IFR operations concurrent with

publication of lilis SLAP.

EFFECTIVEDATE:0901 UTC, August 15,

1996.

FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT;

Benny L. McGlamery. Operations

Branch, Air Traffic Division. Federal

Aviation Administration. P.O. Box

20636. Atlanta. Georgia 30320:

telephone (404) 305-5570.

SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION:

History

On April 16, 1996,lile FAA proposed

TOamend Parl 71 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 Cf'R Part 71) by

establishing Class E airspace at

Chiefland. FL, (01 FR 16621). This

action will provide adequate Class E

airspace for IFR operations at White

Farms Airport.

Interested parties were invited to

participate in this rulemaking

proceeding by submitting wriuen

comments on the proposal to the FAA.

No comments objecting to the proposal

were received. Designations for Class E

airspace extending upward from 700

feet or more above the surface are

published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9C dated August 17, 1995,

and effective September 16, 1995. The

Class E airspace designation listed in

this document will be published

subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

This amendment to Part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

hsued in College Park. Georgia, on June 5,

1996. .

Benny L. McGlamery.

AeungManager. Air Trame Division.

Southem Region.

[FRDoc. 96-15984 Filed 6-2]-96; 8:45 amI

elUING CODE 491D-13-M

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96-ASO-9]

Establishment of Class E Airspace;

Dawson, GA

AGENCY:Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA). DOT.

ACTION:Final rule.

SUMMARY:This amendment establishes

Class E airspace at Dawson. GA. A VORl

DME RWY 31 Standard Instrument

Approach Procedure (SlAP) has been

developed for Dawson Municipal

Airport. Controlled airspace extending

upward from 700 feel above the surface

(AGL) is needed 10 accommodate lhis

SlAP and for instrument flight rules

(lFR) operations at the airport. The

operating status of the airport will

change from VFR to include IFR

operations concurrent with publication

ohms SlAP.

EFFECTIVE. DATE:0901 UTC, August IS,

1996.

FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT:

Benny L. McGlamery, Operations

Branch. Air Traffic Division. Federal

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box

20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320;

telephone (404) 305-5570.

SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION:

History

On April 8. 1996, lile FAA proposed

to amend Part 71 of the F'edeml Aviation

Regulations (14 eF'R Part 71) by

establishing Class E airspace at Dawson,

GA, (61 FR 15434). This action will

provide adetluate Class E airspace for

IFR operations at Dawson Municipal

Airport.

(nterested parties were invited (0

participate in this rulemaking

proceeding by submiiling written

comments on the proposal to the FAA.

No comments objecting to the proposal

were received. Designations for Class E

airspace extending upward from 700

feet or more above the surface are

published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9C dated August 17, 1~95,

and effective September 16,1995. The

Class E airspace designation listed in

this document will be published

subsequently in the Order.