43758 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

Larry Mitchell, 

Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2013–17452 Filed 7–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 920 and 944 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–13–0032; FV13–920–1 

IR] 

Kiwifruit Grown in California and 

Imported Kiwifruit; Relaxation of 

Minimum Grade Requirement 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Interim rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This rule relaxes the 

minimum grade requirement under the 

marketing order for kiwifruit grown in 

California (order), and for kiwifruit 

imported into the United States that are 

shipped to the fresh market, by 

increasing the tolerance of kiwifruit 

which is ‘‘badly misshapen’’ from 7 

percent to 16 percent. The order is 

administered locally by the Kiwifruit 

Administrative Committee (Committee). 

This change is intended to facilitate the 

packing of fruit to meet the minimum 

grade requirement of ‘‘KAC No. 1’’, and 

reduce costs associated with re-sorting 

and repacking this grade of fruit. The 

change in the import regulation is 

required under section 8e of the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937. 

DATES: July 25, 2013; comments 

received by September 20, 2013 will be 

considered prior to issuance of a final 

rule. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order and Agreement Division, Fruit 

and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938; or Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. All comments 

should reference the document number 

and the date and page number of this 

issue of the Federal Register and will be 

made available for public inspection in 

the Office of the Docket Clerk during 

regular business hours, or can be viewed 

at: http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments submitted in response to this 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

Internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kathie M. Notoro, Marketing Specialist, 

or Martin Engeler, Regional Director, 

California Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email: 

Kathie.Notoro@ams.usda.gov or 

Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order No. 

920, as amended (7 CFR part 920), 

regulating the handling of kiwifruit in 

California, hereinafter referred to as the 

‘‘order.’’ The order is effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ 

This rule is also issued under section 

8e of the Act, which provides that 

whenever certain specified 

commodities, including kiwifruit, are 

regulated under a Federal marketing 

order, imports of these commodities 

into the United States are prohibited 

unless they meet the same or 

comparable grade, size, quality, or 

maturity requirements as those in effect 

for the domestically produced 

commodities. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

There are no administrative 

procedures which must be exhausted 

prior to any judicial challenge to the 

provisions of import regulations issued 

under section 8e of the Act. 

Under the terms of the marketing 

order, fresh market shipments of 

California kiwifruit are required to be 

inspected and are subject to grade, size, 

maturity, pack, and container 

requirements. Current requirements 

include specifications that such 

shipments be at least Size 45, grade at 

least KAC No. 1 quality, and contain a 

minimum of 6.2 percent soluble solids. 

This rule relaxes the minimum grade 

requirement under the definition for 

KAC No. 1 kiwifruit quality by 

increasing the tolerance for ‘‘badly 

misshapen’’ fruit from 7 percent to 16 

percent. The Committee unanimously 

recommended these changes at a 

meeting on March 27, 2013. 

Section 920.52 of the order provides, 

in part, the authority to regulate the 

handling of kiwifruit and specifically, in 

paragraph (a)(1), the Secretary may 

limit, during any period or periods, the 

shipment of any particular grade, size, 

quality, maturity, or pack, or any 

combination thereof, of any variety or 

varieties of kiwifruit grown in the 

production area. 

Section 920.302 establishes 

regulations regarding grade, size, pack, 

and container regulations. Paragraph (a) 

(1) specifies that the minimum grade be 

at least KAC No.1 quality and paragraph 

(b) defines that the term KAC No. 1 

quality means kiwifruit that meets the 

requirements of the U.S. No. 1 grade as 

defined in the United States Standards 

for Grades of Kiwifruit (7 CFR 51.2335 

through 51.2340) except that the 

kiwifruit shall be ‘‘not badly 

misshapen,’’ and a tolerance of 7 

percent is provided for kiwifruit that is 

‘‘badly misshapen,’’ and except that all 

varieties of kiwifruit are exempt from 

the ‘‘tightly packed’’ standard as defined 

in § 51.2338(a) of the U.S. Standards for 

Grades of Kiwifruit. The terms fairly 

uniform in size and diameter mean the 

same as defined in the U.S. Standards 

for Grades of Kiwifruit. 

At its meeting, the Committee 

recommended revising paragraph (b) of 

920.302 to increase the tolerance for 

‘‘badly misshapen’’ fruit from 7 percent 

to 16 percent. ‘‘Badly misshapen fruit’’ 

is defined in the United States 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 43759 

Standards for Kiwifruit as fruit that is so 

decidedly deformed that its appearance 

is seriously affected. 

Most kiwifruit naturally grow in an 

‘‘egg’’ shape. A small percentage of fruit 

develop into a flat, wide, almost square 

shape. Such fruit, if it is wider than it 

is tall, is considered to be badly 

misshapen. Identification of badly 

misshapen fruit is performed visually 

during the packing process, and this 

fruit is manually sorted out by 

packinghouse employees. The flat/wide 

fruit is separated from the cylindrical 

fruit and packed into different boxes so 

that there is a uniformity of shape 

within the containers. 

However, during the inspection 

process, badly misshapen fruit is 

identified using calipers that precisely 

measure the dimensions of the fruit. 

Consequently, fruit that appears to meet 

the grade requirement based on visual 

observation occasionally fails to meet 

the requirements when measured with 

calipers. Containers of packed KAC No. 

1 fruit sometimes exceed the tolerance 

for misshapen fruit by two or three 

pieces of fruit and are required to be resorted and repacked, resulting in 

increased costs. 

The end of season packout by grade 

for kiwifruit for 2011/12 resulted in 1 

percent U.S. Fancy, 94 percent U.S. No. 

1, and 5 percent KAC No. 1. Although 

it accounts for only 5 percent of the 

industry pack, KAC No. 1 fruit is the 

most difficult to pack because of the 

discrepancy between visually 

identifying misshapen fruit and 

identifying such fruit with calipers 

during the inspection process. 

Increasing the tolerance for badly 

misshapen fruit is expected to reduce 

the incidence of containers of KAC No. 

1 fruit failing to meet grade 

requirements, thereby reducing costs 

associated with repacking and re-sorting 

failing fruit. It is also expected to help 

facilitate and streamline the packing 

process by avoiding disruptions 

associated with repacking and re-sorting 

fruit. 

Section 8e of the Act provides that 

when certain domestically produced 

commodities, including kiwifruit, are 

regulated under a Federal marketing 

order, imports of that commodity must 

meet the same or comparable grade, 

size, quality, and maturity requirements. 

Since this action would relax the 

minimum grade requirement by 

increasing the tolerance of kiwifruit 

which is ‘‘badly misshapen’’ from 7 

percent to 16 percent under the 

domestic handling regulations, a 

corresponding change to the import 

regulations must also be considered. 

Minimum grade, size, quality, and 

maturity requirements for kiwifruit 

imported into the United States are 

currently in effect under § 944.550 (7 

CFR 944.550). Paragraph (a) of this 

section specifies a tolerance of 7 percent 

for badly misshapen fruit. This rule 

would increase the tolerance for 

imported kiwifruit that is badly 

misshapen from 7 percent to 16 percent 

to be consistent with the requirements 

for California kiwifruit regulated under 

the order. The increase in the tolerance 

for imports is expected to reduce the 

incidence of product that fails to meet 

the minimum grade requirement of KAC 

No. 1. This would help reduce costs 

associated with product that fails to 

meet import requirements, and would 

help to facilitate the importation of 

kiwifruit. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. Import regulations issued under 

the Act are based on those established 

under Federal marketing orders. 

There are approximately 178 kiwifruit 

growers subject to regulation under the 

marketing order and approximately 28 

handlers in the production area. There 

are approximately 53 importers of 

kiwifruit. Small agricultural service 

firms, which include kiwifruit handlers 

and importers, are defined by the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 

121.201) as those having annual receipts 

of less than $7,000,000, and small 

agricultural producers are defined as 

those having annual receipts less than 

$750,000. 

The California Agricultural Statistical 

Service (CASS) reported total California 

kiwifruit production for the 2011–12 

season at 37,700 tons, with an average 

price of $775 per ton. Based on the 

average price and shipment information 

provided by the CASS and the 

Committee, the majority of kiwifruit 

handlers would be considered small 

businesses under the SBA definition. 

Based on kiwifruit production and price 

information, as well as the total number 

of California kiwifruit growers, the 

average annual grower revenue is less 

than $750,000. Thus, the majority of 

California kiwifruit producers may also 

be classified as small entities. In 

addition, based on data from the U.S. 

Census Bureau, Department of 

Commerce, the value of imported 

kiwifruit for 50 of the 53 importers was 

less than $7,000,000. Thus, it can be 

concluded that the majority of kiwifruit 

importers may be classified as small 

entities. 

This rule relaxes the minimum grade 

requirement currently specified in 

§ 920.302 (b) of the regulations under 

the order by increasing the tolerance for 

kiwifruit that is ‘‘badly misshapen’’ 

from 7 percent to 16 percent under the 

definition for KAC No. 1 quality. 

This action does not impose any 

additional costs on the industry. It is 

expected to reduce costs to handlers and 

growers of kiwifruit, and to increase 

efficiencies in the packing process. 

Containers of packed kiwifruit 

occasionally fail to meet the minimum 

grade requirement of KAC No. 1 quality 

because two or three pieces of 

misshapen fruit in a container cause the 

container to exceed the allowable 

tolerance for such fruit. The fruit in 

these containers must then be re-sorted 

and repacked to meet the minimum 

grade requirement. There are costs 

associated with re-sorting and 

repacking. Assuming a labor cost of 

$8.50 per hour and an estimated time of 

five to ten minutes to re-sort and repack 

a container of fruit, the direct additional 

cost per container of fruit could be up 

to $1.40. Other costs associated with 

repacking and re-sorting fruit include 

employee supervision, and the 

unstacking and re-stacking of pallets in 

order to do the work. These latter types 

of costs are difficult to estimate due to 

differences in various packing 

operations. Some of these costs incurred 

by handlers are passed on to the 

growers. In addition to these costs, the 

re-sorting and repacking of fruit causes 

inefficiencies in the packing process, as 

packing lines can be interrupted and 

employees are diverted from other 

duties to repack fruit. 

Increasing the tolerance for 

misshapen fruit will reduce the amount 

of product that fails to meet the 

minimum grade, thus reducing resorting and repacking costs and 

reducing inefficiencies in the packing 

process. 

The quality of fruit to consumers is 

not expected to be significantly affected. 

Based on Committee data, 95 percent of 

kiwifruit under the order is packed to a 

higher grade standard than the 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
43760 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

minimum grade of KAC No.1. Of the 5 

percent packed as KAC No.1, only a 

small percentage of those shipments 

will be affected by allowing two or three 

additional misshapen pieces of fruit in 

the container. 

Regarding alternatives to this action, 

the Committee discussed changing the 

current parameters for misshapen fruit; 

from ‘‘fruit that is not wider than tall’’ 

to fruit that is a certain percentage wider 

than it is tall. This alternative would 

allow for flatter/wider fruit to be packed 

than what is currently allowed and 

would be even more difficult to 

accurately sort fruit visually. The 

industry does not want to pack more 

fruit that is flatter and wider; they want 

to make it easier to accurately identify 

and pack the KAC No. 1 grade fruit as 

it is currently defined. Therefore, the 

Committee rejected this alternative. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Generic 

Fruit Crops. No changes in those 

requirements as a result of this action 

are necessary. Should any changes 

become necessary, they would be 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

This rule will not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

kiwifruit handlers in California or 

importers. As with all Federal marketing 

order programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

In addition, USDA has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap or conflict with this 

rule. 

Further, the Committee meeting was 

widely publicized throughout the 

California kiwifruit industry. All 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and participate in 

Committee deliberations. Like all 

Committee meetings, the March 27, 

2013, meeting was a public meeting. All 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express their views on this issue. 

Also, the embassies of those countries 

that export fruit to the United States and 

known kiwifruit importers will be 

notified of this interim rule upon its 

publication. Finally, interested persons 

are invited to submit comments on this 

interim rule, including the regulatory 

and informational impacts of this action 

on small businesses. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: www.ams.usda.gov/ 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

This rule invites comments on 

relaxing the minimum grade 

requirements for domestic and imported 

kiwifruit. Any comments received will 

be considered prior to finalization of 

this rule. 

In accordance with section 8e of the 

Act, the United States Trade 

Representative has concurred with the 

issuance of this rule. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

Committee’s recommendation, and 

other information, it is found that this 

interim rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also 

found and determined upon good cause 

that it is impracticable, unnecessary, 

and contrary to the public interest to 

give preliminary notice prior to putting 

this rule into effect and that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

because: (1) This action relaxes the 

current minimum grade requirement 

under the order; (2) this change needs 

to be in effect by September 15, 2013; 

(3) the Committee recommended these 

changes at a public meeting and 

interested parties had an opportunity to 

provide input; and (4) this rule provides 

a 60-day comment period and any 

comments received will be considered 

prior to finalization of this rule. 

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 920 

Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements. 

7 CFR Part 944 

Avocados, Food grades and standards, 

Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit, 

Limes, Olives, Oranges. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 920 and 944 are 

amended as follows: 

PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 920 and 944 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. In § 920.302, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 920.302 Grade, size, pack, and container 

regulations. 

* * * * * 

(b) Definitions. The term KAC No. 1 

quality means kiwifruit that meets the 

requirements of the U.S. No. 1 grade as 

defined in the United States Standards 

for Grades of Kiwifruit (7 CFR 51.2335 

through 51.2340) except that the 

kiwifruit shall be ‘‘not badly 

misshapen,’’ and an additional tolerance 

of 16 percent is provided for kiwifruit 

that is ‘‘badly misshapen,’’ and except 

that all varieties of kiwifruit are exempt 

from the ‘‘tightly packed’’ standard as 

defined in § 51.2338(a) of the U.S. 

Standards for Grades of Kiwifruit. The 

terms fairly uniform in size and 

diameter mean the same as defined in 

the U.S. Standards for Grades of 

Kiwifruit. 

* * * * * 

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT 

REGULATIONS 

■ 3. In § 944.550, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 944.550 Kiwifruit import regulation. 

(a) Pursuant to section 8e of the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended, the importation 

into the United States of any kiwifruit 

is prohibited unless such kiwifruit 

meets all the requirements of a U.S. No. 

1 grade as defined in the United States 

Standards for Grades of Kiwifruit (7 CFR 

51.2335 through 51.2340), except that 

the kiwifruit shall be ‘‘not badly 

misshapen,’’ and an additional tolerance 

of 16 percent is provided for kiwifruit 

that is ‘‘badly misshapen,’’ and except 

that such kiwifruit shall have a 

minimum of 6.2 percent soluble solids. 

Such fruit shall be at least Size 45, 

which means there shall be a maximum 

of 55 pieces of fruit and the average 

weight of all samples in a specific lot 

must weigh at least 8 pounds (3.632 

kilograms), provided that no individual 

sample may be less than 7 pounds 12 

ounces (3.472 kilograms). 

* * * * * 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 43761 

Dated: July 16, 2013. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–17462 Filed 7–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1222; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–134–AD; Amendment 

39–17505; AD 2013–13–17] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

airworthiness directive (AD) 2011–13– 

08 for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model 

DHC–8–400 series airplanes. AD 2011– 

13–08 required a free-play check for 

excessive free-play of the shaft swaged 

bearing installed in the tailstock end of 

each elevator power control unit (PCU), 

and replacing any PCU on which the 

bearing exceeds allowable limits with a 

serviceable PCU. This new AD adds 

airplanes to the applicability from that 

of AD 2011–13–08. This AD was 

prompted by a determination that 

additional airplanes are affected by the 

identified unsafe condition. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

excessive free-play of the swaged 

bearings, which could lead to excessive 

airframe vibrations and difficulties in 

pitch control, and consequent loss of 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

August 26, 2013. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of August 26, 2013. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain other publication listed in 

this AD as of August 1, 2011 (76 FR 

37253, June 27, 2011). 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7318; fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. The 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on December 4, 2012 (77 FR 

71729), and proposed to supersede AD 

2011–13–08, Amendment 39–16731 (76 

FR 37253, June 27, 2011). Transport 

Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is 

the aviation authority for Canada, has 

issued Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2010–28R1, dated June 12, 

2012 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) 

states: 

Several reports have been received on the 

elevator power control units (PCUs) where 

the shaft (tailstock) swaged bearing liners had 

shown a higher than normal rate of wear. 

Investigation revealed that the excessive wear 

was due to the paint contamination between 

the bearing roller and bearing liner. The 

bearing paint contamination is known to be 

abrasive and could seize the bearing. 

This condition, if not corrected, could lead 

to excessive airframe vibrations and 

difficulties in aircraft pitch control. 

This [TCCA] directive mandates a free-play 

check of the shaft swaged bearing installed in 

the elevator PCU tailstock end and 

replacement of the shaft swaged bearings if 

excessive free-play is found. 

This [TCCA] AD is revised to amend the 

applicability for DHC–8 Series 400 

aeroplanes. 

The unsafe condition is loss of 

controllability of the airplane. You may 

obtain further information by examining 

the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

have considered the comments received. 

Request To Clarify Applicability 

Bombardier, Inc. stated that the 

applicability in the NPRM (77 FR 71729, 

December 4, 2012) is ‘‘ambiguous.’’ 

Bombardier noted that the applicability 

specifies a serial number range of 

airplanes, but the NPRM could be 

interpreted to apply to those PCUs or 

bearings installed on the airplane at the 

time of manufacture. Bombardier added 

that the preamble and service 

information sections of the NPRM 

contribute to this interpretation by 

citing paint contamination during 

airplane manufacture as the basis for 

bearing wear, in addition to the 

identification of PCUs and bearings by 

part number. Bombardier stated that the 

affected airplanes have a production run 

between the years 2000 and 2010; the 

PCUs are line replaceable units and 

could have been removed from an 

affected airplane and installed on an 

airplane outside of the serial number 

range. Bombardier concluded that if the 

intent of the NPRM is to apply to PCUs 

installed at the time of airplane 

manufacture, there are no provisions to 

account for those PCUs in the NPRM or 

in the service information. 

We infer that the commenter wants 

clarification of the applicability. We 

agree to clarify. This AD applies only to 

those airplanes having serial numbers 

(S/Ns) 4001 through 4334 inclusive, and 

4336, and matches the applicability of 

Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF– 

2010–28R1, dated June 12, 2012. Based 

on the infrequent removal and 

replacement of single actuators, we have 

determined it is not necessary to 

include additional airplanes in the 

applicability at this time. To alter the 

applicability to include additional 

airplanes would require additional 

rulemaking. We find that delaying this 

action would be inappropriate in light 

of the identified unsafe condition. 

However, we might consider additional 

rulemaking to address any airplanes that 

might be identified in the future as 

having an affected PCU or bearing. We 

have made no change to this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Give Credit for Previous 

Accomplishment of Certain Inspections 

Bombardier also stated that 

maintenance review board (MRB) Task 

273000–213, ‘‘Functional Check of the 

Elevator Free Play,’’ was introduced on 

February 10, 2011, with a 12,000-flighthour interval. Bombardier added that 

the NPRM (77 FR 71729, December 4, 

2012) contains no provisions for giving 

credit for inspections accomplished 

using the MRB task, which applies to all 

airplanes and addresses excessive 

elevator free-play, regardless of the 

source. 

We disagree to give credit for previous 

accomplishment of the free-play 

inspections using that MRB task because 

that task does not meet the requirements 

in this AD. The free-play inspections in 

this AD must be performed at the 

required compliance times in 

accordance with Bombardier Service 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES