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.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

8089 

Vol. 77, No. 30 

Tuesday, February 14, 2012 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 205 

[Document Number AMS–NOP–10–0079; 

NOP–09–02FR] 

RIN 0581–AD06 

National Organic Program (NOP); 

Amendments to the National List of 

Allowed and Prohibited Substances 

(Crops and Processing) 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

(USDA) National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances (National List) to 

enact six recommendations submitted to 

the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) 

by the National Organic Standards 

Board (NOSB) on May 22, 2008, 

November 19, 2008, and May 6, 2009. 

This final rule adds one substance, 

microcrystalline cheesewax, along with 

any restrictive annotations, for use in 

organic mushroom production; and 

adds three substances, acidified sodium 

chlorite, dried orange pulp, and Pacific 

kombu seaweed, with any restrictive 

annotations, for use in organic handling. 

This final rule also amends the 

annotation for one substance used in 

organic handling, unbleached lecithin, 

and removes bleached lecithin from the 

National List. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule becomes 

effective March 15, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa Bailey, Ph.D., Director, 

Standards Division, National Organic 

Program, Telephone: (202) 720–3252; 

Fax: (202) 205–7808. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On December 21, 2000, the Secretary 

established within the NOP [7 CFR part 

205] the National List regulations 

§§ 205.600 through 205.607. The 

National List identifies synthetic 

substances that may be used and the 

nonsynthetic (natural) substances that 

may not be used in organic production. 

The National List also identifies 

nonagricultural synthetic, nonsynthetic 

nonagricultural and nonorganic 

agricultural substances that may be used 

in organic handling. The Organic Foods 

Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), and 

NOP regulations, in § 205.105, 

specifically prohibit the use of any 

synthetic substance in organic 

production and handling unless the 

synthetic substance is on the National 

List. Section 205.105 also requires that 

any nonorganic agricultural and any 

nonsynthetic, nonagricultural substance 

used in organic handling must also be 

on the National List. 

Under the authority of the OFPA, the 

National List can be amended by the 

Secretary based on proposed 

amendments developed by the NOSB. 

Since established, the NOP has 

published multiple amendments to the 

National List: October 31, 2003 (68 FR 

61987); November 3, 2003 (68 FR 

62215); October 21, 2005 (70 FR 61217); 

June 7, 2006 (71 FR 32803); September 

11, 2006 (71 FR 53299); June 27, 2007 

(72 FR 35137); October 16, 2007 (72 FR 

58469); December 10, 2007 (72 FR 

69569); December 12, 2007 (72 FR 

70479); September 18, 2008 (73 FR 

54057); October 9, 2008 (73 FR 59479); 

July 6, 2010 (75 FR 38693); August 24, 

2010 (75 FR 51919); December 13, 2010 

(75 FR 77521) and March 14, 2011 (76 

FR 13501). Additionally, a proposed 

amendment to the National List was 

published on May 5, 2011 (76 FR 

25612). 

This final rule amends the National 

list to enact six recommendations 

submitted to the Secretary by the NOSB 

on May 22, 2008, November 19, 2008, 

and May 6, 2009. 

II. Overview of Amendments 

The following provides an overview 

of the amendments made to designated 

sections of the National List regulations: 

Section 205.601 Synthetic Substances 

Allowed for Use in Organic Crop 

Production 

This final rule amends § 205.601 of 

the National List regulations by adding 

new paragraph (o) for the addition of 

one substance as follows: As production 

aids. Microcrystalline cheesewax (CAS 

#s 64742– 42–3, 8009–03–08, and 8002– 

74–2)—for use in log grown mushroom 

production. Must be made without 

either ethylene-propylene co-polymer or 

synthetic colors. 

The proposed rule to add 

microcrystalline cheesewax included an 

annotation specifying that the substance 

be ‘‘for use in log grown mushroom 

culture.’’ The NOP determined that the 

substance’s use annotation should be 

modified ‘‘for use in log grown 

mushroom production’’ (emphasis 

added) in this final rule. This language 

change is consistent with terminology 

that will be utilized in a forthcoming 

proposed rule on organic mushroom 

standards. 

Section 205.605 Nonagricultural 

(Nonorganic) Substances Allowed as 

Ingredients in or on Processed Products 

Labeled as ‘‘Organic’’ or ‘‘Made With 

Organic (Specified Ingredients or Food 

Groups(s))’’ 

This final rule amends § 205.605(b) of 

the National List regulations by 

removing Lecithin—bleached, and 

adding acidified sodium chlorite in 

alphabetical order as follows: Acidified 

sodium chlorite—Secondary direct 

antimicrobial food treatment and 

indirect food contact surface sanitizing. 

Acidified with citric acid only. 

Section 205.606 Nonorganically 

Produced Agricultural Products Allowed 

as Ingredients in or on Processed 

Products Labeled as ‘‘Organic’’ 

This final rule amends § 205.606 of 

the National List regulations by revising 

paragraph (p) to read as follows: (p) 

Lecithin—de-oiled. Further, this final 

rule redesignates paragraphs (r) through 

(t) and paragraphs (u) through (y) as 

paragraphs (s) through (u) and (w) 

through (aa) respectively; and adds new 

paragraphs (r) and (v) for the addition of 

two substances as follows: (r) Orange 

pulp, dried, and (v) Seaweed, Pacific 

kombu. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8090 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic 

Research Service. 2009. Data Sets: U.S. Certified 

Organic Farmland Acreage, Livestock Numbers and 

Farm Operations, 1992–2008. http://www.ers.usda.

gov/Data/Organic/. 

2U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic 

Research Service, 2009. Data Sets: Procurement and 

Contracting by Organic Handlers: Documentation. 

III. Related Documents 

Three notices were published 

regarding the meetings of the NOSB and 

its deliberations on recommendations 

and substances petitioned for amending 

the National List. Substances and 

recommendations included in this 

proposed rule were announced for 

NOSB deliberation in the following 

Federal Register notices: (1) 74 FR 

11904, March 20, 2009 (bleached 

lecithin, acidified sodium chlorite, 

unbleached fluid lecithin); (2) 73 FR 

54781, September 23, 2008 (dried 

orange pulp, acidified sodium chlorite); 

and (3) 73 FR 18491, April 4, 2008 

(microcrystalline cheesewax, acidified 

sodium chlorite, Pacific kombu 

seaweed). The proposal to allow the use 

of the four substances in this final rule, 

along with the deletion of one substance 

and the revised annotation of one 

substance, was published as a proposed 

rule on November 8, 2010 (75 FR 

68505). 

IV. Statutory and Regulatory Authority 

The OFPA, as amended (7 U.S.C. 

6501–6522), authorizes the Secretary to 

make amendments to the National List 

based on proposed amendments 

developed by the NOSB. Sections 

6518(k)(2) and 6518(n) of the OFPA 

authorize the NOSB to develop 

proposed amendments to the National 

List for submission to the Secretary and 

establish a petition process by which 

persons may petition the NOSB for the 

purpose of having substances evaluated 

for inclusion or deletion from the 

National List. The National List petition 

process is implemented under § 205.607 

of the NOP regulations. The current 

petition process (72 FR 2167, January 

18, 2007) can be accessed through the 

NOP Web site at http://www.ams.usda.

gov/nop. 

A. Executive Order 12866 

This action has been determined not 

significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866, and therefore, has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

B. Executive Order 12988 

Executive Order 12988 instructs each 

executive agency to adhere to certain 

requirements in the development of new 

and revised regulations in order to avoid 

unduly burdening the court system. 

This final rule is not intended to have 

a retroactive effect. 

States and local jurisdictions are 

preempted under the OFPA from 

creating programs of accreditation for 

private persons or State officials who 

want to become certifying agents of 

organic farms or handling operations. A 

governing State official would have to 

apply to USDA to be accredited as a 

certifying agent, as described in 

§ 2115(b) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 

6514(b)). States are also preempted 

under §§ 2104 through 2108 of the 

OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6503 through 6507) 

from creating certification programs to 

certify organic farms or handling 

operations unless the State programs 

have been submitted to, and approved 

by, the Secretary as meeting the 

requirements of the OFPA. 

Pursuant to § 2108(b)(2) of the OFPA 

(7 U.S.C. 6507(b)(2)), a State organic 

certification program may contain 

additional requirements for the 

production and handling of organically 

produced agricultural products that are 

produced in the State and for the 

certification of organic farm and 

handling operations located within the 

State under certain circumstances. Such 

additional requirements must: (a) 

Further the purposes of the OFPA, (b) 

not be inconsistent with the OFPA, (c) 

not be discriminatory toward 

agricultural commodities organically 

produced in other States, and (d) not be 

effective until approved by the 

Secretary. 

Pursuant to § 2120(f) of the OFPA (7 

U.S.C. 6519(f)), this final rule would not 

alter the authority of the Secretary 

under the Federal Meat Inspection Act 

(21 U.S.C. 601–624), the Poultry 

Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451– 

471), or the Egg Products Inspection Act 

(21 U.S.C. 1031–1056), concerning meat, 

poultry, and egg products, nor any of 

the authorities of the Secretary of Health 

and Human Services under the Federal 

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 

301 et seq.), nor the authority of the 

Administrator of the Environmental 

Protection Agency under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide 

Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). 

Section 2121 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 

6520) provides for the Secretary to 

establish an expedited administrative 

appeals procedure under which persons 

may appeal an action of the Secretary, 

the applicable governing State official, 

or a certifying agent under this title that 

adversely affects such person or is 

inconsistent with the organic 

certification program established under 

this title. The OFPA also provides that 

the U.S. District Court for the district in 

which a person is located has 

jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s 

decision. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612) requires agencies to 

consider the economic impact of each 

rule on small entities and evaluate 

alternatives that would accomplish the 

objectives of the rule without unduly 

burdening small entities or erecting 

barriers that would restrict their ability 

to compete in the market. The purpose 

is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to the action. Section 

605 of the RFA allows an agency to 

certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an 

analysis, if the rulemaking is not 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the RFA, AMS performed an 

economic impact analysis on small 

entities in the final rule published in the 

Federal Register on December 21, 2000 

(65 FR 80548). AMS has also considered 

the economic impact of this action on 

small entities. The impact on entities 

affected by this final rule would not be 

significant. The effect of this final rule 

would be to allow the use of additional 

substances and clarify the use of one 

substance in agricultural production 

and handling. This action will modify 

the regulations published in the final 

rule and will provide small entities with 

more tools to use in day-to-day farming 

and handling operations. AMS 

concludes that the economic impact of 

this addition of allowed substances, if 

any, will be minimal and beneficial to 

small agricultural service firms. 

Accordingly, USDA certifies that this 

rule will not have a significant impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Small agricultural service firms, 

which include producers, handlers, and 

accredited certifying agents, have been 

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 of less than $750,000. 

According to USDA Economic 

Research Service (ERS) data based upon 

information from USDA-accredited 

certifying agents, the number of certified 

U.S. organic crop and livestock 

operations totaled nearly 13,000 and 

certified organic acreage exceeded 4.8 

million acres in 2008.1 ERS, based upon 

the list of certified operations 

maintained by the National Organic 

Program, estimated the number of 

certified handling operations was 3,225 

in 2007.2 The AMS believes that most of 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 8091 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/OrganicHandlers/

Documentation.htm. 

3 Dimitri, C., and L. Oberholtzer. 2009. Marketing 

U.S. Organic Foods: Recent Trends from Farms to 

Consumers, Economic Information Information 

bulletin No. 58, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Economic Research Service, http://www.ers.suda.

gov/PublicationsE1B58. 

4Organic Trade Association’s 2011 Organic 

Industry Survey, http://www.ota.com. 

these entities would be considered to be 

small entities under the criteria 

established by the SBA. 

The U.S. sales of organic food and 

beverages grew from $3.6 billion in 1997 

to nearly $21.1 billion in 2008.3

Between 1990 and 2008, organic food 

sales demonstrated an historic growth 

rate between 15 to 24 percent each year. 

In 2010, organic food sales grew 7.7%.4

In addition, USDA has 93 accredited 

certifying agents (ACA) who provide 

certification services to producers and 

handlers under the NOP. A complete 

list of names and addresses of ACAs 

may be found on the AMS NOP Web 

site, at http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop. 

The AMS believes that most of these 

accredited certifying agents would be 

considered small entities under the 

criteria established by the SBA. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

No additional collection or 

recordkeeping requirements are 

imposed on the public by this final rule. 

Accordingly, OMB clearance is not 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, Chapter 35. 

E. Executive Order 13175 

This final rule has been reviewed in 

accordance with the requirements of 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments. The review reveals that 

this regulation will not have substantial 

and direct effects on Tribal governments 

and will not have significant Tribal 

implications. 

F. Comments Received on Proposed 

Rule NOP–09–02 

AMS received 11 comments on the 

proposed rule AMS–NOP–10–0079; 

NOP–09–02PR. Comments were 

received from specialty food ingredient 

processors and distributors, specialty 

food products manufacturers, an 

industrial sanitation supply firm, an 

organic consultant, a coalition of foreign 

governments and a private citizen. 

Comments were submitted in support of 

the proposed additions to the National 

List for all four of the proposed new use 

exemptions and the deletion of one 

substance. Comments in favor of the 

addition of acidified sodium chlorite to 

§ 205.605(b) stated that it will increase 

the intervention options available for 

maintaining high sanitation standards in 

organic food processing and thereby 

further improve food safety for 

consumers of organic processed foods. 

While one comment expressed concern 

about the proposed exemption for the 

secondary direct antimicrobial food 

treatment use of acidified sodium 

chlorite, the commenter did not take a 

position for or against the specific 

proposal. A comment endorsing the 

addition of dried orange pulp to 

§ 205.606 stated that its use is consistent 

with organic principles, since an 

insufficient volume of organic oranges 

are grown and processed to produce 

organic orange pulp, which is a 

byproduct of extraction orange juice 

processing. 

Many comments addressed the 

proposed change in the lecithin 

annotation from unbleached to de-oiled 

on § 205.606. Nonorganic forms of the 

substances listed under § 205.606 are 

allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as organic 

only when the nonorganic substance is 

not commercially available in organic 

form and only in accordance with any 

specified restrictions. Most comments 

submitted in support of the lecithin 

annotation change stated that the listing 

of de-oiled lecithin on § 205.606 would 

prevent disruption in the availability or 

quality of a broad range of organic food 

products such as ice cream, pasta, 

bakery goods, cereals, sauces, soups and 

frozen desserts. They indicated that deoiled is the appropriate annotation 

because this form of lecithin has a 

unique function and blander flavor in 

comparison to fluid or dry lecithin. The 

comments mentioned de-oiled lecithin’s 

superiority in maintaining stability of 

water and oil emulsions. Furthermore, 

the comments informed that de-oiled 

lecithin is not available as organic. 

Comments in support of removing 

bleached lecithin from § 205.605(b) 

indicated that this action will encourage 

the increased production and use of 

organic ingredients needed for organic 

food processing. They also argued that 

unbleached lecithin is now 

commercially available in organic 

forms, so the exemption for these 

substances is no longer crucial. 

Commenters stated that the use of 

nonorganic de-oiled lecithin on 

§ 205.606, instead of the nonorganic 

unbleached form previously allowed, 

would be subject to the determination of 

commercial availability of any organic 

form—once developed—in the 

processor’s organic system plan and 

other specific restrictions. Commenters 

in favor of the amendment expressed 

frustration with discrepant use of 

organic unbleached lecithin and less 

expensive conventional unbleached 

lecithin in comparably priced multiple 

brands of the same processed organic 

products on retail shelves. These 

commenters conveyed expectations that 

this rule change will result in the 

replacement of nonorganic bleached 

lecithin with the organic form and thus 

encourage increased use and availability 

of organic ingredients. 

A few comments opposing the change 

in the unbleached lecithin annotation at 

§ 205.606 explained that the only 

current source of organic lecithin is soy, 

which is a food allergen. They cited a 

lack of availability of organic forms of 

lecithin from sunflower or canola and 

predicted that consumers with a soy 

allergy would not be able to eat organic 

products containing soy lecithin. These 

commenters noted that soy is identified 

in the U.S. Food Allergen Labeling and 

Consumer Protection Act of 2004 (Pub. 

L. 108–282, Title II) (21 U.S.C. 301) as 

one of 8 major food groups which 

account for 90 percent of lifethreatening food allergies. This 

legislation established mandatory 

disclosure requirements on labels for 

processed food containing any amounts 

of the eight named foods (milk, eggs, 

fish, shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, 

and soybeans) listed in the 2004 Act. 

Food processors have become more 

aware of soy’s allergenic potential and 

the federal labeling requirements when 

soy-based ingredients are used since 

passage of the 2004 Act. The opposing 

comments expressed concern that the 

annotation change would result in 

higher levels of soy lecithin being used 

in processed organic foods because it is 

more commonly available in organic 

form, but did not provide specific 

evidence to support this statement. 

Nonorganic lecithin from sunflower, 

rapeseed and canola is widely available 

commercially, and NOP believes that 

there is potential that any increased 

demand for non-soy lecithin will 

stimulate increased production of 

organic forms of bleached and 

unbleached lecithin from these 

alternative sources. 

A comment criticized the NOSB for 

omitting food allergies from the 

discussion in considering the lecithin 

petition. The NOSB did address this 

issue several times during its 

deliberation, as captured in the May 

2009 NOSB meeting transcripts. The 

Board concluded that its recommended 

change to unbleached lecithin would 

still avail manufacturers with the option 

to use nonorganic, non-soy forms of deoiled lecithin. Commenters conveyed a 

preference to have non-allergenic, 

nonorganic forms of lecithin available 

under § 205.606. The change in 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8092 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

annotation does not specify the plant 

source of lecithin and, therefore, 

nonorganic de-oiled lecithin from nonsoy and nonorganic sources may be 

used when organic equivalents are not 

available. A substance is considered 

commercially available if it is available 

in an appropriate form, quality, or 

quantity to fulfill an essential function 

in a system of organic production or 

handling, as determined by the 

certifying agent in the course of 

reviewing the organic plan. In summary, 

this annotation change would not limit 

the use of lecithin to organic de-oiled 

soy lecithin. Non-soy sources that are 

non-GMO and nonorganic would 

remain acceptable under § 205.606, and 

accredited certifying agents would 

continue to require any nonorganic deoiled lecithin to be sourced from nonGMO sources as long as de-oiled 

lecithin is not commercially available in 

organic form. 

Changes Requested But Not Made 

Commenters requested that the 

proposed action be amended for 

§ 205.606 to allow the use of non-GMO, 

non-allergenic lecithin. We have not 

made that change because we believe 

this request is mostly accommodated by 

the proposed action. Nonorganic forms 

of de-oiled lecithin can be used when 

the organic version is not commercially 

available. The NOP regulations define 

commercially available as a production 

input in an appropriate form, quality, or 

quantity to fulfill an essential function 

in a system of organic production or 

handling, as determined by the 

certifying agent in the course of 

reviewing the organic plan. Therefore, if 

a processor intends to make a soy-free 

product containing lecithin, in which 

de-oiled is the appropriate form, the 

processor may use nonorganic de-oiled 

lecithin from sunflower, canola or other 

sources if lecithin from the preferred 

sources is not available in organic form. 

If a product requires a form of lecithin 

other than de-oiled, such as fluid or 

powered, the lecithin must be sourced 

organically. The NOSB recommendation 

was finalized in May 2009. We believe 

that processors have had adequate 

notice to pursue the procurement of 

non-soy forms of organic lecithin if their 

products are intended to be soy free. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Agriculture, Animals, 

Archives and records, Imports, Labeling, 

Organically produced products, Plants, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Seals and insignia, Soil 

conservation. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 205, subpart G is 

amended as follows: 

PART 205—NATIONAL ORGANIC 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 205 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501–6522. 

■ 2. In § 205.601 add new paragraph (o) 

to read as follows: 

§ 205.601 Synthetic substances allowed 

for use in organic crop production. 

* * * * * 

(o) As production aids. 

Microcrystalline cheesewax (CAS #’s 

64742–42–3, 8009–03–08, and 8002–74– 

2)–for use in log grown mushroom 

production. Must be made without 

either ethylene-propylene co-polymer or 

synthetic colors. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 205.605 is amended by: 

■ A. Removing ‘‘Lecithin-bleached’’ 

from paragraph (b); and 

■ B. Adding one new substance 

‘‘Acidified sodium chlorite’’, in 

alphabetical order, to paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) 

substances allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as ‘‘organic’’ or 

‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients 

or food group(s)).’’ 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Acidified sodium chlorite— 

Secondary direct antimicrobial food 

treatment and indirect food contact 

surface sanitizing. Acidified with citric 

acid only. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 205.606 is amended by: 

■ A. Revising paragraph (p); 

■ B. Redesignating paragraphs (r) 

through (t) and paragraphs (u) through 

(y) as paragraphs (s) through (u) and (w) 

through (aa) respectively; and 

■ C. Adding new paragraphs (r) and (v). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 205.606 Nonorganically produced 

agricultural products allowed as ingredients 

in or on processed products labeled as 

‘‘organic.’’ 

* * * * * 

(p) Lecithin—de-oiled. 

* * * * * 

(r) Orange pulp, dried. 

* * * * * 

(v) Seaweed, Pacific kombu. 

* * * * * 

Dated: February 3, 2012. 

Robert C. Keeney, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–2938 Filed 2–13–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0889; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NE–35–AD; Amendment 39– 

16953; AD 2012–03–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca 

S.A. Turboshaft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

all Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2B and 2B1 

turboshaft engines. That AD currently 

requires checking the transmissible 

torque between the low-pressure (LP) 

pump impeller and the high-pressure 

(HP) pump shaft on high-pressure/lowpressure (HP/LP) pump hydromechanical metering units (HMUs) that 

do not incorporate Modification TU 147. 

This new AD requires inspection and 

possible replacement of the HMU. This 

AD was prompted by three additional 

cases of uncoupling of the HP/LP pump 

HMU LP fuel pump impeller and the HP 

fuel pump shaft, since the existing AD 

was issued. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent an uncommanded in-flight 

shutdown, which can result in a forced 

autorotation landing or accident. 

DATES: This AD is effective March 20, 

2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of March 20, 2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain other publication listed in 

this AD as of March 11, 2010 (75 FR 

5689, February 4, 2010). 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this AD, contact 

Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; 

phone: 33–05–59–74–40–00, fax: 33– 

05–59–74–45–15. You may review 

copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES