3344 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 13 / Thursday, January 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

grain and other grains regarding kind, 

class, quality and condition. The mixed 

grain standards, established by USDA 

on July 2, 1934, were last revised in 

1987 and appear in the USGSA 

regulations at 7 CFR 810.801 through 

810.805. The standards facilitate mixed 

grain marketing and define U.S. mixed 

grain quality in the domestic and global 

marketplace. The standards define 

commonly used industry terms; contain 

basic principles governing the 

application of standards, such as the 

type of sample used for a particular 

quality analysis; the basis of 

determination; and specify grades and 

grade requirements. Official procedures 

for determining grading factors are 

provided in GIPSA’s Grain Inspection 

Handbook, Book II, Chapter 6, ‘‘Mixed 

grain’’ which also includes standardized 

procedures for additional quality 

attributes not used to determine grade, 

such as dockage and moisture content. 

Together, the grading standards and 

testing procedures allow buyers and 

sellers to communicate quality 

requirements, compare mixed grain 

quality using equivalent forms of 

measurement and assist in price 

discovery. 

GIPSA’s grading and inspection 

services are provided through a network 

of federal, state, and private laboratories 

that conduct tests to determine the 

quality and condition of mixed grain. 

These tests are conducted in accordance 

with applicable standards using 

approved methodologies and can be 

applied at any point in the marketing 

chain. Furthermore, the tests yield 

rapid, reliable and consistent results. In 

addition, GIPSA-issued certificates 

describing the quality and condition of 

graded mixed grain are accepted as 

prima facie evidence in all Federal 

courts. U.S. mixed grain standards and 

the affiliated grading and testing 

services offered by GIPSA verify that a 

seller’s mixed grain meets specified 

requirements, and ensure that customers 

receive the quality of mixed grain they 

purchased. 

In order for U.S. standards and 

grading procedures for mixed grain to 

remain relevant, GIPSA is issuing this 

request for information to invite 

interested parties to submit comments, 

ideas, and suggestions on all aspects of 

the U.S. mixed grain standards and 

inspection procedures. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87K. 

Larry Mitchell, 

Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2016–01046 Filed 1–20–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–0183; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–SW–016–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Kaman 

Aerospace Corporation 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for Kaman 

Aerospace Corporation (Kaman) Model 

K–1200 helicopters. This proposed AD 

would require revising the ‘‘Flight 

Limitations—NO LOAD’’ and ‘‘Flight 

Limitations—LOAD’’ sections of the 

rotorcraft flight manual (RFM). This 

proposed AD is prompted by a report of 

certain flight maneuvers that may lead 

to main rotor (M/R) blade to opposing 

hub contact. The proposed actions are 

intended to prevent damage to the M/R 

flight controls and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 21, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

0183; or in person at the Docket 

Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed rule, contact Kaman 

Aerospace Corporation, Old Windsor 

Rd., P.O. Box 2, Bloomfield, 

Connecticut 06002–0002; telephone 

(860) 242–4461; fax (860) 243–7047; or 

at http://www.kamanaero.com. You may 

review the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 

10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N–321, 

Fort Worth, TX 76177. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk 

Gustafson, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 

Engine & Propeller Directorate, FAA, 12 

New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; 

telephone (781) 238–7190; email 

kirk.gustafson@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to participate in this 

rulemaking by submitting written 

comments, data, or views. We also 

invite comments relating to the 

economic, environmental, energy, or 

federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit only one time. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments that we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

Before acting on this proposal, we will 

consider all comments we receive on or 

before the closing date for comments. 

We will consider comments filed after 

the comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. We may change this 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. 

Discussion 

We propose to adopt a new AD for 

Kaman Model K–1200 helicopters. This 

proposed AD would require revising the 

‘‘Flight Limitations—NO LOAD’’ and 

‘‘Flight Limitations—LOAD’’ sections of 

the RFM by inserting a warning and 

limitations about rearward to forward 

flight, establishing maximum rearward 

and sideward flight speeds, and 

prohibiting weather-vanning takeoffs 

and departures to turn the helicopter. 

This proposed AD is prompted by a 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 13 / Thursday, January 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules 3345 

report of a Model K1200 helicopter 

turning suddenly and causing blade 

contact with the hub. The report 

suggests that a rapid aircraft yaw rate 

and subsequent yaw arresting maneuver 

may cause low clearance of the M/R 

blades with the opposing M/R hub. This 

condition could cause an M/R blade to 

strike the opposing rotor’s flight 

controls. The proposed actions are 

intended to prevent damage to the M/R 

flight controls and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all known relevant 

information and determined that an 

unsafe condition exists and is likely to 

exist or develop on other products of the 

same type design. 

Related Service Information 

We reviewed Kaman K–1200 RFM, 

Revision 5, dated April 14, 2015. This 

revision of the limitations section of the 

RFM inserts, for both load operations 

and no load operations, a warning and 

limitations about departing from 

rearward to forward flight, a maximum 

rearward flight speed of 25 knots, a 

maximum sideward flight speed of 17 

knots, and a prohibition on weathervanning takeoffs and departures as a 

method to turn aircraft. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require, 

within 10 hours time-in-service, 

revising the Limitations section of the 

RFM by inserting a copy of this AD or 

by making pen-and-ink changes. This 

proposed AD, under ‘‘Flight 

Limitations—NO LOAD’’ and ‘‘Flight 

Limitations—LOAD,’’ would insert a 

warning and limitations about departing 

from rearward to forward flight to avoid 

high rates of turn and minimize yaw 

and cyclic control inputs, establish a 

maximum rearward flight speed of 25 

knots, establish a maximum sideward 

flight speed of 17 knots, and prohibit 

weather-vanning takeoffs and 

departures as a method to turn the 

helicopter. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 16 helicopters of U.S. 

Registry. We estimate that operators 

may incur the following costs in order 

to comply with this AD. At an average 

labor rate of $85 per work-hour, we 

expect revising the RFM would require 

0.5 work-hour, for cost of about $43 per 

helicopter, or $688 for the U.S. fleet. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect 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. 

For the reasons discussed, I certify 

this proposed regulation: 

1. 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); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction; and 

4. 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. 

We prepared an economic evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by Reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Kaman Aerospace Corporation (Kaman): 

Docket No. FAA–2016–0183; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–SW–016–AD. 

(a) Applicability 

This AD applies to Model K–1200 

helicopters, certificated in any category. 

(b) Unsafe Condition 

This AD defines the unsafe condition as a 

main rotor (M/R) blade striking the opposing 

rotor’s flight controls. This condition could 

result in damage to the M/R flight controls 

and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

(c) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by March 21, 

2016. 

(d) Compliance 

You are responsible for performing each 

action required by this AD within the 

specified compliance time unless it has 

already been accomplished prior to that time. 

(e) Required Actions 

Within 10 hours time-in-service, revise 

Section 2 Limitations of the Kaman K–1200 

Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) by inserting 

a copy of this AD into the RFM or by making 

pen-and-ink changes, as follows: 

(1) In the ‘‘Flight Limitations—NO LOAD’’ 

and ‘‘Flight Limitations—WITH LOAD,’’ 

sections, add the information in Figure 1 to 

paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. 

WARNING 

When departing from rearward to forward flight, avoid high rates of turn and minimize yaw and cyclic control inputs to prevent exceeding 17 

knot sideward flight limit. 

Figure 1 to paragraph (e)(1). 

(2) In the ‘‘Flight Limitations—NO LOAD’’ 

and ‘‘Flight Limitations—WITH LOAD’’ 

sections, add the following: Maximum 

rearward flight speed: 25 knots. Maximum 

sideward flight speed: 17 knots. Weather— 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
3346 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 13 / Thursday, January 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

vanning takeoffs/departures as a method to 

turn aircraft: Prohibited. 

(f) Credit for Actions Previously Completed 

Incorporating the changes contained in 

Kaman K–1200 RFM, Revision 5, dated April 

14, 2015, before the effective date of this AD 

is considered acceptable for compliance with 

the corresponding actions specified in 

paragraph (e) of this AD. 

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOC) 

(1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, may approve 

AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: 

Kirk Gustafson, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, FAA, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 

01803; telephone (781) 238–7190; email 

kirk.gustafson@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(h) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6710, Main Rotor Control. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 12, 

2016. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–00947 Filed 1–20–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–0459; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–081–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015–10– 

03, for certain Airbus Model A330–200 

and –300 series airplanes, and Model 

A340–200 and –300 series airplanes. AD 

2015–10–03 currently requires a 

detailed inspection for visible chrome of 

each affected main landing gear (MLG) 

sidestay upper cardan pin, associated 

nuts, and retainer assembly; pin 

replacement if needed; measurement of 

cardan pin clearance dimensions (gap 

check); corrective actions if necessary; 

and a report of all findings. Since we 

issued AD 2015–10–03, further 

investigation concluded that the 

reported MLG sidestay upper cardan pin 

migration event had been caused by 

corrosion due to lack of jointing 

compound and inadequate sealant 

application during the MLG installation. 

This proposed AD would require a 

detailed inspection of the upper cardan 

pin and nut threads for any corrosion, 

pitting, or thread damage, and if 

necessary, replacement of the cardan 

pin and nut threads. This proposed AD 

would also revise the applicability to 

include additional airplane models. We 

are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct migration of the sidestay upper 

cardan pin, which could result in 

disconnection of the sidestay upper arm 

from the airplane structure, and could 

result in a landing gear collapse and 

consequent damage to the airplane and 

injury to occupants. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 7, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS— 

Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email 

airworthiness.A330–A340@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

0459; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1138; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2016–0459; Directorate Identifier 

2015–NM–081–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On April 30, 2015, we issued AD 

2015–10–03, Amendment 39–18158 (80 

FR 30608, May 29, 2015). AD 2015–10– 

03 requires actions intended to address 

an unsafe condition on certain Airbus 

Model A330–200 and –300 series 

airplanes, and Model A340–200 and 

–300 series airplanes. 

Since we issued AD 2015–10–03, 

Amendment 39–18158 (80 FR 30608, 

May 29, 2015), further investigation 

concluded that the reported MLG 

sidestay upper cardan pin migration 

event had been caused by corrosion due 

to lack of jointing compound and 

inadequate sealant application during 

the MLG installation. Therefore, this 

issue affects any MLG that had an upper 

cardan pin replacement or 

reinstallation, regardless of MLG 

overhaul. Any corrosion on the upper 

cardan pin and nut threads would not 

have been detected during the currently 

required detailed inspection. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS