### 17487 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

§ 981.70 Records and verification.

Each handler shall keep records which will clearly show the details of his or her receipts of almonds, withholdings, sales, shipments, inventories, reserve disposition, advertising and promotion activities, as well as other pertinent information regarding his or her operation pursuant to the provisions of this part: Provided, that, such records shall be kept in the
State of California. * * *

23. A new § 981.76 is added before the undesignated center heading ‘‘Expenses and Assessments’’ to read as
follows:

§ 981.76 Handler List of Growers.

No later than December 31 of each crop year, each handler other than a cooperative handler (hereinafter, referred to as independent handler) governed by this subpart shall, upon request, submit to the Board a complete list of growers who have delivered almonds to such independent handler during that crop year.

24. Section 981.81 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) to read as
follows:

§ 981.81 Assessment.

* * * * *

(e) Any assessment not paid by a handler within a period of time prescribed by the Board may be subject to an interest or late payment charge or both. The period of time, rate of interest and late payment charge shall be as recommended by the Board and approved by the Secretary. Subsequent to such approval, all assessments not paid within the prescribed period of time shall be subject to an interest or late payment charge or both.

25. Section 981.90 is amended redesignating paragraph (b)(2) and (b)(3) as paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) and by amending newly designated paragraph (b)(3) by removing the date ‘‘June 1’’ and adding in its place ‘‘July 1’’ and adding a new (b)(2), to read as follows:

§ 981.90 Effective time, suspension, or
termination.

* * * * *

(b) * * * (2) The Secretary shall conduct a referendum as soon as practical after the end of the fiscal year ending two years after implementation of this amendment, and at such time every fifth year thereafter, to ascertain whether continuation of the order is favored by growers who have been engaged in the production of almonds for market within the State of California during the current crop year.

* * * * * § 981.467 [Amended]
26. In § 981.467, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the date ‘‘July 1’’ and adding in its place ‘‘August 1’’ and by removing the words ‘‘export or’’ and ‘‘or both,’’ from the second sentence in paragraph (a).

§ 981.462 [Amended]

27. In § 981.472, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the dates ‘‘July 1 to August 31’’ and adding in its place ‘‘August 1 to August 31.’’

Dated: March 22, 1995. Lon Hatamiya,

Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95–8205 Filed 4–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–ANE–10]

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company CF6 Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION : Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY : This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to General Electric Company (GE) CF6–45/ –50 series turbofan engines. This proposal would require an initial and repetitive on-wing visual inspection of
the side links of the five-link forward mount assembly for cracks, and replacement of the side links and pylon attachment bolts, and inspection of the fail-safe bolt and platform lug, if the
side links are found cracked. Thisproposal would also require a shoplevel refurbishment of the side links as a terminating action to the on-wing inspection program. This proposal is prompted by four reports of cracked side links detected during routine engine shop visits. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent a side link fracture, which
could result in the failure of the second side link, or the forward engine mount pylon attachment bolts, and possible separation of the engine from the
aircraft.

DATES : Comments must be received by May 8, 1995.

ADDRESSES : Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–ANE–10, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. Comments may be inspected at this
location between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from General Electric Aircraft Engines, CF6 Distribution Clerk, Room 132, 111 Merchant Street, Cincinnati, OH 45246. This information may be examined at the FAA, New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Ganley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299; telephone (617) 238–7138; fax (617) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, specified above, will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments
received.

Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact
concerned with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules
Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to
Docket Number 95–ANE–10.’’ The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request to the FAA, New England Region, Office of the

### 17488 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–ANE–10, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803–5299.

Discussion

This proposed airworthiness directive (AD) is applicable to the General Electric Company (GE) CF6–45/–50 series turbofan engines. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has received four reports of cracked side links of the five-link forward mount assembly. These cracks were detected during routine engine shop visits. Metallurgical analysis performed on the fractured side links indicate that the cracking is the result of stress corrosion. Stress corrosion cracking occurs when the protective coating is locally missing, allowing corrosive materials to come in contact with the base material of the side link. Preliminary analysis conducted with a simulated side link failure indicates that the second side link, or the pylon attachment bolts depending on the type of aircraft, may not be capable of withstanding the resulting loads in this configuration. A shop-level refurbishment procedure exists which enhances the durability of the side links’ protective coating, therefore reducing the chance of cracks due to stress corrosion. This condition, if not corrected, could result in a side link fracture, which could result in the failure of the second side link or the forward engine mount pylon attachment bolts, and possible separation of the engine from the aircraft. The requirements of this AD have been reviewed by the Transport Airplane
Directorate.

The FAA has reviewed and approved
the technical contents of GE Aircraft Engines CF6–50 Service Bulletin No. 72–1092, dated November 18, 1994, that describes procedures for the initial and repetitive on-wing visual inspection and
side link refurbishment.

Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the proposed AD would require an initial and repetitive on-wing visual inspection of the side links of the five-link forward mount assembly for cracks, replacement of the side links and pylon attachment bolts, and inspection of the fail-safe bolt and platform lug, if side links are found cracked. This proposal would also require a shop-level refurbishment of the side links as a terminating action to the on-wing inspection program.

The FAA estimates that 220 engines installed on aircraft of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 7.5 work hours per engine to accomplish the proposed actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. The FAA has estimated that only a small percentage of parts will actually require replacement as a result of this AD, and therefore, has determined the parts cost to be negligible. Based on these figures, the total cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $99,000.

The regulations proposed herein
would 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 proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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); and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES

.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421 and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

General Electric Company: Docket No. 95–
ANE–10. Applicability: General Electric Company (GE) CF6–45/–50 series turbofan engines installed on, but not limited to, Airbus A300 series, Boeing 747 series, and McDonnell Douglas DC–10 series aircraft.

Note: This AD applies to each engine identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority provided in paragraph (d) to request approval from the FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe condition, or different actions necessary to address the unsafe
condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair remove any engine from the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.

To prevent a side link fracture, which could result in failure of the second side link, or the forward engine mount pylon attachment bolts, and possible separation of the engine from the aircraft, accomplish the following:

(a) Inspect left-hand side links, Part Numbers (P/N) 9204M94P01, 9204M94P03, and 9346M99P01, and right-hand side links, P/N’s 9204M94P02, 9204M94P04, and 9346M99P02, that have not had the side link
refurbishment done in accordance with GE CF6–50 Task Numbered Shop Manual, GEK 50481, Chapter 72–23–11, including Temporary Revision No. 72–0821 and 72– 0822, both dated November 1, 1994, as
follows:

(1) For side links that have not been previously inspected in accordance with GE Aircraft Engines (GEAE) CF6–50 Service Bulletin (SB) No. 72–1092, dated November 18, 1994, inspect in accordance with paragraph 2.A of GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72– 1092, dated November 18, 1994, prior to accumulating 350 cycles in service (CIS), or 750 hours time in service (TIS), after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
earlier.

(2) For side links that have been previously inspected in accordance with GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72–1092, dated November 18, 1994, inspect in accordance with paragraph 2.A of GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72–1092, dated November 18, 1994, prior to accumulating 350 CIS, or 750 hours TIS since inspected in
accordance with GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72– 1092, dated November 18, 1994, whichever
occurs earlier.

(3) Thereafter, inspect in accordance with paragraph 2.A of GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72– 1092, dated November 18, 1994, at intervals

### 17489 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

not to exceed 350 CIS, or 750 hours TIS since the last inspection, whichever occurs earlier.

(4) If side links are found cracked, replace the cracked side links and pylon attachment bolts with serviceable parts, and inspect the fail-safe bolt and platform lug in accordance with paragraph 2.B of GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72–1092, dated November 18, 1994, prior to further flight.

(b) Refurbish the left-hand and right-hand side links identified in paragraph (a) of this AD at the next engine shop visit after the
effective date of this AD in accordance with paragraph 2.C of GEAE CF6–50 SB No. 72– 1092, dated November 18, 1994.
Refurbishment of side links in accordance with this paragraph constitutes terminating action to the on-wing inspection requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(c) For the purpose of this AD, an engine shop visit is defined as the induction of an engine into a shop for maintenance involving the separation of the fan and core modules.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, Engine Certification Office. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may
add comments and then send it to the Manager, Engine Certification Office.

Note: Information concerning the existence of approved alternate methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive, if any, may be obtained from the Engine Certification
Office.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on March 22, 1995.

James C. Jones, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 95–8444 Filed 4–3–95; 1:31 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–20–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9 and Model DC–9– 80 Series Airplanes; Model MD–88 Airplanes; and C–9 (Military) Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION : Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the supersedure of an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9 and Model DC–9–80 series airplanes; Model MD–88 airplanes; and C–9 (military) series airplanes; that currently requires visual and eddy current inspections to detect cracking of the rudder pedals adjuster hub assembly, and replacement of the assembly, if necessary. That AD was prompted by several occurrences of failure of the rudder pedals adjuster hub assembly due to broken detent lugs. This action would expand the applicability of the existing AD to include additional airplanes. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent loss of rudder pedals control and reduction of braking capability.

DATES : Comments must be received by May 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES : Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM– 20–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. Comments may be inspected at this location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, P.O. Box 1771, Long Beach, California 90801–1771, Attention: Business Unit Manager, Technical Administrative Support, Dept. LS1, M.C. 2–98. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Augusto Coo, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712; telephone (310) 627– 5225; fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All communications received on or before the closing date for comments, specified above, will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in light
of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Docket Number 95–NM–20–AD.’’ The postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–20–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On December 9, 1992, the FAA issued AD 92–27–07, amendment 39–8441 (57 FR 60116, December 18, 1992), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9 and Model DC–9– 80 series airplanes; Model MD–88 airplanes; and C–9 (military) series airplanes. That AD requires visual and eddy current inspections to detect cracking of the rudder pedals adjuster hub assembly, and replacement of the assembly, if necessary. That action was prompted by several occurrences of failure of the rudder pedals adjuster hub assembly due to broken detent lugs. The actions required by that AD are intended to prevent loss of rudder pedals control and reduction of braking capability.

Since the issuance of AD 92–27–07,
the manufacturer has advised the FAA that several additional airplanes have been identified that are subject to the same type of cracking of the rudder pedals adjust hub assembly as addressed by that AD. These airplanes were inadvertently omitted from the effectivity listing of McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Alert Service Bulletin A27–235, Revision 1, dated February 3, 1992. AD 92–27–07 referenced that specific listing of airplanes as those subject to the requirements of that AD. In light of this,
the FAA has determined that those additional airplanes are subject to the same unsafe condition addressed by AD
92–27–07.

The FAA has reviewed and approved
McDonnell DC–9 Alert Service Bulletin A27–325, Revision 2, dated January 27,
1994. This revised service bulletin is essentially identical to the original version, which was cited in AD 92–27– 07 as the appropriate source of service