10624 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Initial Relative Position Check of 2nd Stage 

Turbine Blades 

(f) Do an initial relative position check of 

the 2nd stage turbine blades using the 

Turbomeca mandatory alert service bulletins 

(ASBs) specified in the following Table 1. Do 

the check before reaching any of the intervals 

specified in Table 1 or within 50 hours timein-service after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later. 

TABLE 1.—INITIAL AND REPETITIVE RELATIVE POSITION CHECK INTERVALS OF 2ND STAGE TURBINE BLADE

Turbomeca engine model Initial relative position check 

interval Repetitive interval Mandatory alert service bulletin 

Arriel 1B (modified per TU 148) .... Within 1,200 hours time-sincenew (TSN) or time-since-overhaul (TSO) or 3,500 cyclessince-new (CSN) or cyclessince-overhaul (CSO), whichever occurs earlier.Within 200 hours time-in-servicesince-last-relative-positioncheck (TSLRPC).A292 72 0807, Update 1, dated 

October 26, 2006. 

Arriel 1D1 and Arriel 1D ................ Within 1,200 hours TSN or TSO 

or 3,500 hours CSN or CSO, 

whichever occurs earlier.

Within 150 hours TSLRPC ........... A292 72 0809, Update No. 1, 

dated October 4, 2005. 

Arriel 1S1 ....................................... Within 1,200 hours TSN or TSO 

or 3,500 hours CSN or CSO, 

whichever occurs earlier.

Within 150 hours TSLRPC ........... A292 72 0810, dated March 24, 

2004. 

Repetitive Relative Position Check of 2nd 

Stage Turbine Blades 

(g) Recheck the relative position of 2nd 

stage turbine blades at the TSLRPC intervals 

specified in Table 1 of this AD, using the 

mandatory ASBs indicated. 

Credit for Previous Relative Position Checks 

(h) Relative position checks of 2nd stage 

turbine blades done using Turbomeca Service 

Bulletin A292 72 0263, Update 1, 2, 3, or 4, 

or A292 72 0807, dated March 24, 2004, 

comply with the initial requirements of 

paragraph (f) of this AD. 

Initial Replacement of 2nd Stage Turbines 

on Arriel 1B, 1D, and 1D1 Engines 

(i) Initially replace the 2nd stage turbine 

with a new or overhauled 2nd stage turbine 

as follows: 

(1) Before accumulating 1,500 hours TSN 

or TSO on the module for Arriel 1D and 1D1 

engines. 

(2) Before accumulating 2,200 hours TSN 

or TSO on the module or 3,000 total hours 

TSN on the 2nd stage turbine blades, 

whichever occurs first, for Arriel 1B engines. 

Repetitive Replacements of 2nd Stage 

Turbines on Arriel 1B, 1D, and 1D1 Engines 

(j) Thereafter, replace the 2nd stage turbine 

with a new or overhauled 2nd stage turbine 

within every 1,500 hours TSN or TSO on the 

module for Arriel 1D and 1D1 engines, and 

within every 2,200 hours TSN or TSO on the 

module or 3,000 total hours TSN on the 2nd 

stage turbine blades, for Arriel 1B engines. 

Criteria for Overhauled 2nd Stage Turbines 

(k) Do the following to overhauled 2nd 

stage turbines, referenced in paragraphs (i) 

and (j) of this AD: 

(1) You must install new blades in the 2nd 

stage turbines of overhauled Arriel 1D and 

1D1 engines. 

(2) You may install either overhauled 

blades with fewer than 3,000 total hours TSN 

or new blades in the 2nd stage turbines of 

overhauled Arriel 1B engines. 

Relative Position Check Continuing 

Compliance Requirements 

(l) All 2nd stage turbines, including those 

that are new or overhauled, must continue to 

comply with relative position check 

requirements of paragraphs (f) and (j) of this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(m) The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, has the authority to approve 

alternative methods of compliance for this 

AD if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(n) The EASA airworthiness directive 

2007–0018, dated January 15, 2007, also 

addresses the subject of this AD. 

(o) Contact Christopher Spinney, 

Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification 

Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: 

Christopher.spinney@faa.gov; telephone 

(781) 238–7175; fax (781) 238–7199, for more 

information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

March 5, 2007. 

Peter A. White, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–4244 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–27342; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–CE–014–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; APEX 

Aircraft Model CAP 10 B Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

A CAP10B aircraft experienced a reduced 

elevator deflection by about 13° due to an 

incorrect routing of the Push To Talk (PTT) 

wire bundle and improperly secured 

connectors which impeded the complete and 

free movement of the control stick. 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 9, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• DOT Docket Web Site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 10625 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; 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 Office (telephone (800) 647–

5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4145; fax: (816) 329–4090. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Streamlined Issuance of AD 

The FAA is implementing a new 

process for streamlining the issuance of 

ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined 

process will allow us to adopt MCAI 

safety requirements in a more efficient 

manner and will reduce safety risks to 

the public. This process continues to 

follow all FAA AD issuance processes to 

meet legal, economic, Administrative 

Procedure Act, and Federal Register 

requirements. We also continue to meet 

our technical decision-making 

responsibilities to identify and correct 

unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated 

products. 

This proposed AD references the 

MCAI and related service information 

that we considered in forming the 

engineering basis to correct the unsafe 

condition. The proposed AD contains 

text copied from the MCAI and for this 

reason might not follow our plain 

language principles. 

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–2007–27342; Directorate Identifier 

2007–CE–014–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 because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.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 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD No: 2007–

0014, dated January 12, 2007 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

A CAP10B aircraft experienced a reduced 

elevator deflection by about 13° due to an 

incorrect routing of the Push To Talk (PTT) 

wire bundle and improperly secured 

connectors which impeded the complete and 

free movement of the control stick. 

The MCAI requires: 

Actions specified in this AD are intended 

to inspect, detect and correct any 

discrepancy on the PTT electrical circuit 

connectors and wires that could lead to a 

reduction of the control stick movements. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

APEX Aircraft has issued Mandatory 

Service Bulletin No. 050605, dated 

October 17, 2006. The actions described 

in this service information are intended 

to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 31 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 1 work-hour per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $2,480, or $80 per 

product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 3 work-hours and require parts 

costing $90, for a cost of $330 per 

product. We have no way of 

determining the number of products 

that may need these actions. 

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 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
10626 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, 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); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory 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, 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 AD: 

APEX Aircraft (Type Certificate No. A36EU 

formerly held by AVIONS MUDRY et 

CIE): Docket No. FAA–2007–27342; 

Directorate Identifier 2007–CE–014–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by April 9, 

2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model CAP 10 B 

airplanes, serial numbers 001 through 282, 

fitted with major change 000302 (woodcarbon wings), that are certificated in any 

category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 27: Flight Controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

A CAP10B aircraft experienced a reduced 

elevator deflection by about 13° due to an 

incorrect routing of the Push To Talk (PTT) 

wire bundle and improperly secured 

connectors which impeded the complete and 

free movement of the control stick. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) Within the next 50 hours time-inservice after the effective date of this AD, 

inspect the wire routing for the proper 

location and attachment of the connectors as 

detailed in the accomplishment instructions 

of APEX Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin 

No. 050605, dated October 17, 2006. 

(2) Before further flight, if a defect or 

discrepancy is found during the inspection in 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, modify the wire 

bundle and connectors routing as detailed in 

the accomplishment instructions of APEX 

Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 

050605, dated October 17, 2006. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, 

FAA, ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) 

329–4090, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Before 

using any approved AMOC on any airplane 

to which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et.seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency AD No: 2007–0014, dated 

January 12, 2007; and APEX Aircraft 

Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 050605, 

dated October 17, 2006, for related 

information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 

2, 2007. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–4243 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0083; FRL–8285–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve a 

request to amend the Missouri State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to include 

revisions to the St. Louis Solvent Metal 

Cleaning rule. The revisions to this rule 

include consolidating exemptions in the 

applicability section, adding new 

exemptions, adding definitions of new 

and previously undefined terms, and 

clarifying rule language regarding 

operating procedure requirements for 

spray gun cleaners and air-tight and 

airless cleaning systems. This revision 

will ensure consistency between the 

state and the Federally-approved rules. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

April 9, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–

OAR–2007–0083 by one of the following 

methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Amy Algoe-Eakin, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551–7942, or 

by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of the Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

SIP revision as a direct final rule 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS