Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18155 

devices using digital logic or other 

complex design technologies must 

provide a level of assurance for the 

encoded logic commensurate with the 

hazard associated with the failure or 

malfunction of the systems in which the 

devices are located. The applicant must 

design, implement, and verify all 

associated logic to minimize the 

existence of errors by using a method, 

approved by the FAA, that is consistent 

with the criticality of the performed 

function. 

6. Amend § 33.29 by adding new 

paragraphs (e) through (h) to read as 

follows: 

§ 33.29 Instrument connection. 

* * * * * 

(e) The applicant must make 

provision for the installation of 

instrumentation necessary to ensure 

operation in compliance with engine 

operating limitations. Where, in 

presenting the safety analysis, or 

complying with any other requirement, 

dependence is placed on 

instrumentation that is not otherwise 

mandatory in the assumed aircraft 

installation, then the applicant must 

specify this instrumentation in the 

engine installation instructions and 

declare it mandatory in the engine 

approval documentation. 

(f) As part of the System Safety 

Assessment of § 33.28(e), the applicant 

must assess the possibility and 

subsequent effect of incorrect fit of 

instruments, sensors, or connectors. 

Where necessary, the applicant must 

take design precautions to prevent 

incorrect configuration of the system. 

(g) The sensors, together with 

associated wiring and signal 

conditioning, must be segregated, 

electrically and physically, to the extent 

necessary to ensure that the probability 

of a fault propagating from 

instrumentation and monitoring 

functions to control functions, or vice 

versa, is consistent with the failure 

effect of the fault. 

(h) The applicant must provide 

instrumentation enabling the flight crew 

to monitor the functioning of the turbine 

cooling system unless appropriate 

inspections are published in the 

relevant manuals and evidence shows 

that: 

(1) Other existing instrumentation 

provides adequate warning of failure or 

impending failure; 

(2) Failure of the cooling system 

would not lead to hazardous engine 

effects before detection; or 

(3) The probability of failure of the 

cooling system is extremely remote. 

7. Amend § 33.53 by revising the 

section heading and paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 33.53 Engine system and component 

tests. 

(a) For those systems and components 

that cannot be adequately substantiated 

in accordance with endurance testing of 

§ 33.49, the applicant must conduct 

additional tests to demonstrate that 

systems or components are able to 

perform the intended functions in all 

declared environmental and operating 

conditions. 

* * * * * 

§ 33.67 [Amended] 

8. Remove paragraph (d) from § 33.67. 

9. Amend § 33.91 by revising the 

section heading and paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 33.91 Engine system and component 

tests. 

(a) For those systems or components 

that cannot be adequately substantiated 

in accordance with endurance testing of 

§ 33.87, the applicant must conduct 

additional tests to demonstrate that the 

systems or components are able to 

perform the intended functions in all 

declared environmental and operating 

conditions. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 

2007. 

John J. Hickey, 

Director, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–6535 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–27532; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–CE–021–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Piaggio Aero 

Industries S.p.A. P–180 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: 

One P–180 aircraft experienced a jamming 

of its longitudinal flight control cables. 

Investigations revealed that its fuselage drain 

holes were plugged, and water was trapped 

in the lower fuselage. 

As a consequence of plugged drain holes, 

water can accumulate and freeze when the 

aircraft reaches and holds altitudes where 

temperature is below the freezing point. If 

not corrected this may cause the loss of 

control of the airplane. 

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 May 11, 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. 

• 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: Go to 

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 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
18156 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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–2007–27532; Directorate Identifier 

2007–CE–021–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–

0031, dated February 9, 2007 (referred 

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

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. 

One P–180 aircraft experienced a jamming 

of its longitudinal flight control cables. 

Investigations revealed that its fuselage drain 

holes were plugged, and water was trapped 

in the lower fuselage. 

As a consequence of plugged drain holes, 

water can accumulate and freeze when the 

aircraft reaches and holds altitudes where 

temperature is below the freezing point. If 

not corrected this may cause the loss of 

control of the airplane. 

The MCAI requires: 

* * * Check for proper operation, fuselage 

drain holes and the passenger evaporator 

drain line and to introduce a temporary 

revision of the Aircraft Maintenance Manual. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. has 

issued Mandatory Service Bulletin 

SB–80–0220, dated August 8, 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 60 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 5 work-hours 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 $24,000, or $400 per 

product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 13 work-hours and require parts 

costing $125 for a cost of $1,165 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 

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: 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18157 

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: 

Piaggio Aero Industries S.P.A.: Docket No. 

FAA–2007–27532; Directorate Identifier 

2007–CE–021–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by May 11, 

2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to P–180 airplanes, 

serial numbers 1004 through 1112, 

certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

One P 180 aircraft experienced a jamming 

of its longitudinal flight control cables. 

Investigations revealed that its fuselage drain 

holes were plugged, and water was trapped 

in the lower fuselage. 

As a consequence of plugged drain holes, 

water can accumulate and freeze when the 

aircraft reaches and holds altitudes where 

temperature is below the freezing point. If 

not corrected this may cause the loss of 

control of the airplane. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) At the next scheduled maintenance 

inspection or 1 month after the effective date 

of the AD, whichever occurs later, and 

repetitively thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed every 12 months, inspect fuselage 

drain holes and the passenger evaporator 

drain line for proper operation and do all the 

necessary corrective actions, following the 

accomplishment instructions of the Piaggio 

Aero Industries S.p.A. Mandatory SB–80–

0220, dated August 8, 2006. 

Note 1: We have established the repetitive 

inspection times of this AD so that they may 

coincide with annual inspections. 

Note 2: We encourage you to update your 

maintenance program by inserting the 

Temporary Revision of the Piaggio P 180 

Avanti Maintenance Manual (AMM) attached 

to the Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. 

Mandatory SB–80–0220, dated August 8, 

2006. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: We 

have added repetitive inspection 

requirements in the AD to coincide with the 

Piaggio P 180 Avanti Maintenance Manual 

temporary revision referenced in the Piaggio 

Aero Industries S.p.A. Mandatory Service 

Bulletin SB–80–0220, dated August 8, 2006. 

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 EASA AD No. 2007–

0031, dated February 9, 2007; and Piaggio 

Aero Industries S.p.A. Mandatory SB–80–

0220, dated August 8, 2006, for related 

information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 

4, 2007. 

David R. Showers, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–6721 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 232 

[DOD–2006–OS–0216] 

RIN 0790–AI20 

Limitations on Terms of Consumer 

Credit Extended to Service Members 

and Dependents 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense 

(the Department or DoD) proposes to 

amend our regulations by adding a new 

part to implement the consumer 

protections covered by Public Law 109–

364, the John Warner National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, 

section 670, ‘‘Limitations on Terms of 

Consumer Credit Extended to Service 

Members and Dependents’’ (October 17, 

2006). Section 670 of Public Law 109–

364 created 10 U.S.C. 987 and requires 

the Secretary of Defense to prescribe 

regulations to carry out the new section. 

The proposed regulation is intended to 

regulate the terms of consumer credit 

extended by creditors to active duty 

service members and their dependents. 

DATES: Comments must be received no 

later than June 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and or 

Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 

and title, by any of the following 

methods: 

—Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

—Mail: Federal Docket Management 

System Office, 1160 Defense 

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–

1160. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or RIN for this Federal 

Register document. The general policy 

for comments and other submissions 

from members of the public is to make 

these submissions available for public 

viewing on the Internet at http:// 

regulations.gov as they are received 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers or contact information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

George Schaefer, (703) 588–0876. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Today’s joint force combat operations 

require highly trained, experienced and 

motivated troops. We are fortunate that 

the All Volunteer Force of today is 

comprised of individuals who fit the 

stringent requirements needed for 

success on the battlefield. The military 

has seen a lot of changes since it became 

an All Volunteer Force in 1973. The 

technological advances over the ensuing 

34 years have made remarkable 

transformations to the capabilities of the 

Armed Forces. 

These advances would not have been 

as easily attained if it were not for the 

All Volunteer Force. The members of 

this force have higher levels of aptitude, 

stay in the military longer, and as a 

consequence, perform better than their 

conscript predecessors. During the 

Vietnam era draft, 90 percent of 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS