Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 1997 / Proposed Rules 52051

Like all Committee meetings, the

September 5, 1997, meeting was a

public meeting and all entities, both

large and small, were able to express

views on this issue. Finally, interested

persons are invited to submit

information on the regulatory and

informational impacts of this action on

small businesses.

In accordance with section 8e of the

Act, the United States Trade

Representative has concurred with the

issuance of this proposed rule.

A 10-day comment period is provided

to allow interested persons to respond

to this proposal. Ten days is deemed

appropriate because this rule, if

adopted, needs to be in place as soon as

possible since handlers will begin

shipping tomatoes in October. In

addition, because of the nature of this

rule, handlers need time to adjust their

equipment and purchase new

equipment to accommodate the new

size ranges and designations. Florida

tomato handlers are aware of this issue,

which has been widely discussed at

various industry and association

meetings and was unanimously

recommended by the Committee. All

comments received in a timely manner

will be considered prior to finalization

of this rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 966 and

7 CFR Part 980

Marketing agreements, Reporting and

record keeping requirements, Tomatoes.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR parts 966 and 980 are

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 966—TOMATOES GROWN IN

FLORIDA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 966 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 966.323 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2)(i) and

the table immediately following it,

(a)(2)(iii), and (d)(3) to read as follows:

§ 966.323 Handling regulation.

* * * * *

(a) Grade, size, container, and

inspection requirements.

(1) Grade. Tomatoes shall be graded

and meet the requirements specified for

U.S. No. 1, U.S. Combination, U.S. No.

2, or U.S. No. 3, of the U.S. Standards

for Grades of Fresh Tomatoes, except

that all shipments of 6 × 7 size tomatoes

must grade U.S. No. 2 or better. When

not more than 15 percent of the

tomatoes in any lot fail to meet the

requirements of U.S. No. 1 grade and

not more than one-third of this 15

percent (or 5 percent) are comprised of

defects causing very serious damage

including not more than 1 percent of

tomatoes which are soft or affected by

decay, such tomatoes may be shipped

and designated as at least 85 percent

U.S. No. 1 grade.

(2) Size. (i) All tomatoes packed by a

registered handler shall be at least 29⁄32

inches in diameter and shall be sized

with proper equipment in one or more

of the following ranges of diameters.

Tomatoes shipped outside the regulated

area shall also be sized with proper

equipment in one or more of the

following ranges of diameters.

Measurements of diameters shall be in

accordance with the methods prescribed

in § 51.1859 of the U.S. Standards for

Grades of Fresh Tomatoes.

Size Designation

Inches

Minimum

diameter

Inches

Maximum

diameter

6 × 7 .......................... 29⁄32 219⁄32

6 × 6 .......................... 217⁄32 227⁄32

5 × 6 .......................... 225⁄32 ................

* * * * *

(iii) Only 6 × 7, 6 × 6, 5 × 6, may be

used to indicate the above listed size

designations or containers of tomatoes.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) For special packed tomatoes.

Tomatoes which met the inspection

requirements of paragraph (a)(4) of this

section which are resorted, regraded,

and repacked by a handler who has

been designated as a ‘‘Certified Tomato

Repacker’’ by the committee are exempt

from:

(i) The tomato grade classifications of

paragraph (a)(1) of this section;

(ii) The size classifications of

paragraph (a)(2) of this section, except

that the tomatoes shall be at least 29⁄32

inches in diameter; and

(iii) The container weight

requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this

section.

* * * * *

§ 980.212 [Amended]

3. Section 980.212 is amended by

revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as

follows:

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) From October 10 through June 15

of each season, tomatoes offered for

importation shall be at least 29⁄32 inches

in diameter. Not more than 10 percent,

by count, in any lot may be smaller than

the minimum specified diameter. All

lots with a minimum diameter of 219⁄32

inches and larger shall be at least U.S.

No. 3 grade. All other tomatoes shall be

at least U.S. No. 2 grade. Any lot with

more than 10 percent of its tomatoes

less than 219⁄32 inches in diameter shall

grade at least U.S. No. 2.

* * * * *

Dated: October 2, 1997.

Robert C. Kenney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–26510 Filed 10–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–120–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland

Model DHC–8–100, –200, and –300

Series Airplanes

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

certain de Havilland Model DHC–8–100,

–200, and –300 series airplanes. This

proposal would require repetitive

inspections of certain refuel/defuel tube

assemblies in the engine nacelles for

fuel leakage, and corrective action, if

necessary. It would also require

eventual modification of all tube

assemblies, which would terminate the

repetitive inspections. This proposal is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent fuel leaks

and consequent increased risk of engine

fires.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

120–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, Garratt Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada.
52052 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 1997 / Proposed Rules

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

New York Aircraft Certification Office,

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 10

Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream,

New York.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Fiesel, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, FAA, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7504; fax

(516) 256–2716.

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 97–NM–120–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.

97–NM–120–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

Transport Canada Aviation (TCA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

Canada, notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain de

Havilland Model DHC–8–100, –200, and

–300 series airplanes. TCA advises that

it received reports of fuel leaks from the

shroud drain line located adjacent to the

refuel/defuel adapter in the engine

nacelles. Investigation has revealed that

some of the welds between the outer

shroud and the inner tube of the refuel/

defuel assemblies may be of poor

quality. Relative motion between the

shroud and the tube can result in

cracking of both the tube and the

shroud. This condition, if not corrected,

could result in fuel leaks and

consequent increased risk of engine

fires.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Bombardier has issued Alert Service

Bulletin S.B. A8–28–20, Revision ‘A,’

dated September 10, 1996, which

describes procedures for repetitive

inspections of the refuel/defuel tube

assemblies in the engine nacelles for

fuel leakage, and replacement of tube

assemblies that leak with improved tube

assemblies.

The alert service bulletin also

describes procedures for eventual

modification of all tube assemblies to

prevent potential future leakage, which

would eliminate the need for the

repetitive inspections. Part 2 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the

alert service bulletin describes

replacement of the tube assembly

located in the most critical area of the

engine nacelle. Part 3 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the

alert service bulletin describes

replacement of the remaining tube

assemblies. Accomplishment of the

actions specified in the alert service

bulletin are intended to adequately

address the identified unsafe condition.

TCA classified this alert service

bulletin as mandatory and issued

Canadian airworthiness directive CF–

96–14, dated August 20, 1996, in order

to assure the continued airworthiness of

these airplanes in Canada.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Canada and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of § 21.29 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29)

and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

TCA has kept the FAA informed of the

situation described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of TCA, reviewed

all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the alert service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 95 de

Havilland Model DHC–8–100, –200, and

–300 series airplanes of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD.

The proposed inspection would take

approximately 6 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

inspection proposed by this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $34,200, or

$360 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The proposed modification (specified

in Part 2 of the Accomplishment

Instructions in the referenced alert

service bulletin), would take

approximately 15 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $500. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of this

modification as proposed by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$133,000, or $1,400 per airplane.

The proposed modification (specified

in Part 3 of the Accomplishment

Instructions in the referenced service

bulletin), would take approximately 36

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $1,600 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of this modification proposed by this

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$357,200, or $3,760 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 1997 / Proposed Rules 52053

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 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. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

De Havilland, Inc.: Docket 97–NM–120–AD.

Applicability: Model DHC–8–100, –200,

and –300 series airplanes; as listed in

Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin S.B. A8–

28–20, Revision ‘A,’ dated September 10,

1996; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. The

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the modification, alteration, or repair

on the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent fuel leaks and consequent

increased risk of engine fires, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 30 days after the effective date

of this AD, inspect the five refuel/defuel tube

assemblies in the engine nacelles to detect

fuel leaks, in accordance with Part 1 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier

Alert Service Bulletin S.B. A8–28–20,

Revision ‘A’, dated September 10, 1996. If

any fuel leak is found, prior to further flight,

replace the refuel/defuel tube assembly with

an improved assembly, in accordance with

the alert service bulletin. Thereafter, repeat

the inspection at intervals not to exceed 6

months.

(b) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the refuel/defuel tube

assembly located under the exhaust

fingernail on the engine nacelle, as specified

in Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions

of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin S.B.

A8–28–20, Revision ‘A,’ dated September 10,

1996, in accordance with the procedures

specified in the alert service bulletin.

(c) Within 24 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the remaining refuel/

defuel tube assemblies, as specified in Part 3

of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin S.B. A8–

28–20, Revision ‘A,’ dated September 10,

1996, in accordance with the procedures

specified in the alert service bulletin.

(d) Accomplishment of the modifications

required by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this AD

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required by paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(e) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install a refuel/defuel tube

assembly having part number 82820107–007,

82821015–003, 82820108–005, 82820245–

001, 82820246–001, 82820247–001, or

82821014–001, on any airplane.

(f) 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, New York

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Engine and Propeller Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, New York ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(g) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with § 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Canadian airworthiness directive CF–96–

14, dated August 20, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

September 30, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–26376 Filed 10–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–106–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Short

Brothers Model SD3–60 Series

Airplanes

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 all

Short Brothers Model SD3–60 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

repetitive inspections to detect

corrosion and/or wear of the top and

bottom shear decks of the left and right

stub wings in the area of the forward

pintle pin of the main landing gear

(MLG), and repair, if necessary. This

proposal is prompted by issuance of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information by a foreign civil

airworthiness authority. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to detect and correct corrosion

and/or wear of the top and bottom shear

decks of the left and right stub wings in

the area of the forward pintle pin of the

MLG, which could result in failure of

the MLG to extend or retract.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

106–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Short Brothers, Airworthiness &

Engineering Quality, P.O. Box 241,

Airport Road, Belfast BT3 9DZ,

Northern Ireland. This information may

be examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary

Lium, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–1112; fax (425) 227–1149.