Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 211 / Friday, October 31, 1997 / Proposed Rules 58925

Heater with the following definitions of

internal heat pump water heater and

add-on heat pump water heater.

1.11.3.a. Integral heat pump water

heater An air-to-water heat pump

integral with an insulated storage tank.

1.11.3.b. Add-on heat pump water

heater An air-to-water heat pump

designed for use with a heat pump

water heater storage tank.

EEI and EPRI claimed the definition

for add-on heat pump water heater is

inappropriate and should not be

adopted. They stated that add-on heat

pump water heaters are designed to

work with any electric water heater tank

and that some are designed to work with

any tank. EPRI further stated that there

are no storage tanks labeled and

designed for use exclusively with heat

pump water heaters. Therefore, EPRI

believed the new definition would not

allow testing of add-on heat pump water

heaters because no heat pump water

heater tanks are labeled for use

exclusively with heat pump water

heater storage tanks. EPRI claimed this

new definition would increase costs of

tanks used with heat pump water

heaters because these tanks must be

specialty tanks. Further, EEI claimed

that this definition ‘‘is ill-advised; at

best, it is likely to create confusion and

increase the cost of heat pump water

heaters.’’ (Testimony from July 12, 1995,

EEI at 29; EEI, No. 2 at 7; EEI, No. 27

at 7; EPRI, No. 17 at 5.) Vaughn

Manufacturing Corp. stated, ‘‘Now DOE

is proposing to add more than one

category of heat pump water heaters and

a solar water heater. These new units

will add to the confusion unless care is

taken to see that the criteria are applied

to comparative models on a valid basis.’’

(Vaughn, No. 31 at 4.)

GAMA objected to the definition of

‘‘integral heat pump water heater’’

because the definition implies that the

heat pump is structurally integrated

with a tank, whereas, in reality, the heat

pump and the tank can be physically

separated, but are usually sold by the

manufacturer as a packaged unit. GAMA

suggested that instead of the 1995 DOE

proposed definitions of ‘‘integral heat

pump water heaters’’ and ‘‘add-on heat

pump water heaters,’’ the respective

definitions should be ‘‘heat pump water

heaters with tanks’’ and ‘‘heat pump

water heaters without tanks.’’

(Testimony from February 12, 1997,

GAMA at 229–31.)

The Department finds that the

definition of ‘‘integral heat pump water

heaters’’ should be withdrawn as

commenters GAMA, EPRI, Oregon

Energy Office, and Virginia Power

suggested. In place of the definition of

‘‘integral heat pump water heaters,’’ the

Department proposes the following

definition: Heat pump water heater with

storage tank means an air-to-water heat

pump sold by the manufacturer with an

insulated storage tank as a packaged

unit. The tank and heat pump can be an

integral unit or they can be separated.

The Department is also withdrawing

the definition for an add-on heat pump

water heater and proposes the following

definition.

Heat pump water heater without

storage tank (also called add-on heat

pump water heater) means an air-towater heat pump designed for use with

a storage-type water heater or a storage

tank that is not specified or supplied by

the manufacturer.

The Department welcomes comments

on these three topics.

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24,

1997.

Joseph J. Romm,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy.

[FR Doc. 97–28908 Filed 10–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–CE–69–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Twin

Commander Aircraft Corporation 500,

520, 560, 680, 681, 685, 690, 695, and

720 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

94–04–17, which currently requires the

following on Twin Commander Aircraft

Corporation (Twin Commander) 500,

520, 560, 680, 681, 685, 690, 695, and

720 series airplanes: inspecting (onetime) the flap system for cables with

broken wires or pulleys with worn cable

clips, replacing any damaged parts, and

replacing the master pulley and cable

with new parts of improved design. The

proposed AD would require inspecting

all flap system cable grooves for the

correct width, inspecting all flap system

pulleys for rubbing on the support

brackets, inspecting all flap pulley cable

assemblies for frayed wires, and

reworking or replacing any parts with

discrepancies. The proposed AD results

from several reports of worn and frayed

flap system cables attributed to flap

pulley grooves that are too narrow. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent failure of a flap

system cable caused by fatigue, which

could result in loss of control of the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before January 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97-CE–69-

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from the

Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation,

19003 59th Drive, NE, Arlington,

Washington 98223–7832; telephone

(360) 435–9797. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Jeffrey Morfitt, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Northwest Mountain Region, 1601

Lind Avenue S.W., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2595;

facsimile (425) 227–1181.

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 that

summarizes 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
58926 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 211 / Friday, October 31, 1997 / Proposed Rules

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 97-CE–69-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, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 97-CE–69-AD, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Discussion

AD 94–04–17, Amendment 39–8837

(59 FR 8845, February 24, 1995),

currently requires the following on

Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation

(Twin Commander) 500, 520, 560, 680,

681, 685, 690, 695, and 720 series

airplanes: inspecting (one-time) the flap

system for certain cables with broken

wires or pulleys with worn cable clips,

replacing any damaged parts, and

replacing the master pulley and cable

with new parts of improved design.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in AD 94–04–17 is in

accordance with Twin Commander

Service Bulletin 210, dated February 1,

1991.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since issuing AD 94–04–17, the FAA

has received two reports of flap pulley

assemblies with cable grooves that were

too narrow. The two pulleys were the

right inboard (slave pulley) and the right

outboard assemblies. In addition, the

FAA has received reports of

discrepancies on flap system cables and

pulleys.

A number of pulleys were incorrectly

manufactured with cable groove radii

that are too narrow. These incorrect

pulleys were produced from several

manufacturers because the type

certificate of the affected airplanes has

been sold and transferred several times.

These incorrectly manufactured parts

include all six flap system pulleys. The

incidents referenced in the reports affect

airplanes covered by AD 94–04–17 and

airplanes not covered by AD 94–04–17.

Previous compliance with AD 94–04–17

does not address the unsafe condition

proposed in this NPRM because

incorrectly manufactured pulleys may

have been installed on the affected

airplanes at any time before and after

the issuance of AD 94–04–17.

Relevant Service Information

Twin Commander has issued Service

Bulletin No. 226, dated April 14, 1997

(Revision No. 1 Release Date: July 15,

1997), which applies to all models of

Twin Commander 500, 520, 560, 680,

681, 685, 690, 695, and 720 series

airplanes. This service bulletin specifies

procedures for the following:

-Inspecting all flap system pulleys and

cable assemblies;

-Replacing or reworking any pulley

assemblies with discrepancies found

during the inspection;

-Replacing cables, support brackets, or

clips with discrepancies found during

the inspection; and

-Identifying pulleys where the actions

specified in the service bulletin have

been accomplished

Revision No. 1 Release Date: July 15,

1997, of Twin Commander Mandatory

Service Bulletin No. 226, specifies

changes in the workhours necessary to

accomplish this action and makes

reference to a gauge that is available

from the manufacturer for use in

accomplishing the inspection.

The FAA’s Determination

After examining the circumstances

and reviewing all available information

related to the incidents described above,

the FAA has determined that AD action

should be taken to prevent failure of a

flap system cable caused by fatigue,

which could result in loss of control of

the airplane.

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other 500, 520, 560, 680, 681,

685, 690, 695, and 720 series airplanes

of the same type design, the FAA is

proposing an AD to supersede AD 94–

04–17. The proposed AD would require

inspecting all flap system cable grooves

for the correct width, inspecting all flap

system pulleys for rubbing on the

support brackets, inspecting all flap

pulley cable assemblies for frayed wires,

and reworking or replacing any parts

with discrepancies. Accomplishment of

the proposed actions would be in

accordance with Twin Commander

Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 226,

dated April 14, 1997, (Revision No. 1

Release Date: July 15, 1997).

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 1,230

airplanes in the U.S. registry would be

affected by the proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 22 workhours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspection, and that the average labor

rate is approximately $60 an hour.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,623,600,

or $1,320 per airplane. These figures

only take into account the inspection

costs of the proposed AD and do not

reflect the costs of any repairs or

replacements that may be required if

discrepancies are found during the

proposed inspection. The FAA has no

way of determining how many parts

would need to be repaired or replaced

after accomplishing the inspection

proposed in this action.

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

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 action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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 has been placed 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 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

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)

94–04–17, Amendment 39–8837 (59 FR
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 211 / Friday, October 31, 1997 / Proposed Rules 58927

8845, February 24, 1995), and by adding

a new AD to read as follows:

Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation:

Docket No. 97–CE–69–AD; Supersedes

AD 94–04–17, Amendment 39–8837.

Applicability: The following airplane

models (all serial numbers), certificated in

any category: 500, 500–A, 500–B, 500–S,

500–U, 520, 560, 560–A, 560–E, 560–F, 680,

680–E, 680–F, 680FL, 680FL(P), 680FP, 680T,

680V, 680W, 681, 685, 690, 690A, 690B,

690C, 690D, 695, 695A, 695B, 720.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

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

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 (e) 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 in the

body of this AD, unless already

accomplished.

To prevent failure of a flap system cable

caused by fatigue, which could result in loss

of control of the airplane, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within the next 100 hours time-inservice (TIS) after the effective date of this

AD, accomplish the following in accordance

with the accomplishment instructions

section of Twin Commander Aircraft

Corporation (Twin Commander) Mandatory

Service Bulletin No. 226, dated April 14,

1997 (Revision No. 1 Release Date: July 15,

1997):

(1) Inspect all flap system cable grooves for

the correct width;

(2) Inspect all flap system pulleys for

rubbing on the support brackets;

(3) Inspect all flap pulley cable assemblies

for frayed wires; and

(4) Mark pulleys that have been inspected

and have the correct groove radius with two

parallel lines as specified in the service

bulletin.

Note 2: Revision No. 1 Release Date: July

15, 1997, of Twin Commander Mandatory

Service Bulletin No. 226, specifies changes in

the workhours necessary to accomplish this

action and makes reference to a gauge that is

available from the manufacturer for use in

accomplishing the inspection.

(b) If any of the above discrepancies are

found, prior to further flight, rework or

replace the affected part in accordance with

Twin Commander Mandatory Service

Bulletin No. 226, dated April 14, 1997

(Revision No. 1 Release Date: July 15, 1997).

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

person may install a pulley that does not

have the criteria presented in either

paragraph (c)(1), (c)(2), or (c)(3) of this AD:

(1) A pulley that has been inspected, found

acceptable, and marked with two parallel

lines in accordance with paragraph (a),

including all subparagraphs, of this AD;

(2) A pulley that has been reworked in

accordance with an FAA-approved procedure

and is marked ‘‘SB 226’’; or

(3) A new pulley that is marked ‘‘SB 226–

NEW’’.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199

to operate the airplane to a location where

the requirements of this AD can be

accomplished.

(e) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), Northwest

Mountain Region, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue

S.W., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

(1) The request shall be forwarded through

an appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, Seattle ACO.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance

approved in accordance with AD 94–04–17

(superseded by this AD) are not considered

approved as alternative methods of

compliance for this AD.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(f) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to the Twin

Commander Aircraft Corporation, 19003 59th

Drive, NE., Arlington, Washington 98223–

7832; or may examine this document at the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

(g) This amendment supersedes AD 94–04–

17, Amendment 39–8837.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

October 24, 1997.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28874 Filed 10–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97–AGL–56]

Proposed Modification of Class E

Airspace; Ashtabula, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to

modify Class E airspace at Ashtabula,

OH. A Global Positioning System (GPS)

Standard Instrument Approach

Procedure (SIAP) to Runway 08 has

been developed for Ashtabula County

Airport. Controlled airspace extending

upward from 700 to 1200 feet above

ground level (AGL) is needed to contain

aircraft executing the approach. This

action proposes to increase the radius of

the existing controlled airspace for the

airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before December 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, AGL–7, Rules

Docket No. 97–AGL–56, 2300 East

Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois

60018.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Federal Aviation

Administration, 2300 East Devon

Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois. An

informal docket may also be examined

during normal business hours at the Air

Traffic Division, Operations Branch,

Federal Aviation Administration, 2300

East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines,

Illinois.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michelle M. Behm, Air Traffic Division,

Airspace Branch, AGL–520, Federal

Aviation Administration, 2300 East

Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois

60018, telephone (847) 294–7568.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy-related

aspects of the proposal.

Communications should identify the

airspace docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

listed above. Commenters wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this notice must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 97–

AGL–56.’’ The postcard will be date/

time stamped and returned to the

commenter. All communications

received on or before the specified

closing date for comments will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposal contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of comments received. All comments

submitted will be available for