Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 216 / Friday, November 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 60163

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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 a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows

97–23–05 Avions Pierre Robin:

Amendment 39–10193; Docket No. 97–

CE–87–AD.

Applicability: Model R3000 airplanes, all

serial numbers, certificated in any category.

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 (c) 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 prior to further

flight after the effective date of this AD,

unless already accomplished.

To prevent the pitch control cables on the

control column from becoming jammed due

to failure of the attachment bolt, which could

result in a reduction in the directional

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

(a) Replace the attachment bolt between

the pitch control cables and control column

lever, part number (P/N) 95.13.19.000 (or

FAA-approved equivalent part number), with

a bolt of improved design, P/N 27.36.03.140

(or FAA-approved equivalent part number),

in accordance with Avions Pierre Robin

Service Bulletin No. 146, Revision 1, dated

September 26, 1996.

(b) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 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.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. The request

should be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(d) The replacement required by this AD

shall be done in accordance with Avions

Pierre Robin Service Bulletin No. 146,

Revision 1, dated September 26, 1996. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Avions

Pierre Robin, 1, route de Troyes, 21121

Darois-France. Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office

of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French AD 96–167(A)R1, dated December

4, 1996.

(e) This amendment (39–10193) becomes

effective on December 1, 1997.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

October 29, 1997.

Mary Ellen A. Schutt,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–29232 Filed 11–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY

COMMISSION

16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616

Standards for Flammability of

Children’s Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through

6X and 7 Through 14; Stay of

Enforcement; Extension

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety

Commission.

ACTION: Extension of Stay of

Enforcement.

SUMMARY: This document announces the

Commission’s decision to extend the

stay of enforcement of sleepwear

requirements involving garments

currently used or likely to be used as

sleepwear if these garments are skintight or nearly skin-tight, similar in

design, material, and fit to underwear,

and are labeled as ‘‘underwear.’’

DATES: The stay which first became

effective on January 13, 1993 (published

at 58 FR 4178, January 13, 1993), and

was extended at 59 FR 53584, October

25, 1994, and 61 FR 47412, September

9, 1996, will continue in effect until

June 9, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia A. Fairall, Office of Compliance

and Enforcement, Consumer Product

Safety Commission, Washington, DC

20207; telephone (301) 504–0400,

extension 1369.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 13, 1993, the Commission

published a document announcing that

for certain garments it would stay

enforcement of its Standard for the

Flammability of Children’s Sleepwear:

Sizes 0–6x (16 CFR part 1615) and the

Standard for the Flammability of

Children’s Sleepwear Sizes 7–14 (16

CFR part 1616). The Commission stated

that it would not enforce the sleepwear

flammability standards against garments

used by children for sleeping that are:

(1) Skin-tight or nearly skin-tight; (2)

manufactured from fabrics such as rib

knit, interlock knit, or waffle knit; (3)

relatively free of ornamentation; and (4)

labeled and marketed as ‘‘underwear.’’

The stay was part of the Commission’s

effort to amend its sleepwear regulations

to exempt certain tight-fitting garments

and infant garments from the sleepwear

standards. The stay was published on

the same day as an advance notice of

proposed rulemaking beginning the

proceeding to exempt these garments.

See 58 FR 4111. The Commission has

since published a proposed rule (59 FR

53616) and a final rule (61 FR 47634)

exempting certain tight-fitting and

infant garments from the sleepwear

flammability standards.

While the Commission was

considering amending the standard and

to allow time for the industry to adjust

to the exemption, the Commission

extended the stay of enforcement when

it issued the proposed rule (59 FR

53584) and the final rule (61 FR 47412).

The Commission is extending the stay 3

months, from March 9, 1998 to June 9,

1998 for the garments described above.

The Commission is taking this action

because the March 9 date falls in the

middle of a retail cycle. Without the

extension, retailers and manufacturers

believe that in the same selling season

they would need to offer and make

garments that are acceptable under the

stay for the first half of the season and

garments that meet the tight fitting

requirements for the second half. This

could be burdensome for some

companies and make it more difficult to

insure compliance of manufactured/

marketed garments. The Commission

does not believe that extending the stay

3 months will adversely affect the

industry or consumer safety.

Garments covered by the stay must

meet applicable requirements of the

Standard for the Flammability of
60164 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 216 / Friday, November 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Clothing Textiles, 16 CFR part 1610, and

the Standard for the Flammability of

Vinyl Plastic Film, 16 CFR part 1611.

After the stay expires, children’s

sleepwear must either pass the

flammability tests described in the

regulations at 16 CFR parts 1615 and

1616 or meet the definition of ‘‘tightfitting garments’’ described in 16 CFR

1615.1(o) and 1616.1(m), or be in infant

sizes 9 months or smaller.

Dated: October 31, 1997.

Sadye E. Dunn,

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety

Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–29306 Filed 11–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

[T.D. 97–88]

19 CFR Parts 101 and 122

Customs Service Field Organization;

Establishment of Sanford Port of Entry

AGENCY: Customs Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Interim rule; solicitation of

comments.

SUMMARY: This document delays the

effective date for implementation of a

final rule document published in the

Federal Register July 11, 1997, as T.D.

97–64, which would establish a new

port of entry at Orlando-Sanford Airport

in Sanford, Florida effective November

10, 1997. Since publication of the final

rule document, the Airport Operator has

brought to Customs attention that the

date chosen by Customs significantly

impairs its agreements with air carriers

that were signed prior to Customs

announcement of its decision. In

addition, the Airport Operator claims

that cargo and warehousing space

currently available at the airport must

be expanded to accommodate projected

needs. Because of these factors, Customs

is delaying the effective date to May 1,

1998 for the port of entry designation.

The user-fee status of the airport will

continue until the new effective date.

DATES: Effective date of November 10,

1997, of the amendments of

§§ 101.3(b)(1) and 122.15(b), Customs

Regulations, published in the Federal

Register (62 FR 37131) on July 11, 1997,

is delayed until May 1, 1998. Comments

must be received on or before December

8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments

(preferably in triplicate) may be

addressed to the U.S. Customs Service,

Office of Regulations and Rulings—

ATTN: Regulations Branch, The Ronald

Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20229.

Comments submitted may be inspected

at the Regulations Branch, Office of

Regulations and Rulings, The Ronald

Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW, Suite 3000, Washington,

DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harry Denning, Office of Field

Operations, Resource Management

Division (202) 927–0196.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 11, 1997, Customs published

in the Federal Register (62 FR 37131)

T.D. 97–64 which amended § 101.3(b),

Customs Regulations (19 CFR 101.3), to

establish a new port of entry at OrlandoSanford Airport in Sanford, Florida, and

§ 122.15(b), Customs Regulations (19

CFR 122.15(b)), to remove the Sanford

Regional Airport from the list of user-fee

airports.

That action was taken by Customs

based on analysis of a report prepared

for the Central Florida Regional Airport

Board that manages the airport at

Sanford. The report showed that the

Sanford Regional Airport was becoming

the fastest growing airport for

international passenger clearance

services in Florida. In response to this

growth, the report indicated that the

Airport Board had decided to make

substantial and long term investment in

new international arrival facilities to

serve this growing Central Florida

market. Applying the criteria used by

Customs since 1973 for the

establishment of ports of entry (see

Treasury Decision (T.D.) 82–37 (47 FR

10137), as revised by T.D. 86–14 (51 FR

4559) and T.D. 87–65 (52 FR 16328)), to

the figures projected by the Central

Florida Regional Airport Board,

Customs believed that sufficient

justification existed for redesignating

the airport facility from its user-fee

status to that of a port of entry. Customs

announced this decision on July 11,

1997, and designated November 10,

1997 as the effective date.

Since publication of the final rule

document, it has come to Customs

attention that agreements currently in

force between the Orlando-Sanford

Airport and the air carriers it serves

effectively requires the Airport to absorb

additional Customs fees through the end

of April 1998. Moreover, the facilities

for cargo processing and warehousing at

Orlando-Sanford Airport need to be

expanded and that construction will not

be completed until late Spring of 1998.

Delayed Effective Date

For the reasons set forth in the above

discussion, Customs has determined

that the effective date for the

establishment of the new port of entry

at Sanford, Florida shall be delayed for

approximately 6 months—until May 1,

1998—to afford the airport facility time

to complete projected facilities. Until

that time, the airport may continue to

operate as a user-fee facility.

Public Comment Requirements

Customs establishes, expands, and

consolidates Customs ports of entry

throughout the United States to

accommodate the volume of Customsrelated activity in various parts of the

country. Because the establishment,

expansion or consolidation of a port of

entry relates to agency management and

organization, a regulatory change

involving such an action is not subject

to the notice and public procedure

requirements of the Administrative

Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553).

In addition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B), Customs finds for good cause

in this instance that notice and public

procedure are impracticable,

unnecessary and contrary to public

interest. It would be impracticable for

Customs to issue a proposal in this

instance as the rulemaking process

could not be completed timely.

If a proposal were to be issued, it

would be unlikely that a final decision

could be published before November 10,

causing possible unforeseen

consequences for the airport operator

and other members of the public. Also

the temporary postponement of the

effective date of a rule is a technical

change for which it is unnecessary to

provide notice and comment. The

substantive decision to create a port of

entry at Sanford has already been made;

the only question is when that port of

entry will open.

Notwithstanding the above, Customs

generally provides the public with an

opportunity to comment on the

establishment of ports of entry. Even

though notice and public comment are

not required in this instance pursuant to

5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) because this is a

matter relating to agency management,

and pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) for

good cause, Customs is requesting the

public to submit comments regarding

the delayed effective date. If comments

submitted within the next 30 days

demonstrate that there exist sufficient

grounds for not delaying the effective

date of the establishment of a port of

entry in Sanford until May 1, 1998,

Customs will issue another document.

Comments submitted will be available

for public inspection in accordance with