Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 59993

appellant shows that the Special

Counsel’s notification was received

more than 5 days after the date of

issuance, within 60 days after the date

the appellant received the Special

Counsel’s notification.

This regulatory action does not affect

the provisions of law and regulation

permitting an appellant to file an IRA

appeal with the Board anytime after 120

days have passed since filing with the

Special Counsel if he or she has not

received notification that the Special

Counsel will seek corrective action from

the Board. 5 U.S.C. 1214(a)(3)(B) and 5

CFR 1209.5(a)(2).

A whistleblower affected by an action

that is directly appealable to the Board

may choose to seek corrective action

from the Special Counsel first or may

file an otherwise appealable action

(OAA) appeal directly with the Board. 5

U.S.C. 1221(b) and 5 CFR 1209.5(b). An

appellant who chooses to go to the

Special Counsel first is subject to the

same time limit for filing as an IRA

appellant under the amended 5 CFR

1209.5(a)(1). An appellant who appeals

directly to the Board is subject to the

same time limit that applies to other

appeals under the Board’s regulation at

5 CFR 1201.22(b), which is being

amended simultaneously with this

amendment. Under the amended 5 CFR

1201.22(b), an appellant must file no

later than 30 days after the effective

date, if any, of the action being

appealed, or 30 days after the date of

receipt of the agency’s decision,

whichever is later.

The Board is also amending its

regulation at 5 CFR 1209.5(c) to ensure

that an appellant who has filed a stay

request before filing a whistleblower

appeal (IRA or OAA) has a full 30 days

to file after the date the appellant

receives the judge’s ruling on the stay

request. This amendment corresponds

to the amendments being made

simultaneously to various filing

requirements in 5 CFR part 1201.

The Board is publishing this rule as

a final rule pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1204(h).

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 1209

Administrative practice and

procedure, Civil rights, Government

employees.

Accordingly, the Board amends 5 CFR

part 1209 as follows:

PART 1209—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 1209

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1204, 1221, 2302(b)(8),

and 7701.

§1209.5 [Amended]

2. Section 1209.5 is amended by

revising paragraph (a)(1) and the first

sentence of paragraph (c) to read as

follows:

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(1) No later than 65 days after the date

of issuance of the Office of Special

Counsel’s written notification to the

appellant that it was terminating its

investigation of the appellant’s

allegations or, if the appellant shows

that the Special Counsel’s notification

was received more than 5 days after the

date of issuance, within 60 days after

the date the appellant received the

Special Counsel’s notification; or,

* * * * *

(c) * * * Where an appellant has

filed a request for a stay with the Board

without first filing an appeal of the

action, the appeal must be filed within

30 days after the date the appellant

receives the order ruling on the stay

request. * * *

Dated: October 31, 1997.

Robert E. Taylor,

Clerk of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–29312 Filed 11–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7400–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–CE–95–AD; Amendment 39–

10192; AD 97–23–04]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd. Models PC–12 and PC–12/

45 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus)

Models PC–12 and PC–12/45 airplanes.

This AD requires replacing the fuel tank

vent valves with modified fuel tank vent

valves. This AD is the result of

mandatory continued airworthiness

information (MCAI) issued by the

airworthiness authority for Switzerland.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent the fuel tank inward

vent valve from freezing, which, if

followed by a cold soak at altitude,

could result in wing airfoil distortion

and structural damage with consequent

degradation of the airplane’s handling

qualities.

DATES: Effective December 1, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of December

1, 1997.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

December 8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket 97–CE–95–AD,

Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106.

Service information that applies to

this AD may be obtained from Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd., CH–6370 Stans,

Switzerland. This information may also

be examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket 97–CE–95–AD,

Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Roman T. Gabrys, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; telephone (816) 426–6934;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

The Federal Office for Civil Aviation

(FOCA), which is the airworthiness

authority for Switzerland, recently

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on Pilatus Models

PC–12 and PC–12/45 airplanes. The

FOCA reports an instance of abnormal

automatic engagement of the fuel

booster pumps during normal operation

of a Pilatus Model PC–12 airplane. The

FOCA’s investigation reveals that the

fuel tank inward vent valves may fail in

the closed position under certain

conditions. Moisture ingestion, followed

by cold soak, can lead to the fuel tank

inward vent valve freezing. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in wing airfoil distortion and structural

damage with consequent degradation of

the airplane’s handling qualities.

Relevant Service Information

Pilatus issued Service Bulletin No.

28–003, Revision 1, dated September 30,

1997, which specifies procedures for

replacing the fuel tank vent valves with

modified fuel tank vent valves.

The FOCA of Switzerland classified

this service bulletin as mandatory and
59994 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

issued Swiss AD HB 97–432A, dated

October 3, 1997, in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in Switzerland.

The FAA’s Determination

This airplane model is manufactured

in Switzerland and is type certificated

for operation in the United States under

the provisions of section 21.29 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.29) and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the FOCA of Switzerland has kept the

FAA informed of the situation described

above.

The FAA has examined the findings

of the FOCA of Switzerland; reviewed

all available information, including the

service bulletin referenced in this

document; and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of this

type design that are certificated for

operation in the United States.

Explanation of the Provisions of This

AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other Pilatus Models PC–12

and PC–12/45 airplanes of the same

type design registered for operation in

the United States, the FAA is issuing an

AD. This AD requires replacing the fuel

tank vent valves with modified fuel tank

vent valves. Accomplishment of the

replacement is required in accordance

with Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 28–

003, Revision 1, dated September 30,

1997.

Determination of the Effective Date of

the AD

Since a situation exists (possible wing

airfoil distortion and structural damage

with consequent degradation of the

airplane’s handling qualities) that

requires the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for public prior comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting immediate flight safety and,

thus, was not preceded by notice and

opportunity to comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this 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

will be considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the 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 AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 97–CE–95–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

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 final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and is not a significant regulatory action

under Executive Order 12866. It has

been determined further that this action

involves an emergency regulation under

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it

is determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket

(otherwise, an evaluation is not

required). A copy of it, if filed, may be

obtained from the Rules Docket.

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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

97–23–04 Pilatus Aircraft, LTD.:

Amendment 39–10192; Docket No. 97–

CE–95–AD.

Applicability: Models PC–12 and PC–12/45

airplanes; serial numbers 101 through 186,

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 within the next 10

hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective

date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent the fuel tank inward vent valve

from freezing, which, if followed by a cold

soak at altitude, could result in wing airfoil

distortion and structural damage with

consequent degradation of the airplane’s

handling qualities, accomplish the following:

(a) Replace the fuel tank vent valves with

modified fuel tank vent valves in accordance

with the Accomplishment Instructions

section of Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 28–

003, Revision 1, dated September 30, 1997.

(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

shall 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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 59995

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 Pilatus

Service Bulletin No. 28–003, Revision 1,

dated September 30, 1997. 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 Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd., CH–6370 Stans, Switzerland.

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 Swiss AD HB 97–432A, dated October 3,

1997.

(e) This amendment (39–10192) 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. 97–29236 Filed 11–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MI38–01–6734; FRL–5884–1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Michigan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is approving requested

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the State of

Michigan for the purpose of transferring

the authority of the Michigan Air

Pollution Control Commission

(Commission) to the Director of the

Michigan Department of Natural

Resources (MDNR) and subsequently

transferring the authority of the Director

of MDNR to the Director of the Michigan

Department of Environmental Quality

(MDEQ). Nothing in this action should

be construed as permitting, allowing, or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. The EPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

DATES: This rule is effective: December

8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Michigan SIP

revision request and EPA’s analysis are

available for inspection during normal

business hours at the following location:

EPA Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division (AR–18J), 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura Gerleman, Air Programs Branch,

Permits and Grants Section (AR–18J),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–5703.

Copies of the State of Michigan’s final

authorization revision application are

available during normal business hours

at the following addresses for inspection

and copying: Library of Michigan,

Government Documents Section, 717

West Allegan, Lansing, Michigan; Olson

Library, Northern Michigan University,

Harden Circle Drive, Marquette,

Michigan; Detroit Public Library Main

Branch, Sociology and Economics

Department, 5201 Woodward Avenue,

Detroit, Michigan. To arrange for access

to the materials in Lansing, call (517)

373–9489 between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on

Mondays through Saturdays and

between 12 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Sundays

(Eastern time); in Marquette, call (906)

227–2260 between 8 a.m. and 12 a.m. on

Mondays through Thursdays, between 8

a.m. and 9 p.m. on Fridays, and between

10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays (Eastern

time); in Detroit, call (313) 833–1440

between 9:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on

Tuesdays and Thursdays through

Saturdays, and between 1 p.m. and 9

p.m. on Wednesdays (Eastern time).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Executive Order 1991–31

On November 8, 1991, Governor John

Engler of Michigan signed Executive

Order 1991–31 which, inter alia,

abolished the Commission and

transferred the authority of the

Commission to the Director of MDNR.

The State of Michigan submitted to EPA

under a December 13, 1994 cover letter,

a SIP revision request containing the

transfer of authority of the Commission

to the Director of MDNR. The EPA

deemed the submittal complete in a

February 16, 1995 letter to Roland

Harmes, Director, MDNR.

B. Executive Order 1995–18

On July 31, 1995, Governor Engler

signed Executive Order 1995–18 which,

inter alia, elevated eight program

divisions and two program offices from

within MDNR to the MDEQ, effective

October 1, 1995. The authority given to

the Director of MDNR in Executive

Order 1991–31 was conferred upon the

Director of MDEQ in Executive Order

1995–18, with the exception of

administrative appeals decisions.

The State of Michigan submitted

Executive Order 1995–18 to EPA under

a January 19, 1996 cover letter as a

supplement to the December 13, 1994

SIP revision.

C. Authority

On March 28, 1997, EPA proposed to

approve Michigan’s requested SIP

revisions as reorganizations of

Michigan’s environmental agencies

wherein the authorities of the Director

of the Commission under the SIP have

been conferred upon the Director of

MDEQ by Executive Order. See 62 FR

14843. The EPA did not receive any

public comment on the proposal. In this

notice, EPA is taking final action to

approve these transfers of authority for

the State of Michigan.

The EPA notes that it is currently

reviewing the Michigan Environmental

Audit Privilege and Immunity Law,

Public Act 132 of 1996, and its potential

impact on Michigan’s federally

delegated and authorized programs,

including programs under the Federal

Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA’s

approval only addresses the requested

SIP revisions submitted by Michigan

that result from Executive Order 1991–

31 and Executive Order 1995–18. The

EPA’s approval of requested revisions to

Michigan’s SIP arising out of these two

Executive Orders does not express any

viewpoint on the question of whether

there are legal deficiencies in

Michigan’s SIP resulting from Public

Act 132 of 1996.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

Delegation of the Governor’s authority

under the CAA does not impose any

new requirements on small entities.

EPA certifies that this delegation will

not affect a substantial number of small

entities.