6708 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 30 / Thursday, February 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

insertion of the term ‘‘weapons of mass

destruction’’ in place of the term

‘‘defense projects’’ used in the statute

limits the SSIA applicant’s work

experience to a specific type of

weaponry not enumerated in the statute

and is, therefore, ultra vires. The

commenter further contended that the

statute states that either expertise or

experience with military-related

projects in the former Soviet Union

qualify a scientist or engineer for SSIA

benefits.

Section 2(3)(B) of the SSIA, in part,

defines eligible scientists as scientists or

engineers who have expertise in

nuclear, chemical, biological, or other

high technology fields or who are

working on nuclear, chemical,

biological, or other high-technology

defense projects, or are working on

nuclear, chemical, biological, or other

high-technology defense projects, as

defined by the Attorney General. In the

interim rule, the Service, employing the

Attorney General’s express authority to

define eligible scientists, modified the

definition to reflect that the expertise

need not be related to a specific defense

project if the expertise was in a field

which could be applied to the

development of weapons of mass

destruction. As discussed in the

preamble to the interim rule, this

modification was necessary to clarify

Congress’ intent to include in the SSIA

those scientists who ‘‘have specialized

in weapons of mass destruction.’’ See 60

FR 54028, citing 138 Cong. Rec. S1249

(daily ed. Feb. 6, 1992). Accordingly,

the Service will not change the

definition of eligible scientists.

The commenter also criticized the

Service from requiring any letters from

United States Government agencies be

from the head of the agency or a duly

appointed designee. See 8 CFR

204.10(e)(2)(ii). The commenter argued

that this provision narrows the pool of

experts available to an applicant and

makes it more difficult to obtain a letter

from a Government agency. As noted in

the interim rule, this provision was

necessary to enhance the reliability of

endorsements issued by Government

agencies. See 60 FR 54029. This

provision, however, still allows SSIA

petitioners, as an alternative to

obtaining a letter from a U.S.

Government agency, to submit two

letters from nationally or internationally

recognized experts to satisfy this

evidentiary requirement.

The interim rule requires a SSIA

petitioner to submit corroborative

evidence of claimed expertise including

the official labor book, any significant

awards or publications and other

comparable evidence or an explanation

of why such evidence cannot be

obtained. See 8 CFR 204.10(e)(2)(iii).

The commenter contended that the

requirement that the petitioner submit

proof of any significant awards or

publications is superfluous, since the

petitioner must submit his or her official

labor book or Trudavaya Knizhka,

which records most such awards. The

purpose of this regulatory provision is

merely to make it clear that, if an

applicant has awards noted in his or her

official labor book and wishes to have

the Service consider such awards as

evidence of the alien’s qualifications,

the applicant should provide separate

proof of receipt of such an award unless

it is unavailable. Accordingly, no

changes have been made in response to

this comment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 605(b),

the Commissioner of the Immigration

and Naturalization Service certifies that

this rule will not, if promulgated, have

a significant adverse economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. This rule merely adopts interim

regulations concerning the immigration

of up to 750 scientists from the former

Soviet Union as final. It will not

significantly change the number of

persons who immigrate to the United

States. Any impact on small business

entities will be, at most, indirect and

attenuated.

Executive Order 12866

This rule is not considered by the

Department of Justice, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, to be a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),

Regulatory Planning and Review, and

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process under

section 6(a)(3)(A).

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as

defined in section 804 of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will not

result in an annual effect on the

economy of $100,000,000 or more; a

major increase in costs or prices; or

significant adverse effects on

competition, employment, investment,

productivity, innovation, or on the

ability of United States-based

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and

export markets.

Executive Order 12612

This regulation 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 rule does not

have sufficient federalism implications

to warrant the preparation of a

Federalism Assessment.

Accordingly, the interim rule

amending 8 CFR part 204, which was

published in the Federal Register at 60

FR 54027–54030 on October 19, 1995, is

adopted as a final rule without change.

Dated: February 4, 1997.

Doris Meissner,

Commissioner, Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3589 Filed 2–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–99–AD; Amendment

39–9928; AD 97–02–08 R1]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9, DC–9–80 and C–

9 (Military) Series Airplanes, and Model

MD–88 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document corrects

information in an existing airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC–

9, DC–9–80 and C–9 (military) series

airplanes, and Model MD–88 airplanes.

The AD currently requires either the

installation of external protective

doublers between the outboard flight

spoiler actuators and the aft spar webs

of the wings, or replacement of the

pistons of the outboard flight spoiler

actuators with improved pistons. This

action corrects a part number specified

for flight spoiler actuator assembly that

is acceptable for installation on these

airplanes. This action is necessary to

ensure that operators who previously

have installed assemblies with this part

number will be given proper credit for

that installation, and will not be

required to perform additional,

unnecessary work to comply with the

requirements of the AD.

DATES: Effective March 4, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 30 / Thursday, February 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 6709

regulations was previously approved by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

March 4, 1997 (62 FR 3985, January 28,

1997).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brent Bandley, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712; telephone (310) 627–

5237; fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 14, 1997, the FAA issued AD

97–02–08, amendment 39–9893 (62 FR

3985, January 28, 1997), which is

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9, DC–9–80 and C–

9 (military) series airplanes, and Model

MD–88 airplanes. That AD requires that

operators of these airplanes either:

1. Install external protective doublers

between the outboard flight spoiler

actuators and the aft spar webs of the

wings; or

2. Replace the pistons of the outboard

flight spoiler actuators with improved

pistons.

That action was prompted by reports

of failure of the piston of the outboard

flight spoiler actuator due to fatigue at

the clevis end of the upper lug

mounting hole of the piston. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent such failure of the piston and

the consequent puncturing of the aft

spar web, which could result in fuel

leakage and reduced structural integrity

of the wings.

Actions Since Issuance of the AD

Recently, the FAA has become aware

of the fact that, due to a typographical

error when the AD was published, an

incorrect part number appeared in the

text of the rule. Specifically, Note 3 of

paragraph (a) stated that installation of

McDonnell Douglas flight spoiler

actuator assemblies, having part number

5915900–5525, on the right and left

wings prior to the effective date of the

AD was considered acceptable for

compliance with the requirements of

paragraph (a). However, the part number

cited was erroneous. The correct part

number is 5913900–5525.

Corrections Necessary to the Current

AD

The FAA has determined that it is

appropriate to take action to revise AD

97–02–08 to correct the part number of

the flight spoiler actuator assemblies,

referred to in Note 3 of the AD, to

‘‘5913900–5525.’’ This correction will

ensure that operators who previously

have installed assemblies with this part

number will be given proper credit for

that installation, and will not be

required to perform additional,

unnecessary work to comply with the

requirements of the AD.

Accordingly, action is taken herein to

correct the error and to correctly add the

AD as an amendment to section 39.13 of

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14

CFR 39.13). The effective date of the

rule remains March 4, 1997.

The final rule is being reprinted in its

entirety for the convenience of affected

operators.

Impact of the Correction

Since this action only corrects a part

number of an installation that is

optional on the affected airplanes, it has

no adverse economic impact and

imposes no additional burden on any

person. Therefore, notice and public

procedures hereon are unnecessary.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Correction

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

removing amendment 39–9893 (62 FR

3985, January 28, 1997), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD),

amendment 39–9928, to read as follows:

97–02–08 R1 McDonnell Douglas:

Amendment 39–9928. Docket 96–NM–

99–AD. Revises AD 97–02–08,

amendment 39–9893.

Applicability: Model DC–9, Model DC–9–

80 and C–9 (military) series airplanes, and

Model MD–88 airplanes; as listed in

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9–

27–300, Revision 02, dated June 29, 1995;

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 (b) 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 leakage and reduced

structural integrity of the wings due to

puncturing of the wings by a failed piston of

the outboard flight spoiler actuator,

accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 5,000

landings after the effective date of this AD,

accomplish the actions specified in either

paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin DC9–27–300, Revision 02, dated

June 29, 1995.

Note 2. Accomplishment of the actions

specified in this paragraph prior to the

effective date of this AD in accordance with

the original issue or Revision 1 of McDonnell

Douglas Service Bulletin 27–300 is

considered acceptable for compliance with

this paragraph.

Note 3: Installation of McDonnell Douglas

flight spoiler actuator assembly, part number

(P/N) 5913900–5525, on the right and left

wings prior to the effective date of this AD

is considered acceptable for compliance with

the requirements of this paragraph.

(1) Install external protective doublers

between the outboard flight spoiler actuators

and the aft spar webs of the left and right

wings; or

(2) Replace the pistons of the outboard

flight spoiler actuators on the left and right

wings with improved pistons.

(b) 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, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(c) 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.

(d) Except as specified in Note 2 of this

AD, the actions shall be done in accordance

with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin

DC9–27–300, Revision 02, dated June 29,

1995. 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, as of March 4, 1997 (62

FR 3985, January 28, 1997). Copies may be

obtained from McDonnell Douglas

Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,

Long Beach, California 90846, Attention:

Technical Publications Business

Administration, Department C1–L51 (2–60).

Copies may be inspected at the FAA,
6710 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 30 / Thursday, February 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California;

or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(e) This amendment is effective on March

4, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

6, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3534 Filed 2–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96–AEA–12]

Amendment to Class E Airspace;

Hudson, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA)DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment modifies the

Class E airspace at Hudson, NY, to

accommodate a Global Positioning

System (GPS) Standard Instrument

Approach Procedure (SIAP) to Runway

(RWY) 21 at Columbia County Airport.

This amendment also corrects the

geographic position of Columbia County

Airport published as a Notice Of

Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal

Register November 27, 1996 (61 FR

60238). The intended effect of this

action is to provide adequate controlled

airspace for instrument flight rules (IFR)

operations at the airport.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 9001 UTC, March 27,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Frances Jordan, Airspace Specialist,

Operations Branch, AEA–530, Air

Traffic Division, Eastern Region, Federal

Aviation Administration, Federal

Building #111, John F. Kennedy

International Airport, Jamaica, New

York 11430, telephone: (718) 553–4521.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

On November 27 1996, the FAA

proposed to amend Part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

Part 71) by modifying Class E airspace

at Hudson, NY, (61 FR 60238). This

action would provide adequate Class E

airspace for IFR operations at Columbia

County Airport.

Interested parties were invited to

participate in this rulemaking

proceeding by submitting written

comments on the proposal to the FAA.

No comments objecting to the proposal

were received.

Class E airspace areas designations are

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9D, dated September 4,

1996, and effective September 16, 1996,

which is incorporated by reference in 14

CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace

designation listed in this document will

be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

This amendment to Part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Reuglations (14 CFR

Part 71) modifies Class E airspace area

at Hudson, NY, to accommodate a GPS

RWY 21 SIAP and for IFR operations at

Columbia County Airport.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation only involves an established

body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are

necessary to keep them operationally

current. Therefore, this regulation—(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 10034; February 26, 1979); and (3)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. Since this is a

routine matter that will only affect air

traffic procedures and air navigation it

is certified that this rule will not have

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

Part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,

40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9D, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated Septemeber 4, 1996, and effective

September 16, 1996, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AEA NY AEA E5 Hudson, NY [Revised]

Columbia County Airport, NY

(Lat. 42°17′29′′ N, long. 73°42′37′′ W)

Philmont NDB

(Lat. 42°15′10′′ N, long. 73°43′37′′ W)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius

of Columbia County Airport and within 14.8-

mile radius of Columbia County Airport

extending clockwise from a 025° bearing to

a 180° bearing from the airport and within

3.1 miles each side of a 194° bearing from the

Philmont NDB extending from the 7-mile

radius to 10 miles south of the NDB and

within 7 miles each side of the 012° bearing

from the airport extending from the 7-mile

radius to 17 miles north of the airport,

excluding the portion that coincides with the

Albany, NY 700 foot Class E airspace area.

* * * * *

Issued in Jamaica, New York on February

3, 1997.

James K. Buckles,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Eastern

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–3670 Filed 2–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96–AGL–12]

Establishment of Class E Airspace;

Gettysburg Municipal Airport;

Gettysburg, SD; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This action corrects an error

in the bearing description of a final rule

that was published in the Federal

Register on December 16, 1996 (61 FR

65939), Airspace Docket No. 96–AGL–

12. The final rule established Class E

airspace at Gettysburg, SD.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, March 27,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John A. Clayborn, Air Traffic Division,

Operations Branch, AGL–530, Federal

Aviation Administration, 2300 East

Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018,

telephone: (847) 294–7568.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

Federal Register Document 96–31869,

Airspace Docket No. 96–AGL–12,

published on December 16, 1996 (61 FR

65939) established the description of the

Class E airspace area at Gettysburg, SD,

and Gettysburg Municipal Airport, SD.

An error was discovered in the bearing

description for the Gettysburg

Municipal Airport, SD; Class E airspace

area. This action corrects that error.