## 73997 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type
certification basis for Cessna Model 680 series airplanes.

Isolation or Security Protection of the Aircraft Control Domain and the Information Services Domain From the Passenger Services Domain

1. The applicant must ensure that the design provides isolation from, or airplane electronic system security protection against, access by
unauthorized sources internal to the airplane. The design must prevent inadvertent and malicious changes to, and all adverse impacts upon, airplane equipment, systems, networks, or other assets required for safe flight and operations.

2. The applicant must establish appropriate procedures to allow the operator to ensure that continued
airworthiness of the aircraft ismaintained, including all post-typecertification modifications that may have an impact on the approved electronic system security safeguards.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 4, 2013. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2013–29377 Filed 12–9–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**



### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–0023; Directorate Identifier 96–CE–072–AD; Amendment 39–**  **17688; AD 99–01–05 R1]**

**RIN 2120–AA64**



### Airworthiness Directives; Various **Aircraft Equipped with Wing Lift Struts**

**AGENCY** 

### : Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION** 

### : Final rule.

**SUMMARY** 

### : We are revising Airworthiness Directive (AD) 99–01–05 for certain aircraft equipped with wing lift struts. AD 99–01–05 required repetitively inspecting the wing lift struts for corrosion; repetitively inspecting the wing lift strut forks for cracks; replacing any corroded wing lift strut; replacing any cracked wing lift strut fork; and repetitively replacing the wing lift strut forks at a specified time for certain airplanes. AD 99–01–05 also required incorporating a ‘‘NO STEP’’ placard on the wing lift strut. Since we issued AD 99–01–05, we were informed that paragraph (c) had been misinterpreted
and caused confusion. This AD clarifies the intent of the language in paragraph (c) of AD 99–01–05 and retains all other requirements of AD 99–01–05. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

**DATES** 

### : This AD is effective January 14,

2014.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of February 8, 1999 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998).

**ADDRESSES** 

### : For service information identified in this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 567–4361; Internet: www.piper.com. Copies of the instructions to the F. Atlee Dodge supplemental type certificate (STC) and information about the Jensen Aircraft STCs may be obtained from F. Atlee Dodge, Aircraft Services, LLC., 6672 Wes Way, Anchorage, Alaska 99518–
0409, Internet: www.fadodge.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329–

4148.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA– 2013–00023; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,

DC 20590.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** 

### : For Piper Aircraft, Inc. airplanes, contact: Gregory ‘‘Keith’’ Noles, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; phone: (404) 474–5551; fax: (404) 474– 5606; email: gregory.noles@faa.gov.

For FS 2000 Corp, FS 2001 Corp, FS 2002 Corporation, and FS 2003 Corporation airplanes, contact: Jeff Morfitt, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, Washington 98057; phone: (425) 917– 6405; fax: (245) 917–6590; email: jeff.morfitt@faa.gov.

For LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) airplanes, contact: S.M. Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: sarjapur.nagarajan@ faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** 

### :

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to revise AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), (‘‘AD 99–01–05’’). AD 99–01–05 applied to the specified products. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on January 16, 2013 (78 FR 3356). The NPRM proposed to retain all requirements of AD 99–01–05 and clarify our intent of required actions if the seal on a sealed wing lift strut is ever improperly broken.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal and the FAA’s response to each comment.

Request to Combine This AD with
Another AD

Len J. Buckel stated that AD 99–26– 19, Amendment 39–11470 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999), (‘‘AD 99– 26–19’’), and AD 99–01–05 should be
combined into one AD.

The commenter stated that since AD 99–01–05 is being revised, it should also be revised to include Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Model J–2 airplanes, which are covered separately in AD 99–26–19, so that all affected Piper airplanes would
be covered in one AD.

We do not agree with the commenter. AD 99–01–05 is being revised only to clarify language about how to maintain a sealed wing lift strut assembly if the seal is ever improperly broken. This revision does not require any additional actions for the owners/operators. The same confusing and misleading language that prompted this revision is also included in AD 99–26–19, which
will also be revised. In order to avoid any further confusion, we believe that it
is in the best interest of the owners/ operators to maintain two separate ADs.

We have not changed the final rule
AD action based on this comment.


## 73998 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

Request to Further Clarify Paragraph (g)

Jamison Peters of Airframes Alaska stated that stronger and clearer language
should be added to this AD that specifies allowing a sealed wing lift strut to be temporarily unsealed in order to perform proper maintenance actions.

The commenter stated that the proposed language in Note 1 to paragraph (g) seems somewhat ambiguous using the word ‘‘never’’ in regards to the seal of a strut being ‘‘never broken’’ but then saying that ‘‘. . . nor did we intend to preclude proper maintenance action that may temporarily unseal a sealed strut . . .’’

We agree with the commenter that the proposed language could be interpreted as ambiguous or conflicting. We have revised Note 2 to paragraph (g) to further clarify that properly unsealing and resealing a sealed wing lift strut for maintenance, as long as all regulations and issues are considered, is still considered a terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of
this AD.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the change described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 3356, January 16, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 3356, January 16, 2013).

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 22,000 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD. However, the only difference in the costs presented below
and the costs associated with AD 99– 01–05 is the change in the labor rate from $65 per hour to $85 per hour:



### E STIMATED 

### C OSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators

Inspection of the wing

lift struts and wing
lift strut forks. 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 per inspection cycle. Not applicable ............ $680 per inspection cycle. $14,960,000 per inspection cycle.

Installation placard ..... 1 work-hour × $85 = $85 ............................... $30 ............................. $115 ........................... $2,530,000.



### We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these replacements:



### O N 

### -C ONDITION 

### C OSTS

Action Labor cost per wing lift strut Parts cost per wing lift

strut Cost per product per

wing lift

strut

Replacement of the wing lift strut

and/or wing lift strut forks. 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 ............................................................. $440 $780



### Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, section 44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority

because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking

action.

Regulatory Findings

We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect 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.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(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),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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.


## 73999 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**

■ 

### 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), and adding the following new AD:

99–01–05 R1 Various Aircraft: Amendment 39–17688; Docket No. FAA–2013–0023;

Directorate Identifier 96–CE–072–AD. (a) Effective Date
This AD is effective January 14, 2014

(b) Affected ADs

This AD revises AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), which superseded AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993). AD 99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999), also relates to the subject of this AD. (c) Applicability

This AD applies to the following airplanes identified in table 1 of paragraph (c) of this AD, that are:

(1) Equipped with wing lift struts, including airplanes commonly known as a ‘‘Clipped Wing Cub,’’ which modify the airplane primarily by removing approximately 40 inches of the inboard portion of each wing; and

(2) certificated in any category.



### T ABLE 

### 1 TO 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### ( C 

### ) OF 

### T HIS 

### AD—A PPLICABILITY

Type certificate holder Aircraft model Serial No.

FS 2000 Corp ..................................................... L–14 .......................................................... ....... All. FS 2001 Corp ..................................................... J5A (Army L–4F), J5A–80, J5B (Army L–4G), J5C, AE–1, and HE–1. All.

FS 2002 Corporation .......................................... PA–14 .............................................................. 14–1 through 14–523. FS 2003 Corporation .......................................... PA–12 and PA–12S ......................................... 12–1 through 12–4036. LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) ................. PA–25, PA–25–235, and PA–25–260 ............. 25–1 through 25–8156024. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... TG–8 (Army TG–8, Navy XLNP–1) ................. All. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... E–2 and F–2 ................................................. ... All. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... J3C–40, J3C–50, J3C–50S, (Army L–4, L–4B, L–4H, and L–4J), J3C–65 (Navy NE–1 and NE–2), J3C–65S, J3F–50, J3F–50S, J3F– 60, J3F–60S, J3F–65 (Army L–4D), J3F– 65S, J3L, J3L–S, J3L–65 (Army L–4C), and
J3L–65S. All.

Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... J4, J4A, J4A–S, and J4E (Army L–4E) ........... 4–401 through 4–1649. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–11 and PA–11S ......................................... 11–1 through 11–1678. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–15 .............................................................. 15–1 through 15–388. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–16 and PA–16S ......................................... 16–1 through 16–736. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–17 .............................................................. 17–1 through 17–215. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–19 (Army L–18C), and PA–19S ................ 19–1, 19–2, and 19–3. Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–20, PA–20S, PA–20 ‘‘115’’, PA–20S ‘‘115’’, PA–20 ‘‘135’’, and PA–20S ‘‘135’’. 20–1 through 20–1121.

Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–22, PA–22–108, PA–22–135, PA–22S– 135, PA–22–150, PA–22S–150, PA–22– 160, and PA–22S–160. 22–1 through 22–9848.

(d) Subject

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

(1) The subject of this AD was originally prompted by reports of corrosion damage found on the wing lift struts. We are revising AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), because of reports that paragraph (c) had been misinterpreted and caused confusion. This AD removes the language in paragraph (c) of AD 99–01–05, which caused the confusion.

(2) This AD clarifies the FAA’s intention that if a sealed wing lift strut assembly is installed as a replacement part, the repetitive inspection requirement is terminated only if the seal is never improperly broken. If the seal is improperly broken, then that wing lift strut becomes subject to continued repetitive inspections. We did not intend to promote drilling holes into or otherwise unsealing a

sealed strut. This AD retains all the actions required in AD 99–01–05 and this AD does not require any actions over that already required by AD 99–01–05. This AD does not add any additional burden to the owners/ operators of the affected airplanes. (3) We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion and cracking on the front and rear wing lift struts and forks, which could cause the wing lift strut to fail. This failure could result in the wing separating from the airplane.

(f) Paragraph Designation Changes to AD

99–01–05 R1

Since AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39– 10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have changed in this AD as listed in the following table:



### T ABLE 

### 2 TO 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### ( F 

### ) OF 

### T HIS



### AD—R EVISED 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### I DENTI



### FIERS

Requirement in AD
99–01–05 Corresponding requirement in AD 99–01–05 R1

paragraph (a) ............. paragraph (h). paragraph (a)(1) ........ paragraph (i)(1). paragraph (a)(1)(i) ..... paragraph (i)(1)(i). paragraph (a)(1)(ii) .... paragraph (i)(1)(ii). paragraph (a)(2) ........ paragraph (i)(2). paragraph (a)(2)(i) ..... paragraph (i)(2)(i). 

### T ABLE 

### 2 TO 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### ( F 

### ) OF 

### T HIS 

### AD—R EVISED 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### I DENTI



### FIERS 

### —Continued

Requirement in AD
99–01–05 Corresponding requirement in AD 99–01–05 R1

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) .... paragraph (i)(2)(ii). paragraph (a)(3) ........ paragraph (j)(1). paragraph (a)(4) ........ paragraph (j)(2). paragraph (a)(5) ........ paragraph (j)(3). paragraph (b) ............. paragraph (k). paragraph (b)(1) ........ paragraph (l). paragraph (b)(1)(i) ..... paragraph (l)(1). paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B)

and (b)(1)(iv). paragraph (l)(2).

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(C)

and (b)(1)(iv). paragraph (l)(3).

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A)

and (b)(1)(iv). paragraph (l)(4).

paragraph (b)(1)(iii),

(b)(2), (b)(1)(iv). paragraph (m)(1).

paragraph (b)(3)

through (b)(3)(ii). paragraph (m)(2).

paragraph (b)(4)

through (b)(4)(vi). paragraph (m)(3) thru (m)(3)(vi). paragraph (b)(5)

through (b)(5)(ii). paragraph (m)(4).

Paragraph (c) ............ Removed. paragraph (d) ............. paragraph (n)(1).


## 74000 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

T ABLE 

### 2 TO 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### ( F 

### ) OF 

### T HIS



### AD—R EVISED 

### P ARAGRAPH 

### I DENTI



### FIERS 

### —Continued

Requirement in AD
99–01–05 Corresponding requirement in AD 99–01–05 R1

paragraph (d)(1) ........ paragraph (n)(1)(i). paragraph (d)(2) ........ paragraph (n)(1)(ii). N/A ............................. paragraph (n)(2).

(g) Compliance

Unless already done (compliance with AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998)), do the following actions within the compliance times specified in paragraphs (h) through (n) of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Properly unsealing and resealing a sealed wing lift strut is still considered a terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD as long as all appropriate regulations and issues are considered, such as static strength, fatigue, material effects, immediate and long-term (internal and external) corrosion protection, resealing methods, etc. Current FAA regulations in 14 CFR 43.13(b) specify that maintenance performed will result in the part’s condition to be at least equal to its original or properly altered condition. Any maintenance actions that unseal a sealed wing lift strut should be
coordinated with the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) through the local airworthiness authority (e.g., Flight Standards District Office). There are provisions in paragraph (o) of this AD for approving such actions as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC).

(h) Remove Wing Lift Struts

At whichever of the compliance times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD that occurs later, remove the wing lift struts following Piper Aircraft Corporation Mandatory Service Bulletin (Piper MSB) No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Before further flight after the removal, do the actions in one of the following paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(1) Within 1 calendar month after February 8, 1999 (the effective date retained from AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998)); or

(2) Within 24 calendar months after the last inspection done in accordance with AD 93– 10–06, Amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993) (which was superseded by AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998)), whichever
occurs later.

(i) Inspect Wing Lift Struts

Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph (h) of this AD, inspect each wing lift strut following paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or do the wing lift strut replacement following one of the options in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD.

(1) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion and perceptible dents following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable.

(i) If no corrosion is visible and no perceptible dents are found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, before further flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to each wing lift strut following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable.

Repetitively thereafter inspect each wing
lift strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(ii) If corrosion or perceptible dents are found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD or during any repetitive inspection required in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this AD, before further flight, replace the affected wing lift strut with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.

(2) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion following the procedures in the Appendix to this AD. This inspection must be done by a Level 2 or Level 3 inspector certified using the guidelines established by the American Society for Non-destructive Testing or the ‘‘Military Standard for Nondestructive Testing Personnel Qualification and Certification’’ (MIL–STD–410E), which can
be found on the Internet at http://aerospacedefense.thomasnet.com/Asset/MILSTD-410.pdf.

(i) If no corrosion is found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD and all requirements in the Appendix to this AD are

met, before further flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to each wing lift strut following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect each wing lift strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(ii) If corrosion is found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD or during any repetitive inspection required in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this AD, or if any requirement in the Appendix of this AD is not met, before further flight after any inspection in which corrosion is found or the Appendix requirements are not met, replace the affected wing lift strut with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.

(j) Wing Lift Strut Replacement Options

Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph (h) of this AD, replace the wing lift struts following one of the options in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or inspect each wing lift strut following paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.

(1) Install original equipment manufacturer(OEM) part number wing lift struts (or FAAapproved equivalent part numbers) that have been inspected following the procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, and are found to be airworthy. Do the installations following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift struts at
intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(2) Install new sealed wing lift strut assemblies (or FAA-approved equivalent part numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut assemblies also include the wing lift strut forks) following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, and Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Installing one of these new sealed wing lift strut assemblies terminates the repetitive inspection requirements in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, and the wing lift strut fork removal, inspection, and replacement requirement in paragraphs (k) and (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, for that wing lift strut assembly.

(3) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut assemblies following F. Atlee Dodge Aircraft Services, Inc. Installation Instructions No. 3233–I for Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) SA4635NM, dated February 1, 1991, which
can be found on the Internet at http:// rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/

E726AAA2831BD20085256CC2000E3DB7? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa4635nm. Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift struts at intervals not to exceed 60 calendar months following the procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(k) Remove Wing Lift Strut Forks

For all affected airplane models, except for Models PA–25, PA–25–235, and PA–25–260 airplanes, within the next 100 hours time-inservice (TIS) after February 8, 1999 (the effective date retained from AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998)) or within 500 hours TIS after the last inspection done in accordance with AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993) (which was superseded by AD 99–01–05), whichever occurs later, remove the wing lift strut forks (unless already replaced in accordance with paragraph (j)(2) of this AD). Do the removal following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Before further flight after the removal, do the actions in one of the following paragraphs (l) or (m) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(l) Inspect and Replace Wing Lift Strut Forks

Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph (k) of this AD, inspect the wing lift strut forks following paragraph (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or do the wing lift strut fork replacement following one of the options in paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Inspect the wing


## 74001 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

lift strut forks for cracks using magnetic particle procedures, such as those contained in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 43.13–1B, Chapter 5, which can be found on the

Internet http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
99c827db9baac81b86256b4500596c4e/ $FILE/Chapter%2005.pdf. Repetitively thereafter inspect at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS until the replacement time requirement specified in paragraph (l)(2) or (l)(3) of this AD is reached provided no
cracks are found.

(1) If cracks are found during any inspection required in paragraph (l) of this AD or during any repetitive inspection required in paragraph (l)(2) or (l)(3) of this
AD, before further flight, replace the affected wing lift strut fork with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.

(2) If no cracks are found during the initial inspection required in paragraph (l) of this AD and the airplane is currently equipped with floats or has been equipped with floats at any time during the previous 2,000 hours TIS since the wing lift strut forks were installed, at or before accumulating 1,000 hours TIS on the wing lift strut forks, replace the wing lift strut forks with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift strut forks at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS following the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(3) If no cracks are found during the initial inspection required in paragraph (l) of this AD and the airplane has never been equipped with floats during the previous 2,000 hours TIS since the wing lift strut forks were installed, at or before accumulating 2,000 hours TIS on the wing lift strut forks, replace the wing lift strut forks with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift strut forks at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS following the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(m) Wing Lift Strut Fork Replacement Options

Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph (k) of this AD, replace the wing lift strut forks following one of the options in paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or inspect the wing lift strut forks following paragraph (1) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(1) Install new OEM part number wing lift strut forks of the same part numbers of the existing part (or FAA-approved equivalent part numbers) that were manufactured with rolled threads. Wing lift strut forks manufactured with machine (cut) threads are not to be used. Do the installations following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect and replace the newly installed wing
lift strut forks at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS following the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(2) Install new sealed wing lift strut assemblies (or FAA-approved equivalent part numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut assemblies also include the wing lift strut forks) following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, and Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. This installation may have already been done through the option specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Installing one of these new sealed wing lift strut assemblies terminates the repetitive inspection requirements in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, and the wing lift strut fork removal, inspection, and replacement requirements in paragraphs (k) and (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, for that wing lift strut assembly.

(3) For the airplanes specified below, install Jensen Aircraft wing lift strut fork assemblies specified below in the applicable STC following Jensen Aircraft Installation Instructions for Modified Lift Strut Fitting. Installing one of these wing lift strut fork assemblies terminates the repetitive inspection requirement of this AD only for that wing lift strut fork. Repetitively inspect each wing lift strut as specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(i) For Models PA–12 and PA–12S airplanes: STC SA1583NM, which can be
found on the Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/ Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/
0/2E708575849845B285256CC1008213CA? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1583nm;

(ii) For Model PA–14 airplanes: STC SA1584NM, which can be found on the

Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/

39872B814471737685256CC1008213D0? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1584nm;

(iii) For Models PA–16 and PA–16S airplanes: STC SA1590NM, which can be
found on the Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/ Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/
0/B28C4162E30D941F85256CC1008213F6? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1590nm;

(iv) For Models PA–18, PA–18S, PA–18 ‘‘105’’ (Special), PA–18S ‘‘105’’ (Special), PA–18A, PA–18 ‘‘125’’ (Army L–21A), PA– 18S ‘‘125’’, PA–18AS ‘‘125’’, PA–18 ‘‘135’’ (Army L–21B), PA–18A ‘‘135’’, PA–18S ‘‘135’’, PA–18AS ‘‘135’’, PA–18 ‘‘150’’, PA– 18A ‘‘150’’, PA–18S ‘‘150’’, PA–18AS ‘‘150’’, PA–18A (Restricted), PA–18A ‘‘135’’ (Restricted), and PA–18A ‘‘150’’ (Restricted) airplanes: STC SA1585NM, which can be
found on the Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/ Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/
0/A2BE010FB1CA61A285256CC1008213D6? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1585nm;

(v) For Models PA–20, PA–20S, PA–20 ‘‘115’’, PA–20S ‘‘115’’, PA–20 ‘‘135’’, and PA–20S ‘‘135’’ airplanes: STC SA1586NM, which can be found on the Internet at http:// rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/

873CC69D42C87CF585256CC1008213DC? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1586nm; and

(vi) For Model PA–22 airplanes: STC SA1587NM, which can be found on the

Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/

B051D04CCC0BED7E85256CC1008213E0? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa1587nm.

(4) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut assemblies following F. Atlee Dodge
Installation Instructions No. 3233–I for Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts (STC SA4635NM), dated February 1, 1991, which
can be found on the Internet at http:// rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory

_ and

_ Guidance

_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/

E726AAA2831BD20085256CC2000E3DB7? OpenDocument&Highlight=sa4635nm. This installation may have already been done in accordance paragraph (j)(3) of this AD. Installing these wing lift strut assemblies terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD for the wing lift strut fork only. Repetitively inspect the wing lift struts as specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(n) Install Placard

(1) Within 1 calendar month after February 8, 1999 (the effective date retained from AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998)), or within 24 calendar months after the last inspection required by AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39– 8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993) (which was superseded by AD 99–01–05), whichever occurs later, and before further flight after any replacement of a wing lift strut assembly required by this AD, do the actions in one of the following paragraphs (n)(1)(i) or (n)(1)(ii)
of this AD:

(i) Install ‘‘NO STEP’’ decal, Piper (P/N) 80944–02, on each wing lift strut approximately 6 inches from the bottom of the wing lift strut in a way that the letters can be read when entering and exiting the airplane; or

(ii) Paint the words ‘‘NO STEP’’ approximately 6 inches from the bottom of the wing lift strut in a way that the letters can be read when entering and exiting the airplane. Use a minimum of 1-inch letters using a color that contrasts with the color of the airplane.

(2) The ‘‘NO STEP’’ markings required by paragraph (n)(1)(i) or (n)(1)(ii) of this AD must remain in place for the life of the airplane.

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD related to Piper Aircraft, Inc. airplanes; the Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD related to FS 2000 Corp, FS 2001 Corp, FS 2002 Corporation, and FS 2003 Corporation airplanes; and the Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for this AD related to LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) airplanes, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In


## 74002 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the appropriate person identified in paragraph (p) of this AD.

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/ certificate holding district office.

(3) AMOCs approved for AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993) and AD 99–01–05, Amendment 39– 10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998) are approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(p) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD related to Piper Aircraft, Inc. airplanes, contact: Gregory ‘‘Keith’’ Noles, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; phone: (404) 474–5551; fax: (404) 474–5606; email: gregory.noles@faa.gov.

(2) For more information about this AD related to FS 2000 Corp, FS 2001 Corp, FS 2002 Corporation, and FS 2003 Corporation airplanes, contact: Jeff Morfitt, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, Washington 98057; phone: (425) 917–6405; fax: (245) 917–6590;
email: jeff.morfitt@faa.gov.

(3) For more information about this AD
related to LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) airplanes, contact: S.M. Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: sarjapur.nagarajan@faa.gov.

(q) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.

(3) The following service information was approved for IBR on February 8, 1999 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998).

(i) Piper Aircraft Corporation Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 528D, dated October 19,

1990.

(ii) Piper Aircraft Corporation Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 910A, dated October 10,

1989.

(iii) F. Atlee Dodge Aircraft Services, Inc.
Installation Instructions No. 3233–I for Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) SA4635NM, dated February 1, 1991.

(iv) Jensen Aircraft Installation Instructions for Modified Lift Strut Fittings, which incorporates pages 1 and 5, Original Issue, dated July 15, 1983; pages 2, 4, and 6, Revision No. 1, dated March 30, 1984; and pages a and 3, Revision No. 2, dated April

20, 1984.

(4) For Piper Aircraft, Inc. service information identified in this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 567–4361; Internet: www.piper.com. Copies of the instructions to the F. Atlee Dodge STC and information about the Jensen Aircraft STCs may be obtained from F. Atlee Dodge, Aircraft Services, LLC., 6672 Wes Way, Anchorage, Alaska 99518–0409, Internet: www.fadodge.com.

(5) You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148.

(6) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.

APPENDIX TO AD 99–01–05 R1

Procedures and Requirements for Ultrasonic Inspection of Piper Wing Lift Struts

Equipment Requirements

1. A portable ultrasonic thickness gauge or flaw detector with echo-to-echo digital thickness readout capable of reading to 0.001-inch and an A-trace waveform display will be needed to do this inspection.

2. An ultrasonic probe with the following specifications will be needed to accomplish this inspection: 10 MHz (or higher), 0.283- inch (or smaller) diameter dual element or delay line transducer designed for thickness gauging. The transducer and ultrasonic system shall be capable of accurately measuring the thickness of AISI 4340 steel down to 0.020-inch. An accuracy of +/- 0.002-inch throughout a 0.020-inch to 0.050- inch thickness range while calibrating shall be the criteria for acceptance.

3. Either a precision machined step wedge made of 4340 steel (or similar steel with equivalent sound velocity) or at least three shim samples of same material will be needed to accomplish this inspection. One thickness of the step wedge or shim shall be less than or equal to 0.020-inch, one shall be greater than or equal to 0.050-inch, and at least one other step or shim shall be between
these two values.

4. Glycerin, light oil, or similar non-water based ultrasonic couplants are recommended in the setup and inspection procedures. Water-based couplants, containing appropriate corrosion inhibitors, may be utilized, provided they are removed from
both the reference standards and the test item after the inspection procedure is completed and adequate corrosion prevention steps are then taken to protect these items.

• Note: Couplant is defined as ‘‘a
substance used between the face of the transducer and test surface to improve transmission of ultrasonic energy across the
transducer/strut interface.’’

• Note: If surface roughness due to paint loss or corrosion is present, the surface should be sanded or polished smooth before testing to assure a consistent and smooth surface for making contact with the transducer. Care shall be taken to remove a
minimal amount of structural material. Paint repairs may be necessary after the inspection to prevent further corrosion damage from occurring. Removal of surface irregularities will enhance the accuracy of the inspection technique.

Instrument Setup

1. Set up the ultrasonic equipment for thickness measurements as specified in the
instrument’s user’s manual. Because of the variety of equipment available to perform ultrasonic thickness measurements, some modification to this general setup procedure may be necessary. However, the tolerance requirement of step 13 and the record keeping requirement of step 14, must be
satisfied.

2. If battery power will be employed, check to see that the battery has been properly charged. The testing will take approximately two hours. Screen brightness and contrast
should be set to match environmental
conditions.

3. Verify that the instrument is set for the type of transducer being used, i.e. single or dual element, and that the frequency setting is compatible with the transducer.

4. If a removable delay line is used, remove it and place a drop of couplant between the transducer face and the delay line to assure good transmission of ultrasonic energy. Reassemble the delay line transducer and

continue.

5. Program a velocity of 0.231-inch/
microsecond into the ultrasonic unit unless
an alternative instrument calibration procedure is used to set the sound velocity.

6. Obtain a step wedge or steel shims per item 3 of the Equipment Requirements. Place the probe on the thickest sample using couplant. Rotate the transducer slightly back and forth to ‘‘ring’’ the transducer to the sample. Adjust the delay and range settings to arrive at an A-trace signal display with the
first backwall echo from the steel near the left
side of the screen and the second backwall echo near the right of the screen. Note that when a single element transducer is used, the initial pulse and the delay line/steel interface will be off of the screen to the left. Adjust the gain to place the amplitude of the first backwall signal at approximately 80% screen height on the A-trace.

7. ‘‘Ring’’ the transducer on the thinnest step or shim using couplant. Select positive half-wave rectified, negative half-wave rectified, or filtered signal display to obtain the cleanest signal. Adjust the pulse voltage, pulse width, and damping to obtain the best signal resolution. These settings can vary
from one transducer to another and are also user dependent.

8. Enable the thickness gate, and adjust the gate so that it starts at the first backwall echo
and ends at the second backwall echo. (Measuring between the first and second backwall echoes will produce a measurement of the steel thickness that is not affected by the paint layer on the strut). If instability of the gate trigger occurs, adjust the gain, gate level, and/or damping to stabilize the thickness reading.

9. Check the digital display reading and if it does not agree with the known thickness


## 74003 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

of the thinnest thickness, follow your

instrument’s calibration recommendations to produce the correct thickness reading. When a single element transducer is used this will usually involve adjusting the fine delay setting.

10. Place the transducer on the thickest step of shim using couplant. Adjust the thickness gate width so that the gate is triggered by the second backwall reflection of the thick section. If the digital display does not agree with the thickest thickness, follow your instruments calibration recommendations to produce the correct thickness reading. A slight adjustment in the velocity may be necessary to get both the thinnest and the thickest reading correct. Document the changed velocity value.

11. Place couplant on an area of the lift strut which is thought to be free of corrosion and ‘‘ring’’ the transducer to surface. Minor adjustments to the signal and gate settings may be required to account for coupling improvements resulting from the paint layer. The thickness gate level should be set just high enough so as not to be triggered by irrelevant signal noise. An area on the upper surface of the lift strut above the inspection area would be a good location to complete this step and should produce a thickness reading between 0.034-inch and 0.041-inch.

12. Repeat steps 8, 9, 10, and 11 until both

thick and thin shim measurements are within

tolerance and the lift strut measurement is reasonable and steady.

13. Verify that the thickness value shown in the digital display is within +/- 0.002-inch

of the correct value for each of the three or more steps of the setup wedge or shims. Make no further adjustments to the instrument settings.

14. Record the ultrasonic versus actual thickness of all wedge steps or steel shims available as a record of setup. Inspection Procedure
1. Clean the lower 18 inches of the wing lift struts using a cleaner that will remove all dirt and grease. Dirt and grease will adversely affect the accuracy of the inspection technique. Light sanding or polishing may also be required to reduce surface roughness as noted in the Equipment Requirements

section.

2. Using a flexible ruler, draw a 1 ⁄ 4 -inch grid on the surface of the first 11 inches from the lower end of the strut as shown in Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. This can be done using a soft (#2) pencil and should be done on both faces of the strut. As an alternative to drawing a complete grid, make two rows of marks spaced every 1 ⁄ 4 -inch across the width of the
strut. One row of marks should be about 11 inches from the lower end of the strut, and
the second row should be several inches away where the strut starts to narrow. Lay the flexible ruler between respective tick marks of the two rows and use tape or a rubber band to keep the ruler in place. See Figure 1.

3. Apply a generous amount of couplant inside each of the square areas or along the edge of the ruler. Re-application of couplant may be necessary.

4. Place the transducer inside the first square area of the drawn grid or at the first

1 ⁄ 4 -inch mark on the ruler and ‘‘ring’’ the transducer to the strut. When using a dual element transducer, be very careful to record
the thickness value with the axis of the transducer elements perpendicular to any curvature in the strut. If this is not done, loss of signal or inaccurate readings can result.

5. Take readings inside each square on the grid or at 1 ⁄ 4 -inch increments along the ruler and record the results. When taking a thickness reading, rotate the transducer slightly back and forth and experiment with the angle of contact to produce the lowest thickness reading possible. Pay close attention to the A-scan display to assure that the thickness gate is triggering off of
maximized backwall echoes.

• NOTE: A reading shall not exceed .041 inch. If a reading exceeds .041-inch, repeat steps 13 and 14 of the Instrument Setup section before proceeding further.

6. If the A-trace is unsteady or the thickness reading is clearly wrong, adjust the signal gain and/or gate setting to obtain reasonable and steady readings. If any instrument setting is adjusted, repeat steps 13 and 14 of the Instrument Setup section before proceeding further.

7. In areas where obstructions are present, take a data point as close to the correct area as possible.

• NOTE: The strut wall contains a fabrication bead at approximately 40% of the strut chord. The bead may interfere with accurate measurements in that specific
location.

8. A measurement of 0.024-inch or less shall require replacement of the strut prior to further flight.

9. If at any time during testing an area is
encountered where a valid thickness
measurement cannot be obtained due to a loss of signal strength or quality, the area shall be considered suspect. These areas may have a remaining wall thickness of less than 0.020-inch, which is below the range of this setup, or they may have small areas of localized corrosion or pitting present. The latter case will result in a reduction in signal strength due to the sound being scattered from the rough surface and may result in a signal that includes echoes from the pits as well as the backwall. The suspect area(s)
shall be tested with a Maule ‘‘Fabric Tester’’ as specified in Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989.

10. Record the lift strut inspection in the aircraft log book.


## 74004 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 10, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 22, 2013.
Earl Lawrence, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2013–29396 Filed 12–9–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**



### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 71**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–0948; Airspace Docket No. 13–ASW–25]** 



### Amendment of Class D and Class E **Airspace; Lake Charles, LA**

**AGENCY** 

### : Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION** 

### : Final rule, technical
amendment.

**SUMMARY** 

### : This action amends Class D and Class E airspace within the Lake Charles, LA, area by updating the geographic coordinates for Lake Charles Regional Airport, and the airport name and geographic coordinates for Chennault International Airport, formerly known as Chennault Industrial Airpark. This action does not change the boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.

**DATES** 

### : Effective date: 0901 UTC, February 6, 2014. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** 

### : Scott Enander, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321–

7716.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** 

### :

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by adjusting the geographic coordinates, within the Class D and Class E airspace areas, of Lake Charles Regional Airport, Lake Charles, LA, and Chennault International Airport, formally known as Chennault Industrial Airpark, Lake Charles, LA, to coincide with the FAA’s
aeronautical database. An
administrative correction also is made to the spelling of the Southland Field, Sulphur, LA, navigation aid from Sulphy NDB to Sulphur NDB. This is an administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.

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 11034; 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 only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency’s authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends controlled airspace in the Lake Charles,

LA area.

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: