Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 58675

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT,

TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS

GROWN IN FLORIDA

2. In § 905.306, the table in paragraph

(a) is amended by revising the entry for

‘‘Seedless, red’’ to read as follows:

§ 905.306 Orange, Grapefruit, Tangerine,

and Tangelo Regulation.

(a) * * *

TABLE I

Variety Regulation period Minimum grade

Minimum

Diameter

(Inches)

(1) (2) (3) (4)

GRAPEFRUIT

*******

Seedless, Red ........................................... On and after 11/13/00 .............................. U.S. No. 1 ................................................. 3–5/16

*******

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT

REGULATIONS

3. In § 944.106, the table in

paragraphs (a) is amended by revising

the entry for ‘‘Seedless, red’’ to read as

follows:

§ 944.106 Grapefruit import regulation.

(a) * * *

Grapefruit classification Regulation period Minimum grade

Minimum

diameter

(inches)

(1) (2) (3) (4)

*******

Seedless, red ............................................ On and after 11/13/00 .............................. U.S. No. 1 ................................................. 3–5/16

*******

Dated: September 27, 2000.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–25188 Filed 9–27–00; 4:21pm]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–CE–55–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd. Models PC–12 and PC–12/

45 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to certain Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) Models PC–12 and

PC–12/45 airplanes that are equipped

with a certain windshield configuration.

The proposed AD would require you to

incorporate pilot’s operating handbook

(POH) information that would prohibit

the operation of the windshield heating

system in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode, and

would require you to modify the

windshield deicing system wiring and

circuit breakers. You could remove the

POH information after accomplishing

the modification. The proposed AD is

the result of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information (MCAI)

issued by the airworthiness authority for

Switzerland. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent loss of electrical power to the

windshield deicing system due to

operation in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode, which

could result in icing of the windshield

and loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this proposed rule on or

before November 7, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 2000–CE–55–AD, 901

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106. Comments may be

inspected at this location between 8

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison

Manager, CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland;

telephone: +41 41 619 63 19; facsimile:

+41 41 619 6224; or from Pilatus

Business Aircraft Ltd., Product Support

Department, 11755 Airport Way,

Broomfield, Colorado 80021; telephone:

(303) 465–9099; facsimile: (303) 465–

6040. This information also may be

examined at the Rules Docket at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roman T. Gabrys, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4141; facsimile: (816) 329–4090.

58676 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

How do I comment on the proposed

AD? The FAA invites comments on this

proposed rule. You may submit

whatever written data, views, or

arguments you choose. You need to

include the rule’s docket number and

submit your comments in triplicate to

the address specified under the caption

ADDRESSES. The FAA will consider all

comments received on or before the

closing date. We may amend the

proposed rule in light of comments

received. Factual information that

supports your ideas and suggestions is

extremely helpful in evaluating the

effectiveness of the proposed AD action

and determining whether we need to

take additional rulemaking action.

Are there any specific portions of the

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

The FAA specifically invites comments

on the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule that might suggest a

need to modify the rule. You may

examine all comments we receive before

and after the closing date of the rule in

the Rules Docket. We will file a report

in the Rules Docket that summarizes

each FAA contact with the public that

concerns the substantive parts of the

proposed AD.

We are re-examining the writing style

we currently use in regulatory

documents, in response to the

Presidential memorandum of June 1,

1998. That memorandum requires

federal agencies to communicate more

clearly with the public. We are

interested in your comments on whether

the style of this document is clearer, and

any other suggestions you might have to

improve the clarity of FAA

communications that affect you. You

can get more information about the

Presidential memorandum and the plain

language initiative at http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

How can I be sure FAA receives my

comment? If you want us to

acknowledge the receipt of your

comments, you must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard. On the

postcard, write ‘‘Comments to Docket

No. 2000–CE–55–AD.’’ We will date

stamp and mail the postcard back to

you.

Discussion

What events have caused this

proposed AD? 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 certain Pilatus

Models PC–12 and PC–12/45 airplanes.

The FOCA reports that the electrical

load of the left hand (LH) and right hand

(RH) windshields can become too high

during flight at cruise altitudes when

the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode is selected on the

windshield deicing system. The FOCA

references eight instances where

prolonged operation of the windshield

deicing system in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode

caused this system to temporarily shut

down.

The airplanes involved in the above

instances were equipped with part

number (P/N) 959.81.10.107 LH and P/

N/ 959.81.10.108 RH windshields.

What are the consequences if the

condition is not corrected? Operation of

the existing design windshield deicing

system in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ position can

overload the electrical capacity of the

wiring and circuit breakers. This could

result in complete electrical power loss

to the windshield and icing of the

windshield.

Is there service information that

applies to this subject? Pilatus has

issued the following:

—Temporary Revision No. 21 to PC–12

Pilot’s Operating Handbook, Report

No. 01973–001, Section 2, Windshield

Heater Operation 101–320, Issued:

May 19, 2000: This document

specifies operating procedures and

limitations for airplanes with the

affected windshield configurations;

and

—Service Bulletin No. 30–006, dated

May 22, 2000: This document

includes procedures for modifying the

windshield deicing system wiring and

circuit breakers.

What action did FOCA take? The

FOCA classified Pilatus Service Bulletin

No. 30–006, dated May 22, 2000, as

mandatory and issued Swiss AD HB

2000–393, dated September 6, 2000, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

Switzerland.

Was this in accordance with the

bilateral airworthiness agreement?

These airplane models are

manufactured in Switzerland and are

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 has

kept FAA informed of the situation

described above.

The FAA’s Determination and an

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

What has FAA decided? The FAA has

examined the findings of the FOCA;

reviewed all available information,

including the service information

referenced above; and determined that:

—The unsafe condition referenced in

this document exists or could develop

on other Pilatus PC–12 and PC-12/45

airplanes of the same type design that

incorporate this windshield

configuration;

—The actions specified in the

previously-referenced service

information should be accomplished

on the affected airplanes; and

—AD action should be taken in order to

correct this unsafe condition.

What does the proposed AD require?

This proposed AD would require you to

incorporate POH information that

would prohibit the operation of the

windshield heating system in the

‘‘LIGHT’’ mode, and would require you

to modify the windshield deicing

system wiring and circuit breakers. You

could remove the POH information after

accomplishing the modification.

Cost Impact

How many airplanes does the

proposed AD impact? We estimate that

the proposed AD affects 108 airplanes in

the U.S. registry.

What is the cost impact of the

proposed AD on owners/operators of the

affected airplanes? We estimate the

following costs to accomplish the

proposed modification:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane

Total cost on

U.S. airplane

operators

18 workhours × $60 per hour = $1,080 .. Pilatus will provide free-of-charge ........... $1,080 per airplane. ................................ $116,640.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 58677

Compliance Time of the Proposed AD

What is the compliance time of the

proposed AD? The compliance time of

the proposed AD is as follows:

—Incorporation of the POH temporary

revision: ‘‘Within the next 30 days

after the effective date of this AD;’’

and

—Modification: ‘‘Within the next 12

months after the effective date of this

AD.’’

Why is the compliance of the

proposed AD in calendar time instead of

hours time-in-service (TIS)? Although

loss of electrical power to the

windshield deicing system due to

operation in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode is

unsafe during flight, the condition is not

a direct result of airplane operation. The

chance of this situation occurring is the

same for an airplane with 10 hours TIS

as it would be for an airplane with 500

hours TIS. A calendar time for

compliance will assure that the unsafe

condition is addressed on all airplanes

in a reasonable time period.

Regulatory Impact

Does this proposed AD impact various

entities? The regulations proposed

herein would 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. Therefore, it is

determined that this proposed rule

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

Does this proposed AD involve a

significant rule or regulatory action? For

the reasons discussed above, I certify

that this proposed action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action has been placed in the Rules

Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: Docket No. 2000–CE–

55–AD.

(a) What airplanes are affected by this AD?

This AD affects Models PC–12 and PC–12/45

airplanes, manufacturer serial number (MSN)

101 through MSN 320, that are:

(1) certificated in any category; and

(2) equipped with part number (P/N)

959.81.10.107 LH and P/N 959.81.10.108 RH

windshields (or FAA-approved equivalent

part numbers).

(b) Who must comply with this AD?

Anyone who wishes to operate any of the

above airplanes on the U.S. Register must

comply with this AD.

(c) What problem does this AD address?

The actions specified by this AD are intended

to prevent loss of electrical power to the

windshield deicing system due to operation

in the ‘‘LIGHT’’ mode, which could result in

icing of the windshield and loss of control of

the airplane.

(d) What actions must I accomplish to

address this problem? To address this

problem, you must accomplish the following:

Action Compliance time Procedures

(1) Insert Temporary Revision No. 21 to PC–12

Pilot’s Operating Handbook, Report No.

01973–001, Section 2, Windshield Heater

Operation 101–320, Issued May 19, 2000.

Within the next 30 days after the effective

date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

Anyone who holds at least a private pilot certificate, as authorized by section 43.7 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

43.7), may incorporate the pilot’s operating

handbook (POH) revision required by this

AD. You must make an entry into the aircraft records that shows compliance with

this AD, in accordance with section 43.9 of

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

43.9).

(2) Modify the windshield deicing system wires

and circuit breakers. You may remove the

POH temporary revision referenced in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD after accomplishing

this modification.

Within the next 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

In accordance with the modification procedures in the Accomplishment Instructions

section of Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 30–

006, dated May 22, 2000.

(3) Do not install, on any affected airplane, P/N

959.81.10.107 LH and P/N 959.81.10.108 RH

windshields (or FAA-approved equivalent part

numbers), without incorporating the modification required in paragraph (d)(2) of this AD.

As of the effective date of this AD ................... Not applicable.

Note 1: Temporary Revision No. 21 to PC–

12 Pilot’s Operating Handbook, Report No.

01973–001, Section 2, Windshield Heater

Operation 101–320, Issued: May 19, 2000,

eliminates the need for Temporary Revision

No. 14 in the POH.

(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other

way? You may use an alternative method of

compliance or adjust the compliance time if:

(1) Your alternative method of compliance

provides an equivalent level of safety; and

(2) The Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, approves your alternative.

Submit your request through a FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in paragraph (a) of this AD,

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

58678 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

that the performance of the requirements of

this AD is affected, the owner/operator must

request approval for an alternative method of

compliance in accordance with paragraph (e)

of this AD. The request should include an

assessment of the effect of the modification,

alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD; and, if you have not

eliminated the unsafe condition, specific

actions you propose to address it.

(f) Where can I get information about any

already-approved alternative methods of

compliance? Contact Roman T. Gabrys,

Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane

Directorate, 1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4141; facsimile: (816) 329–4090.

(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to

another location to comply with this AD? The

FAA can issue a special flight permit under

sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and

21.199) to operate your airplane to a location

where you can accomplish the requirements

of this AD.

(h) How do I get copies of the documents

referenced in this AD? You may obtain copies

of the documents referenced in this AD from

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison

Manager, CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland; or

from Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd., Product

Support Department, 11755 Airport Way,

Broomfield, Colorado 80021. You may

examine these documents at FAA, Central

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Swiss AD HB 2000–393, dated September

6, 2000.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

September 26, 2000.

Michael K. Dahl,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–25152 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–CE–14–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rockwell

Collins, Inc. ADC–85, ADC–85A, ADC–

850C, and ADC–850F Air Data

Computers

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to certain

Rockwell Collins, Inc. (Rockwell) ADC–

85, ADC–85A, ADC–850C, and ADC–

850F air data computers that are

installed on airplanes. The proposed AD

would require you to replace any air

data computer (ADC) with one that has

reprogrammed and tested central

processing unit (CPU) circuit card and

circuit card assemblies. The proposed

AD is the result of a flight test that

showed that these ADC’s could display

an unwarranted ADC flag in response to

the airplane’s ‘‘Normal/Alternate Air’’

static source selection capability. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent the ADC from

displaying an unwarranted ADC flag

when switching static air sources. This

could cause the flight crew to deselect

a valid alternate static air source during

the time the unwarranted ADC flag is

displayed and possibly result in the

display of misleading information

during critical operating situations.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this proposed rule by

November 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments in triplicate

to FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 2000–CE–14–AD, 901

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106. You may inspect

comments at this location between 8

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except holidays.

You may get the service information

referenced in the proposed AD from

Rockwell Collins, Business and

Regional Systems, 400 Collins Road

Northeast, Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52498.

You may read this information at the

Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roger A. Souter, FAA, Wichita Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport

Road, Rm 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone: (316) 946–4134; facsimile:

(316) 946–4407. E-mail address:

Roger.Souter@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

How do I comment on this AD? We

invite your comments on the proposed

rule. You may send whatever written

data, views, or arguments you choose.

You need to include the rule’s docket

number and send your comments in

triplicate to the address specified under

the caption ADDRESSES. We will

consider all comments received by the

closing date specified above, before

acting on the proposed rule. We may

change the proposals contained in this

notice because of the comments

received.

Are there any specific portions of the

AD I should pay attention to? The FAA

specifically invites comments on the

overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule that might call for a

need to change the proposed rule. You

may read all comments we receive. We

will file a report in the Rules Docket

that summarizes each FAA contact with

the public that concerns the substantive

parts of this proposal.

The FAA is reviewing the writing

style we currently use in regulatory

documents, in response to the

Presidential memorandum of June 1,

1998. That memorandum requires

federal agencies to communicate more

clearly with the public. We are

interested in your comments on the ease

of understanding this document, and

any other suggestions you might have to

improve the clarity of FAA

communications that affect you. You

can get more information about the

Presidential memorandum and the plain

language initiative at http://

www.faa.gov/language/.

How can I be sure FAA receives my

comment? If you want us to

acknowledge the receipt of your

comments, you must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard. On the

postcard, write ‘‘Comments to Docket

No. 2000–CE–14–AD.’’ We will date

stamp and mail the postcard back to

you.

Discussion

What events have caused this

proposed AD? The air data computer

(ADC), as part of its monitoring process,

tests for errant sensor behavior, such as

unreasonable jumps in altitude and

unreasonably high vertical speed. When

the ADC detects an errant sensor

behavior, the ADC displays a flag for 5.5

seconds plus the time it takes for the

sensor to settle within the limits for

another 5.5-second period. This results

in a minimum ADC flag display of 11

seconds.

Testing of certain Rockwell Collins

ADC’s reveals the ADC could display

unwarranted flags on aircraft where you

can select the ‘‘Normal/Alternate Air’’

static source. When there is a significant

difference between normal and

alternate/revisionary static air sources,

you can exceed the ADC monitor

thresholds and the ADC would display

flags.