66604 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT,

TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS

GROWN IN FLORIDA

2. In § 905.306, the table in paragraph

(a) is amended by removing both lines

for the entry for ‘‘Seedless, red’’ and

adding in their place the following:

§ 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 ................................................. 35⁄16

*******

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT

REGULATIONS

3. In § 944.106, the table in paragraph

(a) is amended by removing both lines

for the entry for ‘‘Seedless, red’’ and

adding in their place the following:

§ 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 35⁄16

*******

Dated: October 31, 2000.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–28333 Filed 11–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–SW–51–AD; Amendment

39–11960; AD 2000–20–51]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Robinson

Helicopter Company Model R22

Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This document publishes in

the Federal Register an amendment

adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD)

2000–20–51, which was sent previously

to all known U.S. owners and operators

of Robinson Helicopter Company (RHC)

Model R22 helicopters by individual

letters. This AD requires checking the

yoke half assembly (yoke) for any crack

and replacing a cracked yoke assembly

before further flight. This AD also

requires replacing certain yokes with

airworthy yokes before further flight

after January 1, 2001. This AD is

prompted by the discovery of cracks in

the yoke. The actions specified by this

AD are intended to detect crack

formation and growth, which could

result in separation of the yokes from

the main rotor drive shaft and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter.

DATES: Effective November 22, 2000, to

all persons except those persons to

whom it was made immediately

effective by Emergency AD 2000–20–51,

issued on October 4, 2000, which

contained the requirements of this

amendment.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

January 8, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–SW–

51–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may

also send comments electronically to

the Rules Docket at the following

address: 9-asw-adcomments@faa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Fredrick A. Guerin, Aviation Safety

Engineer, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, Airframe Branch,

3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood,

California 90712, telephone (562) 627–

5232, fax (562) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 4, 2000, the FAA issued

Emergency AD 2000–20–51, for RHC

Model R22 helicopters, which requires

checking the yoke for any crack and

replacing a cracked yoke assembly

before further flight. The Emergency AD

also requires replacing certain yokes

with airworthy yokes before further

flight after January 1, 2001. That action

was prompted by the discovery of

cracks in the yokes. The cracked yokes

were still in service and functioned for

an unknown duration. Several lots of

the yokes were machined from 2024-T3

aluminum billet, which has poor stress

corrosion properties in the transverse

grain directions. Clamping the yokes in

place causes a preload tension in areas

that have exposed transverse grain.

When these areas are exposed to a

corrosive environment, such as salty air,

stress corrosion causes crack formation

and growth. This condition, if not

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 66605

corrected, could result in separation of

the yokes from the main rotor drive

shaft and subsequent loss of control of

the helicopter.

The FAA has reviewed RHC R22

Service Bulletin SB–88A, dated

September 13, 2000, which describes

procedures for determining the lot

number for yokes, P/N A203–5, and

replacing any affected yoke with yoke,

P/N A203–7.

Since the unsafe condition described

is likely to exist or develop on other

RHC Model R22 helicopters of the same

type design, the FAA issued Emergency

AD 2000–20–51 to detect crack

formation and growth, which could

result in separation of the yokes from

the main rotor drive shaft and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter. The AD requires the

following:

• Before further flight and thereafter

before the first flight of each day, check

the identified area of each yoke for a

crack. The visual check required by the

AD may be performed by an owner/

operator (pilot) but must be entered into

the aircraft records showing compliance

with paragraph (a) of the AD in

accordance with 14 CFR 43.11 and

91.417(a)(2)(v). The AD allows a pilot to

perform this check because it involves

only a visual check for a crack in the

yoke and can be performed equally well

by a pilot or a mechanic.

• If a yoke has a crack, before further

flight, replace the yokes with airworthy

yokes, P/N A203–7. Both yokes must be

replaced with yoke, P/N A203–7.

• Before further flight after January 1,

2001, determine the lot identifier for

each yoke, P/N A203–5, and replace any

affected yokes, P/N A203–5, with yokes,

P/N A203–7.

Determining that the installed yokes

are not in the lots affected by this AD

or replacing both yokes, P/N A203–5,

with yokes, P/N A203–7, is terminating

action for the requirements of this AD.

The short compliance time involved is

required because the previously

described critical unsafe condition can

adversely affect the structural integrity

and controllability of the helicopter.

Therefore, checking the yoke for any

crack and replacing any cracked yoke

are required before further flight, and

this AD must be issued immediately.

Since it was found that immediate

corrective action was required, notice

and opportunity for prior public

comment thereon were impracticable

and contrary to the public interest, and

good cause existed to make the AD

effective immediately by individual

letters issued on October 4, 2000 to all

known U.S. owners and operators of

RHC Model R22 helicopters. These

conditions still exist, and the AD is

hereby published in the Federal

Register as an amendment to section

39.13 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it

effective to all persons. However, one

minor editorial correction is made in

this AD. The note concerning existing

alternative methods of compliance was

incorrectly numbered in the emergency

AD. This AD corrects that Note number

as NOTE 3. The FAA has determined

that this change will neither increase

the economic burden on any operator

nor increase the scope of the AD.

The FAA estimates that 1305

helicopters of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD, that it will take

approximately 0.3 work hour per

helicopter to check both yokes and 0.5

work hour to replace both yokes. The

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$150 per helicopter (two yokes). Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to

be $258,390, assuming each helicopter

is inspected once and both yokes are

replaced on all helicopters.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this rule by

submitting such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications should identify the

Rules Docket number and be submitted

in triplicate to the address specified

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their mailed

comments submitted in response to this

rule must submit a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2000–SW–

51–AD.’’ The postcard will be date

stamped and returned to the

commenter.

The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it is

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

Rules Docket at the FAA, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort

Worth, Texas.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive to

read as follows:

2000–20–51 Robinson Helicopter Company:

Amendment 39–11960. Docket No.

2000–SW–51–AD.

Applicability: Model R22 helicopters, with

a yoke half assembly (yoke), Part number(P/

66606 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

N) A203–5, installed, certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

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 helicopters 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 (f) 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 failure of a yoke, separation of

a yoke from the main rotor drive shaft, and

subsequent loss of control of the helicopter,

accomplish the following:

(a) Before further flight and thereafter

before the first flight of each day, check each

yoke for a crack. See Figure A.

(b) If a yoke is cracked, before further

flight, replace the yokes with airworthy

yokes, P/N A203–7. Both yokes must be

replaced with yokes, P/N A203–7.

(c) Before further flight after January 1,

2001,

(1) Determine the Lot identifier of each

yoke.

(2) If the Lot identifier is from 24 through

43, if it is a letter code, or if it is illegible,

replace yokes, P/N A203–5, with airworthy

yokes, P/N A203–7. Yoke, P/N A203–7,

cannot be installed with yoke, P/N A203–5.

Note 2: Robinson Helicopter Company R22

Service Bulletin SB–88A, dated September

13, 2000, pertains to the subject of this AD.

(d) The visual check required by paragraph

(a) may be performed by an owner/operator

(pilot) holding at least a private pilot

certificate and must be entered into the

aircraft records showing compliance with

paragraph (a) in accordance with 14 CFR

43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v).

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C

(e) Determining that the installed yokes, P/

N A203–5, are not in the lots affected by this

AD, or replacing yokes, P/N A203–5, with

yokes, P/N A203–7, is terminating action for

the requirements of this AD.

(f) 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, FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,

who may concur or comment and then send

it to the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office.

(g) Special flight permits will not be

issued.

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

November 22, 2000, to all persons except

those persons to whom it was made

immediately effective by Emergency AD

2000–20–51, issued October 4, 2000, which

contained the requirements of this

amendment.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 66607

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 27,

2000.

Henry A. Armstrong,

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–28236 Filed 11–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–136–AD; Amendment

39–11962; AD 2000–22–15]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–100, –200B, –200C, –200F,

and –300 Series Airplanes Delivered In

or Modified Into the Stretched Upper

Deck Configuration

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain Boeing Model 747–

100, –200B, –200C, –200F, and –300

series airplanes delivered in or modified

into the stretched upper deck

configuration. This action requires a

one-time inspection to detect chafing

between certain engine thrust control

cables and certain cable penetration

holes, and follow-on actions, if

necessary. This action is necessary to

prevent chafing and failure of engine

thrust control cables, which could result

in a severe asymmetric thrust condition

during landing, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane. This

action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective November 22, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations was approved previously by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

April 24, 2000 (65 FR 14838, March 20,

2000).

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

January 8, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

136–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-iarcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–136–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box

3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dionne Krebs, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2250; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

10, 2000, the FAA issued AD 2000–05–

30, amendment 39–11640 (65 FR 14838,

March 20, 2000), applicable to certain

Boeing Model 747 series airplanes, to

require repetitive inspections to detect

discrepancies of the cables, fittings, and

pulleys of the engine thrust control

cable installation; replacement, if

necessary; and, for certain airplanes,

certain preventative actions on the

engine thrust control cable installation.

That action was prompted by reports of

failure of engine thrust control cables.

The requirements of that AD are

intended to prevent such failures, which

could result in a severe asymmetric

thrust condition during landing, and

consequent reduced controllability of

the airplane.

Paragraph (g) of AD 2000–05–30

requires, for certain Model 747–100B

series airplanes with a stretched upper

deck (SUD), a detailed visual inspection

and measurement of the clearance

between certain engine thrust control

cables and the cable penetration holes,

and follow-on corrective actions, if

necessary. Since the issuance of AD

2000–05–30, the FAA has determined

that certain other Model 747 series

airplanes delivered with or modified to

have a SUD are subject to the same

unsafe condition as the Model 747–

100B SUD airplanes identified in

paragraph (g) of the existing AD.

Therefore, the FAA finds that further

rulemaking is necessary to prevent

chafing and failure of engine thrust

control cables, which could result in a

severe asymmetric thrust condition

during landing, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane, on all

affected airplanes.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has previously reviewed

and approved Boeing Service Bulletin

747–53–2327, Revision 2, dated

September 24, 1998. That service

bulletin describes procedures for

repetitive inspections of certain upper

deck floor beams to detect cracking, and

repair of any cracks found or

reinforcement of those floor beams. The

service bulletin also describes

procedures for a detailed inspection and

measurement of the clearance between

the engine thrust control cables and the

cable penetration holes in that area, and

modification of the holes or replacement

of the plate, if necessary.

Explanation of Requirements of the

Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design, this AD is being issued to

prevent chafing and failure of engine

thrust control cables, which could result

in a severe asymmetric thrust condition

during landing, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane. This AD

requires accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between This AD and

Relevant Service Bulletin

Operators should note that, although

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2327

describes procedures for inspection of

certain upper deck floor beams, and

repair of any cracks found or

reinforcement of those floor beams, as

applicable, this AD requires only the

detailed visual inspection and

measurement of the clearance between

the engine thrust control cables and the

cable penetration holes in that area. The

inspection, repair, and reinforcement of

certain upper deck floor beams are

mandated by AD 92–24–07, amendment

39–8412 (57 FR 53436, November 10,

1992). The detailed visual inspection

and measurement of the clearance

between the engine thrust control cables

and the cable penetration holes was

incorporated into the service bulletin

after AD 92–24–07 was issued.

Therefore, the FAA is requiring that part

of the service bulletin in this AD. In

addition, for airplanes on which

insufficient clearance is measured, this

AD adds an additional inspection of the