### 60395 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules

d. In paragraph (e) introductory text, by adding a sentence after the second sentence to read as set forth below.

e. By adding a sentence after the paragraph (e)(1) introductory text heading to read as set forth below.

**§ 305.9 Irradiation treatment requirements.**
* * * * *

(a) * * * (1) Where certified irradiation facilities are available, an approved irradiation treatment may be conducted for any imported regulated article either prior to shipment to the United States or in the United States. For any regulated article moved interstate from Hawaii or U.S. territories, irradiation treatment may be conducted either prior to movement to the mainland United States or in the mainland United States. Irradiation facilities may be located in any State on the mainland United States. For irradiation facilities located in the States of Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia, the following additional conditions must be
met:

(i) Prospective facility operators must submit a detailed layout of the facility site and its location to APHIS. APHIS will evaluate plant health risks based on the proposed location and layout of the facility site. APHIS will only approve a proposed facility if the Administrator determines that regulated articles can be safely transported to the facility from port of entry or points of origin in the United States.

(ii) The government of the State in which the facility is to be located must concur in writing with the establishment of the facility or, if it does not concur, must provide a written explanation of concern based on pest risks. In instances where the State government does not concur with the proposed facility location, APHIS and the State will agree on a strategy to resolve the pest risk concerns prior to APHIS approval.

(iii) Untreated articles may not be removed from their packaging prior to treatment under any circumstances.

(iv) The facility must have contingency plans, approved by APHIS, for safely destroying or disposing of regulated articles if the facility is unable to properly treat a shipment.

(v) The facility may only treat articles approved by APHIS for treatment at the facility. Approved articles will be listed in the compliance agreement required in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section.

(vi) Arrangements for treatment must be made before the departure of a consignment from its port of entry or points of origin in the United States. APHIS and the facility must agree on all parameters, such as time, routing, and conveyance, by which the consignment will move from the port of entry or points of origin in the United States to the treatment facility.

(vii) Regulated articles must be conveyed to the facility in a refrigerated (via motorized refrigeration equipment or other methods including ice or insulation) or air-conditioned conveyance at a temperature that minimizes the mobility of the pests of concern for the article.

(viii) The facility must maintain and provide APHIS with an updated map identifying places where horticultural or other crops are grown within 4 square miles of the facility. Proximity of host material to the facility will necessitate trapping or other pest monitoring activities to help prevent establishment of any escaped pests of concern, as approved by APHIS; these activities will be listed in the compliance agreement required in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section. The treatment facility must have a pest management plan within the facility.

(ix) The facility must comply with any additional requirements that APHIS may require to prevent the escape of plant pests during transport to and from the irradiation facility itself, for a particular facility based on local conditions, and for any other risk factors of concern. These activities will be listed in the compliance agreement required in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section.

* * * * *

(b) * * * Other agencies that have regulatory oversight and requirements must concur in writing with the establishment of the facility prior to APHIS approval.

(c) * * * Compliance agreements for facilities located in States listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may also contain additional provisions as described in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(ix) of this section. * * *

* * * * *

(e) * * * Facilities must be located within the local commuting area for APHIS employees for inspection
purposes.

(1) * * * Facilities shall be located within an area over which the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is assigned authority to accept entries of merchandise, to collect duties, and to enforce the provisions of the customs and navigation laws in force. * * *

* * * * * **PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES** 

3. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, and 7781–7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

**§ 319.56–46 [Amended]**

4. Section § 319.56–46 is amended as follows:

a. In paragraph (a), by removing the words ‘‘in India’’.

b. In paragraph (e) introductory text, by removing the words ‘‘certifying that the fruit received the required irradiation treatment. The phytosanitry certificate must also bear’’ and adding the word ‘‘with’’ in their place.

**§ 319.56–47 [Amended]**

5. Section 319.56–47 is amended as follows:

a. In paragraph (b), by removing the second sentence.

b. In paragraph (c)(1), by removing the words ‘‘that the litchi were treated with irradiation as described in paragraph (b) of this section and’’.

c. In paragraph (c)(2), by removing the words ‘‘with an additional declaration stating that the longan, mango, mangosteen, pineapple, or rambutan were treated with irradiation as described in paragraph (b) of this section’’.

Done in Washington, DC, this 22nd day of September 2011. Edward Avalos, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–25092 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–34–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Agricultural Research Service**

**7 CFR Part 505**

**Modification of Interlibrary Loan Fee Schedule; Correction** 

**AGENCY :**  Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; correction.

**SUMMARY :**  The proposed rule published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2011 (76 FR 57681) announced Agricultural Research Service intent to seek comments on renewing the National Agricultural Library’s regulation to increase the interlibrary loan fees. This document corrects the RIN number.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Kay Derr, 301–504–5879.


### 60396 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Correction

In the Federal Register of September 16, 2011, in FR Doc. 2011–23723, on pages 57681–57682 in the heading section, correct the RIN number to read as follows: RIN 0518–AA04

Yvette Anderson, Federal Register Liaison Officer for Agricultural Research Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–24367 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2011–1040; Directorate Identifier 2011–CE–029–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. Airplanes** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. Model P–180 airplanes. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

One event of in-flight baggage door opening occurred on an in-service aeroplane due to a defective locking mechanism or installation thereof; the BAG DOOR warning light went on properly before the event, but was ignored by the pilot, who misinterpreted it as a false warning.

NOTE: False in-service BAG DOOR warnings had occurred on other P.180 aeroplanes, and Piaggio Aero Industries (PAI) had issued Service Bulletin (SB) No. 80–0223 revision 1 to improve the installation of the baggage door warning microswitch and to modify the locking mechanism if necessary.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to in-flight detachment of the door, which could hit and damage the left propeller and/or the vertical or horizontal stabilizer, possibly resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane, or in injuries to persons or damage to property on the ground. Instances of the baggage door open light illuminating have occurred when the baggage door was not open. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the pilot disregarding a valid warning. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 14,
2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: (202) 493–2251.

• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A.-Airworthiness Office,Via Luigi Cibrario, 4–16154 GenovaItaly; phone: +39 010 6481353; fax: +39 010 6481881; e-mail: airworthiness@piaggioaero.it; Internet:http://www.piaggioaero.com/#/en/aftersales/service-support. 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; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the

**ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4144; fax: (816) 329–4090; e-mail: mike.kiesov@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2011–1040; Directorate Identifier 2011–CE–029–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those
comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD No.: 2011–0132, dated July 12, 2011 (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

One event of in-flight baggage door opening occurred on an in-service aeroplane due to a defective locking mechanism or installation thereof; the BAG DOOR warning light went on properly before the event, but was ignored by the pilot, who misinterpreted it as a false warning.

NOTE: false in-service BAG DOOR warnings had occurred on other P.180 aeroplanes, and Piaggio Aero Industries (PAI) had issued Service Bulletin (SB) No. 80–0223 revision 1 to improve the installation of the baggage door warning microswitch and to modify the locking mechanism if necessary.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to in-flight detachment of the door, which could hit and damage the left propeller and/or the vertical or horizontal stabilizer, possibly resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane, or in injuries to persons or damage to property on the ground.

This AD requires an inspection of the locking mechanism of the baggage door and its proper adjustment, in accordance with PAI SB No. 80–0289 revision 1; if baggage door lockpins do not reach the correct engagement, or false BAG DOOR warnings were reported by flight crew, this AD requires also a modification of the door mechanism in accordance with PAI SB No. 80–0223 revision 1. Instances of the baggage door open light illuminating have occurred when the baggage door was not open. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the pilot disregarding a valid warning. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. has issued Service Bulletin No. 80–0223,