Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68475 

handlers. While assessments impose 

some additional costs on handlers, the 

costs are minimal and uniform on all 

handlers. However, these costs would 

be offset by the benefits derived by the 

operation of the marketing order. In 

addition, the Committee’s meetings 

were widely publicized throughout the 

California kiwifruit industry and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and participate in 

Committee deliberations on all issues. 

Like all Committee meetings, the July 17 

and September 16, 2015, meetings, were 

public meetings and all entities, both 

large and small, were able to express 

views on this issue. Finally, interested 

persons are invited to submit comments 

on this proposed rule, including the 

regulatory and informational impacts of 

this action on small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C 

Chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189. No 

changes in those requirements are 

necessary as a result of this action. 

Should any changes become necessary, 

they would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California kiwifruit handlers. As with 

all Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 

requirements and duplication by 

industry and public sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this action. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A 15-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Fifteen days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2015–16 fiscal year began on August 1, 

2015, handlers began shipping kiwifruit 

in September and the marketing order 

requires that the rate of assessment 

apply to all assessable kiwifruit handled 

during the fiscal period; (2) the 

Committee needs to have sufficient 

funds to pay its expenses, which are 

incurred on a continuous basis; and (3) 

handlers are aware of this action which 

was unanimously recommended by the 

Committee at a public meeting and is 

similar to other assessment rate actions 

issued in past years. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920 

Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and record keeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 920 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 920.213 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 920.213 Assessment rate. 

On and after August 1, 2015, an 

assessment rate of $0.040 per 9-kilo 

volume-fill container or equivalent of 

kiwifruit is established for kiwifruit 

grown in California. 

Dated: October 30, 2015. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–28142 Filed 11–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3805; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NE–28–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca 

S.A. Turboshaft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Turbomeca S.A. ARRIEL 2C, 2C1, 2C2, 

2S1, and 2S2 turboshaft engines with 

modification TU34 or TU34A installed. 

This proposed AD was prompted by 

torque conformation box (TCB) failures. 

This proposed AD would require 

inspecting the TCB for correct resistance 

values and removing TCBs that fail 

inspection before further flight. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent failure of 

the TCB which could lead to loss of 

engine thrust control and damage to the 

aircraft. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by January 4, 2016. 

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. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Turbomeca 

S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 

(0)5 59 74 40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 

15. You may view this service 

information at the FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3805; or in person at the Docket 

Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI), the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

in the ADDRESSES section. Comments 

will be available in the AD docket 

shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

& Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7772; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: brian.kierstead@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. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68476 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

FAA–2015–3805; Directorate Identifier 

2015–NE–28–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 based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning 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 2015– 

0177, dated August 25, 2015 (referred to 

hereinafter as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Several cases of torque conformation box 

(TCB) failures have been reported on engines 

incorporating mod TU34 or mod TU34A. 

Investigation concluded that these failures 

were caused by cracks on soldered joints of 

TCB resistors. 

This condition, if not corrected, could lead 

to limited power availability in a One Engine 

Inoperative (OEI) case, possibly resulting in 

reduced control of the helicopter. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3805. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

Turbomeca S.A. has issued 

Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 

292 72 2860, Version A, dated July 15, 

2015. The MSB describes procedures for 

checking TCB resistance values. This 

service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section of 

this NPRM. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of France, and is 

approved for operation in the United 

States. Pursuant to our bilateral 

agreement with the European 

Community, EASA has notified us of 

the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information provided by EASA and 

determined the unsafe condition exists 

and is likely to exist or develop on other 

products of the same type design. This 

proposed AD would require inspecting 

the TCB for correct resistance values 

and removing TCBs that fail inspection. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 300 engines installed on 

helicopters of U.S. registry. We estimate 

that it would take about 1 hour to 

perform an inspection. We also estimate 

that 20% of these engines would fail the 

inspection and require TCB removal, 

which would take about 1 hour. The 

average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based 

on these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this proposed AD on U.S. operators to 

be $30,600. 

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 determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction, 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. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Turbomeca S.A.: Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3805; Directorate Identifier 2015–NE– 

28–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by January 4, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Turbomeca S.A. 

ARRIEL 2C, 2C1, 2C2, 2S1, and 2S2 

turboshaft engines with modification TU34 

or TU34A installed. 

(d) Reason 

This AD was prompted by torque 

conformation box (TCB) failures. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent failure of the TCB, 

which could lead to loss of engine thrust 

control and damage to the aircraft. 

(e) Actions and Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(1) Within 600 engine flight hours (EFHs) 

or 6 months after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs first, check the 

resistance values on the TCB. Use 

Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 

2.3.2 of Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service 

Bulletin (MSB) 292 72 2860, Version A, dated 

July 15, 2015, to do the inspection. Repeat 

this inspection every 600 EFHs since last 

inspection. 

(2) Remove before further flight any TCB 

that fails the inspection required by 

paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. 

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

The Manager, Engine Certification Office, 

FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68477 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to 

make your request. You may email your 

request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov. 

(g) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7772; fax: 781–238–7199; 

email: brian.kierstead@faa.gov. 

(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency AD 2015–0177, dated August 

25, 2015, for more information. You may 

examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating it in Docket No. 

FAA–2015–3805. 

(3) Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service 

Bulletin No. 292 72 2860, Version A, dated 

July 15, 2015, can be obtained from 

Turbomeca S.A., using the contact 

information in paragraph (g)(4) of this 

proposed AD. 

(4) For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Turbomeca S.A., 

40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 

40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. 

(5) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, 

MA. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 28, 2015. 

Colleen M. D’Alessandro, 

Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–28011 Filed 11–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–5318; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–CE–035–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Quest 

Aircraft Design, LLC Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Model 

KODIAK 100 airplanes. This proposed 

AD was prompted by a report of limited 

control yoke movement of the elevator 

control system due to cushion edging 

jammed in the elevator control antirotation guide slot. This proposed AD 

would require repetitively inspecting 

the elevator control system cushion 

edging for proper condition; replacing 

the cushion edging; and at a specified 

time terminating the repetitive 

inspections by installing wear pads on 

the elevator bearing assemblies. We are 

proposing this AD to correct the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 21, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Quest 

Aircraft Design, LLC, 1200 Turbine 

Drive, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864; 

telephone: (208) 263–1111; toll free: 

(866) 263–1112; email: 

CustomerService@QuestAircraft.com; 

Internet: www.questaircraft.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 Docket No. FAA–2015– 

5318; 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 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Herron, Aerospace Engineer, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057; phone: (425) 917– 

6469; fax: (425) 917–6591; email: 

david.herron@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2015–5318; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

CE–035–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://

www.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 

We received a report that, during a 

preflight inspection, an operator noted 

limited travel of the control yoke on a 

Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Model 

KODIAK 100 airplane. Upon further 

inspection of the control yoke system 

forward of the control yoke, cushion 

edging was found jammed in the 

elevator control anti-rotation guide slot. 

The jammed edging prevented the 

control yoke from having full nose up 

and nose down travel. The operator also 

reported the same problem on a 

different KODIAK 100 airplane in which 

the cushion edging plastic portion 

separated from the metal track. 

Investigation revealed that over time 

the cushion edging may become worn 

and degrade. This condition, if not 

corrected, could result in failure of the 

elevator control system cushion edging, 

which could restrict elevator control 

yoke movement and cause loss of 

control. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Quest Aircraft KODIAK 

Mandatory Service Bulletin SB14–07, 

dated August 26, 2014; Quest Aircraft 

Field Service Instruction, Elevator 

Control System—Cushion Edging 

Inspection, Report No. FSI–105, 

Revision 00, not dated; Quest Aircraft 

KODIAK 100 Recommended Service 

Bulletin SB15–01, dated March 26, 

2015; and Quest Aircraft Field Service 

Instruction, Yoke Anti-Rotation Guide 

Wear Pad Upgrade, Report No. FSI–108, 

Revision 00, not dated. The service 

information describes procedures for 

repetitively inspecting the cushion 

edging installed on the elevator control 

anti-rotation guide for proper condition, 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS