Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 28035

III. Executive Order 12866

The OTS has determined that this

final rule is not a significant regulatory

action as defined in Executive Order

12866.

IV. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 104 Pub.

L. 104–4 (signed into law on March 22,

1995) requires that an agency prepare a

budgetary impact statement before

promulgating a rule that includes a

Federal mandate that may result in

expenditure by State, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector of $100 million or more

in one year. If the budgetary impact

statement is required, section 205 of the

Act also requires an agency to identify

and consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule. As discussed in the

preamble, this final rule is limited in

application to the internal procedures of

OTS. The OTS has therefore determined

that the final rule will not result in

expenditure by State, local, or tribal

governments or by the private sector of

more than $100 million. Accordingly,

the OTS has not prepared a budgetary

impact statement or specifically

addressed the regulatory alternatives

considered.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 509

Administrative practice and

procedures, Penalties.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Office of Thrift

Supervision hereby amends part 509,

chapter V, title 12, Code of Federal

Regulation as set forth below:

SUBCHAPTER A—ORGANIZATION AND

PROCEDURES

PART 509—RULES OF PRACTICE AND

PROCEDURE IN ADJUDICATORY

PROCEEDINGS

1. The authority citation for part 509

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 556; 12 U.S.C. 1464,

1467, 1467a, 1813; 15 U.S.C. 78l.

2. Section 509.9 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a) and (b) and by

adding a new paragraph (e) to read as

follows:

§ 509.9 Ex parte communications.

(a) Definition—(1) Ex parte

communication means any material oral

or written communication relevant to

the merits of an adjudicatory proceeding

that was neither on the record nor on

reasonable prior notice to all parties that

takes place between:

(i) An interested person outside the

Office (including such person’s

counsel); and

(ii) The administrative law judge

handling that proceeding, the Director,

or a decisional employee.

(2) Exception. A request for status of

the proceeding does not constitute an ex

parte communication.

(b) Prohibition of ex parte

communications. From the time the

notice is issued by the Director until the

date that the Director issues the final

decision pursuant to § 509.40(c) of this

subpart:

(1) No interested person outside the

Office shall make or knowingly cause to

be made an ex parte communication to

the Director, the administrative law

judge, or a decisional employee; and

(2) The Director, administrative law

judge, or decisional employee shall not

make or knowingly cause to be made to

any interested person outside the Office

any ex parte communication.

* * * * *

(e) Separation-of-functions. Except to

the extent required for the disposition of

ex parte matters as authorized by law,

the administrative law judge may not

consult a person or party on any matter

relevant to the merits of the

adjudication, unless on notice and

opportunity for all parties to participate.

An employee or agent engaged in the

performance of investigative or

prosecuting functions for the Office in a

case may not, in that or a factually

related case, participate or advise in the

decision, recommended decision, or

agency review of the recommended

decision under § 509.40 of this subpart,

except as witness or counsel in public

proceedings.

Dated: May 23, 1995.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Jonathan L. Fiechter,

Acting Director.

[FR Doc. 95–13117 Filed 5–26–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–74–AD; Amendment

39–9241; AD 95–09–03]

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Model 4101 Airplanes

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)

95–09–03, that was sent previously to

all known U.S. owners and operators of

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes by

individual letters. This AD requires

inspection to determine the number of

hours time-in-service on the landing

gear control unit, and modification of

the cable (electrical wiring circuit) of

the landing gear control unit. This

amendment is prompted by a report of

failure of a micro-switch in the landing

gear control unit. The actions specified

by this AD are intended to prevent

uncommanded retraction of a landing

gear, which could adversely affect

airplane controllability.

DATES: Effective June 14, 1995, to all

persons except those persons to whom

it was made immediately effective by

priority letter AD 95–09–03, issued on

April 18, 1995, which contained the

requirements of this amendment.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 14,

1995.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

July 31, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

74–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The applicable service information

may be obtained from Jetstream Aircraft,

Inc., P.O. Box 16029, Dulles

International Airport, Washington, DC

20041–6029. 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:

William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2148; fax (206) 227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

18, 1995, the FAA issued priority letter

AD 95–09–03, which is applicable to

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes. That

action was prompted by a report of

failure of a micro-switch in the landing

gear control unit. This failure was

apparently due to a manufacturing

defect. Investigation revealed that the

micro-switch failure caused the units to
28036 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

produce spurious signals, which

resulted in an uncommanded retraction

of the landing gear while the airplane

was on the ground. This condition, if

not corrected, could result in

uncommanded retraction of a landing

gear, which could adversely affect

airplane controllability.

Jetstream has issued Alert Service

Bulletin J41–A32–042, dated April 13,

1995, which describes procedures for

inspection to determine the number of

hours time-in-service on the landing

gear control unit. This alert service

bulletin also describes procedures for a

modification of the cable (electrical

wiring circuit) of the landing gear

control unit, which will preclude

uncommanded retraction of a landing

gear in the event of a micro-switch

failure. The Civil Aviation Authority

(CAA), which is the airworthiness

authority for the United Kingdom,

classified this service bulletin as

mandatory.

This airplane model is manufactured

in the United Kingdom and is 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 CAA has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the CAA,

reviewed all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Since the unsafe condition described

is likely to exist or develop on other

airplanes of the same type design

registered in the United States, the FAA

issued priority letter AD 95–09–03 to

require inspection to determine the

number of hours time-in-service on the

landing gear control unit, and

modification of the cable (electrical

wiring circuit) of the landing gear

control unit. The actions are required to

be accomplished in accordance with the

alert service bulletin previously

described.

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 April 18, 1995 to all

known U.S. owners and operators of

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes. 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 as to all persons.

This is considered interim action. The

manufacturer has advised that it

currently is developing a modification

that will further address the unsafe

condition addressed by this AD. Once

this modification is developed,

approved, and available, the FAA may

consider additional rulemaking.

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 shall 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 comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–74–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

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 location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

95–09–03 Jetstream Aircraft Limited:

Amendment 39–9241. Docket 95–NM–

74–AD.

Applicability: Model 4101 airplanes,

constructor numbers 41001 through 41046

inclusive, and 41048 through 41052

inclusive; having either landing gear control

unit part number 717701–1 or 717701

modification A; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, 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 that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (b) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition; or different
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 28037

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any airplane from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent uncommanded retraction of the

landing gear, which can adversely affect

airplane controllability, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 8 hours time-in-service after the

effective date of this AD, perform an

inspection to determine the number of hours

time-in-service on the landing gear control

unit, in accordance with Jetstream Alert

Service Bulletin J41–A32–042, dated April

13, 1995.

(1) For those airplanes on which the

control unit has accumulated less than 200

hours time-in-service: Prior to further flight,

modify the cable (electrical wiring circuit) of

the landing gear control unit in accordance

with the alert service bulletin.

(2) For those airplanes on which the

control unit has accumulated 200 hours or

more time-in-service: Within 50 hours timein-service or within 7 days after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs earlier,

modify the cable (electrical wiring circuit) of

the landing gear control unit in accordance

with the alert service bulletin.

(b) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) The inspection and modification shall

be done in accordance with Jetstream Alert

Service Bulletin J41–A32–042, dated April

13, 1995. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029,

Dulles International Airport, Washington, DC

20041–6029. Copies may be inspected 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.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

June 14, 1995, to all persons except those

persons to whom it was made immediately

effective by priority letter AD 95–09–03,

issued April 18, 1995, which contained the

requirements of this amendment.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 18,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12711 Filed 5–26–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–79–AD; Amendment

39–9242; AD 95–11–07]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10 Series Airplanes

and KC–10A (Military) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all McDonnell Douglas

Model DC–10 series airplanes and KC–

10A (military) airplanes, that requires

inspections to detect cracking of H–11

attach bolts of the upper vertical

stabilizer and replacement of these bolts

and associated nuts with Inconel bolts

and nuts. This amendment is prompted

by failure of the attach bolts of the

upper vertical stabilizer due to stress

corrosion. The actions specified by this

AD are intended to prevent undetected

cracked or failed attach bolts that may

lead to reduced structural integrity of

the vertical stabilizer.

DATES: Effective June 29, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 29,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from McDonnell Douglas Corporation,

3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,

California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Department C1–L51 (2–60). This

information may be examined at the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California ; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maureen Moreland, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–121L,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,

Lakewood, California 90712; telephone

(310) 627–5238; fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to all McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10 series airplanes

and KC–10A (military) airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

September 19, 1994 (59 FR 47825). That

action proposed to require inspections

to detect cracking of H–11 attach bolts

of the upper vertical stabilizer and

replacement with Inconel attach bolts

and associated nuts.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

One commenter supports the

proposed rule.

The Air Transport Association of

America, on behalf of one of its member

operators, requests that the 18-month

compliance time for the repetitive

inspections required by proposed

paragraph (a)(1) be extended to 24

months. The commenter states that this

extension in the compliance time would

coincide with regularly scheduled

maintenance visits, and would result in

savings of over $2,800 per airplane if

operators were not required to ‘‘special

schedule’’ these airplanes for the

inspection.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to extend the

compliance time. The FAA has

determined that the compliance time, as

proposed, represents the maximum

interval of time allowable for the

affected airplanes to continue to operate

prior to accomplishing the required

inspections without compromising

safety. Further, the FAA’s intent is to

have the compliance time for the

repetitive inspections coincide with the

18-month interval recommended by the

manufacturer. Additionally, since the

FAA has received an additional report

of bolt failure, the FAA finds that the

18-month interval for the repetitive

inspections is appropriate to ensure

safety of the fleet.

Additionally, the Service Action

Requirements Document (SARD) that is

referenced in this final rule was

developed by McDonnell Douglas only

after extensive and detailed

consultations with large numbers of

operators of Model DC–10 series

airplanes. The compliance times were

based on these consultations and

developed in order to minimize the

economic impact on operators without

compromising the safety objectives of