Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 190 / Monday, October 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57487 

Inspection Service (APHIS) will conduct its 

own tests during quarantine. 

Two commenters said that the new 

cancellation policy unnecessarily 

penalizes those who reserve stall space 

early and are then required to make 

legitimate alterations to their bookings. 

The commenters asked that we consider 

implementing a small administrative fee 

for changes made more than 30 days 

prior to the reservation date. 

The purpose of the interim rule was 

to discourage horse brokers from making 

several reservations and simply 

forfeiting the $40 cancellation fees if a 

client is not found to fill those reserved 

spaces. This situation had led some 

brokers to complain that the potential 

loss of a $40 cancellation fee is not an 

effective deterrent to prevent brokers 

from reserving stall space before a client 

is found. Since the publication of our 

December 2002 interim rule, the 

problem of late cancellations has been 

eliminated. We believe that instituting 

the suggested small fee for canceled 

reservations would result in a situation 

similar to the one that existed prior to 

publication of the interim rule. 

All three commenters stated that a 

policy should be enacted wherein stall 

space in a horse quarantine facility may 

be formally transferred from one party 

to another within 15 days of arrival. 

Shipments arriving at quarantine 

facilities are comprised of horses from 

several different brokers. As such, the 

suggested formal transfer policy would 

require a continual monitoring policy, 

along with the accompanying 

paperwork. Such an approach 

potentially involves a great amount of 

time, personnel, and expense for all 

affected parties. As such, this method is 

not cost effective, nor would it eliminate 

the practice of speculative reservation. 

Two commenters said that the grace 

period within which shipments may 

arrive without incurring cancellation 

fees should be extended from 24 to 48 

hours. 

Under the regulations in effect prior 

to the December 2002 interim rule, we 

required 5 business days’ notice for 

cancellations in order for importers to 

avoid forfeiture of the total reservation 

fee. As a result of the interim rule, we, 

among other things, established a 

graduated fee schedule for 

cancellations. Importers or their agents 

are now required to present for entry, 

within 24 hours following the 

designated time of arrival, the horse for 

which the reservation was made. In our 

opinion, increasing the time period 

within which importers must present 

their horses would lead to a 

reintroduction of past speculative 

reservation practices. The regulations in 

§ 93.304(a)(3)(iv) provide for the return 

of reservation fees to importers in 

certain cases when unforseen 

circumstances arise that prevent an 

importer from presenting a horse for 

entry within the required time period. 

One commenter said that the 

forfeiture amounts as established in the 

graduated fee schedule set for 

cancellations are too high. 

Prior to publication of the interim 

rule, we carefully considered a fee 

schedule that we thought to be 

appropriate and effective in eliminating 

the practice of speculative reservations. 

The USDA quarantine facilities in 

Florida and New York each lost 

approximately $300,000 to $470,000 

yearly in forgone user fees. While we 

recognize that increasing cancellation 

fees and the time period required for 

cancellation affects both horse owners 

and brokers, the forfeiture amounts 

must necessarily be set at a level that 

will serve as a meaningful deterrent to 

speculative reservation-making and 

allow APHIS to recover the fixed cost 

associated with operating quarantine 

facilities when stall space goes unused. 

Two commenters stated that there is 

a need to specifically create a set of 

circumstances under which a full 

refund of the reservation fee would be 

granted, suggesting that a refund would 

be appropriate in cases where an airline 

cancels a flight or a horse is injured 

during loading. 

The regulations already describe the 

circumstances under which a full 

refund may be granted. As stated 

previously, under the regulations at 

§ 93.304(a)(3)(iv), a reservation fee will 

not be forfeited if the Administrator 

determines that certain essential 

services were not available at the 

necessary time as a result of unforseen 

circumstances. These circumstances 

include, but are not limited to, the 

closing of an airport due to inclement 

weather or the unavailability of the 

reserved space due to the extension of 

another quarantine. We believe it is 

appropriate and necessary to limit 

refunds to the circumstances relating to 

services, other than those provided by 

carriers, necessary for the importation of 

the horses within the required period 

that are unavailable because of 

unforeseen circumstances as determined 

by the Administrator. 

Likewise, the issuance of refunds, as 

may be necessary in the situations 

described above, is based somewhat on 

the Administrator’s discretion. As such, 

we believe that any attempt to list all 

instances where a refund would be 

granted would unnecessarily limit the 

Administrator’s ability to make 

determinations in a wide variety of 

circumstances. It is necessary to leave 

the exception as written in order to 

preserve the flexibility of the 

regulations. 

Therefore, for the reasons given in the 

interim rule and in this document, we 

are adopting the interim rule as a final 

rule without change. 

This action also affirms the 

information contained in the interim 

rule concerning Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

Executive Order 12988, and the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Further, this action has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, 

therefore, has not been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93 

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, 

Poultry and poultry products, 

Quarantine, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN 

ANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY, 

AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND 

POULTRY PRODUCTS; 

REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF 

CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING 

CONTAINERS 

■ Accordingly, we are adopting as a 

final rule, without change, the interim 

rule that amended 9 CFR part 93 and 

that was published at 67 FR 72827–

72830 on December 9, 2002. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

September 2005. 

Elizabeth E. Gaston, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–19689 Filed 9–30–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22534; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NE–27–AD; Amendment 39–

14305; AD 2005–20–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

Corporation (RRC) (formerly Allison 

Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine 

Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison) 

Models 250–C28, –C28B, and –C28C 

Turboshaft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

57488 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 190 / Monday, October 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for RollsRoyce Corporation (formerly Allison 

Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine 

Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison) 

(RRC) Models 250–C28, –C28B, and 

–C28C turboshaft engines. This AD 

requires a onetime visual inspection of 

the seal joint in each passage between 

airfoils at the hub and shroud of thirdstage turbine wheels, part number (P/N) 

6899383. This AD results from reports 

of three failed third-stage turbine wheels 

and from the manufacturer’s analysis of 

those failures. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent loss of power and 

uncommanded engine shutdown due to 

failure of the third-stage turbine wheel. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 18, 2005. 

We must receive any comments on 

this AD by December 2, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to comment on this AD: 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

0001. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Contact Rolls-Royce Corporation, PO 

Box 420, Indianapolis, IN 46206–0420; 

telephone (317) 230–6400; fax (317) 

230–4243 for the service information 

identified in this AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Tallarovic, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300 

East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 

60018–4696; telephone (847) 294–8180; 

fax (847) 294–7834. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In April 

2005, we became aware of reports of 

three failed third-stage turbine wheels, 

P/N 6899383. The third-stage turbine 

wheels had partial loss of the blades and 

shroud. RRC conducted an analysis and 

found the failures were caused by 

compromised third-stage blade fillet 

radii, which led to increased stresses to 

the third-stage blades and shroud. RRC 

categorized this finding as a 

manufacturer’s quality control problem. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

result in loss of power and 

uncommanded engine shutdown due to 

failure of the third-stage turbine wheel. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This AD 

The unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

on other RRC Models 250–C28, –C28B, 

and –C28C turboshaft engines of the 

same type design. For that reason, we 

are issuing this AD to prevent loss of 

power and uncommanded engine 

shutdown due to failure of the thirdstage turbine wheel. This AD requires a 

onetime visual inspection of the seal 

joint in each passage between airfoils at 

the hub and shroud of third-stage 

turbine wheels, P/N 6899383. 

FAA’s Determination of the Effective 

Date 

Since an unsafe condition exists that 

requires the immediate adoption of this 

AD, we have found that notice and 

opportunity for public comment before 

issuing this AD are impracticable, and 

that good cause exists for making this 

amendment effective in less than 30 

days. 

Comments Invited 

This AD is a final rule that involves 

requirements affecting flight safety and 

was not preceded by notice and an 

opportunity for public comment; 

however, we invite you to send us any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments regarding this AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 

FAA–2005–22534; Directorate Identifier 

2005–NE–27–AD’’ in the subject line of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the rule that might suggest a 

need to modify it. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this AD. Using the 

search function of the Docket 

Management System (DMS) Web site, 

anyone can find and read the comments 

in any of our dockets, including the 

name of the individual who sent the 

comment (or signed the comment on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the docket that 

contains the AD, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility Docket Offices between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The Docket 

Office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is 

located on the plaza level of the 

Department of Transportation Nassif 

Building at the street address stated in 

ADDRESSES. Comments will be available 

in the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

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 have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the 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); and 

3. 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. 

We prepared a summary of the costs 

to comply with this AD and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary at the address listed 

under ADDRESSES. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 190 / Monday, October 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57489 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Under 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

2005–20–11 Rolls-Royce Corporation 

(formerly Allison Engine Company, 

Allison Gas Turbine Division, and 

Detroit Diesel Allison): Amendment 39–

14305. Docket No. FAA–2005–22534; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NE–27–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective October 18, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce 

Corporation (RRC) (formerly Allison Engine 

Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and 

Detroit Diesel Allison) models 250–C28, 

–C28B, and –C28C turboshaft engines. These 

engines are installed on, but not limited to, 

Bell Helicopter Textron 206L–1; Eurocopter 

Deutschland BO 105 LS A–1; and Eurocopter 

Canada BO 105 LS A–3 helicopters. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from reports of three 

failed third-stage turbine wheels and from 

the manufacturer’s analysis of those failures. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of 

power and uncommanded engine shutdown 

due to failure of the third-stage turbine 

wheel. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Onetime Visual Inspection 

(f) For third-stage turbine wheels, part 

number (P/N) 6899383, with fewer than 

3,000 hours time-since-new (TSN), inspect 

the next time the third-stage turbine wheel is 

directly available for removal, at the next 

turbine overhaul, or by April 30, 2007, 

whichever occurs sooner. 

(g) For third-stage turbine wheels, P/N 

6899383, with 3,000 hours or more TSN, 

inspect within 300 hours or by April 30, 

2007, whichever occurs sooner. 

(h) Remove the third-stage turbine wheel 

and perform a onetime visual inspection of 

the seal joint in each passage between airfoils 

at the hub and shroud. Seal joint evidence 

must not be present within blade fillet radii. 

See Figure 1 of this AD for reference. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

57490 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 190 / Monday, October 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 


ER03OC05.055</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 190 / Monday, October 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57491 

(i) Remove from service any turbine wheel 

that has seal joint evidence present within 

blade fillet radii. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(j) The Manager, Chicago Aircraft 

Certification Office, has the authority to 

approve alternative methods of compliance 

for this AD if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(k) RRC Alert Service Bulletin No. CEB–A–

72–2205, dated April 26, 2005, pertains to 

the subject of this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

September 26, 2005. 

Francis A. Favara, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–19693 Filed 9–30–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–20881; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–253–AD; Amendment 

39–14302; AD 2003–17–07 R1] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Various 

Transport Category Airplanes 

Manufactured by McDonnell Douglas 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to various transport 

category airplanes manufactured by 

McDonnell Douglas. We issued that AD 

to require a one-time test of the fire 

extinguishers for the engine and 

auxiliary power unit (APU), as 

applicable, to determine the capability 

of the Firex electrical circuits to fire 

discharge cartridges, and 

troubleshooting actions if necessary. 

This new AD removes certain transport 

category airplanes from the applicability 

of the existing AD. This AD results from 

reports indicating that fire extinguishers 

for the engine and auxiliary power unit 

had failed to discharge when 

commanded. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent failure of the fire extinguishers 

to fire discharge cartridges, which could 

result in the inability to put out a fire 

in an engine or in the APU. 

DATES: The effective date of this AD is 

September 24, 2003. 

On September 24, 2003 (68 FR 50058, 

August 20, 2003), the Director of the 

Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

service bulletins listed in the AD. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street 

SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, 

Washington, DC. 

Contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, 

California 90846, Attention: Data and 

Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A 

(D800–0024) for service information 

identified in this AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

telephone (562) 627–5262; fax (562) 

627–5210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the street 

address stated in the ADDRESSES section. 

Discussion 

The FAA proposed to amend part 39 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 

CFR part 39) with an airworthiness 

directive (AD) to revise AD 2003–17–07, 

amendment 39–13281 (68 FR 50058, 

August 20, 2003). The existing AD 

applies to various transport category 

airplanes manufactured by McDonnell 

Douglas. The proposed AD was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 11, 2005 (70 FR 18324) to require 

a one-time test of the fire extinguishers 

for the engine and auxiliary power unit 

(APU), as applicable, to determine the 

capability of the Firex electrical circuits 

to fire discharge cartridges, and 

troubleshooting actions if necessary. 

That action also proposed to remove 

Model MD–10–10F and MD–10–30F 

airplanes from the applicability of the 

existing AD. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

No Objections to the NPRM 

One commenter states that it has no 

objection to the NPRM. 

Request To Give Credit for Previous 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

This same commenter notes that it has 

received an AMOC with AD 2003–17–

07. We infer that the commenter is 

requesting that credit be given for 

compliance with the AD in accordance 

with the AMOC. 

We acknowledge that the AMOC the 

commenter received provides 

compliance with AD 2003–17–07. 

However, it is unnecessary to amend 

this revised AD to reflect credit for 

previous accomplishment of the onetime test of the fire extinguishers for the 

engine and auxiliary power unit (APU), 

as applicable. This revised AD merely 

reduces the applicability of the AD, and 

all of the previous requirements, 

conditions, and provisions remain in 

effect. 

Request To Revise Note 1 

One commenter requests that we 

revise a typographical error in Note 1 of 

the proposed AD, which referred to 

paragraph (c) as the AMOC paragraph. 

We agree with the commenter, and have 

revised Note 1 to refer to paragraph (h) 

of the AD for AMOCs. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data, including the comments 

received, and determined that air safety 

and the public interest require adopting 

the AD with the change described 

previously. We have determined that 

this change will neither increase the 

economic burden on any operator nor 

increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 3,311 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This AD will affect about 1,520 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2003–17–07 and retained in this AD 

take between 4 work hours and 7 work 

hours per airplane, at an average labor 

rate of $65 per work hour. Based on 

these figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required actions is estimated 

to be between $395,200, and $691,600, 

on U.S. operators, or between $260 and 

$455 per airplane. 

This AD does not add any new 

actions to the existing actions required 

by AD 2003–17–07. Since this AD will 

remove certain airplanes from the 

applicability of the AD, the total 

estimated cost of compliance of the AD 

for U.S. operators is actually reduced