Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 61549 

What Must I Do To Address This Problem? 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following: 

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(1) Do the following: 

(i) Inspect the upper and lower grooves of 

the forward cargo door slide for cracks 

and excessive wear; and 

(ii) Measure the width of the grooves to ensure the grooves are no more than 0.145 

inches in width (excessive width).

Initially within the next 20 hours time-in-service (TIS) after November 17, 2005 (the effective date of this AD). Repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours 

TIS.

As specified in Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2005–23, 

Issue 2, Date of Issue: September 13, 

2005. 

(2) If any crack, excessive wear, or excessive 

width is found during any inspection required 

in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, replace the 

door slide with a new door slide, part number 

GA8–521022–149. 

Replace before further flight after the inspection in which the damage is found. After the 

replacement, continue with the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (e)(1) of 

this AD.

As specified in Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2005–23, 

Issue 2, Date of Issue: September 13, 

2005. 

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, 

send your request to your principal 

inspector. The principal inspector may add 

comments and will send your request to the 

Manager, Standards Office, Small Airplane 

Directorate, FAA. For information on any 

already approved alternative methods of 

compliance, contact Doug Rudolph, 

Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4059; facsimile: (816) 329–4090. 

Is There Other Information That Relates to 

This Subject? 

(g) Australian AD Number AD/GA8/3, 

dated September 27, 2005, also addresses the 

subject of this AD. 

Does This AD Incorporate Any Material by 

Reference? 

(h) You must do the actions required by 

this AD following the instructions in 

Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service 

Bulletin SB–GA8–2005–23, Issue 2, Date of 

Issue: September 13, 2005. The Director of 

the Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of this service 

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

and 1 CFR part 51. To get a copy of this 

service information, contact Gippsland 

Aeronautics, PO Box 881, Morwell, Victoria 

3840, Australia; telephone: +61 (0) 3 5172 

1200; facsimile: +61 (0) 3 5172 1201; e-mail: 

support@gippsaero.com. To review copies of 

this service information, go to the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the availability 

of this material at NARA, go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html or call (202) 741–6030. To 

view the AD docket, go to the Docket 

Management Facility; U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, 

DC 20590–001 or on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov. The docket number is Docket 

No. FAA–2005–22639; Directorate Identifier 

2005–CE–48–AD. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 18, 2005. 

David R. Showers, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–21176 Filed 10–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–20742; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NE–03–AD; Amendment 39–

14347; AD 2005–22–03] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

Corporation (Formerly Allison Engine 

Company) 501–D22A, 501–D22C, and 

501–D22G Turboprop Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for RollsRoyce Corporation (RRC) (formerly 

Allison Engine Company) 501–D22A, 

501–D22C, and 501–D22G turboprop 

engines. This AD requires a onetime 

inspection for proper metal hardness of 

certain 1st stage, 2nd stage, 3rd stage, 

and 4th stage turbine wheels. This AD 

results from a report of a turbine wheel 

found to be over dimensional limits, 

caused by improper metal hardness. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent 

uncontained turbine wheel failure, 

leading to damage of the airplane and 

total loss of engine power. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

November 29, 2005. The Director of the 

Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in the regulations as 

of November 29, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Contact Rolls-Royce 

Corporation, P.O. Box 420, 2001 South 

Tibbs Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46206–

0420; telephone (317) 230–2000; fax 

(317) 230–4020 for the service 

information identified in this AD. 

You may examine the AD docket on 

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

Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the 

Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Downs, Aerospace Engineer, 

Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des 

Plaines, IL 60018; telephone (847) 294–

7870; fax (847) 294–7834. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with 

a proposed airworthiness directive (AD). 

The proposed AD applies to Rolls-Royce 

Corporation (RRC) (formerly Allison 

Engine Company) 501–D22A, 501–

D22C, and 501–D22G turboprop 

engines. We published the proposed AD 

in the Federal Register on March 29, 

2005 (70 FR 15784). That action 

proposed to require a onetime 

inspection for proper metal hardness of 

certain 1st stage, 2nd stage, 3rd stage, 

and 4th stage turbine wheels. That 

action proposed to do the inspection at 

the next shop visit of the engine or 

turbine module, but not to exceed 7,400 

cycles-since-new of any 1st stage, 2nd 

stage, 3rd stage, or 4th stage turbine 

wheel. 

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. 

61550 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

NPRM Work Hour Estimate Is Different 

Than Estimate in RRC Commercial 

Engine Bulletins 

One commenter states that the NPRM 

work hour estimate of 0.5 hour per 

engine is different from the estimate in 

the RRC Commercial Engine Bulletins 

(CEBs) No. CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–

4051, and No. CEB–72–1584, (combined 

in one document) dated January 23, 

2004. The CEBs state that the 0.5 hour 

for inspection is in addition to the time 

required to remove the wheel. The 

commenter received an estimate from a 

Rolls-Royce-authorized overhaul facility 

of 250 work hours to perform the wheel 

inspection, which includes turbine 

disassembly and reassembly. We 

disagree. We estimated the cost of 

compliance to be 0.5 hour based on the 

assumption that the turbine is 

disassembled for other reasons, notably 

for an overhaul. The 250 work hours are 

basic and unrelated to the onetime 

inspection required by this AD. We have 

clarified in this final rule that the 0.5 

hour is for the onetime inspection for 

metal hardness, but we have not 

changed the total costs of compliance in 

the AD. 

Airplane Designations Not on the Type 

Certificate 

The same commenter states that in the 

Applicability paragraph of the proposed 

AD, the L–100–20 and L–100–30 

airplane designations are not included 

on the type certificate. The commenter 

suggests that only the type certificated 

airplanes be listed. The commenter 

states that historically, the L–382E is 

also known as the L–100–20, and the L–

382G is also known as the L–100–30. 

We agree. We have corrected the 

Applicability in the AD to list the typecertificated airplanes and put the other 

designations in parentheses, for 

reference. 

The Term ‘‘Shop Visit’’ Needs 

Clarification 

The same commenter states that in the 

Compliance paragraph of the proposed 

AD, the term ‘‘shop visit’’ needs 

clarification. The commenter asks if it is 

our intention to have the hardness test 

performed at the next visit to the engine 

shop, regardless of the extent of other 

work performed. The commenter feels 

that is not our intention. The 

commenter also cites the recommended 

compliance appearing in CEBs No. 

CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and 

No. CEB–72–1584, (combined in one 

document) dated January 23, 2004. The 

commenter suggests that the 

Compliance paragraph be changed to 

require compliance with the hardness 

inspection on suspect turbine wheels 

based on whichever of the following 

events occurs first: 

• Not to exceed 7,400 cycles-sincenew; 

• Before installation of a suspect 

turbine wheel onto the rotor; 

• When the suspect turbine wheel is 

next accessed by rotor disassembly. 

We disagree. We expect a ‘‘shop visit’’

to be a visit that results in a turbine 

wheel disassembly. The most common 

term is overhaul, but not all users 

request an overhaul from their supplier 

when a turbine module visits the shop. 

The type of service being sought is not 

relevant to the hardness inspection. 

What is relevant, is that you perform the 

inspection before 7,400 cycles-sincenew. We have not changed the 

Compliance paragraph in the AD based 

on this comment. 

Request To Clarify Where To Mark the 

Part 

The same commenter requests that we 

change compliance paragraph (h) to 

allow the part to be marked after or near 

the end of the serial number. The 

commenter states that CEBs No. CEB–

72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. 

CEB–72–1584, (combined in one 

document) dated January 23, 2004, also 

specify the marking this way. The 

paragraph in the proposed AD instructs 

service personnel to mark the part after 

the serial number only. The commenter 

states there is not always adequate space 

to mark the part after the serial number. 

We disagree. The area suitable for 

marking is quite large, however RRC 

chose to use the words ‘‘after or near’’

to make sure the part is marked in a 

suitable place. We have not changed the 

AD based on this comment. 

Request Clarification of When To 

Report Findings of Inspections 

The same commenter requests 

clarification of when to report findings 

of inspections. The proposed AD 

requires reporting findings of 

inspections using the procedures 

specified in paragraph 2.E. of RRC CEBs 

No. CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, 

and No. CEB–72–1584, (combined in 

one document) dated January 23, 2004. 

Those procedures state that inspection 

results be reported to Rolls-Royce T56/ 

501 Customer Support in compliance 

with this CEB (when done). ‘‘When 

done’’ does not specify a time frame for 

submitting the inspection results. Some 

people may interpret this as 

immediately and others at a later time. 

The commenter suggests we specify that 

the inspection findings be submitted 

within 30 days of the inspection 

completion. We agree. We have changed 

paragraph (i) of the AD to state to report 

findings of inspections within 30 days 

of inspection using the procedures 

specified in paragraph 2.E of RRC CEBs 

No. CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, 

and No. CEB–72–1584, (combined in 

one document) dated January 23, 2004. 

Clarification of Compliance 

As clarification, we have added 

wording to paragraph (g) of this AD, to 

state to install a serviceable turbine 

wheel. This change relates the 

compliance to the serviceable turbine 

wheel definition in paragraph (j) of this 

AD. 

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 changes described 

previously. We have determined that 

these changes will neither increase the 

economic burden on any operator nor 

increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 150 RRC 501-D22A, 

501-D22C, and 501-D22G turboprop 

engines of the affected design in the 

worldwide fleet. We estimate that 150 

engines installed on airplanes of U.S. 

registry are affected by this AD. We also 

estimate that it will take about 0.5 work 

hour per engine to perform the onetime 

inspection for proper metal hardness, 

and that the average labor rate is $65 per 

work hour. Required parts will cost 

about $1,495 per turbine wheel. The 

manufacturer has stated that it may 

provide replacement parts for turbine 

wheels that do not meet inspection 

criteria, at no cost to operators. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the total cost 

of the AD to U.S. operators to be 

$229,125. 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 61551 

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 this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

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. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 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: 

2005–22–03 Rolls-Royce Corporation 

(formerly Allison Engine Company): 

Amendment 39–14347. Docket No. 

FAA–2005–20742; Directorate Identifier 

2005–NE–03–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective November 29, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce 

Corporation (RRC) (formerly Allison Engine 

Company) 501–D22A, 501–D22C, and 501–

D22G turboprop engines with the turbine 

wheels listed in the following Table 1, 

installed. 

TABLE 1.—AFFECTED TURBINE WHEELS

Turbine wheel part number Turbine wheel Serial numbers 

6875431 ..................................................................... 1st Stage .................................................................... KK50152 through KK50199. 

6845592 ..................................................................... 2nd Stage .................................................................. KK40998 through KK41057. 

6845593 ..................................................................... 3rd Stage ................................................................... KK36452 through KK36461, and 

KK36492 through KK36532. 

6870434 ..................................................................... 4th Stage ................................................................... KK40320 through KK40393, and 

KK40485 through KK40535. 

These engines are installed on, but not 

limited to, Commercial Hercules L–382B, L–

382E (L–100–20), L–382G (L–100–30), Airbus 

Super Guppy–201, Super Convair CV–580A, 

and CV5800 airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report of a 

turbine wheel found to be over dimensional 

limits, caused by improper metal hardness. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

uncontained turbine wheel failure, leading to 

damage of the airplane and total loss of 

engine power. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed at the 

next shop visit of the engine or turbine 

module, but not to exceed 7,400 cycles-sincenew of any 1st stage, 2nd stage, 3rd stage, or 

4th stage turbine wheel, unless the actions 

have already been done. 

Onetime Inspection for Proper Metal 

Hardness 

(f) Perform a onetime inspection for proper 

metal hardness of 1st stage, 2nd stage, 3rd 

stage, and 4th stage turbine wheels. Use 

paragraphs 2.B. and 2.F. of RRC Commercial 

Engine Bulletins (CEBs) No. CEB–72–1138, 

No. CEB–72–4051, and No. CEB–72–1584, 

(combined in one document) dated January 

23, 2004. 

(g) Remove from service any turbine wheel 

that does not pass inspection, using 

paragraph 2.C. of RRC CEBs No. CEB–72–

1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. CEB–72–

1584, (combined in one document) dated 

January 23, 2004, and install a serviceable 

turbine wheel. 

(h) Mark the letters, HC, after the serial 

number on any turbine wheel that passes 

inspection, using the method described in 

paragraph 2.D. of RRC CEBs No. CEB–72–

1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. CEB–72–

1584, (combined in one document) dated 

January 23, 2004. 

Reporting Requirements 

(i) Report findings of inspections within 30 

days of inspection using the procedures 

specified in paragraph 2.E of RRC CEBs No. 

CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. 

CEB–72–1584, (combined in one document) 

dated January 23, 2004. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the reporting requirements 

specified in paragraph 2.E. of RRC CEBs No. 

CEB–72–1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. 

CEB–72–1584, (combined in one document) 

dated January 23, 2004, and assigned OMB 

control number 2120–0056. 

Definition 

(j) For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable 

turbine wheel is: 

(1) A turbine wheel that has a serial 

number not listed in this AD; and 

(2) A turbine wheel that has a serial 

number listed in this AD that passed the 

inspection specified in paragraph (f) of this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(k) 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 

(l) None. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(m) You must use Rolls-Royce Corporation 

Commercial Engine Bulletins No. CEB–72–

1138, No. CEB–72–4051, and No. CEB–72–

1584, (combined in one document) dated 

January 23, 2004, to perform the actions 

61552 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

required by this AD. The Director of the 

Federal Register approved the incorporation 

by reference of this service bulletin in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. Contact Rolls-Royce Corporation, 

P.O. Box 420, 2001 South Tibbs Avenue, 

Indianapolis, IN 46206–0420; telephone (317) 

230–2000; fax (317) 230–4020 for a copy of 

this service information. You may review 

copies at the Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room 

PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–0001, on the 

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

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

(202) 741–6030, or go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 17, 2005. 

Francis A. Favara, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–21173 Filed 10–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21449; Airspace 

Docket No. 05–AAL–15] 

Establishment of Class E Airspace; 

Deering, AK 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class 

E airspace at Deering, AK to provide 

adequate controlled airspace to contain 

aircraft executing four new Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs). This rule results in new Class 

E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) 

and 1,200 ft. above the surface at 

Deering, AK. 

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 

22, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

Rolf, AAL–538G, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, 

Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587; 

telephone number (907) 271–5898; fax: 

(907) 271–2850; e-mail: 

gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov. Internet address: 

http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On Thursday, August 4, 2005, the 

FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 71) to create new Class E airspace 

upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above 

the surface at Deering, AK (70 FR 

44869). The action was proposed in 

order to create Class E airspace 

sufficient in size to contain aircraft 

while executing four new SIAPs for the 

Deering Airport. The new approaches 

are (1) Area Navigation (Global 

Positioning System) (RNAV (GPS)) 

Runway (RWY) 2, original; (2) RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 20, original; (3) RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 11, original, and (4) RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 29, original. New Class E 

controlled airspace extending upward 

from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above the 

surface in the Deering Airport area is 

established by this action. Interested 

parties were invited to participate in 

this rulemaking proceeding by 

submitting written comments on the 

proposal to the FAA. No public 

comments have been received; thus the 

rule is adopted as proposed. 

The area will be depicted on 

aeronautical charts for pilot reference. 

The coordinates for this airspace docket 

are based on North American Datum 83. 

The Class E airspace areas designated as 

700/1200 ft. transition areas are 

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA 

Order 7400.9N, Airspace Designations 

and Reporting Points, dated September 

1, 2005, and effective September 16, 

2005, which is incorporated by 

reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E 

airspace designation listed in this 

document will be published 

subsequently in the Order. The Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking document 

included airspace exclusions to 

Kotzebue and Buckland Class E airspace 

and established Federal Airways. Those 

exclusions were not necessary and are 

not included in this action. 

The Rule 

This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 

establishes Class E airspace at Deering, 

Alaska. This Class E airspace is 

designated to accommodate aircraft 

executing four new SIAPs and will be 

depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot 

reference. The intended effect of this 

rule is to provide adequate controlled 

airspace for Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) 

operations at Deering Airport, Deering, 

Alaska. 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. It, therefore—(1) is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle 1, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in subtitle 

VII, part A, subpart 1, section 40103, 

Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under 

that section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to ensure the 

safe and efficient use of the navigable 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority because it creates 

Class E airspace sufficient in size to 

contain aircraft executing instrument 

procedures for the Deering Airport and 

represents the FAA’s continuing effort 

to safely and efficiently use the 

navigable airspace. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71— DESIGNATION OF CLASS 

A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 

CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; 

AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING 

POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9N, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated September 1, 2005, and 

effective September 16, 2005, is 

amended as follows: 

* * * * * 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending 

upward from 700 feet or more above the 

surface of the earth. 

* * * * *