16388 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 1995 / Proposed Rules

requests the opportunity to review the

government’s evidence, the alien will be

served with a copy of the evidence in

the record of proceeding relied on by

the government to support the

allegations and/or charge. The alien

may, within ten days following service

of the government’s evidence (thirteen

days if service is by mail), furnish a

final response in accordance with

paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Either

the alien’s initial written response or the

alien’s final response must be

accompanied by an affidavit and a

completed and signed application

designed for any relief sought.

(d) Determination by deciding Service

officer. (1) No response; acceptance of

Final Administrative Deportation Order.

If

(i) A timely response is not received

by the deciding Service officer, or

(ii) The alien accepts immediate

issuance of the Final Administrative

Deportation Order, then the deciding

Service officer shall issue and cause to

be served upon the alien a Final

Administrative Deportation Order. The

determination of deportability must be

supported by clear, convincing, and

unequivocal evidence contained in the

record of proceeding.

(2) Response submitted. (i)

Insufficient rebuttal; no prima facie

claim or genuine issue of material fact.

If the deciding Service officer finds that

the response fails to rebut the

allegations and charge in the Notice of

Intent, fails to present a prima facie

claim of relief from deportation under

the Act, and fails to raise a genuine

issue of material fact, he or she shall

issue and cause to be served upon the

alien a Final Administrative Deportation

Order. The determination of

deportability must be supported by

clear, convincing, and unequivocal

evidence contained in the record of

proceeding.

(ii) Additional evidence required. If

the deciding Service officer finds that

the alien’s response raises a genuine

issue of material fact regarding the

preliminary findings, he or she

(A) May request additional

information from any source, including

the alien, as he or she may deem

appropriate, or

(B) Issue an order to show cause to

initiate deportation proceedings under

section 242(b) of the Act. If the deciding

Service officer considers additional

information from a source other than the

alien, that evidence shall be provided to

the alien, and the alien may, within ten

days of service thereof (thirteen days if

service is by mail) furnish a response to

the deciding Service officer. If, after

considering all additional information,

the deciding Service officer finds that

deportation is supported by the

requisite proof, he or she shall issue and

cause to be served upon the alien a

Final Administrative Deportation Order.

(iii) Secretary eligibility for relief;

conversion to proceedings under section

242(b) of the Act. If the deciding Service

officer finds that the alien has presented

a prima facie claim of present statutory

eligibility for a specific form of relief

from deportation, the deciding Service

officer shall terminate the expedited

proceedings under section 242A(b) of

the Act, and shall, where appropriate,

issue an order to show cause for the

purpose of initiating an immigration

judge proceeding under section 242(b)

of the Act.

(3) Termination of proceedings by

deciding Service officer. Only the

deciding Service officer may terminate

proceedings under section 242A(b) of

the Act, in the exercise of his or her

discretion.

(e) Proceedings commenced under

section 242(b) of the Act. In any

proceeding commenced under section

242(b) of the Act, if it appears that the

respondent’s case falls under the

provisions of section 242A(b) of the Act,

the immigration judge may, upon the

Service’s request, terminate the case

and, upon such termination, the Service

may commence administrative

proceedings under section 242A(b) of

the Act. However, in the absence of any

such request, the immigration judge

shall complete the pending proceeding

commenced under section 242(b) of the

Act.

(f) Executing final order of deciding

Service officer—

(1) Thirty (30) calendar days. Upon

the issuance of a Final Administrative

Deportation Order, the Service shall

issue a warrant of deportation issued in

accordance with 8 CFR part 243.2; such

warrant shall be executed no sooner

than 30 calendar days after the date the

Final Administrative Deportation Order

is issued, unless the 30-day period is

waived in writing by the alien. The 72-

hour provisions of § 243.3(b) of this

chapter shall not apply.

(2) Place to which deported. The

deciding Service officer shall designate

the country of deportation, in the

manner prescribed by section 243(a) of

the Act.

(g) Arrest and detention. At the time

of issuance of a Notice of Intent or at

any time thereafter and up to the time

the alien becomes the subject of a

warrant of deportation, the alien may be

arrested and taken into custody under

the authority of a warrant of arrest

issued by an officer listed in

§ 242.2(c)(1) of this chapter. Pursuant to

section 242(a)(2)(A) of the Act, pending

proceedings under section 242A(b) of

the Act, the deciding Service officer

shall not release an alien who has not

been lawfully admitted. Pursuant to

section 242(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the

deciding Service officer may release an

alien who has been lawfully admitted

based upon factors considered under

§ 242.2(h) of this chapter. The decision

of the deciding Service officer

concerning custody or bond is not

administratively appealable during

proceedings initiated under section

242A(b) of the Act and this section.

(h) Record of proceeding. A record of

proceeding shall be maintained by the

Service for judicial review of the Final

Administrative Deportation Order

sought by any petition for review. The

record of proceeding shall include, but

not necessarily be limited to, the

charging document (Notice of Intent);

the Final Administrative Deportation

Order; the alien’s response, if any; all

evidence in support of the charges; and

any admissible evidence, briefs, or

documents submitted by either party

respecting deportability or relief from

deportation.

Dated: March 16, 1995.

Janet Reno,

Attorney General.

[FR Doc. 95–7754 Filed 3–29–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–177–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 727 and Model 737 Series

Airplanes Equipped With J.C. Carter

Company Fuel Valve Actuators

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This document revises an

earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to certain Boeing

Model 727 and Model 737 series

airplanes, that would have required

replacement of the actuator of the

engine fuel shutoff valve and the fuel

system crossfeed valve with an

improved actuator. That proposal was

prompted by reports indicating that,

during ground acceptance tests on

Model 737 series airplanes, the actuator

clutch on the engine shutoff and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 1995 / Proposed Rules 16389

crossfeed valves slipped at cold

temperatures due to improper

functioning. This action revises the

proposed rule by expanding the

applicability to include an additional

actuator. The actions specified by this

proposed AD are intended to prevent

improper functioning of these actuators,

which could result in a fuel imbalance

due to the inability of the flight crew to

crossfeed fuel; improperly functioning

actuators could also prevent the pilot

from shutting off the fuel to the engine

following an engine failure and/or fire.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

177–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen S. Bray, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–141S, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (206) 227–2681;

fax (206) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed 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 above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed 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

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 94–NM–177–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

94–NM–177–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to add an airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Boeing Model 727 and Model 737 series

airplanes, was published as a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the

Federal Register on December 15, 1994

(59 FR 64628). That NPRM would have

required replacement of the actuator of

the engine fuel shutoff valve and the

fuel system crossfeed valve with a new

actuator. That NPRM was prompted by

reports indicating that, during ground

acceptance tests on Model 737 series

airplanes, the actuator clutch on the

engine shutoff and crossfeed valves

slipped at cold temperatures when the

engine shutoff valve was commanded to

either the ‘‘close’’ or ‘‘open’’ position.

Improper functioning of these actuators,

if not corrected, could result in a fuel

imbalance due to the inability of the

flightcrew to crossfeed fuel, or could

prevent the pilot from shutting off the

fuel to the engine following an engine

failure and/or fire.

Since the issuance of that NPRM, the

FAA has received a report indicating

that additional fuel valve actuators

(Model EM487–2, serial numbers 0001

through 1443 inclusive) installed on

certain Model 727 and Model 737 series

airplanes are also subject to the same

failure. The FAA has determined that

these additional actuators are subject to

the addressed unsafe condition.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

a later version of J. C. Carter Company

Service Bulletin 61163–28–08, dated

December 2, 1994. J. C. Carter Company

Service Bulletin 61163–28–08, dated

September 1, 1994, was cited in the

NPRM as the appropriate source of

service information. The replacement

procedures described in the later

version of the service bulletin are

identical to those described in the

earlier version of the service bulletin.

However, the later version expands the

effectivity listing to include additional

actuators. The applicability and

paragraph (e) of the supplemental

NPRM have been revised to reference

the later version of the service bulletin.

Since this change expands the scope

of the originally proposed rule, the FAA

has determined that it is necessary to

reopen the comment period to provide

additional opportunity for public

comment.

As a result of recent communications

with the Air Transport Association

(ATA) of America, the FAA has learned

that, in general, some operators may

misunderstand the legal effect of AD’s

on airplanes that are identified in the

applicability provision of the AD, but

that have been altered or repaired in the

area addressed by the AD. The FAA

points out that all airplanes identified in

the applicability provision of an AD are

legally subject to the AD. If an airplane

has been altered or repaired in the

affected area in such a way as to affect

compliance with the AD, the owner or

operator is required to obtain FAA

approval for an alternative method of

compliance with the AD, in accordance

with the paragraph of each AD that

provides for such approvals. A note has

been included in this notice to clarify

this long standing requirement.

There are approximately 4,137 Model

727 and Model 737 series airplanes of

the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 2,190

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 3 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be supplied by J.C. Carter

Company at no cost to the operators.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $394,200, or

$180 per airplane.

The total cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

The regulations proposed herein

would 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
16390 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 1995 / Proposed Rules

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that 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); and (3) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend 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:

Boeing: Docket 94–NM–177–AD.

Applicability: Model 727 and Model 737

series airplanes; equipped with J.C. Carter

Company fuel valve actuators, as listed in J.C.

Carter Company Service Bulletin 61163–28–

08, dated December 2, 1994, 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

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 improper functioning of certain

actuators, which could result in a fuel

imbalance due to the inability of the

flightcrew to crossfeed fuel, or which could

prevent the pilot from shutting off the fuel to

the engine following an engine failure and/

or fire, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 24 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace the actuator having

part number (P/N) 40574–2 (Model EM487–

2, serial numbers 0001 through 1443

inclusive; and Model EM487–3, serial

numbers 0001 through 2711 inclusive), on

the fuel system crossfeed valve and the

engine shutoff valves with a new actuator

having P/N 40574–4, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of J.C. Carter

Company Service Bulletin 61163–28–08,

dated December 2, 1994.

(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, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March

24, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–7779 Filed 3–29–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–116–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mk 0100 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Fokker Model F28 Mk 0100

series airplanes. This proposal would

require the installation of modified

Passenger Service Unit (PSU) panel

lenses. This proposal would also require

a one-time post-installation inspection

to detect corrosion or deterioration of

the PSU connectors, and correction of

discrepancies, and application of

sealant. This proposal is prompted by

reports that ‘‘No Smoking’’ and ‘‘Fasten

Seat Belt’’ signs installed in certain

overhead PSU’s are not readable from

passengers’ and flight attendants’ seats.

This proposal is also prompted by

reports of smoke in the passenger cabin

caused by overheating of the PSU

connectors. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to ensure that

warning signs are readable to passengers

and flight attendants, and to eliminate a

potential fire hazard.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 8, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

116–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North

Fairfax Street, Alexandria, Virginia

22314. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark Quam, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2145; fax (206) 227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed 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 above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,