[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19498-19502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10823]




[[Page 19497]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part IX





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Aviation Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



14 CFR Part 43



Revisions to Maintenance and Preventive Maintenance Rule; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 1, 1996 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 19498]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 43

[Docket No. 28273; Amendment No. 43-36]
RIN 2120-AE57


Revisions to Maintenance and Preventive Maintenance Rule

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rule amends the maintenance rules to allow properly 
trained pilots of aircraft type certificated for 9 or fewer passenger 
seats and operated under 14 CFR Part 135 to perform certain maintenance 
tasks on their aircraft. This rule also adds certain tasks to those 
items considered to be preventive maintenance. The changes are needed 
because a large number of exemption requests has demonstrated a need 
for pilots conducting certain types of operations to be able to respond 
more rapidly to emergency medical missions and to reconfigure cabins to 
accommodate changing needs to transport varying combinations of 
passenger and/or cargo in situations when a certificated mechanic is 
not available to perform the required maintenance task. This rule will 
improve emergency response and flight turnaround times for these 
operations, and will relieve the public and agency burdens of filing 
and processing exemptions.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward L. Ortiz, General Aviation 
Commercial Branch (AFS-340), Aircraft Maintenance Division, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20591, (202) 267-8203.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Statement of the Problem

    Many small air carriers operating under 14 CFR part 135 (part 135) 
perform missions in locations where or during times when a certificated 
mechanic may not be available to perform certain maintenance tasks that 
need immediate attention. These air carriers provide emergency 
ambulance service; transport internal organs for emergency medical 
treatment; transport packages, parts, and electronic equipment whose 
delivery is of a time-critical nature; and provide normal passenger-
carrying service, occasionally with freight as a secondary load. 
Because the demand for these services varies and, especially in the 
case of medical emergency calls, arises at all times of the day, it is 
impossible for air carriers to anticipate airplane configuration 
requirements.
    Performing cabin conversions to aircraft operating under part 135 
is considered either maintenance (if extensive) or preventive 
maintenance (if simple), and must currently be performed by a 
certificated mechanic as required by Sec. 43.3. Similarly, the removal 
and replacement of medical oxygen bottles is considered maintenance and 
must be performed by a certificated mechanic.
    For many carriers, locating a mechanic each time a request for 
service occurs creates lengthy delays that are costly and could be 
potentially life threatening to injured or ill passengers. Similarly, 
providing a maintenance crew on ``24-hour call'' is cost prohibitive 
for many carriers.
    In addition to imposing these burdens, the current regulations also 
prohibit general aviation pilots from removing and replacing easily 
removable communication and navigation devices, and from updating 
easily replaceable data bases. Certain aviation communication and 
navigation systems are now designed for easy removal and data base 
update. Many privately-owned aircraft owners and operators prefer to 
remove this self-contained equipment (a job that normally requires only 
an allen wrench and no disassembly of the unit) to prevent theft. They 
also would like to be able to insert flight plans or update the Air 
Traffic Control (ATC) software data base. Current regulations require 
that a mechanic perform these tasks.

History

    The FAA has addressed over 250 petitions for exemption from the 
sections of part 43 governing these ``maintenance'' items. A majority 
of these petitions were from nonhelicopter, air taxi operators who 
learned from local FAA inspectors that their pilots are not authorized 
to reconfigure their cabins or exchange medical oxygen bottles. The 
petitions for exemption highlight several common issues: (1) Many small 
part 135 air carriers operate in areas where they undergo a hardship 
due to their regions' lack of certificated mechanics; (2) Many others 
operate during times when certificated mechanics are not normally on 
duty (these missions are usually time-critical); and (3) Many of these 
operators are unable to operate their aircraft in only one 
configuration. Passenger-to-cargo or passenger-to-stretcher conversion 
ensures the most efficient utilization of cabin space on each flight. 
In most instances, seats stretchers, base assemblies, and other items 
used in the conversion are approved for aircraft installation, and the 
procedures for installation and removal are designed to be accomplished 
safely by a trained person.
    Historically, the FAA has granted exemptions to permit pilots of 
aircraft operated under part 135 to perform seat removal and 
replacement tasks only if the aircraft were operated in remote areas 
such as the Alaskan bush or sparsely populated areas of the 
Northwestern United States. Certificated mechanics servicing these 
areas are scarce. Many of the operations include such essential 
services as flying food, mail, needed goods, and people into and out of 
areas that may not be accessible by other modes of transportation.
    More recently, however, exemptions have been granted to part 135 
air carriers to permit their properly trained pilots to reconfigure 
cabin seats when flying missions of an emergency nature during times--
at night and on weekends--when certificated mechanics are not normally 
available, and when a time delay incurred by locating a mechanic could 
cause undue burden or create a life-threatening situation.
    The FAA has determined that if a properly trained pilot can change 
seat configurations in a remote area where a certificated mechanic is 
not available (and which might be performed under adverse conditions), 
he or she would be capable of and should be allowed to perform the same 
conversions under better conditions such as those present at the 
operator's maintenance base.
    Passenger-to-cargo and passenger-to-stretcher conversions have been 
performed safely by pilots who have been trained to do so and who are 
employed by air carriers holding exemptions allowing their pilots to 
perform the tasks. No reported incidents or accidents have been 
attributed to properly trained pilots changing aircraft cabin 
configurations. If an air taxi operator develops an appropriate program 
for performing seat conversions and appropriately instructs and trains 
its pilots according to the program, safety levels equivalent to those 
achieved by certificated mechanics will be maintained.
    Also, on January 10, 1994, the FAA published a Request for Comments 
(59 FR 1326; docket No. 27581) to solicit from the public a list of 
those regulations that are believed to be unwarranted or inappropriate. 
The

[[Page 19499]]

agency received eight comments that addressed the maintenance and 
preventive maintenance regulations of part 43. The commenters noted 
that current regulations do not allow a pilot of a part 135 operator to 
remove and reinstall aircraft cabin seats and stretchers. The comments 
feel that the current regulations are unnecessary and are financially 
and physically burdensome. They point out that the FAA has issued a 
number of exemptions to relieve the burden, and that the exemption 
process itself is burdensome and time consuming.
    The FAA has determined that the concern shown for this issue is 
significant, and that this rulemaking action is consistent with the 
agency's responsibility to review the continuing need for its 
regulations and to eliminate regulations that impose unnecessary 
burdens.

Related Rulemaking

    The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), which is a 
committee composed of aviation community and FAA personnel, has been 
tasked with reviewing part 43 and Appendix A to determine what 
revisions, if any, should be made. The FAA has not yet received any 
recommendations.

The Current Rule

    Part 43 requires air carriers to use certificated mechanics for 
their aircrafts' maintenance and preventive maintenance needs. This 
requirement reflects an FAA policy that passengers of all aircraft be 
given a high degree of safety protection through the proper 
installation of cabin seats and appointments. As outlined in Appendix 
A, paragraph (c), of this part, removal and replacement of aircraft 
seats is considered preventive maintenance.
    Several years ago, the FAA recognized the need for pilots operating 
helicopters under part 135 to be able to perform certain preventive 
maintenance tasks when operating in remote areas. Accordingly, the 
agency amended part 43, effective January 6, 1987 (51 FR 40702, Nov. 7, 
1986), by adding a new Sec. 43.3(h), which authorizes part 135 
certificate holders to allow their pilots, when operating rotorcraft, 
to perform specific preventive maintenance tasks, under the following 
conditions:
    (1) The items of preventive maintenance must be a result of a known 
or suspected mechanical difficulty or malfunction that occurred en 
route to or in a remote area.
    (2) The pilot must have satisfactorily completed an approved 
training program and is authorized, in writing, by the certificate 
holder for each item of preventive maintenance that the pilot is 
authorized to perform.
    (3) There must be no certificated mechanic available to perform 
preventive maintenance.
    (4) The certificate holder must have procedures to evaluate the 
accomplishment of a preventive maintenance item that requires a 
decision concerning the airworthiness of the rotorcraft.
    (5) The items of preventive maintenance authorized by this section 
must be those listed in paragraph (c) of Appendix A of part 43.

Discussion of Comments

    A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Revisions to 
Maintenance and Preventive Maintenance'' was published on July 18, 1995 
(60 FR 36926), which solicited public comment. Forty comments were 
received. Thirty-one commenters agree with the proposal as published.
    Five commenters believe that airplanes with 10 to 19 passenger 
seats should be included in the rulemaking, and one commenter believes 
that rotorcraft with 10 or more seats should be similarly included. The 
FAA disagrees. This rulemaking was precipitated by the volume of 
exemption requests that were filed by operators who needed a shorter 
turn-around time to respond to emergency medical missions and other 
time sensitive operations, or who operated in areas where a 
certificated mechanic was not available. Almost all of the exemption 
requests were filed by operators whose airplanes are configured with 
nine or fewer passenger seats. As stated in the NPRM, the FAA continues 
to find that operators of aircraft type certificated for 10 or more 
passenger seats are required to have a maintenance organization in 
place to support their part 135 operations, and their aircraft tend to 
be more complex in design and construction. The FAA will continue to 
address operations using aircraft configured with 10 or more passenger 
seats on a case by case basis. There will be no change to the proposed 
rule as a result of these comments.
    One commenter suggests that the regulatory language in Sec. 43.3(h) 
be amended to include fixed wing aircraft with nine or fewer passenger 
seats. The FAA disagrees. This rulemaking addresses specific tasks 
associated with specific operations, and the suggestions of the 
commenter are outside the scope of this action. There will be no change 
to the proposed rule as a result of these comments.
    One commenter proposes that the word ``aircraft'' be changed to 
read ``airplane.'' The FAA disagrees. The rule is intended to include 
rotorcraft so helicopter pilots can also perform the tasks prescribed 
that allow for a shorter turn around in emergency situations. Without 
the term ``aircraft,'' helicopter pilots transporting patients, for 
instance, would not be allowed to reconfigure their cabins without an 
exemption. The commenter also proposes that the word ``fewer'' be 
replaced by the old term ``less'' in the context ``nine or fewer.'' The 
FAA recognizes that people are familiar with the hold terminology, but 
the agency is moving in a direction to correct grammatical errors 
whenever rules are revised. The new term, ``nine or fewer'' is being 
incorporated into new rulemaking efforts. There will be no change to 
the proposed rule as a result of these comments.
    The same commenter is concerned about the phrase in paragraph (i) 
that says ``may perform the removal and reinstallation of approved 
aircraft cabin-mounted seats. . .'' He suggests that the sentence 
should include a reference to maintenance and preventive maintenance, 
as stated in the section title, and that the term ``aircraft'' should 
again read ``airplane.'' The FAA disagrees. The title of the section is 
sufficient without repeating it in paragraph (i); the redundancy would 
not clarify the rule language, but would rather make it more 
cumbersome. The argument for ``aircraft'' vs. ``airplane'' is addressed 
above. There will be no change to the proposed rule as a result of 
these comments.
    The same commenter suggests that the rule should allow pilots of 
part 135 rotorcraft to perform the functions. The FAA agrees and will 
retain the term ``aircraft'' in the rule language. The commenter 
suggests that the reference to part 135 be removed from Sec. 43.3(g), 
which, he states, would eliminate the need for paragraph (h) and (i). 
He also suggests that current paragraphs (h) (2), (3), (4), and (5) 
should be incorporated into existing paragraph (g), and that existing 
paragraph [i] should be redesignated as new paragraph (h). Under this 
scheme, existing paragraph (h)(1) would be eliminated. He also suggests 
that the new rule should add the removal and reinstallation of 
stretchers and cabin-mounted medical oxygen bottles to [paragraph (c) 
of] Appendix A. The FAA disagrees. Removing the reference to part 135 
from Sec. 43.3(g) would allow pilots to perform any of the tasks listed 
in paragraph (c) of Appendix A. The purpose of this rulemaking is to 
allow pilots performing specific operations to perform only

[[Page 19500]]

certain tasks relevant to the operation. Pilots are hired to fly 
aircraft, not to perform maintenance and preventive maintenance in all 
areas on a regular basis. Moreover, the suggestion to incorporate 
existing paragraphs (h) (2), (3), (4), and (5) into existing paragraph 
(g) would have the unintended effect of having general aviation pilots, 
who operate under part 91, meet requirements intended and adopted for 
rotorcraft pilots who operate under part 135 in order to perform 
preventive maintenance tasks. The suggestion to revise Sec. 43.3(g) is 
outside the scope of this rulemaking and no change to the proposal will 
be made pursuant to the suggestion.
    Two commeters point out that removing and replacing navigation and 
communication devices (paragraph (c)(31)) could adversely affect safety 
if the connectors are not properly engaged upon reinstallation and no 
operational check is performed. The FAA agrees, and has revised the 
proposed rule language to reflect that the panel-mounted device must be 
a front loading device that employs a tray-mounted connector that 
connects the unit when the unit is installed into the instrument panel. 
Language has also been added to paragraphs (c)(31) and (c)(32) to 
require an operational check prior to use, in accordance with the 
applicable sections of part 91. Depending on the type of flight and/or 
the type of equipment, a pilot would have to comply with FAA91.407 or 
Sec. 91.171.
    One of these commenters also suggests that procedures on how to 
perform the maintenance task and any testing required to determine if 
the equipment is serviceable after maintenance is performed, should be 
documented in the aircraft flight manual. The FAA agrees that the 
information should be made available to the pilot, but will not 
restrict the location of the material to the flight manual. Paragraph 
(i)(2) has been revised to require the certificate holder to have 
written procedures available to the pilot to evaluate the 
accomplishment of the task.
    The same commenter states that the tasks permitted in this 
rulemaking should be allowed only when there is no maintenance 
personnel available. The FAA disagrees. During rulemaking proceedings, 
the FAA examined this issue extensively. The definition of 
``availability'' is complex enough that in this case, it was determined 
that if a pilot is properly trained to perform the tasks, he or she 
should be permitted to perform them whenever needed during operations 
described in this rulemaking action. Over 250 exemptions have been 
granted by the FAA to allow pilots to perform the tasks described here, 
with no adverse effect on safety. Therefore, no change will be made to 
the proposal as a result of this comment.

International Compatibility

    The FAA has reviewed corresponding International Civil Aviation 
Organization regulations and Joint Aviation Authority regulations, 
where they exist, and has identified no differences in these proposed 
amendments and the foreign regulations.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Information collection requirements in the amendment to Sec. 43.3 
have been previously approved by the Office of the Management and 
Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1980 (Pub. L. 96-511) and have been assigned PMB Control Number 2120-
0021. For further information contact: the Information Requirements 
Division, M-34, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4735.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    Executive Order 12866 established the requirement that, within the 
extent permitted by law, a Federal regulatory action may be undertaken 
only if the potential benefits to society for the regulation outweigh 
the potential costs to society. In response to this requirement, and in 
accordance with Department of Transportation policies and procedures, 
the FAA has estimated the anticipated benefits and costs of this 
rulemaking action. The FAA has determined that this rule change is not 
a significant rulemaking action as defined by Executive Order 12866 
(Regulatory Planning and Review). The results are summarized in this 
section. For more detailed economic information, see the full 
regulatory evaluation contained in the docket.
    This rule is cost relieving because it eliminates the need for 
operators to carry mechanics on trips to remote areas or make special 
trips to maintenance facilities for the purpose of altering seat 
configurations or exchanging medical oxygen bottles. Currently, even if 
a mechanic is not needed on a regular basis at a remote site, operators 
may have to hire the services of a local mechanic to reconfigure a 
cabin, which can be especially expensive for emergency medical 
evacuation operations conducted at night during off-duty hours. For the 
purposes of this regulatory evaluation, the FAA assumes that typical 
air taxi operators that fly into remote areas where mechanics are 
scarce could make 36 trips per year that require cabin configuration. 
The FAA further assumes that a pilot flying into a remote area has to 
fly the airplane for an additional hour (roundtrip) to a larger airport 
where a mechanic is available to perform the required maintenance.
    The FAA estimates that a mechanic will have to be paid for \1/2\ 
hour of working time at a loaded wage rate (including benefits) of 
$18.16 per hour. The FAA also estimates that, in the event a cabin 
reconfiguration is needed in a remote area, the airplane burns an 
additional 30 gallons of fuel during the one hour of flying time needed 
to reach an available mechanic, which adds $60 to operating costs. The 
additional cost per trip amounts to $69. On an annual basis, these 
cost-savings amount to $2,484 ($69 x 36) based on the assumption of 36 
trips per year. The FAA further estimates that at least 30 operators 
per year have a recurring need to reconfigure cabins in remote areas 
based on the number of requests for exemption from the requirements of 
Sec. 43.3 submitted to the FAA each year. This number is a very 
conservative estimate; many air taxi operators are unaware of this 
option and forego the additional revenue that could be earned through 
reconfiguring their cabins. The FAA estimates that industry-wide cost 
savings from the proposed rule amendment amount to $74,520 per year 
($2,484 x 30). Over a 10-year period, the discounted value of these 
cost savings amounts to $523,382.
    Since January 1987, part 135 rotorcraft operators have been 
permitted to allow their pilots to perform certain preventive 
maintenance tasks, under very limited specified conditions, one of 
which is that the item of preventive maintenance must be the result of 
a malfunction that occurred en route to or in a remote area. In 
addition, numerous exemptions that permitted pilots of aircraft 
operating under part 135 to reconfigure cabins were granted to 
operators of rotorcraft. Each of the above authorizations contained a 
requirement that the pilot be properly trained for the preventive 
maintenance task that would be undertaken. Rotorcraft pilots operating 
under part 91 rules are authorized to perform preventive maintenance 
tasks under Sec. 43.3(g).
    National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident reports reveal 
no instance of rotorcraft accidents where the removal and replacement 
of cabin seats by a rotorcraft pilot was suspected as a possible cause. 
In fact, a search of the FAA and NTSB accident and incident data 
recorded for part 91 and

[[Page 19501]]

part 135 operations over the 1972-present period did not reveal a 
single instance in which the performance by a pilot of any of the tasks 
that would be authorized in this final rule were suspected as having 
had a causal role in an accident. The FAA has therefore determined that 
this final rule is cost relieving and will not reduce the current level 
of safety.
    In the NPRM, the FAA solicited information from the public to 
refine its estimate of cost savings. No comments were received.

International Trade Impact Analysis

    This rule will affect only those operators engaged in part 135 
operations of a localized or regional nature. No impact is expected on 
international trade because these domestic operators seldom compete 
with foreign firms in the markets they serve.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by 
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and 
disproportionately burdened by government regulations. The RFA requires 
agencies to review rules that may have ``a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.'' This final rule is of a 
cost relieving nature and will therefore afford cost savings to 
individual part 135 operators.
    Under FAA Order 2100.14A, the criterion for a ``substantial 
number'' is a number that is not less than 11 and that is more than one 
third of the small entities subject to the rule. This rule will affect 
all part 135 operators who operate aircraft type certificated for 9 or 
fewer passenger seats. For operators of aircraft for hire, a small 
operator is one that owns, but not necessarily operates, nine or fewer 
aircraft.
    The FAA's criterion for a ``significant impact'' is $4,330 or more 
per year for a unscheduled operator. The extent of the cost savings per 
operator is estimated at $2,484 per operator in the section on economic 
impacts. The FAA concludes, therefore, that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial 
number of small entities.

Federalism Implications

    This final rule 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 rule will not have sufficient 
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism 
Assessment.

Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and based on the 
findings in the Regulatory Flexibility Determination and the 
International Trade Impact Analysis, the FAA has determined that this 
final rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
12866. In addition, the FAA certifies that this final rule 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. This rule is considered nonsignificant 
under Order DOT 2100.5, Policies and Procedures for Simplification, 
Analysis, and Review of Regulations. A regulatory evaluation of the 
rule, including an initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination and 
International Trade Impact Analysis, has been placed in the docket. A 
copy may be obtained by contacting the person identified under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects 14 CFR Part 43

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends 14 CFR part 43 of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations as follows:

PART 43--MAINTENANCE, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, REBUILDING, AND 
ALTERATION

    1. The authority citation for part 43 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44703, 44705, 44707, 
44711, 44713, 44717.

    2. In Sec. 43.3, paragraph (i) is redesignated as paragraph (j), 
and a new paragraph (i) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 43.3  Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventive 
maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations.

* * * * *
    (i) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (g) of this 
section, in accordance with an approval issued to the holder of a 
certificate issued under part 135 of this chapter, a pilot of an 
aircraft type-certificated for 9 or fewer passenger seats, excluding 
any pilot seat, may perform the removal and reinstallation of approved 
aircraft cabin seats, approved cabin-mounted stretchers, and when no 
tools are required, approved cabin-mounted medical oxygen bottles, 
provided--
    (1) The pilot has satisfactorily completed an approved training 
program and is authorized in writing by the certificate holder to 
perform each task; and
    (2) The certificate holder has written procedures available to the 
pilot to evaluate the accomplishment of the task.
* * * * *
    3. In Appendix A to part 43, paragraph (c)(30)(i), the reference 
``Sec. 147.21(f)'' is revised to read ``Sec. 147.21(e) of this 
chapter.''
    4. In Appendix A to part 43, paragraphs (c)(31) and (c)(32) are 
added to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 43--Major Alterations, Major Repairs, and 
Preventive Maintenance

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (31) Removing and replacing self-contained, front instrument panel-
mounted navigation and communication devices that employ tray-mounted 
connectors that connect the unit when the unit is installed into the 
instrument panel, (excluding automatic flight control systems, 
transponders, and microwave frequency distance measuring equipment 
(DME)). The approved unit must be designed to be readily and repeatedly 
removed and replaced, and pertinent instructions must be provided. 
Prior to the unit's intended use, and operational check must be 
performed in accordance with the applicable sections of part 91 of this 
chapter.
    (32) Updating self-contained, front instrument panel-mounted Air 
Traffic Control (ATC) navigational software data bases (excluding those 
of automatic flight control systems, transponders, and microwave 
frequency distance measuring equipment (DME)) provided no disassembly 
of the unit is required and pertinent instructions are provided. Prior 
to the unit's intended use, an operational check must be performed in 
accordance with applicable sections of part 91 of this chapter.


Sec. 43.7  [Amended]

    5. In section 43.7(d), the reference ``Sec. 43.3(h)'' is revised to 
read ``Sec. 43.3(j)''.


Sec. 43.11  [Amended]

    6. In section 43.11(b), the reference ``Sec. 91.30(d)(2)'' is 
revised to read ``Sec. 91.213(d)(2) of this chapter''.

[[Page 19502]]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 26, 1996.
David R. Hinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-10823 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P