29008 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 96–NM–111–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

96–12–21 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–9664. Docket 96–NM–111–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9–81 (MD–81),

DC–9–82 (MD–82), DC–9–83 (MD–83), DC–

9–87 (MD–87), MD–88, and MD–90

airplanes; 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure the flight crew’s ability to

continue to control the airplane manually if

the autopilot or autothrottle function fails to

disengage, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 14 days after the effective date

of this AD, revise the Limitations section of

the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to include the following statement.

This may be accomplished by inserting a

copy of this AD in the AFM.

‘‘If the autopilot or autothrottle fails to

disconnect normally, press and hold the

autopilot release button or either autothrottle

release button, as appropriate. Refer to the

Abnormal Procedures section for procedures

if the autopilot or autothrottle fails to

disconnect.’’

(b) Within 14 days after the effective date

of this AD, revise the Abnormal Procedures

section of the FAA-approved AFM to include

the following information. This may be

accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD

in the AFM.

‘‘AUTOPILOT:

If the Autopilot (A/P) disconnects when

the AUTOPILOT RELEASE button on either

control wheel is depressed, and re-engages

when the AUTOPILOT RELEASE button is

released, accomplish the following

procedures:

PROCEDURE: Use Autopilot (as desired)

AUTOPILOT RELEASE button—PRESS

AND HOLD

• Hold either yoke (yellow) Autopilot

Release button while continuing to fly the

aircraft manually. The A/P will remain

disengaged while depressing the button.

• When the Autopilot Release button is

released, the A/P will engage and all A/P

functions should work normally.

TO SILENCE THE AURAL WARNING:

CAWS C/B (P–38)—PULL

• Circuit breaker is located behind the

Captain’s seat.

• Pulling the C/B will disable the Stall

Warning SSRS–1, Landing Gear, Takeoff,

Cabin Altitude, Speed Brake aural warnings,

in addition to the Autopilot aural warning.

CAUTION:

Do not attempt to overpower the autopilot.

When the autopilot is engaged, applying

force to the column may allow the alternate

trim to reposition the stabilizer. If the force

is applied long enough, it will result in an

out-of-trim condition.’’

‘‘AUTOTHROTTLE:

If the Autothrottle (A/T) disconnects when

either throttle disconnect button is

depressed, and re-engages when throttle

disconnect button is released, accomplish the

following procedures:

PROCEDURE: Use Autothrottle System (as

desired)

WHEN A DISCONNECT IS NECESSARY:

AUTOTHROTTLE RELEASE BUTTON—

PRESS AND HOLD

• Press and hold either button until

flashing red A/T annunciation is illuminated.

Flashing red light indicates autothrottle is

disconnected.

• AUTOTHROTTLE RELEASE BUTTON

may then be released.

• The FMA A/T window will annunciate

as though the A/T is engaged.

• The flashing red A/T annunciation of the

FMA cannot be extinguished with repeated

depression of the autothrottle release button.

• If the throttle levers are retarded to the

idle stop, the flashing red A/T annunciation

will extinguish, and the A/T system will reengage.

• If the DFGC is selected to the IAS mode

and the A/T SPEED mode is selected, the A/

T system will re-engage.’’

(c) 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, Los

Angeles 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, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(d) 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.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

June 24, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 3,

1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–14385 Filed 6–06–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29009

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–120–AD; Amendment

39–9661; AD 96–12–18]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10 Series Airplanes

and Model MD–11F (Freighter)

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to all McDonnell Douglas

Model DC–10 series airplanes and

Model MD–11F airplanes. Among other

things, this amendment requires

repetitive leak checks of the lavatory

drain system and repair, if necessary;

provides for the option of revising the

FAA-approved maintenance program to

include a schedule of leak checks; and

requires the installation of a cap on the

flush/fill line. This amendment is

prompted by continuing reports of

damage to engines and airframes,

separation of engines from airplanes,

and damage to property on the ground,

caused by ‘‘blue ice’’ that forms from

leaking lavatory drain systems on

transport category airplanes and

subsequently dislodges from the

airplane fuselage. The actions specified

by this AD are intended to prevent such

damage associated with the problems of

‘‘blue ice.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Information related to this

rulemaking action may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Walter Eierman, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (310) 627–5336; fax (310)

627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to all Model DC–10

series airplanes and MD–11F airplanes

was published in the Federal Register

on November 2, 1995 (60 FR 55668).

That action proposed to require

repetitive leak checks of the lavatory

drain system and repair, if necessary; to

provide for the option of revising the

FAA-approved maintenance program to

include a schedule of leak checks; and

to require the installation of a cap on the

flush/fill line.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Proposal

One commenter supports the

proposal.

Request To Exclude All-Cargo

Configured Airplanes From

Applicability

One commenter requests that the

applicability of the proposal be revised

to exclude airplanes operating in an allcargo configuration, where lavatories

and lavatory fill/drain systems have

been removed.

The FAA concurs. This final rule

requires leak checks of the lavatory/fill

drain system. However, if no such

system is installed on the airplane then,

obviously, the requirements of the AD

cannot be performed and, likewise,

should not be required. Although the

commenter states that, for all-cargo

configurations of the affected airplanes,

lavatory systems may be removed, the

FAA is aware that most cases of allcargo-configured Model DC–10’s have at

least one (forward) lavatory installed

near the flightcrew deck. As long as

there is one lavatory drainage system

installed on the airplane, the

requirements of this AD would still

apply. To make this eminently clear to

affected operators, the FAA has revised

the applicability of the final rule to

clarify that the AD applies to airplanes

that are equipped with a lavatory

drainage system.

Request To Revise Dump Valve Leak

Check Procedure

One commenter requests that the

dump valve leak check procedures,

specified throughout the proposal, be

revised to permit the check to be

performed using less fluid. The proposal

states that the check is to be performed

by filling the toilet tank with fluid to a

level such that the bowl is

approximately half full (at least 2 inches

above the flapper in the bowl).

However, this commenter states that the

check can be accomplished and the

same intent can be achieved with the

use of less fluid. This commenter, a U.S.

operator, indicates that use of less fluid

would be more effective in terms of both

time and cost. As an example, the

commenter states that many Model DC–

10 airplanes are equipped with aft waste

tanks with a 90-gallon capacity; if the

proposed check procedures are

accomplished, over 120 gallons of fluid

would be required to fill the toilet tanks

to a level such that each of the four

toilet bowls are half full. The

commenter requests that this leak check

on these airplanes be revised to require

a maximum of only 50 gallons of fluid

to be used. The commenter asserts that

this revision to the test procedures

would still accomplish the same intent

and would decrease the time required to

test the system.

The FAA does not concur. The

procedure to fill the toilet bowl to

approximately 1⁄2 full is also meant to

check the tank and the rinse line check

valves. The FAA finds that performing

the test using less fluid does not do as

complete and adequate a job as is

necessary to meet the intent of this AD.

Request To Delete the Method for

Conducting Leak Checks

One commenter requests that the

proposal be revised to delete the defined

method of conducting the leak check.

The commenter suggests that, in lieu of

requiring the aircraft to be pressurized,

the proposal should merely stipulate

that operators are to ‘‘apply 3 psi [sic]

across the valve’’ and then allow

operators to determine the most

economical means of verifying the

integrity of the seals. The commenter

contends that requiring pressurization

of the airplane causes unnecessary

expenses to be incurred.

The FAA does not consider that any

revision to the final rule is necessary

based on the commenter’s request. The

wording of the final rule (and proposal)

simply states that the check must be

performed with ‘‘a minimum of 3 PSID

applied across the valve.’’ To do this

does not require that the airplane be

pressurized. The FAA acknowledges

that the NOTE contained in the proposal

referred operators to the procedures

specified in chapter 38–30–00 of the

DC–10 Maintenance Manual procedure

as one source of guidance for

performing the check procedures, and

those particular procedures do call for

pressurizing the airplane. However, the

reference to the Maintenance Manual

procedure is merely informational; it is

not a requirement and, likewise,

pressurizing the airplane is not a

requirement. The only requirement of

the AD is that a minimum of 3 PSID be

applied across the valve when the check

is performed.
29010 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Request for Clarification of Check

Requirements for Valves With Outer

Seals and Inner Caps

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and

(a)(3)(ii) be revised to define more

clearly which types of valves require the

outer seal to be pressure checked for

leakage.

The FAA agrees that some

clarification is warranted. Some valves

have an inner seal that is closed when

the outer cap is closed. For this type of

valve, leakage from the outer cap could

only be checked if the inner seal were

removed since, when the inner seal is

correctly in place, it will prevent any

fluid from reaching the outer cap seal.

For this type of valve, paragraph

(a)(3)(ii) of the final rule provides an

alternative to allow operators to inspect

the seal and seal surface of the outer cap

seal in lieu of performing a leak check

of the outer seal. The FAA has included

a new NOTE in paragraph (a)(3) to

provide this information.

Request To Increase Leak Check

Interval for Certain Shaw Aero Valves

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraph (a)(1) and (b)(2)(i)

be revised to allow the following Shaw

Aero valves to be leak checked at 1,000-

hour intervals:

• 331 series, all serial numbers;

• 332 series, all serial numbers;

• 10101000BA2, having serial

numbers 130 and higher; and

• 10101000BB2, all serial numbers.

The commenter states that these valves

have been accepted previously by the

FAA for a 1,000-hour leak check

interval either in accordance with AD

94–23–10, amendment 39–9073 (59 FR

59124, November 16, 1994), which is

applicable to Boeing Model 727 series

airplanes; or a similar proposed rule

applicable to Boeing Model 737 series

airplanes (reference Docket No. 95–NM–

111–AD; 60 FR 55673, November 2,

1995).

The FAA concurs in part. The FAA

finds that the 1,000-hour leak check

interval is acceptable for most of the

valves requested by the commenter.

However, based on data received, only

10101000BB2 series valves having serial

number 0011 and higher are acceptable

for this leak check interval. The final

rule has been revised accordingly.

Request for Increase in Leak Check

Interval for All Shaw Aero Valves

This same commenter requests that

proposed paragraph (a)(1) and (b)(2)(i)

be revised to permit the leak check

interval of 1,000 hours for specified

Shaw Aero valves to be increased to

2,000 hours upon the revision of an

operator’s maintenance procedures in

accordance with the proposal and the

submittal of data to substantiate the

longer interval.

The FAA does not consider that any

change to the rule is necessary based on

this commenter’s request. Paragraph (c)

of the final rule provides a procedure for

collecting and submitting data to

substantiate an increase in the leak

check interval for any valve. The

procedure specified in that paragraph is

the appropriate one to follow for

requesting any such increase in the leak

check interval.

Request To Increase Leak Check

Interval for Certain Kaiser Valves

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(2)(i)

be revised to increase the 1,000-hour

leak check interval for Kaiser valves

having part numbers 0218–0026 and

0218–0032. The commenter requests

that the interval be increased to 2,500

hours based on qualification and test

report data submitted.

The FAA cannot concur with the

commenter’s request since insufficient

data was submitted to support a longer

inspection interval.

Request for Special Procedures for

Systems With ‘‘Interlock’’ Mechanisms

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraph (b)(2)(ii) be revised

to include different requirements for

systems that incorporate an ‘‘interlock’’

mechanism that prevents the closure of

the outer cap if the ‘‘donut’’ is not

installed. This commenter states that if

the functioning of the interlock

mechanism is verified, the requirement

for pressure leak checks should be

similar to the checks of other valves that

have both an inner and an outer seal.

The FAA does not concur. Though the

interlock mechanism ensures that the

donut is installed, it does not ensure

that the donut is in good condition. This

type of valve, therefore, should be

inspected at the same interval as other

‘‘donut valves,’’ unless data to

substantiate a longer inspection interval

can be provided. For this type of valve,

the inner seal (the ‘‘donut’’) can be leak

checked and the outer cap seal and seal

surface can be inspected for wear in

accordance with the procedures

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B) of the

final rule.

Request To Allow Installation of an

Alternative Lock Cap

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraph (d) be revised to

allow the installation of a 1⁄4-turn ball

lock cap as an alternative to the

proposed lever lock cap. This

commenter, a non-U.S. operator, states

that its fleet is already equipped with

these lock caps and the commenter

considers them equivalent to the caps

that would be required by the AD.

The FAA does not concur. Service

experience has shown that, on many

occasions, caps have been missing from

the airplane. The lever lock cap

installation required by this final rule

secures the cap to the airplane better

than other types of cap installations that

the FAA currently knows of. However,

under the provisions of paragraph (f) of

this final rule, the FAA would consider

approval of the use of other types of

caps as an alternative method of

compliance if sufficient data are

presented to justify the use of a different

type of cap.

Request To Address Need for Heaters

on Flush/Fill Lines

This same commenter indicates that

the proposed installation of caps on the

flush/fill lines, as would be required by

paragraph (d) of the proposal, also may

require the installation of heaters.

Without such heaters, residual water

will collect at the flush/fill nipples and

freeze, thus hindering maintenance.

This will increase the costs associated

with the proposed rule.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s observation. Typically,

caps already are installed on airplanes;

this AD will require the installation of

only a particular style of cap, and may

not change the possible need for heaters

on some airplanes. If the lines are

allowed to drain thoroughly before the

cap is closed, the need for heaters also

would be minimized or eliminated.

Request for Permission To Use

Alternative Check Valves on Flush/Fill

Line

Several commenters request that

proposed paragraph (d) be revised to

permit the use of Monogram 4803–86

series check valves on flush/fill lines as

an alternative to the proposed lever/lock

caps. These commenters point out that

Monogram check valves with similar

design characteristics were approved

previously by the FAA as an acceptable

alternative item for compliance with a

similar proposed AD that is applicable

to Boeing Model 737 series airplanes

(reference Docket No. 95–NM–111–AD).

The FAA concurs with the

commenters’ request. Paragraph (d) of

the final rule has been revised to specify

that installation of Monogram 4803–86

series check valves on the flush/fill

lines is an acceptable action for

compliance.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29011

Additionally, paragraphs (a)(4) and

(b)(3) of the final rule have been revised

to provide the necessary instructions for

replacing the O-rings associated with

the Monogram 4803–86 series check

valve, and for testing the check valve for

proper operation.

Request for Revision of Cost Impact

Information

One commenter states that the cost

impact information, as explained in the

preamble to the proposal, indicated that

required parts for installing a cap on the

flush/fill line would cost $275 per

airplane. The commenter states that the

cost of parts is $275 per unit; based on

an average of 8 units per airplane, the

cost per airplane is $2,200.

The FAA concurs. The cost

information presented in the proposal

inadvertently indicated the cost per

unit, rather than the total cost per

airplane. The commenter’s figures are

correct and the cost impact discussion,

below, has been revised accordingly.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 435 Model

DC–10 series airplanes and Model MD–

11F airplanes of the affected design in

the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates

that 285 airplanes of U.S. registry, and

18 U.S. operators, will be affected by

this proposed AD.

For airplanes in the passenger

configuration, the estimated costs

associated with the requirements of this

AD are as follows:

1. Leak checks. It will take

approximately 4 work hours per

airplane lavatory drain to accomplish

each leak check, at an average labor cost

of $60 per work hour. There normally

are two drains per airplane. Depending

upon the type of valve installed and the

flight utilization rate of the airplane,

airplanes will be required to be

inspected as few as 3 times per year or

as many as 15 times per year. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed leak check requirement on

U.S. operators is expected to be between

$1,440 and $7,200 per airplane per year.

2. Inspections. Should an operator

elect to perform the inspection of the

service panel drain valve cap/door seal

and seal mating surface, the inspection

will take approximately 2 work hours to

accomplish, at an average labor cost of

$60 per work hour. Depending upon the

type of valves installed and the flight

utilization rate of the airplane, airplanes

will be required to be inspected as few

as 3 times per year or as many as 15

times per year. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of the inspection

requirements on U.S. operators will be

between $360 and $1,800 per airplane

per year.

3. Installation of cap on flush/fill line.

This installation will take

approximately 2 work hours to

accomplish, at an average labor cost of

$60 per work hour. The cost of required

parts is estimated to be $2,200 per

airplane. (There are 8 flush/fill lines per

airplane, and parts for each line will

cost approximately $275.) There

currently are 175 passenger-configured

airplanes of U.S. registry that will be

subject to this requirement. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

installation requirement on U.S.

operators is expected to be $553,000, or

$3,160 per airplane.

For airplanes in the freighter

configuration, the estimated costs

associated with the requirements of this

AD are as follows:

1. Leak checks. It will take

approximately 4 work hours per

airplane lavatory drain to accomplish

each leak check, at an average labor cost

of $60 per work hour. There normally is

one drain per airplane. Depending upon

the type of valve installed and the flight

utilization rate of the airplane, airplanes

will be required to be inspected as few

as 3 times per year or as many as 15

times per year. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of the leak check

requirement on U.S. operators of these

airplanes is expected to be between

$720 and $3,600 per airplane per year.

2. Inspections. Should an operator

elect to perform the inspection of the

service panel drain valve cap/door seal

and seal mating surface, the inspection

will take approximately 1 work hour to

accomplish, at an average labor cost of

$60 per work hour. Depending upon the

type of valves installed and the flight

utilization rate of the airplane, airplanes

will be required to be inspected as few

as 3 times per year or as many as 15

times per year. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of the inspection

requirements on U.S. operators of these

airplanes will be between $180 and

$900 per airplane per year.

3. Installation of cap on flush/fill line.

This installation will take

approximately 2 work hours to

accomplish, at an average labor cost of

$60 per work hour. The cost of required

parts is estimated to be $275 per

airplane. (There is 1 flush/fill line per

airplane.) There currently are 110

freighter-configured airplanes of U.S.

registry that will be subject to this

requirement. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the installation

requirement on U.S. operators of these

airplanes is expected to be $43,450, or

$395 per airplane.

The number of required work hours,

as indicated above, is presented as if the

accomplishment of the actions required

by this AD were to be conducted as

‘‘stand alone’’ actions. However, in

actual practice, these actions could be

accomplished coincidentally or in

combination with normally scheduled

airplane inspections and other

maintenance program tasks. Therefore,

the actual number of necessary

‘‘additional’’ work hours will be

minimal in many instances.

Additionally, any costs associated with

special airplane scheduling should be

minimal.

In addition to the costs discussed

above, for those operators who elect to

comply with paragraph (b) of this AD

action, the FAA estimates that it will

take approximately 40 work hours per

operator to incorporate the lavatory

drain system leak check procedures into

the maintenance programs, at an average

labor cost of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the maintenance revision requirement of

this AD on the 18 affected U.S.

operators is estimated to be $43,200, or

$2,400 per operator.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted.

The FAA recognizes that the

obligation to maintain aircraft in an

airworthy condition is vital, but

sometimes expensive. Because AD’s

require specific actions to address

specific unsafe conditions, they appear

to impose costs that would not

otherwise be borne by operators.

However, because of the general

obligation of operators to maintain

aircraft in an airworthy condition, this

appearance is deceptive. Attributing

those costs solely to the issuance of this

AD is unrealistic because, in the interest

of maintaining safe aircraft, prudent

operators would accomplish the

required actions even if they were not

required to do so by the AD.

A full cost-benefit analysis has not

been accomplished for this AD. As a

matter of law, in order to be airworthy,

an aircraft must conform to its type
29012 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

design and be in a condition for safe

operation. The type design is approved

only after the FAA makes a

determination that it complies with all

applicable airworthiness requirements.

In adopting and maintaining those

requirements, the FAA has already

made the determination that they

establish a level of safety that is costbeneficial. When the FAA, as in this

AD, makes a finding of an unsafe

condition, this means that the original

cost-beneficial level of safety is no

longer being achieved and that the

required actions are necessary to restore

that level of safety. Because this level of

safety has already been determined to be

cost-beneficial, a full cost-benefit

analysis for this AD would be redundant

and unnecessary.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (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. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

96–12–18 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–9661. Docket 95–NM–120–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–10 series

airplanes and Model MD–11F series

airplanes; equipped with a lavatory drainage

system, forward or aft; 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. The

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the modification, alteration, or repair

on the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

previously accomplished.

To prevent engine damage, airframe

damage, and/or a hazard to persons or

property on the ground as a result of ‘‘blue

ice’’ that has formed from leakage of the

lavatory drain system and dislodged from the

airplane, accomplish the following:

Note 2: The toilet dump valve leak checks

required by this AD may be performed by

filling the toilet tank with water/rinsing fluid

to a level such that the bowl is approximately

half full (at least 2 inches above the flapper

in the bowl) and checking for leakage after

a period of 5 minutes.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of

this AD, accomplish the applicable

procedures specified in paragraphs (a)(1),

(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5) of this AD. If

the individual waste drain system panel

incorporates more than one type of valve, the

inspection interval that applies to that panel

is determined by the component with the

longest inspection interval allowed. Each of

the components must be inspected or tested

at that time at each service panel location.

(1) Within 1,000 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight hours,

accomplish the applicable procedures

specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii)

of this AD for each lavatory drain system

with a service panel drain valve installed that

is listed in Table 1, below:

TABLE 1.—VALVES REQUIRING LEAK CHECKS AT 1,000-FLIGHT-HOUR INTERVALS

Manufacturer Part No. Serial No.

Kaiser Electroprecision ................................... 0218–0032 series .................................................. All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 1010100C–N (or higher dash number) ................. All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 1010100B–A–1 ...................................................... 0115 through 0121, 0146 through 0164,

0180 and higher.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 10101000BA2 ........................................................ 130 and higher.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 10101000BB2 ........................................................ 0011 and higher.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 331 series .............................................................. All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ......................................... 332 series .............................................................. All serial numbers.

Pneudraulics .................................................... 9527 series ............................................................ All serial numbers.

(i) Conduct a leak check of the dump valve

and drain valve. The service panel drain

valve leak check must be performed with a

minimum of 3 PSID applied across the valve.

Both the inner door/closure device and the

outer cap/door must be leak checked.

(ii) For service panel valves that have an

inner seal: In lieu of pressure testing, the

outer cap seal and seal surface may be

visually inspected for damage or wear. Any

damaged parts must be replaced or repaired

prior to further flight, or the affected

lavatory(s) must be drained and placarded

inoperative until repairs can be

accomplished.

(2) Within 600 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 600 flight hours,

accomplish the applicable procedures

specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii)

of this AD for each lavatory drain system

with a service panel drain valve installed that

is listed in Table 2, below:

TABLE 2.—VALVES REQUIRING LEAK

CHECKS AT 600–FLIGHT HOUR INTERVALS

Manufacturer Part No. Serial No.

Kaiser

Electroprecision.

0218–0026

series.

All serial

numbers.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29013

TABLE 2.—VALVES REQUIRING LEAK

CHECKS AT 600–FLIGHT HOUR INTERVALS—Continued

Manufacturer Part No. Serial No.

Shaw Aero

Devices.

1010100C

series, except as

called out

in Table 1,

above,.

Shaw Aero

Devices.

1010100B

series, except as

called out

in Table 1,

above.

(i) Conduct a leak check of the dump valve

and the service panel drain valve. The

service panel drain valve leak check must be

performed with a minimum 3 PSID applied

across the valve. Both the inner door/closure

device and the outer cap/door must be leak

checked.

(ii) For service panel valves that have an

inner seal: In lieu of pressure testing, the

outer cap seal and seal surface may be

visually inspected for damage or wear. Any

damaged parts must be replaced or repaired

prior to further flight, or the affected

lavatory(s) must be drained and placarded

inoperative until repairs can be

accomplished.

(3) For each lavatory drain system not

addressed in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this

AD: Within 200 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 200 flight hours,

accomplish the following procedures:

(i) Conduct a leak check of the dump valve

and the service panel drain valve. The

service panel drain valve leak check must be

performed with a minimum 3 PSID applied

across the valve. If the service panel drain

valve has an inner door with a second

positive seal, both the inner door and the

outer cap/door must be leak checked.

(ii) For service panel valves that have an

inner seal: In lieu of pressure testing, the

outer cap seal and seal surface may be

visually inspected for damage or wear. Any

damaged parts must be replaced or repaired

prior to further flight, or the affected

lavatory(s) must be drained and placarded

inoperative until repairs can be

accomplished.

Note 3: Some service panel valves have an

inner seal that is closed when the outer cap

is closed. For this type of valve, the fluid

leakage from the outer cap can be checked

only if the inner seal is removed; when the

inner seal is in place, it prevents any fluid

from reaching the outer cap seal. For this

type of valve, the actions specified in

paragraph (a)(3)(ii) are provided to allow

inspection of the seal and seal surface of the

outer cap seal as an alternative to leak

checking the outer seal itself.

(4) For flush/fill lines: Within 5,000 flight

hours after the effective date of this AD, and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000

flight hours, accomplish either of the

procedures specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) or

(a)(4)(ii) of this AD, as appropriate for the

airplane’s flush/fill line installation:

(i) For airplanes equipped with a flush/fill

line cap, accomplish either paragraph

(a)(4)(i)(A) or (a)(4)(i)(B) of this AD:

(A) Conduct a leak check of the flush/fill

line cap. This leak check must be made with

a minimum of 3 PSID applied across the cap.

Or

(B) Replace the seals on the toilet tank antisiphon (check) valve and the flush/fill line

cap. Additionally, perform a leak check of

the toilet tank anti-siphon (check) valve with

a minimum of 3 PSID across the valve.

Note 4: The Inspection/Check procedure

specified in DC–10 Maintenance Manual,

chapter 38–30–00, pages 601 and 602, dated

June 1, 1993, may be referred to as guidance

for the procedures required by this

paragraph.

(ii) For airplanes equipped with a check

valve vacuum breaker, Monogram part

number series 4803–86: Replace the O-rings

/seals in the valve and test the check valve

and vacuum breaker sections of the valve for

proper operation, in accordance with the

manufacturer’s component maintenance/

overhaul manual.

(5) If a leak is discovered during any leak

check required by paragraph (a) of this AD,

prior to further flight, accomplish either of

the procedures specified in paragraph

(a)(5)(i) or (a)(5)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Repair the leak and retest. Or

(ii) Drain the affected lavatory system and

placard the lavatory inoperative until repairs

can be accomplished.

(b) As an alternative to the requirements of

paragraph (a) of this AD: Within 180 days

after the effective date of this AD, revise the

FAA-approved maintenance program to

include the requirements specified in

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5),

and (b)(6) of this AD.

(1) For each lavatory drain system: Within

5,000 flight hours after revision of the

maintenance program in accordance with

paragraph (b) of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 18 months, replace

the valve seals. Any revision to this

replacement schedule must be approved by

the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate.

(2) Conduct periodic leak checks of the

lavatory drain systems in accordance with

the applicable schedule specified in

paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), and (b)(2)(iii) of

this AD. If the individual waste drain system

panel incorporates more than one type of

valve, the inspection interval that applies to

that panel is determined by the component

with the longest inspection interval allowed.

Each of the components must be inspected/

tested at that time at each service panel

location. Any revision to the leak check

schedule must be approved by the Manager,

Los Angeles ACO, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(i) Within 1,000 flight hours after revising

the maintenance program in accordance with

paragraph (b) of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight hours,

accomplish the applicable procedures

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(A) and

(b)(2)(i)(B) of this AD for each lavatory drain

system with a service panel drain valve

installed that is listed in Table 3, below:

TABLE 3.—VALVES REQUIRING LEAK CHECKS AT 1,000-FLIGHT HOUR INTERVALS

Manufacturer Part No. Serial No.

Kaiser Electroprecision ................................. 0218–0032 series ...................................................... All serial numbers.

Kaiser Electroprecision ................................. 0218–0026 series ...................................................... All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 1010100C series ........................................................ All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 1010100B series ........................................................ All series numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 10101000BA2 ............................................................ 130 and higher.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 10101000BB2 ............................................................ 0011 and higher.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 331 series .................................................................. All serial numbers.

Shaw Aero Devices ...................................... 332 series .................................................................. All serial numbers.

Pneudraulics ................................................. 9527 series ................................................................ All serial numbers.

(A) Conduct leak checks of the dump valve

and service panel drain valve. The service

panel drain leak must be performed with a

minimum of 3 PSID applied across the valve.

Only the inner door/closure device of the

service panel drain valve must be leak

checked. And

(B) Visually inspect the service panel drain

valve outer cap/door seal and seal mating

surface for wear or damage that may cause

leakage. Any worn or damaged seal must be

replaced, and any damaged seal mating

surface must be repaired or replaced, prior to

further flight, in accordance with the valve

manufacturer’s maintenance manual.

(ii) Within 200 flight hours after revising

the maintenance program in accordance with

paragraph (b) of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 200 flight hours,

accomplish the applicable procedures in
29014 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) and (b)(2)(ii)(B) of this

AD for each lavatory drain system with a

lavatory drain system valve that incorporates

one of the valves listed in Table 4, below:

TABLE 4.—VALVES REQUIRING LEAK

CHECKS AT 200-FLIGHT HOUR INTERVALS

Manufacturer Part No. Serial No.

Kaiser

Electroprecision.

4259–20 or

4259–31

‘‘donut’’ assemblies

(or substitute assemblies

from another manufacturer).

All serial

numbers.

Kaiser Roylyn 2651–231.

Kaiser Roylyn 2651–259.

(A) Conduct leak checks of the dump valve

and the service panel drain valve. The

service panel drain valve leak check must be

performed with a minimum 3 PSID applied

across the valve. Both the donut and the

outer cap/door must be leak checked.

(B) For service panel valves that have an

inner seal: In lieu of pressure testing, visually

inspect the outer cap seal and seal surface for

damage or wear. Any damaged parts must be

replaced or repaired prior to further flight, or

the affected lavatory(s) must be drained and

placarded inoperative until repairs can be

accomplished.

(iii) For each lavatory drain system that

incorporates any other type of approved

valves: Within 400 flight hours after revising

the maintenance program in accordance with

paragraph (b) of this AD, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 400 flight hours

accomplish both of the following procedures:

(A) Conduct leak checks of the dump valve

and the service panel drain valve. The

service panel drain valve leak check must be

performed with a minimum 3 PSID applied

across the valve. If the service panel drain

valve has an inner door/closure device with

a second positive seal, only the inner door

must be leak checked. And

(B) If the valve has an inner door/closure

device with a second positive seal: Visually

inspect the service panel drain valve outer

door/cap seal and seal mating surface for

wear or damage that may cause leakage. Any

worn or damaged seal must be replaced and

any damaged seal mating surface must be

repaired or replaced, prior to further flight,

in accordance with the valve manufacturer’s

maintenance manual.

(3) For flush/fill lines: Within 5,000 flight

hours after the effective date of this AD, and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000

flight hours, accomplish the procedure

specified in either paragraph (b)(3)(i) or

(b)(3)(ii) of this AD, as appropriate for the

airplane’s flush/fill line installation:

(i) For airplanes equipped with a flush/fill

line cap, accomplish either paragraph

(b)(3)(i)(A) or (b)(3)(i)(B) of this AD:

(A) Conduct a leak check of the flush/fill

line cap. This leak check must be made with

a minimum of 3 PSID applied across the cap.

Or

(B) Replace the seals on the toilet tank antisiphon (check) valve and the flush/fill line

cap. Additionally, perform a leak check of

the toilet tank anti-siphon (check) valve with

a minimum of 3 PSID across the valve.

Note 5: The Inspection/Check procedure

specified in DC–10 Maintenance Manual,

chapter 38–30–00, pages 601 and 602, dated

June 1, 1993, may be referred to as guidance

for the procedures required by this

paragraph.

(ii) For airplanes equipped with a check

valve vacuum breaker, Monogram part

number series 4803–86: Replace the O-rings/

seals in the valve and test the check valve

and vacuum breaker sections of the valve for

proper operation, in accordance with the

manufacturer’s component maintenance/

overhaul manual.

(4) Provide procedures for accomplishing

visual inspections to detect leakage, to be

conducted by maintenance personnel at

intervals not to exceed 4 calendar days or 45

flight hours, whichever occurs later.

(5) Provide procedures for reporting

leakage. These procedures shall provide that

any ‘‘horizontal blue streak’’ findings must be

reported to maintenance and that, prior to

further flight, the leaking system shall either

be repaired, or be drained and placarded

inoperative.

(6) Provide training programs for

maintenance and servicing personnel that

include information on ‘‘Blue Ice

Awareness’’ and the hazards of ‘‘blue ice.’’

(c) For operators who elect to comply with

paragraph (b) of this AD: Any revision to (i.e.,

extension of) the leak check intervals

required by paragraph (b) of this AD must be

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Requests for such revisions must be

submitted to the Manager of the Los Angeles

ACO through the FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector (PMI), and must include the

following information:

(1) The operator’s name;

(2) A statement verifying that all known

cases/indications of leakage or failed leak

tests are included in the submitted material;

(3) The type of valve (make, model,

manufacturer, vendor part number, and serial

number);

(4) The period of time covered by the data;

(5) The current FAA leak check interval;

(6) Whether or not seals have been

replaced between the seal replacement

intervals required by this AD;

(7) Whether or not leakage has been

detected between leak check intervals

required by this AD, and the reason for

leakage (i.e., worn seals, foreign materials on

sealing surface, scratched or damaged sealing

surface or valve, etc.);

(8) Whether or not any leak check was

conducted without first inspecting or

cleaning the sealing surfaces, changing the

seals, or repairing the valve. [If such

activities have been accomplished prior to

conducting the periodic leak check, that leak

check shall be recorded as a ‘‘failure’’ for

purposes of the data required for this request

submission. The exception to this is the

normally scheduled seal change in

accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this AD.

Performing this scheduled seal change prior

to a leak check will not cause that leak check

to be recorded as a failure.]

Note 6: Requests for approval of revised

leak check intervals may be submitted in any

format, provided that the data give the same

level of assurance specified in paragraph (c)

of this AD.

Note 7: For the purposes of expediting

resolution of requests for revisions to the leak

check intervals, the FAA suggests that the

requester summarize the raw data; group the

data gathered from different airplanes (of the

same model) and drain systems with the

same kind of valve; and provide a

recommendation from pertinent industry

group(s) and/or the manufacturer specifying

an appropriate revised leak check interval.

(d) For all airplanes: Within 5,000 flight

hours after the effective date of this AD,

accomplish the requirements of either

paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD:

(1) Install a lever/lock cap on the flush/fill

lines for all lavatory service panels. The cap

must be either an FAA-approved lever/lock

cap; or a lever/lock cap installed in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin 38–65 (for Model DC–10 series

airplanes) or Service Bulletin 38–39 [for

Model MD–11F series airplanes (freighter)],

as applicable. Or

(2) Install a Monogram 4803–86 series

check valve on the flush/fill lines for all

lavatory service panels.

(e) For any affected airplane acquired after

the effective date of this AD: Before any

operator places into service any airplane

subject to the requirements of this AD, a

schedule for the accomplishment of the leak

checks required by this AD shall be

established in accordance with either

paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this AD, as

applicable. After each leak check has been

performed once, each subsequent leak check

must be performed in accordance with the

new operator’s schedule, in accordance with

either paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD as

applicable.

(1) For airplanes previously maintained in

accordance with this AD, the first leak check

to be performed by the new operator must be

accomplished in accordance with the

previous operator’s schedule or with the new

operator’s schedule, whichever would result

in the earlier accomplishment date for that

leak check.

(2) For airplanes that have not been

previously maintained in accordance with

this AD, the first leak check to be performed

by the new operator must be accomplished

prior to further flight, or in accordance with

a schedule approved by the FAA PMI, but

within a period not to exceed 200 flight

hours.

(f) 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, Los

Angeles ACO, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate. Operators shall submit their

requests through an appropriate FAA PMI,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 8: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29015

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Note 9: For any valve that is not eligible

for the extended leak check intervals of this

AD: To be eligible for the leak check interval

specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(2)(i),

the service history data of the valve must be

submitted to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, with a

request for an alternative method of

compliance with this AD. The request should

include an analysis of known failure modes

for the valve, if it is an existing design, and

known failure modes of similar valves.

Additionally, the request should include an

explanation of how design features will

preclude these failure modes, results of

qualification tests, and approximately 25,000

flight hours or 25,000 flight cycles of service

history data, including a winter season,

collected in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD or

a similar program.

(g) 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.

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

July 12, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 3,

1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–14386 Filed 6–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 28594; Amdt. No. 1732]

Standard Instrument Approach

Procedures; Miscellaneous

Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment establishes,

amends, suspends, or revokes Standard

Instrument Approach Procedures

(SIAPs) for operations at certain

airports. These regulatory actions are

needed because of the adoption of new

or revised criteria, or because of changes

occurring in the National Airspace

System, such as the commissioning of

new navigational facilities, addition of

new obstacles, or changes in air traffic

requirements. These changes are

designed to provide safe and efficient

use of the navigable airspace and to

promote safe flight operations under

instrument flight rules at the affected

airports.

DATES: An effective date for each SIAP

is specified in the amendatory

provisions.

Incorporation by reference—approved

by the Director of the Federal Register

on December 31, 1980, and reapproved

as of January 1, 1982.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters

incorporated by reference in the

amendment is as follows:

For Examination—

1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA

Headquarters Building, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591;

2. The FAA Regional Office of the

region in which the affected airport is

located; or

3. The Flight Inspection Area Office

which originated the SIAP.

For Purchase—Individual SIAP

copies may be obtained from:

1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA–

200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591; or

2. The FAA Regional Office of the

region in which the affected airport is

located.

By Subscription—Copies of all SIAPs,

mailed once every 2 weeks, are for sale

by the Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, DC 20402.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paul J. Best, Flight Procedures

Standards Branch (AFS–420), Technical

Programs Division, Flight Standards

Service, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;

telephone (202) 267–8277.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

amendment to part 97 of the Federal

Aviation Regulation (14 CFR part 97)

establishes, amends, suspends, or

revokes Standard Instrument Approach

Procedures (SIAPs). The complete

regulatory description of each SIAP is

contained in official FAA from

documents which are incorporated by

reference in this amendment under 5

U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and § 97.20

of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(FAR). The applicable FAA Forms are

identified as FAA Forms 8260–3, 8260–

4, and 8260–5. Materials incorporated

by reference are available for

examination or purchase as stated

above.

The large number of SIAPs, their

complex nature, and the need for a

special format make their verbatim

publication in the Federal Register

expensive and impractical. Further,

airmen do not use the regulatory text of

the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic

depiction on charts printed by

publishers of aeronautical materials.

Thus, the advantages of incorporation

by reference are realized and

publication of the complete description

of each SIAP contained in FAA form

documents is unnecessary. The

provisions of this amendment state the

affected CFR (and FAR) sections, with

the types and effective dates of the

SIAPs. This amendment also identifies

the airport, its location, the procedure

identification and the amendment

number.

The Rule

This amendment to part 97 is effective

upon publication of each separate SIAP

as contained in the transmittal. Some

SIAP amendments may have been

previously issued by the FAA in a

National Flight Data Center (FDC)

Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an

emergency action of immediate flight

safety relating directly to published

aeronautical charts. The circumstances

which created the need for some SIAP

amendments may require making them

effective in less than 30 days. For the

remaining SIAPs, an effective date at

least 30 days after publication is

provided.

Further, the SIAPs contained in this

amendment are based on the criteria

contained in the U.S. Standard for

Terminal Instrument Approach

Procedures (TERPS). In developing

these SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were

applied to the conditions existing or

anticipated at the affected airports.

Because of the close and immediate

relationship between these SIAPs and

safety in air commerce, I find that notice

and public procedure before adopting

these SIAPs are impracticable and

contrary to the public interest and,

where applicable, that good cause exists

for making some SIAPs effective in less

than 30 days.

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. For the same

reason, the FAA certifies that this

amendment will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

Air Traffic Control, Airports,

Navigation (Air).