Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 5275

TABLE 2.—CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS, COMMODITY DONATIONS—Continued

Dollars in thousands Pounds in thousands

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

Additional processing costs at $0.93 per

pound ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 18,061 ................ ................ ................ ................ 19,420

Turkey, frozen ground ......................... 5,957 5,928 5,978 11,012 9,858 9,098 8,189 7,847 18,817 16,926

Turkey, chilled bulk ............................. 3,832 3,613 5,870 8,212 7,287 5,976 5,544 9,821 13,752 11,720

Subtotal, turkey ............................... 9,789 9,541 11,848 19,224 17,145 15,074 13,733 17,668 32,569 28,646

Additional processing costs at $0.93 per

pound ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 26,641 ................ ................ ................ ................ 28,646

Total, meat and poultry ................... 144,205 159,062 163,689 180,762 157,850 128,449 137,220 149,256 170,836 148,088

Additional processing costs at $0.93 per

pound ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 137,722 ................ ................ ................ ................ 148,088

Potential State processing savings at:

1 percent ............................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 1,377 ................ ................ ................ ................ ................

5 percent ............................................. ................ ................ ................ ................ 6,886 ................ ................ ................ ................ ................

10 percent ........................................... ................ ................ ................ ................ 13,772 ................ ................ ................ ................ ................

Approved:

Dated: June 28, 1995.

William E. Ludwig,

Administrator, Food and Consumer Service.

Dated: August 29, 1995.

Stephen B. Dewhurst,

Director, Office of Budget and Program

Analysis.

Dated: August 4, 1995.

Keith Collins,

Acting Chief Economist.

Dated: September 11, 1995.

Ellen Haas,

Assistant Secretary for Food, Nutrition and

Consumer Services.

[FR Doc. 96–2177 Filed 2–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–30–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–162–AD; Amendment

39–9504; AD 96–03–07]

Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model

400, 400A, and MU–300–10 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Beech Model 400,

400A, and MU–300–10 airplanes, that

requires installation of an improved

adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seats and replacement of the

existing aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies with steel assemblies. This

amendment is prompted by reports of

incomplete latching of the existing

adjustment mechanism and cracked

reinforcement assemblies, which could

result in sudden shifting of a flightcrew

seat. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to prevent such shifting of

a flightcrew seat, which could impair

the flightcrew’s ability to control the

airplane.

DATES: Effective March 13, 1996.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 13,

1996.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Raytheon Aircraft Company, P.O.

Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085.

This information may be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate,

Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita

Aircraft Certification Office, 1801

Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Engler, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ACE–118W, FAA,

Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita

Aircraft Certification Office, 1801

Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone (316) 946–4122; fax (316)

946–4407.

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 certain Beech

Model 400, 400A, and MU–300–10

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on May 25, 1995 (60 FR 27705).

That action proposed to require

installing an improved adjustment

mechanism on the flightcrew seats, and

replacing the existing aluminum seat

reinforcement assemblies with steel

assemblies.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

single comment received.

The commenter suggests that the

corrective action for this proposed AD is

much simpler than that specified in the

proposal. The commenter perceives the

problem to be that some pilots may not

carefully check the security and locking

of their seats after making an

adjustment. Therefore, the seat can slide

during taxi, climb out, or turning. The

commenter believes the corrective

action involves flightcrew awareness;

the flightcrew should be responsible in

determining if the seat is locked into

position by attempting to make the seat

slide out of position by rocking the seat

fore and aft. The commenter suggests

that, if this method were employed, the

costs associated with the

accomplishment of the actions specified

in this proposed AD would not be

necessary. The commenter agrees that if

the seat locking pins are worn or the

mechanism bent, those parts should be

repaired.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s suggestion that attempting

to make the seat slide out of position by

rocking the seat fore and aft sufficiently

addresses the unsafe condition. In this

case, the FAA has received several

reports of incomplete latching of the

existing adjustment mechanism, and

cracking of the aluminum seat

reinforcement assemblies. Cracking of

the aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies is an indicator of a
5276 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

structurally weak design, and this is the

unsafe condition the FAA is addressing

in this AD action. The FAA has the

authority to issue an AD when it is

found that an unsafe condition is likely

to exist or develop on other products of

the same type design. The FAA finds

that installing an improved seat tracking

adjustment mechanism and replacing

the aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies with steel assemblies

adequately, and appropriately,

addresses this unsafe condition.

This same commenter also questions

the FAA’s original certification basis of

the subject airplane relative to the seat

mechanism. The commenter asks

whether the FAA ‘‘made a mistake’’ by

certifying the airplane with these seat

mechanisms installed.

In response to this, the FAA points

out that an airplane’s 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 made the

determination that they establish an

appropriate level of safety. However,

actual in-service experience (as well as

other factors, such as manufacturers’

fatigue testing, etc.) may reveal

problems in an airplane or its

components that were not envisioned or

predictable at the time of its type

certification. When these problems

create an unsafe condition, this means

that the original level of safety is no

longer being achieved. When actions or

procedures are identified that will

positively correct the unsafe condition

and restore the airplane to its original

level of safety, an AD is the appropriate

vehicle for mandating that such actions

be accomplished.

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 as proposed.

There are approximately 169 Beech

Model 400, 400A, and MU–300–10

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

121 airplanes of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD, that it will take

approximately 24 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

will cost approximately $700 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $258,940, or $2,140 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is 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 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, Incorporation by reference,

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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

96–03–07 Beech Aircraft Corporation:

Amendment 39–9504. Docket 94–NM–

162–AD.

Applicability: Model 400 airplanes, serial

numbers RJ–1 through RJ–65 inclusive;

Model 400A airplanes, serial numbers RK–1

through RK–93 inclusive; and Model

MU–300–10 airplanes, serial numbers

A1001SA through A1011SA inclusive;

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) of this AD 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 reduced controllability of the

airplane due to a shifting of the flightcrew

seat during flight, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 200 hours time-in-service after

the effective date of this AD, install an

improved adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seat, and replace the existing

aluminum seat reinforcement assemblies

with steel assemblies, in accordance with

Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2536,

Revision 1, dated April 1995.

(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, Wichita

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Small 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, Wichita ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Wichita 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.

(d) The installation and replacement shall

be done in accordance with Beechcraft

Service Bulletin No. 2536, Revision 1, dated

April 1995. (NOTE: The issue date of Service

Bulletin No. 2536 is indicated only on page

1; no other page of the document is dated.)

This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

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

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Raytheon Aircraft Company, P. O. Box

85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Small Airplane

Directorate, Wichita Aircraft Certification

Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, MidContinent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

March 13, 1996.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 5277

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

23, 1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–1521 Filed 2–9–96; 8:45am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–261–AD; Amendment

39–9475; AD 95–26–17]

Airworthiness Directives; de Havilland

Model DHC–8–301, –311, and –315

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain de Havilland

Model DHC–8–301, –311, and –315

series airplanes. This action requires

modification of the airspeed limitations

placard and revision of the Airplane

Flight Manual to specify operating at

lower airspeeds at full flaps. This action

also provides for the termination of the

requirements of this AD for certain

airplanes. This amendment is prompted

by a report that incorrect rivets were

installed on the outboard flaps

assemblies of these airplanes. The

actions specified in this AD are

intended to prevent structural failure of

the outboard flaps of the wings due to

the installation of incorrect rivets in the

flap assemblies, which could result in

reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Effective February 27, 1996.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of February

27, 1996.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

April 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

261–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, Garratt Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario, Canada M3K 1Y5.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

New York Aircraft Certification Office,

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 10

Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream,

New York; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,

suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Franco Pieri, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, FAA, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7526; fax

(516) 568–2716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Transport

Canada Aviation, which is the

airworthiness authority for Canada,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain de

Havilland Model DHC–8–301, –311, and

–315 series airplanes. Transport Canada

Aviation advises that incorrect rivets

were installed during manufacture of

the outboard flap assemblies of these

airplanes. Investigation revealed that

AD rivets were installed on the outboard

flaps instead of DD rivets. AD rivets are

made of a material that is not as strong

as that of DD rivets. This condition, if

not corrected, could result in structural

failure of the outboard flaps of the

wings, and subsequent reduced

controllability of the airplane.

The manufacturer has issued de

Havilland Service Bulletin S.B. 8–57–

24, Revision ‘A’, dated September 26,

1995, which describes procedures for

modification (8/2498) of the airspeed

limitations placard to specify a lower

airspeed at 35 degrees flaps.

The service bulletin also describes

procedures for modification (8/2066) of

the outboard flaps, which entails

drilling out the AD rivets and installing

new DD rivets on Model DHC–8–311

and –315 series airplanes. Following

accomplishment of this modification,

the service bulletin specifies removal of

the airspeed limitations placard

(Modification 8/2498). A corrective

modification has not yet been developed

for Model DHC–8–301 series airplanes.

Transport Canada Aviation classified

this service bulletin as mandatory and

issued Canadian airworthiness directive

CF–95–05R1, dated October 19, 1995, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

Canada. In addition, the Canadian

airworthiness directive requires a

revision to the Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM), which specifies operating at a

lower airspeed at full flaps. The

Canadian airworthiness directive

references DHC–8 Model 301 Flight

Manual, PSM 1–83–1A, Flight Manual

Revision 57, dated September 26, 1995,

for accomplishment of the AFM revision

for Model DHC–8–301 series airplanes.

These airplane models are

manufactured in Canada and are type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of section

21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral

airworthiness agreement, Transport

Canada Aviation has kept the FAA

informed of the situation described

above. The FAA has examined the

findings of Transport Canada Aviation,

reviewed all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, this AD is being issued to

prevent structural failure of the

outboard flaps of the wings and

subsequent reduced controllability of

the airplane. This AD requires

modification of the airspeed limitations

placard to indicate that the airplane

must be flown at reduced airspeed when

flying at 35 degrees flaps. This action is

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

Additionally, this AD requires a

revision to the AFM for all airplanes to

include information relative to reducing

airspeed at 35 degrees flaps. (The

revision for Model DHC–8–301 series

airplanes is described in DHC–8 Model

301 Flight Manual, PSM 1–83–1A,

Flight Manual Revision 57, dated

September 26, 1995.)

For Model DHC–8–311 and –315

series airplanes, this AD also provides

for termination of the requirements of

the AD by modifying the outboard flaps

(installation of Modification 8/2066).

This is considered to be interim

action. The FAA is currently

considering requiring the

accomplishment of Modification 8/2066

on the applicable airplanes, which will

constitute terminating action for the

requirements of this AD action.

However, the planned compliance time

for accomplishment of this modification

is sufficiently long so that prior notice

and time for public comment will be

practicable.

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.