This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
Proposed rule; withdrawal.
This document withdraws a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would have applied to all Bombardier Inc. Models DHC-6-1, DHC-6-100, DHC-6-200, and DHC-6-300 airplanes. The NPRM would have superseded both AD 80-13-11 R2 and AD 80-03-08, which currently require repetitive inspections of the flight control rods for cracks on the above-referenced airplanes, with replacement of any cracked flight control rods. The NPRM would have required replacement of these flight control rods with improved design parts and would have reduced the need for the number of repetitions of the inspections. After evaluating all the comments received on the proposal, we have determined that, since the need for repetitive inspections is not eliminated by the replacements, the requirements of the current AD's should stand. We have not received any recent service problems regarding this subject on the affected airplanes. For these reasons, we are withdrawing the supplemental NPRM.
You may look at information related to this action at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 91-CE-87-AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jon Hjelm, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, 3rd Floor, Valley Stream, New York 11581; telephone (516) 256-7523; facsimile (516) 568-2716.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
What Action Has FAA Taken to Date?
We issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply to all Bombardier Inc. Models DHC-6-1, DHC-6-100, DHC-6-200, and DHC-6-300 airplanes. The proposal was published in the Federal Register as a supplemental NPRM on April 1, 1997 (62 FR 15443).
The NPRM proposed to supersede both AD 80-13-11 R2 and AD 80-03-08, which currently require repetitive inspections of the flight control rods for cracks on the above-referenced airplanes, with replacement of any cracked flight control rods. The NPRM would have required replacement of these flight control rods with improved design parts and would have reduced the need for the number of repetitions of the inspections.
Was the Public Invited To Comment?
The FAA invited interested persons to participate in the making of this amendment. The comments, in most part, reflect the public's desire to have FAA withdraw the proposal and let the current AD's stand. The reason for this is because the need for repetitive inspections is not eliminated by replacing flight control rods with improved design parts.
The FAA's Determination
What Is FAA's Final Determination on This Issue?
After re-evaluating all information related to this subject, we have determined that:
—The unsafe condition is currently addressed through AD 80-13-11 R2 and AD 80-03-08;
—Because we have not received any recent service problems regarding this subject on the affected airplanes, there is no need for the supplemental NPRM, Docket No. 91-CE-87-AD; and
—We should withdraw the supplemental NPRM.
Withdrawal of this action does not prevent us from taking or commit us to any future action.
Does This Proposed AD Withdrawal Involve a Significant Rule or Regulatory Action?
Since this action only withdraws a proposed AD, it is not an AD and, therefore, is not covered under Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
- Air transportation
- Aviation safety
Accordingly, FAA withdraws the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket No. 91-CE-87-AD, published in the Federal Register on April 1, 1997 (62 FR 15443).Start Signature
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 28, 2000.
William J. Timberlake,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 00-30947 Filed 12-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U