DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 64/Tuesday, April 6, 2021/Rules

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 64/Tuesday, April 6, 2021/Rules Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 17703 approved AMOC, notify your appropriate of this material at NARA, email fedreg.legal@ www.regulations.gov by searching for principal inspector, or lacking a principal nara.gov, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/ and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– inspector, the manager of the responsible federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 0752; or in person at Docket Operations Flight Standards Office. Issued on February 8, 2021. between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain instructions Lance T. Gant, through Friday, except Federal holidays. from a manufacturer, the instructions must Director, Compliance & Airworthiness The AD docket contains this AD, the be accomplished using a method approved Division, Aircraft Certification Service. European Aviation Safety Agency (now by the Manager, Large Aircraft Section, [FR Doc. 2021–07003 Filed 4–5–21; 8:45 am] European Union Aviation Safety International Validation Branch, FAA; or BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Agency) (EASA) AD, any service EASA; or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design information that is incorporated by Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by reference, any comments received, and the DOA, the approval must include the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION other information. The street address for DOA-authorized signature. Docket Operations is U.S. Department of (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except Federal Aviation Administration as required by paragraphs (i) and (j)(2) of this Transportation, Docket Operations, AD, if any service information contains M–30, West Building Ground Floor, procedures or tests that are identified as RC, 14 CFR Part 39 Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey those procedures and tests must be done to [Docket No. FAA–2013–0752; Product Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. comply with this AD; any procedures or tests Identifier 2009–SW–44–AD; Amendment 39– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that are not identified as RC are 21490; AD 2021–07–13] Kristi Bradley, Aviation Safety Engineer, recommended. Those procedures and tests RIN 2120–AA64 General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, that are not identified as RC may be deviated International Validation Branch, FAA, from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator’s maintenance or Airworthiness Directives; Pacific 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX inspection program without obtaining Scientific Company Seat Restraint 76177; telephone (817) 222–5110; email approval of an AMOC, provided the System Rotary Buckle Assemblies [email protected]. procedures and tests identified as RC can be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: done and the airplane can be put back in an AGENCY: Federal Aviation airworthy condition. Any substitutions or Administration (FAA), DOT. Discussion changes to procedures or tests identified as ACTION: Final rule. The FAA issued a supplemental RC require approval of an AMOC. notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) SUMMARY: (k) Related Information The FAA is adopting a new to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an airworthiness directive (AD) for certain AD that would apply to Pacific For more information about this AD, Pacific Scientific Company rotary contact Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace Scientific Company buckle part Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, buckle assemblies (buckles). This AD numbers (P/Ns) 1111430 and 1111475, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 requires inspecting each buckle all dash numbers. The SNPRM South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; including its buckle handle vane, and published in the Federal Register on telephone and fax 206–231–3218; email depending on the results, removing the September 24, 2020 (85 FR 60100). The [email protected]. buckle from service and installing an FAA preceded the SNPRM with a notice (l) Material Incorporated by Reference airworthy buckle. This AD also of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that prohibits installing the affected buckles. published in the Federal Register on (1) The Director of the Federal Register This AD was prompted by several approved the incorporation by reference September 5, 2013 (78 FR 54594). The (IBR) of the service information listed in this reports of cracked buckle handles. The NPRM proposed to require inspecting paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR actions of this AD are intended to each buckle for a crack and the part 51. address an unsafe condition on these thickness of the buckle handle vane. (2) You must use this service information products. Depending on the inspection results, the as applicable to do the actions required by DATES: This AD is effective May 11, NPRM proposed to require replacing the this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. (3) The following service information was 2021. buckle. The NPRM also proposed to approved for IBR on May 11, 2021. The Director of the Federal Register prohibit installing an affected buckle on (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency approved the incorporation by reference any helicopter or airplane. The SNPRM (EASA) AD 2020–0167, dated July 27, 2020. of a certain document listed in this AD proposed to the same requirements (ii) [Reserved] as of May 11, 2021. except with longer compliance times to (4) For EASA AD 2020–0167, contact the ADDRESSES: For service information accomplish the inspections. The EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 identified in this final rule, contact SNPRM also corrected the name of Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 Meggitt Services, 1785 Voyager Ave., Pacific Scientific Aviation Services to 000; email [email protected]; internet Pacific Scientific Company, updated the www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this Simi Valley, CA 93063, telephone 877– EASA AD on the EASA website at https:// 666–0712 or at CustomerResponse@ estimated costs of compliance, edited ad.easa.europa.eu. meggitt.com. You may view the the Applicability paragraph by adding a (5) You may view this material at the FAA, referenced service information at the note to clarify that an affected buckle Airworthiness Products Section, Operational FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, could be included as a component of a Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood different part-numbered restraint system Moines, WA. For information on the Pkwy., Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, TX assembly and reference Appendix 1 of availability of this material at the FAA, call 76177. It is also available on the internet Pacific Scientific Service Bulletin SB 206–231–3195. This material may be found at https://www.regulations.gov by 25–1111432, dated May 22, 2007 (SB in the AD docket on the internet at https:// 25–1111432), which lists the P/Ns of www.regulations.gov by searching for and searching for and locating Docket No. locating Docket No. FAA–2020–0854. FAA–2013–0752. potentially affected restraint systems, updated the names of certain (6) You may view this material that is Examining the AD Docket incorporated by reference at the National potentially-affected Type Certificate Archives and Records Administration You may examine the AD docket on holders, and updated the contact (NARA). For information on the availability the internet at https:// information name and contact VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:01 Apr 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06APR1.SGM 06APR1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 17704 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations information from Pacific Scientific SA1751SW, which allows installation of proposal in the SNPRM and will neither Aviation Services to Meggitt Services. certain affected buckles on Mitsubishi increase the economic burden on any The NPRM was prompted by EASA MU–2B series aircraft. operator nor increase the scope of this AD 2007–0256, dated September 19, The FAA partially agrees. The FAA AD. 2007, issued by EASA, which is the agrees that affected buckles could be Technical Agent for the Member States installed on Mitsubishi Heavy Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD of the European Union, to correct an Industries, Ltd., Model MU–2B series unsafe condition for certain Pacific airplanes; however, the applicability The EASA AD applies to certain Scientific Company Seat Restraint only identifies possible installations on buckles used on certain restraint System Plastic Rotary Buckle Handles. airplanes and helicopters by ‘‘make’’ systems that are known to be installed According to EASA, Pacific Scientific and not ‘‘models.’’ Accordingly, the on, but not limited to, certain Company reported several instances of FAA has added Mitsubishi Heavy Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters) cracked handles on certain buckles with Industries, Ltd., to the list of airplanes model helicopters. The applicability of a date of manufacture from November that affected buckles could be installed the EASA AD is limited to rotorcraft 2004 through May 2007. Testing on on in the applicability of this final rule. only and is not intended for airplanes. Since the affected buckles may be buckles with a cracked handle indicated Extension of Compliance Time that in some circumstances, a load installed in other aircraft resulting in placed on the restraint system prevents MHIA requested extending the the same unsafe condition, this AD a strap from releasing as intended when compliance time to at least 12 months, applies to the same certain buckles, the buckle is rotated. EASA states in its as replacement parts could be in short which may be installed on but not AD that this failure to release is possible supply. MHIA states that it has limited to certain airplanes and when a passenger weighs more than 50 attempted to contact the product helicopters. This AD does not require kg (approximately 110 lbs.) and an support representative at Meggitt returning the unairworthy buckle aircraft is upside down. Services located in Simi Valley, CA in assembly to the manufacturer, and this order to obtain additional technical AD does not apply to spare parts that Comments information; however, no formal are not installed on an aircraft.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • E. Runway Length Analysis
    JOSLIN FIELD, MAGIC VALLEY REGIONAL AIRPORT DECEMBER 2012 E. Runway Length Analysis This appendix describes the runway length analysis conducted for the Airport. Runway 7-25, the Airport’s primary runway, has a length of 8,700 feet and the existing crosswind runway (Runway 12-30) has a length of 3,207 feet. A runway length analysis was conducted to determine if additional runway length is required to meet the needs of aircraft forecasted to operate at the Airport through the planning period. The analysis was conducted according to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance contained in Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design. The runway length analysis set forth in AC 150/5325-4B relates to both arrivals and departures, although departures typically require more runway length. Runway length requirements were determined separately for Runway 7-25 and Runway 12-30. E.1 Primary Runway Length Requirements According to AC 150/5325-4B, the design objective for the primary runway is to provide a runway length for all aircraft without causing operational weight restrictions. The methodology used to determine required runway lengths is based on the MTOW of the aircraft types to be evaluated, which are grouped into the following categories: Small aircraft (MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less) – Aircraft in this category range in size from ultralight aircraft to small turboprop aircraft. Within this category, aircraft are broken out by approach speeds (less than 30 knots, at least 30 knots but less than 50 knots, and more than 50 knots). Aircraft with approach speeds of more than 50 knots are further broken out by passenger seat capacity (less than 10 passenger seats and 10 or more passenger seats).
    [Show full text]
  • Raytheon, UTC Merger to Create a ‘Giant’ by David Donald
    PUBLICATIONS Vol.50 | No.7 $9.00 JULY 2019 | ainonline.com Paris Air Show 2019 The 737 Max program received a huge vote of confidence at the Paris Air Show last month. International Airlines Group (IAG) inked a letter of intent covering 200 Max 8s and Max 10s worth more than $24 billion at list prices. CFM also signed a significant engine deal—valued at $20 billion— during the show (see page 6). For more Paris Air Show news, also see pages 8 and 10. Aircraft Quest buy expands Daher line. page 8 Airports SMO operator bulldozing excess runway. page 14 INTOSH c Avionics DAVID M DAVID Universal developing a new FMS style. page 46 Raytheon, UTC merger to create a ‘giant’ by David Donald Citing “less than 1 percent overlap” between competing against [UTC].” combined company value is $166 billion the two companies, Raytheon International Upon completion of the Raytheon/UTC and, based on 2019 sales, the new company CEO John Harris spoke at the Paris Air Show, merger, the company will become the world’s will generate $74 billion in annual revenue. dismissing concern expressed by President second-largest defense/aerospace company The company’s first CEO will be Greg Hayes, Donald Trump over the merger of his com- after Boeing, and the second largest U.S. UTC chairman and CEO, with Raytheon’s pany and United Technologies Corp. (UTC). defense contractor behind Lockheed Mar- CEO, Thomas Kennedy, becoming executive Announced on June 9, the all-stock “merger tin. Revenue will be divided roughly equally chairman. Hayes is due to become chairman of equals” will create an industrial defense/ between defense and commercial sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Facility Requirements
    JOSLIN FIELD, MAGIC VALLEY REGIONAL AIRPORT DECEMBER 2012 4. Facility Requirements This section identifies the airside and landside facility requirements for the Airport through the planning period (2029). Facility requirements for the Airport are based on several factors, including the relationship between demand and capacity for various Airport systems/facilities, deficiencies identified through comparison of existing conditions to applicable planning/design standards, and functional/operational deficiencies identified through discussions with Airport management, tenants, and users. The methodologies used and described in this section to determine facility requirements and capacity for various Airport systems generally follow industry standards, with adjustments made, as appropriate, to reflect actual use characteristics at the Airport. The determination of facility requirements for the Airport uses information presented in Sections 2 and 3, along with any additional information that more accurately reflects existing or future conditions at the Airport. The remainder of this section is organized by functional Airport systems, which are identified and summarized as follows: Airfield facilities – The runway and taxiway system, lighting, markings, navigational aids, and related safety and protection areas. The ability of the airfield system to serve forecast demand is evaluated in terms of runway capacity and design standards. Passenger terminal facilities – The terminal building, where enplaning and deplaning passenger demand defines the need for various areas such as ticketing, baggage claim, security screening, and holdrooms, among other building spaces. Requirements for the terminal curb and aircraft parking apron are also assessed. Tenant facilities – General aviation facilities accommodate privately owned and corporate-owned based and itinerant aircraft. Facility requirements evaluated include aircraft aprons/tie-downs and storage hangars.
    [Show full text]
  • [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 04/06/2021 and available online at [4910-13-P] federalregister.gov/d/2021-06979, and on govinfo.gov DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2013-0752; Product Identifier 2009-SW-44-AD; Amendment 39- 21490; AD 2021-07-13] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Pacific Scientific Company Seat Restraint System Rotary Buckle Assemblies AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Pacific Scientific Company rotary buckle assemblies (buckles). This AD requires inspecting each buckle including its buckle handle vane, and depending on the results, removing the buckle from service and installing an airworthy buckle. This AD also prohibits installing the affected buckles. This AD was prompted by several reports of cracked buckle handles. The actions of this AD are intended to address an unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD is effective [INSERT DATE 35 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of [INSERT DATE 35 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, contact Meggitt Services, 1785 Voyager Ave., Simi Valley, CA 93063, telephone 877-666-0712 or at [email protected]. You may view the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of the Minimum Equipment List: Current Practice and the Need for Standardisation
    aerospace Review Development of the Minimum Equipment List: Current Practice and the Need for Standardisation Solomon O. Obadimu 1, Nektarios Karanikas 2 and Kyriakos I. Kourousis 1,* 1 School of Engineering, University of Limerick, V94 T9PX Limerick, Ireland; [email protected] 2 School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane QLD 4000, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +353-61-202-217 Received: 10 December 2019; Accepted: 15 January 2020; Published: 17 January 2020 Abstract: As part of the airworthiness requirements, an aircraft cannot be dispatched with an inoperative equipment or system unless this is allowed by the Minimum Equipment List (MEL) under any applicable conditions. Commonly, the MEL mirrors the Master MEL (MMEL), which is developed by the manufacturer and approved by the regulator. However, the increasing complexity of aircraft systems and the diversity of operational requirements, environmental conditions, fleet configuration, etc. necessitates a tailored approach to developing the MEL. While it is the responsibility of every aircraft operator to ensure the airworthiness of their aircraft, regulators are also required to publish guidelines to help operators develop their MELs. Currently, there is no approved standard to develop a MEL, and this poses a challenge to both aviation regulators and aircraft operators. This paper reviews current MEL literature, standards and processes as well as MEL related accidents/incidents to offer an overview of the present state of the MEL development and use and reinstate the need for a systematic approach. Furthermore, this paper exposes the paucity of MEL related literature and the ambiguity in MEL regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated List of Noisy Aircraft Types
    List of Noisy Aircraft Types The following list addresses the requirement of Proposed Town Code §75- 38 A.(4)(a) for the Airport Director to maintain on the Town website a current list of “noisy aircraft” defined to be “any airplane or rotorcraft for which there is a published Effective Perceived Noise in Decibels (EPNdB) approach (AP) level of 91.0 or greater.” 1 The list is presented in terms of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aircraft type codes and an accompanying commonplace aircraft type description. Commonplace Aircraft Description ICAO Aircraft Note: Published data for shaded aircraft types include ranges of noise levels that extend across the 91.0 EPNdB threshold. These ranges result from multiple published noise levels for varying aircraft configurations (e.g., Type differing powerplants, maximum operating weights, etc.). For these types, aircraft owners must provide the Code Airport Director with noise level information from the individual aircraft’s flight manual, if the owner believes the aircraft in question should not be classified as noisy. A109 Agusta A-109 AW119 Agusta AW119 MKII A124 Antonov An-124 A139 Agusta AB-139 A189 AgustaWestland AW189 A306 Airbus A300B4-600/A300C4-600 A30B Airbus A300B2/A300B4-100/A300B4-200 A310 Airbus A310-200/A310-300 A318 Airbus A318-100 A319 Airbus A319-100 A320 Airbus A320-100/A320-200/A320-200neo A321 Airbus A321-100/A321-200/A321-200neo A332 Airbus A330-200 A333 Airbus A330-300 A342 Airbus A340-200 A343 Airbus A340-300 A345 Airbus A340-500 A346 Airbus A340-600 A359 Airbus A350-900 A388 Airbus A380-800 A3ST Airbus A300-600ST Beluga A400 Airbus A400M A748 BAe HS748 AN26 Antonov An-26 AN72 Antonov An-72, An-74 Updated September 30, 2015 List of Noisy Aircraft Types Page 2 Commonplace Aircraft Description ICAO Aircraft Note: Published data for shaded aircraft types include ranges of noise levels that extend across the 91.0 EPNdB threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • SERVICE BULLETIN Service Bulletin No
    SERVICE BULLETIN Service Bulletin No. 075 2900 Selma Highway Montgomery, AL 36108 USA Alternator Drive Coupling Inspection Tel: 334-386-5400 Fax: 334-386-5450 1. Planning Information A. Effectivity (1) Plane-Power Jasco series alternators manufactured by Hartzell Engine Technologies (HET) and Skytronics Inc. PNs 6555(T, C), 6565(T, C), 7555(T, C), 7565(T, C), and 7655(T, C) are affected by this Service Bulletin (SB). (a) 6555(T, C) serial numbers H-S060104 and prior are affected by this SB. (b) 6565(T, C) serial numbers H-S060108 and prior are affected by this SB. (c) 7555(T, C) serial numbers H-S060118 and prior are affected by this SB. (d) 7565(T, C) serial numbers H-S051413 and prior are affected by this SB. (e) 7655(T, C) serial numbers H-S050284 and prior are affected by this SB. (2) Aircraft Type/Model and alternator part numbers affected by this SB are shown in Table 1 – Alternator/Aircraft Effectivity. NOTE: Table 1 is for reference only and is not an all-inclusive list of aircraft affected by this SB. It is the responsibility of the owner/operator to verify whether an affected alternator may be installed. WARNING: DO NOT USE OBSOLETE OR OUTDATED INFORMATION. PERFORM ALL INSPECTIONS OR WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT REVISION OF THIS SERVICE BULLETIN. INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED FROM EARLIER REVISIONS. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS SERVICE BULLETIN OR THE USE OF OBSOLETE INFORMATION MAY CREATE AN UNSAFE CONDITION THAT MAY RESULT IN DEATH, SERIOUS BODILY INJURY, AND/OR SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY DAMAGE.
    [Show full text]
  • Choice of Aircraft Size - Explanations and Implications
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Givoni, Moshe; Rietveld, Piet Working Paper Choice of Aircraft Size - Explanations and Implications Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, No. 06-113/3 Provided in Cooperation with: Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam and Rotterdam Suggested Citation: Givoni, Moshe; Rietveld, Piet (2006) : Choice of Aircraft Size - Explanations and Implications, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, No. 06-113/3, Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam and Rotterdam This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/86235 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu TI 2006-113/3 Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper Choice of Aircraft Size - Explanations and Implications Moshe Givoni1 Piet Rietveld1,2 1 Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; 2 Tinbergen Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-07-13.Pdf (223
    [Federal Register Volume 86, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 6, 2021)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 17703-17706] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 2021-06979] –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2013-0752; Product Identifier 2009-SW-44-AD; Amendment 39-21490; AD 2021-07-13] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Pacific Scientific Company Seat Restraint System Rotary Buckle Assemblies AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Pacific Scientific Company rotary buckle assemblies (buckles). This AD requires inspecting each buckle including its buckle handle vane, and depending on the results, removing the buckle from service and installing an airworthy buckle. This AD also prohibits installing the affected buckles. This AD was prompted by several reports of cracked buckle handles. The actions of this AD are intended to address an unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD is effective May 11, 2021. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of May 11, 2021. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, contact Meggitt Services, 1785 Voyager Ave., Simi Valley, CA 93063, telephone 877-666-0712 or at [email protected]. You may view the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Rulemaking on July 21, 2020, and We Are Submitting It for Publication in the Federal Register
    The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Andrew Wheeler, signed the following Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on July 21, 2020, and we are submitting it for publication in the Federal Register. While we have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this Internet version of the Proposal, it is not the official version. Please refer to the official version in a forthcoming Federal Register publication, which will appear on the Government Printing Office’s FDSys website (www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action) and on Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2018-0276. Once the official version of this document is published in the Federal Register, this version will be removed from the Internet and replaced with a link to the official version. 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 87 and 1030 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2018–0276; FRL-10010-88-OAR] RIN 2060-AT26 Control of Air Pollution from Airplanes and Airplane Engines: GHG Emission Standards and Test Procedures AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. __________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards applicable to certain classes of engines used by certain civil subsonic jet airplanes with a maximum takeoff mass greater than 5,700 kilograms and by certain civil larger subsonic propeller-driven airplanes with turboprop engines having a maximum takeoff mass greater than 8,618 kilograms. These proposed standards are equivalent to the airplane CO2 standards adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in 2017 and would apply to both new type design airplanes and in-production airplanes.
    [Show full text]
  • FAQ's of Idaho Aircraft Owners & Dealers
    FAQ’s of Idaho Aircraft Owners & Dealers Idaho Division of Aeronautics is regulated by Title 21-114 and IDAPA 39.04.05 Owner’s Who, What If’s, Where, & Why’s 1. Who has to register their aircraft? According to Title 21-114: "Every aircraft operating within this state shall be registered with the department prior to or during each annual registration year (January 1 to December 31) in which the aircraft is operated within the state.” 2. Why does Idaho charge an aircraft registration fee? And, what do you do with fees collected? Aeronautics receives funding from two sources: aviation fuel tax and aircraft registrations. This funding enables our department to maintain 31 backcountry airstrips, provide grants for airport upgrades, support the search and rescue program and provide funding for educational programs. 3. What are the cost of aircraft registration fees? Three cents (3¢) per pound of the manufacturer’s maximum certified gross weight authorized in the aircraft specification or type certificate data sheet of said aircraft issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. In the case that your aircraft does not have a manufacturer’s maximum certified gross weight, please use maximum takeoff weight as indicated in your Pilot’s Operating Handbook. This also includes “kit planes and home-builds”. In no case will the fee be less than twenty dollars ($20) on one aircraft. In no case will the fee exceed six hundred dollars ($600) on one aircraft. Aircraft registration is in lieu of personal property taxes. (Not to be confused with State Sales Tax). Idaho does not require registration of UAS/Drones at this time.
    [Show full text]
  • Business & Commercial Aviation
    BUSINESS & COMMERCIAL AVIATION REJECTED TAKEOFF AUTHORITY TRAGICALLY MIS-SET TRIM JUNE 2019 $10.00 www.bcadigital.com 2019 PURCHASE PLANNING HANDBOOK Production Aircraft Comparison Performance Tables and a Look at the Trends and New Developments in Avionics Business & Commercial Aviation HURRICANES AND AVIATION JUNE 2019 VOL. 115 NO. 6 Rejected Takeoff Authority Tragically Mis-set Trim Hurricanes and Aviation Charter, Fractional, Ownership and/or Managed? Digital Edition Copyright Notice The content contained in this digital edition (“Digital Material”), as well as its selection and arrangement, is owned by Informa. and its affiliated companies, licensors, and suppliers, and is protected by their respective copyright, trademark and other proprietary rights. Upon payment of the subscription price, if applicable, you are hereby authorized to view, download, copy, and print Digital Material solely for your own personal, non-commercial use, provided that by doing any of the foregoing, you acknowledge that (i) you do not and will not acquire any ownership rights of any kind in the Digital Material or any portion thereof, (ii) you must preserve all copyright and other proprietary notices included in any downloaded Digital Material, and (iii) you must comply in all respects with the use restrictions set forth below and in the Informa Privacy Policy and the Informa Terms of Use (the “Use Restrictions”), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Any use not in accordance with, and any failure to comply fully with, the Use Restrictions is expressly prohibited by law, and may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum possible extent.
    [Show full text]