Proposed Rules. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

5,261 words·~24 min read·/register/2006/04/28/06-4022

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6450-01-U DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for all Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

(MHI)MU-2B series airplanes. This proposed AD would require you to do flight checks of the rigging of the engine and propeller systems. This proposed AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven approach to evaluate the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and correct improper adjustment of the flight idle fuel flow setting. This condition, if uncorrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD: • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • Fax: 1-202-493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone:

(972)934-5480; facsimile:

(972)934-5488 for the service information identified in this proposed AD. You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW-150, Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193; telephone:

(817)222-5284; facsimile:

(817)222-5960. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include the docket number, “FAA-2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Using the search function of the DOT docket Web site, anyone can find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Discussion Recent accidents and the service history of the Mitsubishi MU-2B series airplanes prompted FAA to conduct an MU-2B Safety Evaluation. This evaluation used a data-driven approach to evaluate the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary to ensure their safe operation. The safety evaluation provided an in-depth review and analysis of MU-2B accidents, incidents, safety data, pilot training requirements, engine reliability, and commercial operations. In conducting this evaluation, the team employed new analysis tools that provided a much more detailed root cause analysis of the MU-2B problems than was previously possible. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. Some operators may be improperly adjusting the flight idle fuel flow setting on the engines to allow a higher than normal sink rate when the flight idle power is selected. The manufacturer developed engine and propeller rigging specifications after considerable flight testing and evaluation. Operation outside of the specifications may result in unsafe flight characteristics during landing or in the event of a stall. In particular, improper settings may cause one or both of the propellers to go into negative torque sensing mode, which may result in an unsafe flight condition. This condition, if not corrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed the following MHI service information: • Service Bulletin No. 234, dated October 7, 1998; and • Service Bulletin No. 097/73-001, dated July 24, 1998. The service information describes procedures for doing flight checks of the rigging of the engine and propeller systems. Foreign Airworthiness Authority Information The MU-2B series airplane was initially certificated in 1965 and again in 1976 under two separate type certificates that consist of basically the same type design. Japan is the State of Design for Type Certificate

(TC)No. A2PC, and the United States is the State of Design for TC No. A10SW. The affected models are as follows (where models are duplicated, specific serial numbers are specified in the individual TCs): Type certificate Affected models A10SW MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-2B-60. A2PC MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36. The Japan Civil Aviation Bureau, the airworthiness authority for Japan, issued Japanese AD No. TCD 4890-98, dated October 7, 1998, to ensure the continued airworthiness of the airplanes in Japan. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We are proposing this AD to address an unsafe condition that we determined is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. The proposed AD would require you to do flight checks of the rigging of the engine and propeller systems. The proposed AD would require you to use the service information described previously to perform these actions. The Agency is committed to updating the aviation community of expected costs associated with the MU-2B series airplane safety evaluation conducted in 2005. As a result of that commitment, the accumulating expected costs of all ADs related to the MU-2B series airplane safety evaluation may be found in the Final Report section at the following Web site: *http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/cos/mu2_foia_reading_library/.* Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD affects 397 airplanes in the U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to accomplish the proposed initial flight check: Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane Total cost on U.S. operators 1 workhour × $80 = $80 Not applicable $80 $31,760 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect 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. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the 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. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. Examining the Dockets You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the DOT Docket Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES . Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management Facility receives them. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: **Mitsubishi Heavy Industries** : Docket No. FAA-2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)must receive comments on this proposed airworthiness directive

(AD)action by June 15, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD affects the following airplane models and serial numbers that are certificated in any category: Table 1.—Applicability Type certificate Models Serial Nos.

(1)A2PC MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 008 through 312, 314 through 320, and 322 through 347.

(2)A2PC MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 501 through 651, 653 through 660, and 662 through 696.

(3)A10SW MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, and MU-2B-40 313SA, 321SA, and 348SA through 459SA.

(4)A10SW MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, and MU-2B-60 652SA, 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven approach to analyze the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect and correct improper adjustment of the flight idle fuel flow setting. The above issue, if uncorrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. Compliance

(e)To address this problem, you must do the following: Table 2.—Actions/Compliance/Procedures Actions Compliance Procedures Do flight checks of the rigging of the engine and propeller systems and make any necessary corrections. Make an entry into the aircraft logbook showing compliance with this portion of the AD in accordance with section 43.9 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9) Check within 100 hours time-in-service

(TIS)after the effective date of this AD, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS. If any corrections are necessary, make the corrections before further flight *For airplanes listed in TCDS A2PC:* follow MHI Service Bulletin No. 234, dated October 7, 1998. *For airplanes listed in TCDS A10SW:* follow MHI Service Bulletin No. 097/73-001, dated July 24, 1998.

(f)The flight checks required in paragraph

(e)of this AD must be done by two individuals. One of the individuals must hold at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) and the other must be one of the following individuals:

(1)Another individual holding at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR43.7) or

(2)An authorized rated mechanic. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(g)The Manager, Fort Worth ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(h)For information on any already approved AMOCs or for information pertaining to this AD, contact Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW-150, Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193; telephone:

(817)222-5284; facsimile:

(817)222-5960. Related Information

(i)Japan Civil Aviation Bureau Airworthiness Directive No. TCD 4890-98, dated October 7, 1998; and MHI Service Bulletins No. 234, dated October 7, 1998; and No. 097/73-001, dated July 24, 1998, also address the subject of this AD.

(j)To get copies of the documents referenced in this AD, contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone:

(972)934-5480; facsimile:

(972)934-5488. To view the AD docket, go to the Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC, or on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* The docket number is Docket No. FAA-2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 21, 2006. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-6420 Filed 4-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23883; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-12-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

(MHI)MU-2B series airplanes. This proposed AD would require you to incorporate power assurance charts into the Limitations Section of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), inspect the engine torque indication system, and recalibrate the torque pressure transducers as required. This proposed AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven approach to analyze the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and correct torque transducers that are out of calibration. The above issue, if uncorrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD: • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • Fax: 1-202-493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone:

(972)934-5480; facsimile:

(972)934-5488 for the service information identified in this proposed AD. You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW-150, Fort Worth Aircraft Certification Office, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193; telephone:

(817)222-5284; facsimile:

(817)222-5960. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited *How do I comment on this proposed AD?* We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include the docket number, “FAA-2006-23883; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-12-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Using the search function of the DOT docket web site, anyone can find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Discussion Recent accidents and the service history of the Mitsubishi MU-2B series airplanes prompted FAA to conduct an MU-2B Safety Evaluation. This evaluation used a data-driven approach to analyze the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. The safety evaluation provided an in-depth review and analysis of MU-2B accidents, incidents, safety data, pilot training requirements, engine reliability, and commercial operations. In conducting this evaluation, the team employed new analysis tools that provided a much more detailed root cause analysis of the MU-2B problems than was previously possible. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. Some torque transducers were found significantly out of calibration. This could result in a safety of flight condition where an actual power mismatch exists that is not indicated on the engine instruments. In addition, an indicated power that is higher or lower than actual power could result. This condition, if not corrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities with loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed the following MHI service information: • Service Bulletin No. 233A, dated January 14, 1999; and • Service Bulletin No. 095/77-002, dated July 15, 1998. The service information describes procedures for inspecting the engine torque indication system and recalibrating the torque pressure transducers as required. Foreign Airworthiness Authority Information The MU-2B series airplane was initially certificated in 1965 and again in 1976 under two separate type certificates that consist of basically the same type design. Japan is the State of Design for type certificate

(TC)No. A2PC, and the United States is the State of Design for TC No. A10SW. The affected models are as follows (where models are duplicated, specific serial numbers are specified in the individual TCs): Type certificate Affected models A10SW MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-2B-60. A2PC MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36. The Japan Civil Aviation Bureau, the airworthiness authority for Japan, issued Japanese AD No. TCD 4889-98, dated January 14, 1999, to ensure the continued airworthiness of the airplanes in Japan. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We are proposing this AD to address unsafe conditions that we determined are likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. The proposed AD would require you to inspect the engine torque indication system and recalibrate the torque pressure transducers if required. The Agency is committed to updating the aviation community of expected costs associated with the MU-2B series airplane safety evaluation conducted in 2005. As a result of that commitment, the accumulating expected costs of all ADs related to the MU-2B series airplane safety evaluation may be found in the Final Report section at the following Web site: *http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/cos/mu2_foia_reading_library/* . Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD affects 397 airplanes in the U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to accomplish these proposed inspections: Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane Total cost on U.S. operators 5 workhours × $80 = $400 Not applicable $400 $158,800 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect 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. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the 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. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. Examining the Dockets You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the DOT Docket Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES . Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management Facility receives them. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: **Mitsubishi Heavy Industries:** Docket No. FAA-2006-23883; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-12-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)must receive comments on this proposed airworthiness directive

(AD)action by June 15, 2006. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD affects the following airplane models and serial numbers that are certificated in any category: Table 1.—Applicability Type certificate Models Serial Nos.

(1)A2PC MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 008 through 312, 314 through 320, and 322 through 347.

(2)A2PC MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 501 through 651, 653 through 660, and 662 through 696.

(3)A10SW MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, and MU-2B-40 313SA, 321SA, and 348SA through 459SA.

(4)A10SW MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, and MU-2B-60 652SA, 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven approach to analyze the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect and correct torque transducers that are out of calibration. The above issue, if uncorrected, could result in degraded performance and poor handling qualities and lead to loss of control of the airplane in certain situations. Compliance

(e)To address this problem, you must do the following: Table 2.—Actions/Compliance/Procedures Actions Compliance Procedures

(1)Incorporate the following pages from the Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM)charts listed in TABLE 3.—AFM INSERTION PAGES, paragraph

(f)of this AD, into the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM Within 100 hours time-in-service

(TIS)after the effective date of this AD The owner/operator holding at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) may do the flight manual changes requirement of this AD. Make an entry into the aircraft records showing compliance with this portion of the AD in accordance with section 43.9 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9).

(2)Inspect the engine torque indication system and recalibrate the torque pressure transducers as required. This inspection requires the use of the power assurance charts referenced in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD and in TABLE 3, paragraph

(f)of this AD Within 100 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD

(i)For airplanes listed in Type Certificate No. A2PC follow Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

(MHI)Service Bulletin No. 233A, dated January 14, 1999.

(ii)For airplanes listed Type Certificate No. A10SW follow MHI Service Bulletin No. 095/77-002, dated July 15, 1998.

(f)Use the following power assurance charts when doing the ground check portion of the inspection required in paragraph (e)(2) of this AD. Table 3.—AFM Insertion Pages Model of airplane affected Date and version of AFM Page number from AFM

(i)MU-2B AFM, Section 6, Revision 9, dated January 14, 1999 6-34

(ii)MU-2B-15 AFM, Section 6, Revision 9, dated January 14, 1999 6-19

(iii)MU-2B-20 AFM, Section 6, Revision 9, dated January 14, 1999 6-20

(iv)MU-2B-25 AFM, Section 6, Reissued March 25, 1986 6-18 and 6-19

(v)MU-2B-26 AFM, Section 6, Reissued March 25, 1986 6-17 and 6-18

(vi)MU-2B-26A AFM, Section 6, Reissued March 25, 1986 6-17 and 6-18

(vii)MU-2B-35 AFM, Section 6, Reissued March 25, 1986 6-18 and 6-19

(viii)MU-2B-36A AFM, Section 6, Reissued February 28, 1986 6-20 and 6-21

(ix)MU-2B-40 AFM, Section 6, Reissued March 25, 1986 6-17 and 6-18

(x)MU-2B-60 AFM, Section 6, Reissued September 24, 1985 6-19 and 6-20

(xi)MU-2B-10 AFM, Section 6, Revision 9, dated January 14, 1999 6-19

(xii)MU-2B-30 AFM, Section 6, Revision 10, dated January 14, 1999 6-19

(xiii)MU-2B-36 AFM, Section 6, Revision 9, dated January 14, 1999 6-20 Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(g)The Manager, Fort Worth Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(817)222-5284; facsimile:

(817)222-5960. Related Information

(i)Japan Civil Aviation Bureau Airworthiness Directive No. TCD 4889-98, dated January 14, 1999; and MHI Service Bulletins No. 233A, dated January 14, 1999; and No. 095/77-002, dated July 15, 1998, also address the subject of this AD.

(j)To get copies of the documents referenced in this AD, contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone:

(972)934-5480; facsimile:

(972)934-5488. To view the AD docket, go to the Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC, or on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov.* The docket number is Docket No. FAA-2006-23883; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-12-AD. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 21, 2006. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-6419 Filed 4-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2003-TN-0001, EPA-R04-OAR-2004-TN-0001-200413(b); FRL-8163-2] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Revisions to the Tennessee Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance Trading Program AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve two State Implementation Plan

(SIP)revisions to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation's Nitrogen Oxides (NO X ) Budget Trading Program (Trading Program) submitted October 27, 2003, and December 10, 2003, by the State of Tennessee. The first revision corrects a miscalculation in Tennessee's NO X trading budget for non-electric generating units (non-EGUs) resulting from the use of an incorrect control efficiency percentage for one of the Trading Program's non-EGU sources—an Eastman Chemical Company boiler. The correction of this miscalculation results in a 147 tons per season

(tps)increase in Tennessee's NO X trading budget for non-EGUs—making its non-EGU trading budget 5,666 tps, instead of 5,519 tps, and increasing Tennessee's total State-wide NO X budget from 163,928 tpy to 164,075 tpy. Based on this correction, Tennessee's second revision reallocates trading allowances to Eastman Chemical Company—increasing the NO X trading allowances from 416 tps to 549 tps for the Eastman Chemical Company boiler. In the Final Rules section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving the State's SIP revisions as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views these as noncontroversial submittals and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no significant, material, and adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2003-TN-0001 or EPA-R04-OAR-2004-TN-0001, by one of the following methods: 1. *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: *difrank.stacy@epa.gov* . 3. Fax: 404-562-9019. 4. Mail: “EPA-R04-OAR-2003-TN-0001 or EPA-R04-OAR-2004-TN-0001”, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is

(404)562-9042. Ms. DiFrank can also be reached via electronic mail at *difrank.stacy@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information, see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** . Dated: April 19, 2006. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 06-4022 Filed 4-27-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 6

Traces to 6 documents

U.S. Code