Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Collection Approval of Information Collection: Safe Disposition of Life Limited Aircraft Parts, 14721-14722 [2020-05179]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 50 / Friday, March 13, 2020 / Notices
where appropriate, in a subsequent
decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR
1152.29(e)(2), EIRR shall file a notice of
consummation with the Board to signify
that it has exercised the authority
granted and fully abandoned the Line. If
consummation has not been effected by
EIRR’s filing of a notice of
consummation by March 13, 2021, and
there are no legal or regulatory barriers
to consummation, the authority to
abandon will automatically expire.
Board decisions and notices are
available at www.stb.gov.
Decided: March 9, 2020.
By the Board, Allison C. Davis, Director,
Office of Proceedings.
Brendetta Jones,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2020–05107 Filed 3–12–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Notice of Opportunity for Public
Comment on a Proposed Change of
Airport Property Land Use From
Aeronautical to Non-Aeronautical Use
at Ardmore Municipal Airport,
Ardmore, OK
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The FAA is considering a
request from Ardmore Development
Authority to change approximately 5
acres, located at 615 Grumman Street, in
the Southwest quadrant of the airport
from aeronautical use to nonaeronautical use and to authorize the
conversion of the airport property.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 13, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this
document to Mr. Glenn Boles, Federal
Aviation Administration, Arkansas/
Oklahoma Airports District Office
Manager, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort
Worth, TX 76177.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Mita Bates, President of Ardmore
Development Authority, 410 W Main
Street, Ardmore, OK 73401, telephone
580–223–7765; or Mr. Glenn Boles,
Federal Aviation Administration,
Arkansas/Oklahoma Airports District
Office Manager, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177,
telephone (817) 222–5630. Documents
reflecting this FAA action may be
reviewed at the above locations.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Mar 12, 2020
Jkt 250001
The
proposal consists of a parcel of land
which is part of over 2,000 acres of land
constituting the Ardmore Municipal
Airport. The citizens of Ardmore
approved a $100,000 bond issued in
1942 to purchase 1,416 acres of land
and the United States Government
contributed 650 acres to develop the
2,066 acres for the Ardmore Army
Airfield. The base was operated as a
training base during World War II and
closed October 31, 1945. In 1946, the
United States Government declared the
base surplus property. The War Assets
Administration issued a quit claim deed
in 1948 which included the land,
2085.28 acres and all thereon. As a
result of the Korean War, the base was
reactivated on September 1, 1953 and
renamed Ardmore Air Force Base. It was
operated until January 1959, and
officially closed again on March 31,
1959, and transferred back to Ardmore
under a quit claim deed. The land
comprising this parcel is outside the
forecasted need for aviation
development and is no longer needed
for indirect or direct aeronautical use.
The Airport wishes to develop this land
for compatible commercial, nonaeronautical use. The Airport will retain
ownership of this land and ensure the
protection of Part 77 surfaces and
compatible land use. Income from the
conversion of these parcels will benefit
the aviation community by reinvestment
in the airport.
Approval does not constitute a
commitment by the FAA to financially
assist in the conversion of the subject
airport property nor a determination of
eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from
the FAA. The disposition of proceeds
from the conversion of the airport
property will be in accordance with
FAA’s Policy and Procedures
Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue,
published in the Federal Register on
February 16, 1999. In accordance with
section 47107(h) of Title 49, United
States Code, this notice is required to be
published in the Federal Register 30
days before modifying the land-use
assurance that requires the property to
be used for an aeronautical purpose.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Issued in Fort Worth, TX.
Ignacio Flores,
Director, Airports Division, FAA, Southwest
Region.
[FR Doc. 2020–05122 Filed 3–12–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14721
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0263]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Collection
Approval of Information Collection:
Safe Disposition of Life Limited
Aircraft Parts
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our
intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval to renew this information
collection. The collection involves
maintaining and recording ‘‘the current
status of life-limited parts of each
airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and
appliance. The information to be
collected is necessary for maintaining
and recording that the part is airworthy.
DATES: Written comments should be
submitted by May 12, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Please send written
comments:
By Electronic Docket:
www.regulations.gov (Enter docket
number into search field).
By mail: David A. Hoyng, FAA
Headquarters, 950 L’Enfant Plaza North,
SW 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20024.
By fax: FAX: 202–267–1812.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David A. Hoyng by email at:
david.a.hoyng@faa.gov or 9-AWA-AFS300-Maintenance@faa.gov; phone:
(325)260–6858 or (202)267–1675
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments Invited: You are
asked to comment on any aspect of this
information collection, including (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for FAA’s
performance; (b) the accuracy of the
estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity
of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be
minimized without reducing the quality
of the collected information. The agency
will summarize and/or include your
comments in the request for OMB’s
clearance of this information collection.
OMB Control Number: 2120–0665.
Title: Safe Disposition of Life Limited
Aircraft Parts.
Form Numbers: None.
Type of Review: Renewal of an
information collection.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
14722
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 50 / Friday, March 13, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Background: The FAA has found lifelimited parts that exceeded their lifelimits installed on type-certificated
products during accident investigations
and in routine surveillance. Although
such installation of life-limited parts
violates existing FAA regulations,
concerns have arisen regarding the
disposition of these life-limited parts
when they have reached their life limits.
Concerns over the use of life-limited
aircraft parts led Congress to pass a law
requiring the safe disposition of these
parts. The Wendell H. Ford Investment
and Reform Act for the 21st Century
(Pub. L. 106–181), added section 44725
to Title 49, United States Code.
Current Requirements
The type design of an aircraft, aircraft
engine, or propeller includes the
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness (ICA), which includes the
Airworthiness Limitations that describe
life limits for parts installed on the
product. See, for instance, 14 CFR
21.3(c) and 21.50.
In order for an aviation product to
comply with its type design, the lifelimited parts installed on it must fall
within the acceptable ranges described
in the Airworthiness Limitations section
of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness. For this reason,
installation of a life-limited part after
the mandatory replacement time has
been reached would be a violation of the
maintenance regulations. Section
43.13(b) requires that maintenance work
be completed so that the product
worked on ‘‘will be at least equal to its
original or properly altered
condition.* * *’’ The product is not at
least equal to its original or properly
altered condition if a life-limited part
has reached or exceeded its life limit.
Existing regulations require that specific
markings be placed on all life-limited
parts at the time of manufacture. This
includes permanently marking the part
with a part number (or equivalent) and
a serial number (or equivalent). See 14
CFR 45.14. Persons who install parts
must have adequate information to
determine a part’s current life status. In
particular, documentation problems
may mislead an installer concerning the
life remaining for a life-limited part.
This rule further provides for the data
needs of subsequent installers to ensure
they know the life remaining on a part
and prevent the part being used beyond
its life limit. Existing regulations
provide for records on life-limited parts
that are installed on aircraft. The
regulations require that each owner or
operator under § 91.417(a)(2)(ii) and
each certificate holder under
§ 121.380(a)(2)(iii) or § 135.439(a)(2)(ii),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Mar 12, 2020
Jkt 250001
maintain records showing ‘‘the current
status of life-limited parts of each
airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and
appliance.’’ These regulations do not
govern the disposition of the part when
it is removed from the aircraft. If the
part is intended to be reinstalled,
however, a record of the life status of
the part will be needed at the time of
reinstallation to show that the part is
within its life limit and to create the
required record under
§§ 91.417(a)(2)(ii), 121.380(a)(2)(iii), or
135.439(a)(2)(ii), as applicable.
Therefore, when a life-limited part is
removed from an aircraft and that part
is intended to be reinstalled in an
aircraft, industry practice is to make a
record of the part’s current status at the
time of removal. Repair stations, air
carriers, and fixed base operators
(FBO’s) have systems in place to keep
accurate records of such parts to ensure
that they can reinstall the parts and
have the required records to show that
the part is airworthy. If the part is not
intended to be reinstalled, however,
under existing regulations and practice
there is no record required or routinely
made when a part is removed from an
aircraft. The part may be at the end of
its life limit and not eligible for
installation. Or, the part may not have
reached the end of its life limit, but is
so close that reinstallation would not be
practicable. In these cases industry
practices vary. For instance, the part
might be put in a bin and later sold as
scrap metal, it might be used as a
training aid, or it might be mutilated.
This renewal of the OMB control action
requires the continued information
collection.
Respondents: Industry associations,
air carriers, manufacturers, repair
stations, representatives of employees, a
foreign civil air authority, and
individuals.
Frequency: As identified in previous
rulemaking proposals for an annual
frequency of information collection
requirements is 625,000 procedures.
Estimated Average Burden per
Response: 5 minutes per procedure.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: As
identified in previous rule making
estimates for this information collection
the FAA refined its NPRM estimate of
annual burden, and has determined that
there is no more than a minimal
paperwork burden on any respondent.
Both the previous proposal and the final
rule estimates are based on 625,000
annual removals subject to the rule. In
the NPRM each removal was estimated
to require record keeping and reporting
requirements of five minutes duration,
at $50 per hour. Thus for the NPRM, the
total annual estimated burden of Public
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Law 106–181 was about $2,600,000,
borne by a total of 5,000 respondents. In
the final rule this estimate is decreased
by an indeterminate amount because the
rule is satisfied by the—
(a) Control for safe-disposition of life
limited parts through the appropriate
use of record keeping systems that are
known in wide use; and
(b) Physical segregation of life-limited
parts that have little or no remaining
capacity as airworthy parts. Many
certificated operators and air agencies
are known to make use of this method
of control.
While a respondent may find it useful
to satisfy the rule by one or more of the
remaining options, the FAA believes
that neither case above is likely to result
in an additional Paperwork Reduction
Act burden.
Further, the option of mutilation is
likely to reduce the NPRM estimate.
This option may include the sale of the
mutilated part as scrap metal. Such a
sale would offset some of all of any
additional cost of this option. Because
FAA has not attempted to determine the
preference ranking by respondents of
the options permitted under this rule, it
has no basis by which to estimate the
amount the choice of these options will
decrease the NPRM estimate. Thus, the
NPRM estimate should be considered to
be a ceiling cost.
Issued in Washington DC on March 5,
2020.
David A. Hoyng,
Aviation Safety Inspector—LLP SME, Air
Carrier Branch/Aircraft Maintenance
Division/Safety Standards/Flight Standards
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–05179 Filed 3–12–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Safety Oversight and Certification
Advisory Committee; Meeting
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Safety Oversight and
Certification Advisory Committee
(SOCAC) meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces a
meeting of the SOCAC.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
April 16, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time.
Requests to attend the meeting must
be received by March 30, 2020.
Requests for accommodations to a
disability must be received by March 30,
2020.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 50 (Friday, March 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14721-14722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05179]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2020-0263]
Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Collection Approval of Information Collection:
Safe Disposition of Life Limited Aircraft Parts
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew this information
collection. The collection involves maintaining and recording ``the
current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine,
propeller, rotor, and appliance. The information to be collected is
necessary for maintaining and recording that the part is airworthy.
DATES: Written comments should be submitted by May 12, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Please send written comments:
By Electronic Docket: www.regulations.gov (Enter docket number into
search field).
By mail: David A. Hoyng, FAA Headquarters, 950 L'Enfant Plaza
North, SW 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20024.
By fax: FAX: 202-267-1812.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David A. Hoyng by email at:
[email protected] or [email protected]; phone:
(325)260-6858 or (202)267-1675
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
OMB Control Number: 2120-0665.
Title: Safe Disposition of Life Limited Aircraft Parts.
Form Numbers: None.
Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
[[Page 14722]]
Background: The FAA has found life-limited parts that exceeded
their life-limits installed on type-certificated products during
accident investigations and in routine surveillance. Although such
installation of life-limited parts violates existing FAA regulations,
concerns have arisen regarding the disposition of these life-limited
parts when they have reached their life limits. Concerns over the use
of life-limited aircraft parts led Congress to pass a law requiring the
safe disposition of these parts. The Wendell H. Ford Investment and
Reform Act for the 21st Century (Pub. L. 106-181), added section 44725
to Title 49, United States Code.
Current Requirements
The type design of an aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller
includes the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA), which
includes the Airworthiness Limitations that describe life limits for
parts installed on the product. See, for instance, 14 CFR 21.3(c) and
21.50.
In order for an aviation product to comply with its type design,
the life-limited parts installed on it must fall within the acceptable
ranges described in the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. For this reason, installation
of a life-limited part after the mandatory replacement time has been
reached would be a violation of the maintenance regulations. Section
43.13(b) requires that maintenance work be completed so that the
product worked on ``will be at least equal to its original or properly
altered condition.* * *'' The product is not at least equal to its
original or properly altered condition if a life-limited part has
reached or exceeded its life limit. Existing regulations require that
specific markings be placed on all life-limited parts at the time of
manufacture. This includes permanently marking the part with a part
number (or equivalent) and a serial number (or equivalent). See 14 CFR
45.14. Persons who install parts must have adequate information to
determine a part's current life status. In particular, documentation
problems may mislead an installer concerning the life remaining for a
life-limited part. This rule further provides for the data needs of
subsequent installers to ensure they know the life remaining on a part
and prevent the part being used beyond its life limit. Existing
regulations provide for records on life-limited parts that are
installed on aircraft. The regulations require that each owner or
operator under Sec. [thinsp]91.417(a)(2)(ii) and each certificate
holder under Sec. [thinsp]121.380(a)(2)(iii) or Sec.
[thinsp]135.439(a)(2)(ii), maintain records showing ``the current
status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller,
rotor, and appliance.'' These regulations do not govern the disposition
of the part when it is removed from the aircraft. If the part is
intended to be reinstalled, however, a record of the life status of the
part will be needed at the time of reinstallation to show that the part
is within its life limit and to create the required record under
Sec. Sec. [thinsp]91.417(a)(2)(ii), 121.380(a)(2)(iii), or
135.439(a)(2)(ii), as applicable. Therefore, when a life-limited part
is removed from an aircraft and that part is intended to be reinstalled
in an aircraft, industry practice is to make a record of the part's
current status at the time of removal. Repair stations, air carriers,
and fixed base operators (FBO's) have systems in place to keep accurate
records of such parts to ensure that they can reinstall the parts and
have the required records to show that the part is airworthy. If the
part is not intended to be reinstalled, however, under existing
regulations and practice there is no record required or routinely made
when a part is removed from an aircraft. The part may be at the end of
its life limit and not eligible for installation. Or, the part may not
have reached the end of its life limit, but is so close that
reinstallation would not be practicable. In these cases industry
practices vary. For instance, the part might be put in a bin and later
sold as scrap metal, it might be used as a training aid, or it might be
mutilated. This renewal of the OMB control action requires the
continued information collection.
Respondents: Industry associations, air carriers, manufacturers,
repair stations, representatives of employees, a foreign civil air
authority, and individuals.
Frequency: As identified in previous rulemaking proposals for an
annual frequency of information collection requirements is 625,000
procedures.
Estimated Average Burden per Response: 5 minutes per procedure.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: As identified in previous rule
making estimates for this information collection the FAA refined its
NPRM estimate of annual burden, and has determined that there is no
more than a minimal paperwork burden on any respondent. Both the
previous proposal and the final rule estimates are based on 625,000
annual removals subject to the rule. In the NPRM each removal was
estimated to require record keeping and reporting requirements of five
minutes duration, at $50 per hour. Thus for the NPRM, the total annual
estimated burden of Public Law 106-181 was about $2,600,000, borne by a
total of 5,000 respondents. In the final rule this estimate is
decreased by an indeterminate amount because the rule is satisfied by
the--
(a) Control for safe-disposition of life limited parts through the
appropriate use of record keeping systems that are known in wide use;
and
(b) Physical segregation of life-limited parts that have little or
no remaining capacity as airworthy parts. Many certificated operators
and air agencies are known to make use of this method of control.
While a respondent may find it useful to satisfy the rule by one or
more of the remaining options, the FAA believes that neither case above
is likely to result in an additional Paperwork Reduction Act burden.
Further, the option of mutilation is likely to reduce the NPRM
estimate. This option may include the sale of the mutilated part as
scrap metal. Such a sale would offset some of all of any additional
cost of this option. Because FAA has not attempted to determine the
preference ranking by respondents of the options permitted under this
rule, it has no basis by which to estimate the amount the choice of
these options will decrease the NPRM estimate. Thus, the NPRM estimate
should be considered to be a ceiling cost.
Issued in Washington DC on March 5, 2020.
David A. Hoyng,
Aviation Safety Inspector--LLP SME, Air Carrier Branch/Aircraft
Maintenance Division/Safety Standards/Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-05179 Filed 3-12-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
