Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation Propellers; Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, 40376-40378 [2021-15979]
Download as PDF
40376
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Proposed Rules
procedures and tests that are not identified
as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator’s
maintenance or inspection program without
obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can
be done and the airplane can be put back in
an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or
changes to procedures or tests identified as
RC require approval of an AMOC.
(j) Related Information
(1) For information about EASA AD 2021–
0103 contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49
221 8999 000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu;
internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find
this EASA AD on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this
material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. This
material may be found in the AD docket on
the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA–2021–0568.
(2) For more information about this AD,
contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace
Engineer, Large Aircraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax: 206 231 3229; email
vladimir.ulyanov@faa.gov.
Issued on July 21, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2021–15942 Filed 7–27–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2021–0032; Project
Identifier AD–2020–01314–P]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton
Sundstrand Corporation Propellers;
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA); request for comment.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
The FAA is publishing and
requesting comments on this IRFA for
the previously published notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM), Project
Identifier AD–2020–01314–P, applicable
to Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
54H model propellers with a 54H60
model propeller hub installed. That
NPRM proposed to supersede
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 27, 2021
Jkt 253001
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020–12–
07, which applies to certain Hamilton
Sundstrand Corporation (Hamilton
Sundstrand) 54H model propellers.
DATES: Comments on this IRFA for the
NPRM published on February 25, 2021
(86 FR 11473), must be received on or
before September 13, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Schwetz, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: (781) 238–7761; fax: (781)
238–7199; email: michael.schwetz@
faa.gov.
Comments Invited
The FAA invites you to send any
written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this IRFA. Send your
comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2021–0032; Project Identifier AD–2020–
01314–P’’ at the beginning of your
comments. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the
proposal, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data. The FAA will consider
all comments received by the closing
date and may amend the proposal
because of those comments.
Except for Confidential Business
Information (CBI) as described in the
following paragraph, and other
information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments
received, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report
summarizing each substantive verbal
contact we receive about this proposed
AD.
Confidential Business Information
CBI is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and
actually treated as private by its owner.
Under the Freedom of Information Act
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt
from public disclosure. If your
comments responsive to this NPRM
contain commercial or financial
information that is customarily treated
as private, that you actually treat as
private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this NPRM, it is important
that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each
page of your submission containing CBI
as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such
marked submissions as confidential
under the FOIA, and they will not be
placed in the public docket of this
NPRM. Submissions containing CBI
should be sent to Michael Schwetz,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston ACO
Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803. Any
commentary that the FAA receives
which is not specifically designated as
CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.
Background
The FAA issued AD 2020–12–07,
Amendment 39–21142 (85 FR 36145,
June 15, 2020) (AD 2020–12–07) for
certain Hamilton Sundstrand 54H
model propellers. AD 2020–12–07 was
prompted by a report of the separation
of a 54H60 model propeller blade
installed on a United States Marine
Corps Reserve (USMCR) KC–130T
airplane during a flight in July 2017.
The USMCR investigation of this event
revealed the Hamilton Sundstrand
54H60 model propeller blade separated
due to corrosion pitting and a resultant
intergranular radial crack that was not
corrected at the last propeller overhaul.
From this intergranular crack, a fatigue
crack initiated and grew under service
loading until the Hamilton Sundstrand
54H60 model propeller blade could no
longer sustain the applied loads and
ultimately the blade separated. The
separation of the blade resulted in the
loss of the airplane and 17 fatalities. The
investigation further revealed that
54H60 model propeller blades
manufactured before 1971 are
susceptible to cracks of the propeller
blade in the area of the internal taper
bore. The applicability of AD 2020–12–
07 was therefore limited to those
Hamilton Sundstrand 54H60 model
propellers blades with a blade serial
number (S/N) below 813320, which are
those propeller blades manufactured
before 1971. AD 2020–12–07 required
initial and repetitive eddy current
inspections (ECIs) of the affected
propeller blades and replacement of any
propeller blade that fails inspection.
The agency issued AD 2020–12–07 to
detect cracking in the propeller blade
taper bore.
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Proposed Rules
Actions Since AD 2020–12–07 Was
Issued
Since the FAA issued AD 2020–12–
07, the manufacturer determined that all
propeller blades installed on Hamilton
Sundstrand 54H model propellers with
a 54H60 model propeller hub are
susceptible to intergranular corrosion
cracking in the blade taper bore. As a
result, the manufacturer published
Hamilton Sundstrand Alert Service
Bulletin (ASB) 54H60–61–A154,
Revision 1, dated May 29, 2020, to
expand the effectivity of the ASB to
include propeller blades with a blade S/
N below 813320, all propeller blades if
the propeller contains a propeller blade
with a blade S/N below 813320, and all
propeller blades that have not been
overhauled within ten years.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes as a
principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with
the objective of the rule and of
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation.
To achieve that principle, the RFA
requires agencies to solicit and consider
flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions.
The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses,
not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to
determine whether a proposed or final
rule will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it
will, the agency must prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis as
described in the Act. Based on the
comments received following
publication of the NPRM, the FAA has
completed an IRFA and requests
comments from affected small entities.
The purpose of this analysis is to
identify the number of small entities
affected, assess the economic impact of
the proposed regulation on them, and
consider less burdensome alternatives
and still meet the agency’s statutory
objectives.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act
Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
of 1980, Public Law 96–354, 94 Stat.
1164 (5 U.S.C. 601–612), as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104–121, 110 Stat. 857, Mar. 29,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 27, 2021
Jkt 253001
1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act
of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–240, 124 Stat.
2504, Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal
agencies to consider the effects of the
regulatory action on small business and
other small entities and to minimize any
significant economic impact. The term
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small
businesses and small organizations that
are independently owned and operated
and are not dominant in their fields, and
small governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than fifty thousand
(50,000).
The FAA is publishing this Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
to aid the public in commenting on the
potential impacts to small entities from
this proposal. The FAA invites
interested parties to submit data and
information regarding the potential
economic impact that would result from
the proposal. The FAA will consider
comments when making a
determination or when completing a
Final Regulatory Flexibility Assessment.
Under Sections 603(b) and (c) of the
RFA, the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis for a proposed rule must:
Contain the following:
(1) A description of the reasons why
the action by the agency is being
considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
proposed rule;
(3) A description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the proposed
rule will apply;
(4) A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rule, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities which will
be subject to the requirement and the
type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule; and
(6) A description of any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and which minimize
any significant economic impact of the
proposed rule on small entities.
1. Reasons the Action Is Being
Considered
AD 2020–12–07 was prompted by a
report of the separation of a 54H60
model propeller blade installed on a
USMCR KC–130T airplane during a
flight in July 2017. The subsequent
NPRM proposed to retain certain
requirements of AD 2020–12–07 and
proposed to require initial and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40377
repetitive ECIs of all propeller blades
installed on Hamilton Sundstrand 54H
model propellers with a propeller hub,
model 54H60, installed. Additionally,
the NPRM proposed to require
replacement of any propeller blade that
fails inspection.
2. Objectives and Legal Basis of the
Proposed Rule
The FAA issued NPRM, Project
Identifier AD–2020–01314–P, under the
authority described in Title 49, Subtitle
VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701,
General requirements. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing minimum
safety standards required in the interest
of safety. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority because it
addresses an unsafe condition that is
likely to exist or develop on the
propellers identified in the NPRM.
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.
3. All Federal Rules That May
Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
There are no relevant Federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule.
4. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities
FAA used the definition of small
entities in the RFA for this analysis. The
RFA defines small entities as small
businesses, small governmental
jurisdictions, or small organizations. In
5 U.S.C. 601(3), the RFA defines ‘‘small
business’’ to have the same meaning as
‘‘small business concern’’ under section
3 of the Small Business Act. The Small
Business Act authorizes the Small
Business Administration (SBA) to
define ‘‘small business’’ by issuing
regulations.
SBA (2019) has established size
standards for various types of economic
activities, or industries, under the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS).1 These size standards
generally define small businesses based
on the number of employees or annual
receipts.
The FAA identified fifty-three (53)
airplanes with 54H model propellers
having propeller hub, model 54H60,
1 Small Business Administration (SBA). 2019.
Table of Size Standards. Effective August 12, 2019.
https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-sizestandards.
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
40378
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
installed. These 53 airplanes are
registered to twenty (20) entities.
Twenty (20) airplanes are registered to
the United States Government entities,
including the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, which operates thirteen (13)
of these airplanes. The FAA determined
that these government entities are not
small businesses or other forms of small
entity.
The remaining thirty-three (33)
airplanes are owned and operated by
sixteen (16) private entities. All of these
private entities fall under the 481112
NAICS Code (Scheduled Freight Air
Transportation) with a small business
size standard of a maximum of 1,500
employees to be considered small
business.
Six (6) of these thirty-three (33)
airplanes are registered to Lynden Air
Cargo, LLC, affiliated with the Lynden
Incorporated, which, with 2,500
employees on its payroll, is not a small
entity per the SBA definition. The FAA
considered all other entities that own
and operate similar airplanes as small
entities since they all employ less than
1,500 employees. Therefore, the FAA
estimated that this proposed AD would
impact fifteen (15) small entities.
5. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping,
and Other Compliance Requirements
There are no reporting or
recordkeeping costs with this proposed
AD. However, the FAA estimated that
there would be compliance costs due to
the proposed requirements as discussed
below.
Using the compliance cost estimate
that Lynden Air Cargo LLC provided in
its public comment to the proposed AD
($9,190 to inspect all propeller blades
installed on each propeller, or $36,760
to inspect an airplane with four (4)
propellers), the FAA calculated the total
compliance costs of this AD on fifteen
(15) small businesses that own and
operate twenty-seven (27) airplanes at
$992,520 ($36,760 × 27). Eight (8) small
businesses that own and operate one
airplane would incur $36,760. The
compliance costs of one small entity
with five (5) airplanes would be
$183,800. The average compliance costs
of this AD on small entities would be
$66,168 ($992,520/15).
The FAA estimated the revenue
impact of complying with this proposed
AD’s requirements on these 15 small
entities would vary from under 1
percent (0.12 percent) of affected
companies’ annual revenues to
approximately 2 percent (1.69 percent)
of their annual revenues.
To the extent that small entities
provide more unique services or serve
markets with less competition, they may
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 27, 2021
Jkt 253001
also be able to pass on costs in the form
of price increases. However, the FAA
assumed that none of these small
entities would be able to pass these
compliance costs to their customers in
terms of higher prices.
6. Significant Alternatives Considered
The FAA did not find any significant
regulatory alternatives to the proposed
AD that would still accomplish the
safety objectives of this proposed AD.
Issued on July 21, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–15979 Filed 7–27–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2018–0689; Product
Identifier 2018–CE–016–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream
Aerospace Corporation Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The FAA is withdrawing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that proposed to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
(Gulfstream) Models G–IV and GIV–X
airplanes. The NPRM was prompted by
reports of disbonding and surface
cracking of the composite aft pressure
bulkhead. The NPRM proposed to
require inspecting the forward and aft
surfaces of the pressure bulkhead
composite panels for damage and
repairing any damage found. Since
issuance of the NPRM, the FAA has
determined that there is not an unsafe
condition. Accordingly, the NPRM is
withdrawn.
DATES: As of July 28, 2021, the proposed
rule, which published in the Federal
Register on July 27, 2018 (83 FR 35568),
is withdrawn.
ADDRESSES:
SUMMARY:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA–2018–0689; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
holidays. The AD docket contains this
AD action, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William O. Herderich, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA,
1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
GA 30337; phone: (404) 474–5547; fax:
(404) 474–5605; email:
william.o.herderich@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The FAA issued an NPRM that
proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 by
adding an AD that would apply to
certain serial-numbered Gulfstream
Models G–IV and GIV–X airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on July 27, 2018 (83 FR 35568).
The NPRM was prompted by reports of
disbonding and accompanying surface
cracking of the composite aft pressure
bulkhead. The NPRM stated that this
condition, if not addressed, could result
in structural failure of the aft pressure
bulkhead and loss of cabin pressure.
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to
require a one-time inspection of the
forward and aft surfaces of the pressure
bulkhead composite panels for damage
and repairing any damage found.
Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued
After issuance of the NPRM, the FAA
reviewed a Gulfstream safety assessment
and determined that a bulkhead with
disbonding is still capable of carrying
operational loads. If the affected
airplanes are capable of carrying
operational loads without failure, then
there is no unsafe condition.
Based on the above information, the
FAA has determined that AD action is
not warranted and the proposal should
be withdrawn.
Comments
The FAA received comments from
Gulfstream, the European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and an
individual commenter.
Requests
Gulfstream requested that the FAA
clarify language throughout the
preamble and unsafe condition
statement. EASA requested the FAA add
a requirement to repeat the inspection.
The individual commenter requested
the FAA clarify the affected serial
numbers.
The FAA acknowledges these
comments. However, because the NPRM
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 28, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40376-40378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15979]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2021-0032; Project Identifier AD-2020-01314-P]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
Propellers; Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA); request for
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is publishing and requesting comments on this IRFA for
the previously published notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), Project
Identifier AD-2020-01314-P, applicable to Hamilton Sundstrand
Corporation 54H model propellers with a 54H60 model propeller hub
installed. That NPRM proposed to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-12-07, which applies to certain Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
(Hamilton Sundstrand) 54H model propellers.
DATES: Comments on this IRFA for the NPRM published on February 25,
2021 (86 FR 11473), must be received on or before September 13, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Schwetz, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: (781) 238-7761; fax: (781) 238-7199; email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this IRFA. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0032; Project Identifier
AD-2020-01314-P'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.
Confidential Business Information
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Michael Schwetz, Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.
Background
The FAA issued AD 2020-12-07, Amendment 39-21142 (85 FR 36145, June
15, 2020) (AD 2020-12-07) for certain Hamilton Sundstrand 54H model
propellers. AD 2020-12-07 was prompted by a report of the separation of
a 54H60 model propeller blade installed on a United States Marine Corps
Reserve (USMCR) KC-130T airplane during a flight in July 2017. The
USMCR investigation of this event revealed the Hamilton Sundstrand
54H60 model propeller blade separated due to corrosion pitting and a
resultant intergranular radial crack that was not corrected at the last
propeller overhaul. From this intergranular crack, a fatigue crack
initiated and grew under service loading until the Hamilton Sundstrand
54H60 model propeller blade could no longer sustain the applied loads
and ultimately the blade separated. The separation of the blade
resulted in the loss of the airplane and 17 fatalities. The
investigation further revealed that 54H60 model propeller blades
manufactured before 1971 are susceptible to cracks of the propeller
blade in the area of the internal taper bore. The applicability of AD
2020-12-07 was therefore limited to those Hamilton Sundstrand 54H60
model propellers blades with a blade serial number (S/N) below 813320,
which are those propeller blades manufactured before 1971. AD 2020-12-
07 required initial and repetitive eddy current inspections (ECIs) of
the affected propeller blades and replacement of any propeller blade
that fails inspection. The agency issued AD 2020-12-07 to detect
cracking in the propeller blade taper bore.
[[Page 40377]]
Actions Since AD 2020-12-07 Was Issued
Since the FAA issued AD 2020-12-07, the manufacturer determined
that all propeller blades installed on Hamilton Sundstrand 54H model
propellers with a 54H60 model propeller hub are susceptible to
intergranular corrosion cracking in the blade taper bore. As a result,
the manufacturer published Hamilton Sundstrand Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB) 54H60-61-A154, Revision 1, dated May 29, 2020, to expand the
effectivity of the ASB to include propeller blades with a blade S/N
below 813320, all propeller blades if the propeller contains a
propeller blade with a blade S/N below 813320, and all propeller blades
that have not been overhauled within ten years.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.
To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for
their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in
the Act. Based on the comments received following publication of the
NPRM, the FAA has completed an IRFA and requests comments from affected
small entities. The purpose of this analysis is to identify the number
of small entities affected, assess the economic impact of the proposed
regulation on them, and consider less burdensome alternatives and still
meet the agency's statutory objectives.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, Public Law 96-354, 94
Stat. 1164 (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat.
857, Mar. 29, 1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L.
111-240, 124 Stat. 2504, Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal agencies to
consider the effects of the regulatory action on small business and
other small entities and to minimize any significant economic impact.
The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses and small
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and small governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than fifty thousand (50,000).
The FAA is publishing this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) to aid the public in commenting on the potential impacts to
small entities from this proposal. The FAA invites interested parties
to submit data and information regarding the potential economic impact
that would result from the proposal. The FAA will consider comments
when making a determination or when completing a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Assessment.
Under Sections 603(b) and (c) of the RFA, the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for a proposed rule must: Contain the following:
(1) A description of the reasons why the action by the agency is
being considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule;
(3) A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
(4) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule; and
(6) A description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and
which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on
small entities.
1. Reasons the Action Is Being Considered
AD 2020-12-07 was prompted by a report of the separation of a 54H60
model propeller blade installed on a USMCR KC-130T airplane during a
flight in July 2017. The subsequent NPRM proposed to retain certain
requirements of AD 2020-12-07 and proposed to require initial and
repetitive ECIs of all propeller blades installed on Hamilton
Sundstrand 54H model propellers with a propeller hub, model 54H60,
installed. Additionally, the NPRM proposed to require replacement of
any propeller blade that fails inspection.
2. Objectives and Legal Basis of the Proposed Rule
The FAA issued NPRM, Project Identifier AD-2020-01314-P, under the
authority described in Title 49, Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III,
Section 44701, General requirements. Under that section, the FAA is
charged with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by
prescribing minimum safety standards required in the interest of
safety. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because
it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on
the propellers identified in the NPRM.
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.
3. All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed rule.
4. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities
FAA used the definition of small entities in the RFA for this
analysis. The RFA defines small entities as small businesses, small
governmental jurisdictions, or small organizations. In 5 U.S.C. 601(3),
the RFA defines ``small business'' to have the same meaning as ``small
business concern'' under section 3 of the Small Business Act. The Small
Business Act authorizes the Small Business Administration (SBA) to
define ``small business'' by issuing regulations.
SBA (2019) has established size standards for various types of
economic activities, or industries, under the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS).\1\ These size standards generally define
small businesses based on the number of employees or annual receipts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Small Business Administration (SBA). 2019. Table of Size
Standards. Effective August 12, 2019. https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA identified fifty-three (53) airplanes with 54H model
propellers having propeller hub, model 54H60,
[[Page 40378]]
installed. These 53 airplanes are registered to twenty (20) entities.
Twenty (20) airplanes are registered to the United States Government
entities, including the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which
operates thirteen (13) of these airplanes. The FAA determined that
these government entities are not small businesses or other forms of
small entity.
The remaining thirty-three (33) airplanes are owned and operated by
sixteen (16) private entities. All of these private entities fall under
the 481112 NAICS Code (Scheduled Freight Air Transportation) with a
small business size standard of a maximum of 1,500 employees to be
considered small business.
Six (6) of these thirty-three (33) airplanes are registered to
Lynden Air Cargo, LLC, affiliated with the Lynden Incorporated, which,
with 2,500 employees on its payroll, is not a small entity per the SBA
definition. The FAA considered all other entities that own and operate
similar airplanes as small entities since they all employ less than
1,500 employees. Therefore, the FAA estimated that this proposed AD
would impact fifteen (15) small entities.
5. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
There are no reporting or recordkeeping costs with this proposed
AD. However, the FAA estimated that there would be compliance costs due
to the proposed requirements as discussed below.
Using the compliance cost estimate that Lynden Air Cargo LLC
provided in its public comment to the proposed AD ($9,190 to inspect
all propeller blades installed on each propeller, or $36,760 to inspect
an airplane with four (4) propellers), the FAA calculated the total
compliance costs of this AD on fifteen (15) small businesses that own
and operate twenty-seven (27) airplanes at $992,520 ($36,760 x 27).
Eight (8) small businesses that own and operate one airplane would
incur $36,760. The compliance costs of one small entity with five (5)
airplanes would be $183,800. The average compliance costs of this AD on
small entities would be $66,168 ($992,520/15).
The FAA estimated the revenue impact of complying with this
proposed AD's requirements on these 15 small entities would vary from
under 1 percent (0.12 percent) of affected companies' annual revenues
to approximately 2 percent (1.69 percent) of their annual revenues.
To the extent that small entities provide more unique services or
serve markets with less competition, they may also be able to pass on
costs in the form of price increases. However, the FAA assumed that
none of these small entities would be able to pass these compliance
costs to their customers in terms of higher prices.
6. Significant Alternatives Considered
The FAA did not find any significant regulatory alternatives to the
proposed AD that would still accomplish the safety objectives of this
proposed AD.
Issued on July 21, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-15979 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P