64692 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Mandate Security Plans, Systems, 

Inspections, and Force-on-Force 

Exercises Protect Against the Amended 

DBT 

The petitioner states that the security 

plans and physical systems 

implementing those plans, inspections 

and force-on-force Operational 

Safeguards Response Evaluation (OSRE) 

program exercises must be upgraded to 

conform to the proposed DBT 

regulations. The petitioner believes they 

must demonstrate high confidence to be 

able to repel a September 11, 2001, level 

assault. 

Require Prompt Construction of Shields 

From Air Attack at Standoff Distances 

From Key Support Structures at Nuclear 

Plants ‘‘Beamhenge’’

The petitioner states that nuclear 

power plants were not designed to 

withstand the attack by a fully loaded 

jumbo jet nor the intentional use of 

airplanes for terrorist purposes. 

The petitioner proposes the 

construction of shields composed of Ibeams with steel or other cabling and 

netting between them at standoff 

distances around the key structures at 

nuclear plants. Airplanes or jets 

attempting to attack sensitive structures 

would instead crash into the 

surrounding Beamhenge shield, leaving 

intact the reactor, spent fuel pool, and 

support facilities, thus protecting the 

public from damage that could result in 

substantial radioactivity releases. The 

Beamhenge concept may also provide 

some measure of protection against such 

weapons as shoulder-launched rockets, 

causing them to detonate before 

reaching their intended target. 

The petitioner states that I-beams are 

relatively inexpensive, and their 

installation can be done quickly and 

with modest expenditures. The 

petitioner estimates that Beamhenge 

shields could be constructed for a 

fraction of one percent of the original 

construction cost of the nuclear plant. 

The petitioner believes that with such a 

low price and relative ease of 

deployment, the burden is on the 

Commission to justify why 

implementation of the Beamhenge 

approach should not be mandated 

immediately. This petitioner requests 

that the shields against air attack be 

required to be promptly constructed at 

the nation’s nuclear plants, on a time 

urgent basis. 

Conclusion 

The petitioner states that the 

Commission’s DBT regulations 

remained essentially unchanged, with 

one exception, for nearly thirty years, 

despite dramatic increases in terrorist 

incidents, casualties, and capabilities. 

The petitioners seek a revision of the 

threat basis to include attack from the 

air by airplanes and jets, and attacking 

forces by land, water, or air—at least 

equal to the nineteen terrorists involved 

in the September 11, 2001, attacks in 

numbers, capacity, ruthlessness, 

dedication, skills, planning, and 

willingness to die and create large 

numbers of casualties. Additionally, the 

petitioners propose that the security 

requirements in part 73 be upgraded to 

provide high confidence in the ability of 

the security system to protect against 

the proposed upgraded September 11, 

2001-equivalent DBT. In particular, the 

petitioners propose requiring, under a 

time-urgent schedule, construction at 

reactor sites of shields consisting of Ibeams and cabling (Beamhenge) at 

stand-off distances from buildings and 

other assets important to safety at 

reactor sites so that airplanes or jets 

attempting to attack sensitive structures 

would instead crash into the 

surrounding Beamhenge shield, leaving 

intact the reactor, spent fuel pool, and 

support facilities, thus protecting the 

public from damage that could result in 

substantial radioactivity releases.

Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day 

of November, 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 04–24803 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2003–CE–65–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Glaser-Dirks 

Flugzeugbau GmbH Model DG–800B 

Sailplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

Reopening of the comment period. 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise 

an earlier proposed airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to all GlaserDirks Flugzeugbau GmbH (DG 

Flugzeugbau) Model DG–800B 

sailplanes equipped with a SOLO 2625 

engine or a Mid-West AE 50T engine. 

The earlier NPRM would have required 

you to modify the coolant pump and 

fuel pump electrical circuits, replace the 

non-resettable circuit breaker with a 

resettable circuit breaker, and (for a 

version of the Mikuni carburetor) secure 

the choke butterfly valve axis. The 

earlier NPRM resulted from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness 

authority for Germany. This proposed 

AD is the result of further analysis by 

FAA of the service information and 

FAA determining that important actions 

were omitted in the NPRM and should 

be incorporated. Since these required 

actions impose an additional burden 

over that proposed in the NPRM, we are 

reopening the comment period to allow 

the public the chance to comment on 

these additional actions.

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by December 13, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to 

submit comments on this proposed AD: 

• By mail: FAA, Central Region, 

Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–CE–

65–AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106. 

• By fax: (816) 329–3771. 

• By e-mail: 9–ACE–7–

Docket@faa.gov. Comments sent 

electronically must contain ‘‘Docket No. 

2003–CE–65–AD’’ in the subject line. If 

you send comments electronically as 

attached electronic files, the files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 

Windows or ASCII. 

You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from DG 

Flugzeugbau, Postbox 41 20, D–76625 

Bruchsal, Federal Republic of Germany; 

telephone: 011–49 7257–890; facsimile: 

011–49 7257–8922. 

You may view the AD docket at FAA, 

Central Region, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

2003–CE–65–AD, 901 Locust, Room 

506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office 

hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg 

Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: 

(816) 329–4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

How do I comment on this proposed 

AD? We invite you to submit any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments regarding this proposal. Send 

your comments to an address listed 

under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket 

No. 2003–CE–65–AD’’ in the subject 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64693

line of your comments. If you want us 

to acknowledge receipt of your mailed 

comments, send us a self-addressed, 

stamped postcard with the docket 

number written on it. We will datestamp your postcard and mail it back to 

you. 

Are there any specific portions of this 

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

We specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

this proposed AD. If you contact us 

through a nonwritten communication 

and that contact relates to a substantive 

part of this proposed AD, we will 

summarize the contact and place the 

summary in the docket. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD in light of those comments 

and contacts. 

Discussion 

What events have caused this 

proposed AD? The Luftfahrt-Bundesamt 

(LBA), which is the airworthiness 

authority for Germany, recently notified 

FAA that an unsafe condition may exist 

on DG Flugzeugbau Model DG–800B 

sailplanes. The LBA reports both 

electrical circuits of the fuel pump and 

the coolant pump (on a SOLO 2625 

engine or a Mid-West AE 50T engine) 

are protected by a non-resettable digital 

engine indicator (DEI) circuit breaker. 

The pumps will stop running if the nonresettable circuit breaker activates. 

What is the potential impact if FAA 

took no action? If a non-resettable 

circuit breaker trips, this could result in 

power loss with the inability to restart 

the fuel pump during a critical phase of 

flight (for example, takeoff under own 

power). 

Has FAA taken any action to this 

point? We issued a proposal to amend 

part 39 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include 

an AD that would apply to all DG 

Flugzeugbau Model DG–800B sailplanes 

equipped with a SOLO 2625 engine or 

a Mid-West AE 50T engine. This 

proposal was published in the Federal 

Register as a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) on April 12, 2004 

(69 FR 19135). The NPRM proposed to 

require you to:

—Modify the coolant pump and fuel 

pump electrical circuits; 

—Replace the non-resettable circuit 

breaker with a resettable circuit 

breaker, and 

— Secure the choke butterfly valve axis 

(for a version of the Mikuni 

carburetor).

Was the public invited to comment?

The FAA encouraged interested persons 

to participate in developing this 

amendment. We did not receive any 

comments on the proposed rule or on 

our determination of the cost to the 

public. 

What events have caused FAA to 

issue a supplemental NPRM? The FAA 

has done further analysis of the service 

information and determined that 

important actions were omitted in the 

NPRM. The omitted actions include 

installing edge protection at the sharp 

edges of the circuit breaker and making 

revisions to the flight manual. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

What has FAA decided? After 

examining the circumstances and 

reviewing all available information 

related to the incidents described above, 

we have determined that:

—The unsafe condition referenced in 

this document exists or could develop 

on other Glaser-Dirks Flugzeugbau 

GmbH (DG Flugzeugbau) Model DG–

800B sailplanes equipped with a 

SOLO 2625 engine or a Mid-West AE 

50T engine of the same type design 

that are on the U.S. registry; 

—We should change the NPRM to 

include the omitted actions; and 

—We should take AD action to correct 

this unsafe condition. 

The Supplemental NPRM 

How will the changes to the NPRM 

impact the public? Proposing the 

additional actions that you install edge 

protection at the sharp edges of the 

circuit breaker and revise the flight 

manual goes beyond the scope of what 

was originally proposed in the NPRM. 

Therefore, we are reopening the 

comment period and allowing the 

public the chance to comment on these 

additional actions.

What are the provisions of the 

supplemental NPRM? The proposed AD 

would require you to:

—Modify the coolant pump and fuel 

pump electrical circuits; 

—Remove the non-resettable digital 

engine indicator (DEI) circuit breaker 

(4-ampere) and replace with a 

resettable 5-ampere circuit breaker; 

—Secure the choke butterfly valve axis 

that is on the SOLO 2625 engine (New 

version Mikuni carburetor); 

—Install edge protection at the sharp 

edges of the resettable 5-ampere DEI 

circuit breaker; and 

—Incorporate ‘‘Flight Manual’’ changes 

that are listed in the service 

information.

How does the revision to 14 CFR part 

39 affect this proposed AD? On July 10, 

2002, we published a new version of 14 

CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 

2002), which governs FAA’s AD system. 

This regulation now includes material 

that relates to altered products, special 

flight permits, and alternative methods 

of compliance. This material previously 

was included in each individual AD. 

Since this material is included in 14 

CFR part 39, we will not include it in 

future AD actions. 

Costs of Compliance 

How many sailplanes would this 

proposed AD impact? We estimate that 

this proposed AD affects 25 sailplanes 

in the U.S. registry. 

What would be the cost impact of this 

proposed AD on owners/operators of the 

affected sailplanes? We estimate the 

following costs to do this proposed 

modification:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per

sailplane 

Total cost on U.S.

operators 

6 workhours at $65 per hour = $390 ................................................................................... $100 $490 25 × $490 = $12,250

Regulatory Findings 

Would this proposed AD impact 

various entities? 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. 

Would this proposed AD involve a 

significant rule or regulatory action? For 

the reasons discussed above, I certify 

that this proposed AD: 

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 

64694 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a summary of the costs 

to comply with this proposed AD and 

placed it in the AD Docket. You may get 

a copy of this summary by sending a 

request to us at the address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 

2003–CE–65–AD’’ in your request.

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 (AD):

Glaser-Dirks Flugzeugbau GmbH: Docket No. 

2003–CE–65–AD. 

When Is the Last Date I Can Submit 

Comments on This Proposed AD? 

(a) We must receive comments on this 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) by 

December 13, 2004. 

What Other ADs Are Affected by This 

Action? 

(b) None. 

What Sailplanes Are Affected by This AD? 

(c) This AD affects all Model DG–800B 

sailplanes, all serial numbers, that are: 

(1) Certificated in any category; and 

(2) Equipped with a SOLO 2625 engine or 

a Mid-West AE 50T engine. 

What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in 

This AD? 

(d) This AD is the result of mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by the airworthiness authority for 

Germany. The actions specified in this AD 

are intended to prevent electrical failure of 

the fuel and coolant pumps if a nonresettable circuit breaker trips. This could 

result in power loss with the inability to 

restart the fuel pump during a critical phase 

of flight (for example, takeoff under own 

power). 

What Must I Do To Address This Problem? 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following:

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(1) Modify the coolant pump and fuel pump 

electrical circuits.

Within the next 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) 

after the effective date of this AD, unless already done.

For sailplanes with a SOLO 2625 engine: Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note 

No. 873/26, dated November 12, 2001; For 

sailplanes with a Mid-West AE 50T engine:

Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical 

Note No. 873/27, dated November 29, 

2001. 

(2) Remove the non-resettable digital engine 

indicator (DEI) circuit breaker (4-ampere) replace with a resettable 5-ampere circuit 

breaker.

Before further flight after the modification of 

the coolant pump and fuel pump and electrical circuits required by paragraph (e)(1) of 

this AD.

For sailplanes with a SOLO 2625 engine: Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note 

No. 873/26, dated November 12, 2001; For 

sailplanes with a Mid-West AE 50T engine:

Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical 

Note No. 873/27, dated November 29, 

2001. 

(3) For sailplanes with engine SOLO 2625 

(New version Mikuni carburetor): Secure the 

choke butterfly valve axis.

Before further flight after the modification of 

the coolant pump and fuel pump electrical 

circuits required by paragraph. (e)(1) of this 

AD and the removal and replacement required by paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

For sailplanes with a SOLO 2625 engine: Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note 

No. 873/26, dated November 12, 2001. 

(4) Install edge protection at the sharp edges of 

the resettable 5-ampere DEI circuit breaker.

Before further flight after the modification of 

the coolant pump and fuel pump electrical 

circuits required by paragraph (e)(1) of this 

AD and the removal and replacement required by paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

For sailplanes with a SOLO 2625 engine: Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note 

No. 873/26, dated November 12, 2001; For 

sailplanes with a Mid-West AE 50T engine:

Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical 

Note No. 873/27, dated November 29, 

2001. 

(5) Incorporate changes in the FAA-approved 

sailplane flight manual (SFM).

(i) 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. 

(ii) Make an entry in the aircraft records showing compliance with this portion of the AD 

following section 43.9 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 43.9). 

Before further flight after the modifications required by paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), 

and (e)(4) of this AD.

For sailplanes with a SOLO 2625 engine: Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note 

No. 873/26, dated November 12, 2001; For 

sailplanes with a Mid-West AE 50T engine:

Follow DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical 

Note No. 873/27, dated November 29, 

2001. 

(6) Do not install any SOLO 2625 engine or 

Mid-West AE 50T engine unless the modifications required by paragraphs (e)(1), 

(e)(2), (e)(3), and (e)(4) of this AD have been 

done.

As of the effective date of this AD ................... Not Applicable. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64695

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, 

send your request to your principal 

inspector. The principal inspector may add 

comments and will send your request to the 

Manager, Standards Office, Small Airplane 

Directorate, FAA. For information on any 

already approved alternative methods of 

compliance, contact Greg Davison, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: 

(816) 329–4090. 

May I Get Copies of the Documents 

Referenced in This AD? 

(g) You may get copies of the documents 

referenced in this AD from DG Flugzeugbau, 

Postbox 41 20, D–76625 Bruchsal, Federal 

Republic of Germany; telephone: 011–49 

7257–890; facsimile: 011–49 7257–8922. You 

may view these documents at FAA, Central 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106. 

Is There Other Information That Relates to 

This Subject? 

(h) German AD Number 2002–083, dated 

April 4, 2002, also addresses the subject of 

this AD.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 2, 2004. 

James E. Jackson, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24818 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19442; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–CE–31–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Gippsland 

Aeronautics Pty. Ltd. Model GA8 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Gippsland Aeronautics Pty. Ltd. 

Model GA8 airplanes. This proposed 

AD would require you to inspect the 

pilot and co-pilot control column 

wheels and aileron cable operating arm 

shafts for damage and, if damage is 

found, to repair the shafts or to replace 

the steel shafts with bronze shafts. This 

proposed AD results from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness 

authority for Australia. We are issuing 

this proposed AD to detect and correct 

damage of the pilot and co-pilot control 

wheels and aileron cable operating arm 

shafts. This damage could result in the 

aileron controls becoming stiff or 

locking, which could lead to loss of 

control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by December 15, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to 

submit comments 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–

001. 

• 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. 

To get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD, contact 

Gippsland Aeronautics Pty. Ltd., 

Latrobe Regional Airport, P.O. Box 881, 

Morwell, Victoria 3840, Australia; 

telephone: 61 (0) 3 5172 1200; facsimile: 

61 (0) 3 5172 1201. 

To view the comments to this 

proposed AD, go to http://dms.dot.gov.

This is docket number FAA–2004–

19442.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, 

Small Airplane Directorate, ACE–112, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: 816–329–

4059; facsimile: 816–329–4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

How do I comment on this proposed 

AD? We invite you to submit any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments regarding this proposal. Send 

your comments to an address listed 

under ADDRESSES. Include the docket 

number, ‘‘FAA–2004–19442; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–CE–31–AD’’ at the 

beginning of your 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 our 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.). This is 

docket number FAA–2004–19442. 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.

Are there any specific portions of this 

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

We specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

this proposed AD. If you contact us 

through a nonwritten communication 

and that contact relates to a substantive 

part of this proposed AD, we will 

summarize the contact and place the 

summary in the docket. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD in light of those comments 

and contacts. 

Docket Information 

Where can I go to view the docket 

information? You may view the AD 

docket that contains the proposal, any 

comments received, and any final 

disposition in person at the DMS Docket 

Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

(eastern standard time), 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. You may also view 

the AD docket on the Internet at

http://dms.dot.gov. The comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after the DMS receives them. 

Discussion 

What events have caused this 

proposed AD? The Civil Aviation Safety 

Authority (CASA), which is the 

airworthiness authority for Australia, 

recently notified FAA that an unsafe 

condition may exist on certain 

Gippsland Aeronautics Pty. Ltd. Model 

GA8 airplanes. CASA reports three 

occurrences of aileron control stiffness 

and one occurrence of aileron control 

locking during taxi. Rubbing between 

the control wheel shaft and the bush in 

the control column may cause wear or 

damage to the control wheel shaft where 

the shaft connects to the control 

column. This damage may lead to the