Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 166 /Thursday, August 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 45689

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August

19, 1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–22820 Filed 8–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–200–AD; Amendment

39–10718; AD 98–18–02]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus

Industrie Model A300–600 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Airbus Industrie Model

A300–600 series airplanes, that

currently requires inspections to detect

cracks in the center spar sealing angles

adjacent to the pylon rear attachment

and in the adjacent butt strap and skin

panel, and correction of discrepancies.

This amendment requires that the initial

inspections be accomplished at reduced

thresholds. This action also limits the

applicability of the existing AD. This

amendment is prompted by reports of

cracking in the vertical web of the

center spar sealing angles of the wing.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent crack formation in

the sealing angles; such cracks could

rupture and lead to subsequent crack

formation in the bottom skin of the

wing, and resultant reduced structural

integrity of the center spar section of the

wing.

DATES: Effective October 1, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300–

57–6027, Revision 2, dated September

13, 1994, as listed in the regulations, is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of October 1, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin No.

A300–57–6027, including Appendix 1,

dated October 8, 1991, as listed in the

regulations, was previously approved by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

January 5, 1994 (58 FR 64112, December

6, 1993).

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 93–23–07,

amendment 39–8741 (58 FR 64112,

December 6, 1993), which is applicable

to all Airbus Industrie Model A300–600

series airplanes, was published in the

Federal Register on June 18, 1997 (62

FR 33040). The action proposed to

supersede AD 93–23–07 to continue to

require inspections to detect cracks in

the center spar sealing angles adjacent

to the pylon rear attachment and in the

adjacent butt strap and skin panel, and

correction of any discrepancies. The

action proposed to require that the

initial inspections be accomplished at

reduced thresholds, and proposed to

limit the applicability of the existing

AD.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Request to Adopt ‘‘Adjustment for

Range’’ Compliance Times

One commenter, the manufacturer,

requests that the proposed AD be

revised to utilize the ‘‘adjustment for

range’’ concept for required compliance

thresholds as recommended by Airbus

Industrie. The commenter states that, in

comparison to the compliance times

specified in the related French

airworthiness directive, the compliance

thresholds specified for paragraphs (c)

and (d) of the proposed AD would

significantly reduce compliance time for

U.S. operators. The commenter

considers this difference in the planned

compliance intervals to be a change in

the FAA’s policy regarding inspections,

which is not linked to the need to

address the unsafe condition, since no

technical reason is provided for the

difference. Such a deviation is a

departure from previously stated FAA

policy, which mentions a preference for

identical compliance times between the

FAA and other airworthiness authorities

such as the Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de

l’Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France. The

commenter further states that the

proposed AD, if adopted, would unduly

penalize U.S. operators of affected

Airbus Industrie Model A300–600 series

airplanes.

The FAA does not concur. As stated

in the preamble of the proposed AD,

utilization of ‘‘adjustment for range’’

calculations may present difficulties in

determining if the applicable actions

have been accomplished within the

appropriate compliance time. While

such adjustable compliance times are

utilized as part of the Maintenance

Review Board program, they do not fit

practically into the AD tracking process

for operators or for Principal

Maintenance Inspectors attempting to

ascertain compliance with AD’s. Based

on reviews of the ‘‘adjustment for

range’’ calculations with the FAA

Aircraft Evaluation Group, and in

further consultation with the

manufacturer, the FAA has determined

that fixed compliance times should

continue to be specified for

accomplishment of the actions required

by this AD. However, operators may

request an extension of the compliance

times of this AD in accordance with the

‘‘adjustment for range’’ formula, under

the provisions of paragraph (g)(2) of the

final rule.

Additionally, the FAA acknowledges

that a conservative estimate of the

average flight time per flight cycle

(landing) was used in development of

the compliance times for the actions

required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of the

AD. Therefore, after additional review of

the average flight utilization of the U.S.

fleet, the FAA has determined that the

fixed compliance thresholds may be

extended somewhat, and that these

compliance thresholds also should be

specified in flight hours, as well as

flight cycles. Accordingly, paragraphs

(c) and (d) of the final rule have been

revised to increase the compliance

threshold specified in flight cycles, and

to add a compliance threshold specified

in flight hours. The extension of the

flight cycle threshold is expected to

provide additional flexibility for

operators in planning for

accomplishment of the required actions

of this AD, and the addition of flight

hours will not be restrictive to any U.S.

operator. The cost impact information

and Note 2 of the AD also have been

revised to reflect these changes to the

compliance thresholds and intervals of

the final rule.
45690 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 166 /Thursday, August 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Request To Increase Grace Period

One commenter requests that the

grace period for accomplishment of the

actions required by paragraph (c) of the

proposed AD be increased from 500 to

1,000 flight cycles. This commenter

states that the rule, as proposed, lowers

the inspection threshold to 4,638 total

flight cycles. Because its fleet of affected

airplanes has already passed this

threshold, the required actions would

need to be accomplished within 500

flight cycles after the effective date of

the AD, and those actions cannot be

accomplished in this timeframe at a line

station. However, an increase in the

grace period to 1,000 flight cycles would

allow this operator to accomplish the

required actions at a main maintenance

base.

The FAA does not concur with the

request to extend the grace period. As

discussed previously, the FAA has

determined that the compliance

threshold and intervals may be

extended for accomplishment of the

actions required by paragraphs (c) and

(d) of this AD. The initial compliance

threshold required by paragraph (c) has

been revised from 4,638 total flight

cycles to require accomplishment of the

required actions ‘‘Prior to accumulation

of 10,600 total flight cycles or 22,600

total flight hours, whichever occurs

first.’’ With this extension of the

compliance threshold, the FAA

considers that operators will have

adequate time to accomplish the

required actions, and has determined

that no further changes to the

compliance times of the AD are

necessary.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

described previously. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 34 Model

A300–600 series airplanes of U.S.

registry that will be affected by this AD.

The requirements of this AD will not

add any new additional economic

burden on affected operators, other than

the costs that are associated with the

initial inspection being required earlier

than would have been required by AD

93–23–07 (inspection is now required

within 10,600 total landings or 22,260

total flight hours, rather than 12,000

total landings, for certain airplanes; and

within 13,200 total landings or 27,720

total flight hours, rather than 15,000

total landings, for certain other

airplanes). The current costs associated

with AD 93–23–07 are reiterated in their

entirety (as follows) for the convenience

of affected operators.

The costs associated with the

currently required inspections entail 8

work hours per airplane, per inspection,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. (This figure does not include the

time necessary for gaining access and

closing up.) Based on these figures, the

cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $16,320, or $480 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–8741 (58 FR

64112, December 6, 1993), and by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD), amendment 39–10718, to read as

follows:

98–18–02 Airbus Industrie: Amendment 39–

10718. Docket 95–NM–200–AD.

Supersedes AD 93–23–07, Amendment

39–8741.

Applicability: Model A300–600 series

airplanes, as listed in Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–57–6027, Revision 2, dated September

13, 1994; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

Note 2: Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD

restate the requirements for initial and

repetitive inspections contained in

paragraphs (a) and (c) of AD 93–23–07.

Therefore, for operators that have previously

accomplished at least the initial inspection in

accordance with AD 93–23–07, paragraphs

(c) and (d) of this AD require that the next

scheduled inspection be performed within

6,000 landings or 12,600 flight hours,

whichever occurs first, after the last

inspection performed in accordance with

paragraph (a) or (c) of AD 93–23–07, or

within 500 landings after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later.

To prevent crack formation in the sealing

angles, which could rupture and lead to

subsequent crack formation in the bottom

skin of the wing, and resultant reduced

structural integrity of the center spar section

of the wing, accomplish the following:

Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD

93–23–07

(a) For those airplanes on which the

modification described in Airbus Repair

Drawing R571–40588 has not been

accomplished: Perform high frequency eddy

current (HFEC) inspections to detect cracks

in the center spar sealing angles adjacent to

Rib 8, in accordance with Airbus Industrie

Service Bulletin No. A300–57–6027, dated
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 166 /Thursday, August 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 45691

October 8, 1991, or Revision 2, dated

September 13, 1994, at the time specified in

paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this AD,

as applicable. After the effective date of this

AD, only Revision 2 of the service bulletin

shall be used.

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated

less than 12,000 total landings as of January

5, 1994 (the effective date of AD 93–23–07,

amendment 39–8741): Prior to the

accumulation of 12,000 total landings or

within 2,000 landings after January 5, 1994,

whichever occurs later; and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 6,000 landings until

the inspections required by paragraph (c) of

this AD are accomplished.

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated

12,000 total landings or more, but less than

14,000 total landings as of January 5, 1994:

Prior to the accumulation of 14,000 total

landings or within 2,000 landings after

January 5, 1994, whichever occurs later; and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000

landings until the inspections required by

paragraph (c) of this AD are accomplished.

(3) For airplanes that have accumulated

14,000 total landings or more as of January

5, 1994: Prior to the accumulation of 500

landings after January 5, 1994; and thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 6,000 landings until

the inspections required by paragraph (c) of

this AD are accomplished.

(b) For those airplanes on which the

modification specified in Airbus Repair

Drawing R571–40588 has been

accomplished: Prior to the accumulation of

15,000 landings after accomplishing the

modification, or within 500 landings after

January 5, 1994, whichever occurs later,

perform a HFEC inspection to detect cracks

in the center spar sealing angles adjacent to

Rib 8, inaccordance with Airbus Industrie

Service Bulletin No. A300–57–6027, dated

October 8, 1991, or Revision 2, dated

September 13, 1994. Thereafter, repeat this

inspection at intervals not to exceed 6,000

landings until the inspection required by

paragraph (d) of this AD is accomplished.

New Requirements of this AD

(c) For those airplanes on which Airbus

Modification 08609H5276 (Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–57–6033), or the modification

specified in Airbus Repair Drawing R571–

40588 or R571–40942, has not been

accomplished: Perform HFEC inspections to

detect cracks in the center spar sealing angles

adjacent to Rib 8, in accordance with Airbus

Industrie Service Bulletin A300–57–6027,

Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994, at the

later of the times specified in paragraph (c)(1)

or (c)(2), as applicable, and paragraph (c)(3)

of this AD. Repeat the inspection thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 6,000 landings or

12,600 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Accomplishment of these inspections

terminates the requirements of paragraph (a)

of this AD.

(1) For airplanes on which HFEC

inspections have not been accomplished in

accordance with AD 93–23–07: Prior to the

accumulation of 10,600 total landings or

22,260 total flight hours, whichever occurs

first.

(2) For airplanes on which HFEC

inspections have been accomplished in

accordance with AD 93–23–07: Within 6,000

landings or 12,600 flight hours, whichever

occurs first, after accomplishment of the last

inspection performed in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(3) Within 500 landings after the effective

date of this AD.

(d) For those airplanes on which Airbus

Modification 08609H5276 (Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–57–6033) or the modification

specified in Airbus Repair Drawing R571–

40588 or R571–40942 has been

accomplished: Perform a HFEC inspection to

detect cracks in the center spar sealing angles

adjacent to Rib 8, in accordance with Airbus

Industrie Service Bulletin No. A300–57–

6027, Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994,

at the later of the times specified in

paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2), as applicable, and

paragraph (d)(3) of this AD. Repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 6,000 landings or 12,600 flight hours,

whichever occurs first. Accomplishment of

this inspection terminates the requirements

of paragraph (b) of this AD.

(1) For airplanes on which HFEC

inspections have not been accomplished in

accordance with AD 93–23–07: Prior to the

accumulation of 13,200 landings or 27,720

flight hours, whichever occurs first, after

accomplishing the modification.

(2) For airplanes on which HFEC

inspections have been accomplished in

accordance with AD 93–23–07: Within 6,000

landings or 12,600 flight hours, whichever

occurs first, after accomplishment of the last

inspection performed in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD.

(3) Within 500 landings after the effective

date of this AD.

(e) If any crack is found in the center spar

sealing angles, including cracking entirely

through the sealing angle, during the

inspections required by paragraph (a), (b), (c),

or (d) of this AD: Prior to further flight,

replace the pair of sealing angles on the

affected wing and cold work the attachment

holes, in accordance with Airbus Repair

Drawing R571–40589 or R571–40942; and

perform the repetitive inspections required

by paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD, as

applicable.

(f) If any sealing angle is found to be

cracked through entirely during the

inspections required by paragraph (a), (b), (c),

or (d) of this AD: Prior to further flight,

perform additional inspections to detect

cracks in the adjacent butt strap and skin

panel, in accordance with paragraph 2.B.(5)

of Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300–

57–6027, Revision 2, dated September 13,

1994. If any crack is found in the adjacent

butt strap and skin panel, prior to further

flight, repair in accordance with Airbus

Repair Drawing R571–40611.

(g)(1) An alternative method of compliance

or adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

(2) Operators may request an extension of

the compliance times of this AD in

accordance with the ‘‘adjustment for range’’

formula found in paragraph 1(d) of Airbus

Industrie Service Bulletin A300–57–6027,

Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994. The

average flight time per flight cycle in hours

used in this formula should be for an

individual airplane. Average flight time for a

group of airplanes may be used if all

airplanes in the group have flight times

differing by no more than 10 percent. If

compliance times are based on the average

flight time for a group of airplanes, the

individual airplane flight times of the group

must be submitted to the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, for review.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(h) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(i) The inspections shall be done in

accordance with Airbus Industrie Service

Bulletin No. A300–57–6027, dated October 8,

1991; and Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin

A300–57–6027, Revision 2, dated September

13, 1994. Revision 2 of Airbus Industrie

Service Bulletin A300–57–6027 contains the

following list of effective pages:

Page No.

Revision

level

shown

on page

Date shown on page

1–7 .......... 2 September 13, 1994.

8–12 ........ 1 November 24, 1993.

The incorporation by reference of Airbus

Industrie Service Bulletin A300–57–6027,

Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994, was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. The incorporation by

reference of Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin

No. A300–57–6027, including Appendix 1,

dated October 8, 1991, was approved

previously by the Director of the Federal

Register as of January 5, 1994 (58 FR 64112,

December 6, 1993). Copies may be obtained

from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 91–253–

128(B)R1, dated March 1, 1995.

(j) This amendment becomes effective on

October 1, 1998.
45692 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 166 /Thursday, August 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August

19, 1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–22818 Filed 8–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–158–AD; Amendment

39–10720; AD 98–18–04]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aerospatiale

Model SN–601 (Corvette) Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Aerospatiale Model

SN–601 (Corvette) series airplanes, that

requires repetitive inspections to detect

corrosion, cracking, or rupture of the

support arms of the aileron balance

weights; and repair, if necessary.

Accomplishment of the repair

terminates the repetitive inspection

requirement of this AD. This

amendment is prompted by issuance of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information by a foreign civil

airworthiness authority. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent corrosion, cracking, or rupture

of the support arms of the aileron

balance weights, which may cause

reduced flutter damping or jamming of

the aileron, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Effective October 1, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of October 1,

1998.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Aerospatiale, 316 Route de

Bayonne, 31060 Toulouse, Cedex 03,

France. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to all Aerospatiale

Model SN–601 (Corvette) series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on July 7, 1998 (63 FR 36626).

That action proposed to require

repetitive inspections to detect

corrosion, cracking, or rupture of the

support arms of the aileron balance

weights; and repair, if necessary.

Accomplishment of the repair

terminates the repetitive inspection

requirement of this AD.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were submitted in response

to the proposal or the FAA’s

determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

The FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule as proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 2 airplanes of

U.S. registry will be affected by this AD,

that it will take approximately 2 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

required inspection, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the inspection required by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $240,

or $120 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

98–18–04 Aerospatiale: Amendment 39–

10720. Docket 98–NM–158–AD.

Applicability: All Model SN–601 (Corvette)

series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent corrosion, cracking, or rupture

of the support arms of the aileron balance

weights, which may cause reduced flutter

damping or jamming of the aileron, and

consequent reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following: