### 34576 Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 122 /Thursday, June 25, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

HSTCU having part number 601R92301–5,
601R92301–7, or 601R92301–951.

(d)(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, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, New York ACO.

(d)(2) Alternative methods of compliance approved previously in accordance with AD 95–13–04, amendment 39–9325, are approved as alternative methods of compliance with this AD.

Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(e) 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.

(f) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Bombardier Service Bulletin S.B. 601R– 27–053, Revision B, dated February 21, 1997. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Bombardier, Inc., Canadair Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre-ville, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Canadian airworthiness directive CF–95– 08R2, dated July 23, 1996.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on July 30, 1998.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 15,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 98–16448 Filed 6–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–78–AD; Amendment 39–10614; AD 98–13–23]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300–600 Series Airplanes

AGENCY : Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION : Final rule.

SUMMARY : This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A300–600 series airplanes, that requires inspections to detect corrosion and cracking of the lower horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron, the corner fitting, the skin strap, and the outer skin; and repair, if necessary. This amendment is prompted by cracking
found at the lower corner of the horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron during a full scale fatigue test. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent such cracking,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the horizontal-stabilizer cutout longeron.

DATES : Effective July 30, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 30,
1998.

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) to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A300–600 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on December 12, 1995 (60 FR 63665). That action proposed to require repetitive visual and eddy current inspections to detect corrosion and fatigue cracking of the lower horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron, the corner fitting, the skin strap, and the skin between FR87 and
FR89 and between STGR24 and STGR27, left-hand and right-hand. That action also proposed to require repetitive rotating probe inspections to
detect cracks in the fastener holes at the same locations; and repair or certain follow-on actions, if necessary.

Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to the
comments received.

Support for the Proposal

One commenter has no objection to the proposed rule.

Request to Revise Compliance Time to Permit ‘‘Adjustment of Range’’

One commenter, the manufacturer, requests that the compliance times for the inspection threshold and the repetitive intervals proposed be revised
to follow the recommendations of the Airbus service bulletin specified in the proposed rule. That service bulletin specifies that inspection thresholds and intervals may be adjusted based on certain average flight operations of the airplane. The commenter states that this approach was approved by the Direction
Ge

 ́ ne

 ́ rale de l’Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, in its approval of the service
bulletin.

The FAA does not concur that the compliance times should be revised. As explained in the proposal, the FAA has determined that such adjustments may
not address the unsafe condition in a timely manner. In developing appropriate compliance times for the proposed rule, the FAA considered not only the manufacturer’s recommendation, but the safety implications involved with cracking of the horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron and the number of landings that had been accumulated when cracking was detected. Therefore, this AD does not permit such adjustments, and no change to the compliance times of the final rule has been made. However, operators may request approval of an adjustment of the compliance time under the provisions of paragraph (f) of this AD, provided that such adjustment provides an acceptable level of safety.

Remove Touch-and-Go Landings From the Total Number of Landings

This same commenter requests that touch-and-go landings not be included in calculating the total number of

### 34577 Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 122 /Thursday, June 25, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

airplane landings. The commenter points out that most of the relevant fatigue parameters for touch-and-go flights are less significant than for conditions of normal flight. Further, thecommenter states that including touchand-go’s in the total landing count for an individual airplane is too conservative, considering the high penalty of counting each touch-and-go.

The FAA does not concur. Fatigue cracking has been found at the lower
corner of the horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron. Since fatigue cracking in that area is aggravated by landing, the FAA finds that all touch-and-go landings must be counted in determining the total number of landings between consecutive inspections.

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 as proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 2 Airbus Model A300–600 series airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 268 work hours per airplane to accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $32,160, or $16,080 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 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:

98–13–23 Airbus Industrie: Amendment
39–10614. Docket 95–NM–78–AD. Applicability: Model A300–600 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification No. 6146 has not been installed, 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 use the authority provided in paragraph (f) of this AD to request approval from the FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions necessary to
address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron due to fatigue cracking, accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 18,000 total landings, or within 2,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Perform a visual and an eddy current inspection to detect cracks and/or corrosion
of Areas 1 and 2 of the lower horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron, as defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995. Perform the inspections in accordance with the service bulletin.

(b) Perform a visual and an eddy current inspection to detect cracks and/or corrosion of Area 3 of the lower horizontal stabilizer cutout longeron, as defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995. Perform these inspections in accordance with the service bulletin, at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 24,000 total landings, but not before the accumulation of 18,000 total landings; or

(2) Prior to the accumulation of 2,000 landings after the effective date of this AD.

(c) If no cracking is detected during any inspection required by this AD: Prior to further flight, cold work and ream the vacated fastener holes, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995; and perform the requirements of paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1) For airplanes on which no cracking is found in Area 1 or 2: Repeat the inspections required by paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles.

(2) For airplanes on which no cracking is
found in Area 3: Perform the various followon actions in accordance with the service bulletin. (The follow-on actions include installing a new corner fitting, installing a new longeron, and performing a cold working procedure.) After accomplishment of these follow-on actions, no further action is required by this AD.

(d) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required by this AD, perform the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1) If any cracking is found in Area 1 or 3 that is within the limits specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995: Prior to further flight, repair in accordance with the service bulletin.

(2) If any cracking is found in Area 2, or if any cracking is found in any area and that cracking is beyond the limits described in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995: Prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

(e) If any corrosion is detected during any inspection required by this AD, prior to further flight, repair the corrosion in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995.

(f) 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. 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.

Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of

### 34578 Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 122 /Thursday, June 25, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116.

(g) 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.

(h) Except as provided by paragraph (d)(2) of this AD, the actions shall be done in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6042, Revision 1, dated February 20, 1995. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 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 3: The subject of this AD is addressed
in French airworthiness directive 94–269– 171(B)R1, dated March 29, 1995.

(i) This amendment becomes effective on July 30, 1998.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 15,
1998.
Darrell M. Pederson, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 98–16472 Filed 6–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–ANE–15–AD; Amendment 39–10612; AD 98–13–21]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Limited, Aero Division-Bristol, S.N.E.C.M.A Olympus 593 Series Turbojet Engines

AGENCY : Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION : Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY : This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to Rolls-Royce Limited, Aero Division-Bristol, S.N.E.C.M.A Olympus 593 series turbojet engines. This action requires initial and repetitive visual inspections of the low pressure (LP) shaft signal system for cable wear and refurbishment of the LP shaft signal system at when the cable is found frayed, or at every engine shop visit,
whichever occurs first. This amendment is prompted by reports of frayed rear cables in the LP shaft signal system. The actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent LP shaft signal system failure, which could result in an LP turbine overspeed, burst, uncontained engine failure, and damage
to the aircraft in the event of a LP shaft
failure.

DATES : Effective July 10, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 10,
1998.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules
Docket must be received on or before August 24, 1998.

ADDRESSES : Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–ANE– 15–AD, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. Comments may also be sent via the Internet usingthe following address: ‘‘9-adengineprop@faa.dot.gov’’. Comments
sent via the Internet must contain the docket number in the subject line.

The service information referenced inthis AD may be obtained from RollsRoyce, PO Box 3, Filton, Bristol BS12 7QE, England; telephone 01–17–979– 1234, fax 01–17–979–7575. This information may be examined at the FAA, New England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Jason Yang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803– 5299; telephone (781) 238–7747, fax (781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which is the airworthiness authority for the United Kingdom (UK), recently notified the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that an unsafe condition may exist on Rolls-Royce Limited (R–R), Aero Division-Bristol, S.N.E.C.M.A. Olympus 593 Mk. 610–14–28 turbojet engines. The CAA advises that they have received reports of frayed rear cables in the low pressure (LP) shaft signal system. The LP shaft signal system prevents the LP turbine disk from bursting in the event of LP shaft failure by cutting off the fuel when excess twist
is detected in the shaft. The rear cable
activates the fuel shut-off valve. This condition, if not corrected, could result in LP shaft signal system failure, which could result in an LP turbine overspeed, burst, uncontained engine failure, and damage to the aircraft in the event of a LP shaft failure.

There are currently no affected engines operated on aircraft of U.S. registry. This AD, then, is necessary to require accomplishment of the required actions for engines installed on aircraft currently of foreign registry that may someday be imported into the U.S or which may be operated in U.S. airspace. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that notice and prior opportunity for comment are unnecessary and good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

R–R has issued Service Bulletin (SB) No. OL.593–76–9039–71, Revision 2, dated July 23, 1997, that specifies procedures for visual inspection of the LP shaft signal system for cable wear and refurbishment of the LP shaft signal system. The CAA classified this SB as mandatory and issued AD 009–09–97 in
order to assure the airworthiness of these engines in the UK.

This engine model is manufactured in the UK and is type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the CAA has kept the FAA informed of
the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of the CAA, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United
States.

Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to exist or develop on other engines of the same type design registered in the United States, this AD requires initial and repetitive visual inspections of the LP shaft signal system for cable wear and refurbishment of the LP shaft signal system when the cable is found frayed, or at every engine shop visit, whichever
occurs first. The actions would be required to be accomplished in
accordance with the SB described previously.

Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not