5746 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(f) The actions shall be done in accordance

with CASA Flight Operation Instructions

COM 212–245, Revision 1, dated November

16, 1993; and CASA Service Bulletin SB–

212–27–47, Revision 1, dated April 13, 1994,

which contains the following list of effective

pages:

Page number

Revision

level

shown on

page

Date shown

on page

1–5, 8, 14–17, 19–

23, 26, 34, 35.

1 ............ April 13,

1994.

6, 7, 9–13, 18, 24,

25, 27–33.

Original .. September

14, 1993.

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 Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.,

Getafe, Madrid, Spain. 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.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

March 14, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

29, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–2674 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–148–AD; Amendment

39–9919; AD 97–03–14]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737–

300 series airplanes, that requires an

inspection to detect fatigue cracking,

base trim, and upper flange over-trim of

the pulley brackets of the aileron control

cables. This amendment also requires, if

necessary, replacement of the pulley

brackets with new pulley brackets, and

replacement of the two button-head

rivets with flush-head rivets. This

amendment is prompted by a review of

the design of the flight control systems

on Model 737 series airplanes. The

actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent fatigue cracking or

fracturing of the pulley brackets, which

could result in slack in the cables and

consequent reduced ability of the

flightcrew to control the aileron.

DATES: Effective March 14, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 14,

1997.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. 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: Don

Kurle, Senior Engineer, Systems and

Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (206) 227–2798;

fax (206) 227–1181.

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 Boeing

Model 737–300 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

August 28, 1996 (61 FR 44237). That

action proposed to require a visual

inspection to detect fatigue cracking,

base trim, and upper flange over-trim of

the pulley brackets of the aileron control

cables. That action also proposed to

require, if necessary, replacement of the

pulley brackets with new pulley

brackets, and replacement of the two

button-head rivets with flush-head

rivets.

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 supports the

proposed rule.

Request To Revise Statement of

Findings of Critical Design Review

Team

One commenter requests the second

paragraph of the Discussion section that

appeared in the preamble to the

proposed rule be revised to accurately

reflect the findings of the Critical Design

Review (CDR) team. The commenter

asks that the FAA delete the one

sentence in that paragraph, which read:

‘‘The recommendations of the team

include various changes to the design of

the flight control systems of these

airplanes, as well as correction of

certain design deficiencies.’’ The

commenter suggests that the following

sentences should be added: ‘‘The team

did not find any design issues that

could lead to a definite cause of the

accidents that gave rise to this effort.

The recommendations of the team

include various changes to the design of

the flight control systems of these

airplanes, as well as incorporation of

certain design improvements in order to

enhance its already acceptable level of

safety.’’

The FAA does not find that a revision

to this final rule in the manner

suggested by the commenter is

necessary, since the Discussion section

of a proposed rule does not reappear in

a final rule. The FAA acknowledges that

the CDR team did not find any design

issue that could lead to a definite cause

of the accidents that gave rise to this

effort. However, as a result of having

conducted the CDR of the flight control

systems on Boeing Model 737 series

airplanes, the team indicated that there

are a number of recommendations that

should be addressed by the FAA for

each of the various models of the Model

737.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

The Air Transport Association (ATA)

of America, on behalf of one of its

members, requests that the proposed

compliance time be extended from 18

months to four years. The ATA member

indicates that the consequences of

bracket failure are minimal since a dual

control path exists. The commenter

adds that, even in the event of total

cable input failure on one side of the

control path, control of the aircraft

would not be lost. The commenter

points out that the referenced service

bulletin states that resultant cable slack

will cause sluggish aileron control,

which should be apparent to the

flightcrew in the event of failure of a

bracket. The commenter also states that

the adoption of an 18-month

compliance time would pose an

unnecessary burden on operators, and

that a compliance time of four years is

adequate to address the unsafe

condition. The ATA states that it does

not view the identified unsafe condition

as an airworthiness concern. However,

in the interest of enhancing safety, the

ATA requests that the rule be adopted

with the extended compliance time.

The FAA does not concur. The FAA

acknowledges that a dual control path

exists, and that in the event of failure of

a bracket, the second load path will
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5747

allow operation of the aileron. However,

under heavy flightcrew workload

conditions, the ability of the flightcrew

to control the airplane would be

reduced; the FAA has determined that

this poses a potential unsafe condition

that must be corrected in a timely

manner.

In developing an appropriate

compliance time for the proposed

inspection, the FAAs’ intent is that it be

performed during a regularly scheduled

maintenance visit for the majority of the

affected fleet when the airplanes would

be located at a base where special

equipment and trained personnel would

be readily available, if necessary. The

FAA finds that 18 months corresponds

closely to the interval representative of

most of the affected operators’ normal

maintenance schedules. Additionally,

since the service bulletin cited in this

AD was issued in 1988, the FAA

anticipates that a majority of the pulley

brackets and rivets that require

replacement have already been

replaced. Finally, in light of the fact that

the required actions take only one work

hour per airplane to accomplish, the

FAA is puzzled by the commenter’s

assertion that the 18-month compliance

time imposes an ‘‘unnecessary burden’’

on affected operations. The FAA

considers that an 18-month compliance

time is appropriate and will provide an

acceptable level of safety.

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

There are approximately 262 Model

737–300 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 169 airplanes of U.S.

registry will be affected by this AD, that

it will take approximately 1 work hour

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

$10,140, or $60 per airplane.

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.

Should an operator be required to

accomplish the replacement of pulley

brackets and rivets, it will take

approximately 15 work hours per

airplane to accomplish those actions, at

an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts will cost

approximately $713 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of any

necessary replacement action is

estimated to be $1,613 per airplane.

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:

97–03–14 Boeing: Amendment 39–9919.

Docket 96–NM–148–AD.

Applicability: Model 737–300 series

airplanes; as listed in Boeing Service Bulletin

737–27–1154, dated August 25, 1988;

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 fatigue cracking or fracturing of

the pulley brackets, which could result in

slack in the cables and consequent reduced

ability of the flightcrew to control the aileron,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 18 months after the effective

date of this AD: Perform a visual inspection

to detect fatigue cracking, base trim, or upper

flange over-trim of the pulley brackets, part

number (P/N) 65C25555–3, 65C25555–501,

or 69–73479–1, of the aileron control cables,

in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

737–27–1154, dated August 25, 1988.

(b) If any cracking or over-trim of the

pulley brackets is detected: Prior to further

flight, replace the pulley brackets with new

pulley brackets; and replace the two existing

button-head rivets with flush-head rivets; in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

737–27–1154, dated August 25, 1988.

(c) 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, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(d) 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.

(e) The inspection and replacement shall

be done in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 737–27–1154, dated August 25,

1988. 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 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. 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.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

March 14, 1997.
5748 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

29, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–2675 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–57–AD; Amendment

39–9922; AD 97–03–17]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747 and 757 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Boeing Model 747 and

757 series airplanes, that requires

repetitive visual inspections to detect

discrepancies of the wire terminal

assembly, electrical connector, and wire

insulation on the fuel pump; and

replacement of the fuel pump with a

new fuel pump, if necessary. This

amendment also requires repetitive

insulation resistance tests of the fuel

pump wiring. This amendment is

prompted by reports of fuel leaks at the

fuel boost and override/jettison pumps

due to corrosion. The actions specified

by this AD are intended to prevent such

a fuel leakage, which could result in a

fire at the location of the affected fuel

pump.

DATES: Effective March 14, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 14,

1997.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. 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: G.

Michael Collins, Aerospace Engineer,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (206) 227–2689;

fax (206) 227–1181.

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 Boeing Model

747 and 757 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

August 14, 1996 (61 FR 42195). That

action proposed to require a visual

inspection to detect discrepancies of the

wire terminal assembly, electrical

connector, and wire insulation on the

fuel pump; and replacement of the fuel

pump with a new fuel pump, if

necessary. That action also proposed to

require repetitive insulation resistance

tests of the fuel pump wiring.

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 supports the

proposed AD.

Request To Allow Credit for Use of

Previous Versions of Service Bulletins

Several commenters request that the

proposal be revised to provide credit to

those operators who have already

initiated the inspections in accordance

with the original versions of Boeing

Service Bulletins 747–28A2194 and 757

28A0043. One of these commenters,

states that Revision 1 of both of these

service bulletins, which are referenced

in the proposal, contain essentially the

same inspection and test procedures of

the subject fuel pumps as is contained

the original versions.

The FAA concurs partially with the

commenters’ request:

The FAA finds that both the original

version and Revision 1 of Boeing

Service Bulletin 757 28A0043, which is

applicable to Model 757 series

airplanes, contain essentially identical

inspection procedures. Therefore,

operators of those airplanes will be

given credit for any inspections

conducted in accordance with the

original version of the service bulletin

accomplished prior to the effective date

of this AD. The final rule has been

revised to indicate this.

However, the FAA finds that Revision

1 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747–

28A2194, which is applicable to Model

747 series airplanes, is substantively

different from the original version, in

that Revision 1 adds a continuity check

of the pin 4 bonding strap internal to the

pump (the pump ground wire).

Although the manufacturer asserts that

this continuity check ‘‘does not affect

the result of the key insulation

resistance test which determines the

condition of the pump connector,’’ the

FAA maintains that the continuity

check is an important step, without

which the resistance test cannot be

considered adequate. Therefore,

operators who previously have

performed the resistance tests in

accordance with the original version of

that service bulletin will not be granted

credit for those tests as compliance with

the applicable requirements of this AD.

Request To Clarify Applicability of

Requirements to New Airplanes

One commenter requests that the

proposal be revised to clarify what

inspection actions would be required of

new airplanes that are delivered after

the effective date of the AD. The

commenter states that the proposal is

not clear whether the AD applies to

these new airplanes or not, and, if it

does apply, when the first inspection is

required.

The FAA does not consider that any

further clarification of the applicability

of the AD is necessary. The applicability

statement of the AD clearly indicates

that it is applicable to ‘‘all Model 747

and 757 airplanes.’’ This includes

airplanes delivered now or in the future;

it is not limited to any range of existing

airplanes. Since the configuration of the

subject area on all of these airplanes,

from the earliest manufactured to the

most recent, is similar, all are subject to

the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD.

To clarify the commenter’s concern as

to when the first inspection of new

airplanes is required, the FAA points

out that any airplane that is

manufactured and/or delivered after 120

days after the effective date of this AD,

will have to be inspected in accordance

with the AD prior to its delivery, as

required by the Federal Aviation

Regulations (FAR). The AD stipulates in

its compliance provisions that the

actions are required at the time

specified in the AD, ‘‘unless [those

actions have been] accomplished

previously.’’ The inspection of the

pumps that is conducted previous to the

delivery of the new airplanes is

considered to be the initial inspection

required by the AD.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

for Initial Inspection

Several commenters request that the

proposal be revised to extend the

proposed compliance time of 120 days

for the initial inspection to as much as

9 months. Most of these commenters are

airline operators, and request the

extension in order to accommodate the

inspection during their regular

maintenance schedules. One of these