55500 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Additions to the Foreign Margin List

CANADA

EDPER BRASCAN CORPORATION

Class A, no par common

FINLAND

MERITA LTD

A shares, par 5 Finnish marks

RAISON TEHTAAT VAIH OS OY AB

K shares common, par 10 Finnish

marks

FRANCE

GROUPE GTM SA

Ordinary shares, par 50 French francs

JAPAN

CALPIS CO., LTD.

50 par common

MALAYSIA

REKAPACIFIC BERHAD

Ordinary shares, par 1 Malaysian

ringgit

SOUTH AFRICA

ANGLO AMERICAN PLATINUM

CORPORATION LIMITED

Ordinary shares, par 10 South African

rand

UNITED KINGDOM

BILLITON PLC

Ordinary shares, par 50 p

HENDERSON SMALLER COMPANIES

INVESTMENT TRUST

Ordinary shares, par 25 p

NYCOMED AMERSHAM

INTERNATIONAL PLC

Ordinary shares, par 25 p

By order of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, acting by its Director

of the Division of Banking Supervision and

Regulation pursuant to delegated authority

(12 CFR 265.7(f)(10)), October 22, 1997.

William W. Wiles,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–28421 Filed 10–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–CE–17–AD; Amendment 39–

10173; AD 97–22–02]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus

Britten-Norman Ltd. Models BN–2, BN–

2A, BN–2B, and BN–2T Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to Pilatus Britten-Norman Ltd.

(PBN) BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B, and BN–

2T series airplanes. This action requires

modifying the upper engine mounting

brackets on the wing front spar as

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections that were required in AD

84–23–06. AD 84–23–06 is being revised

in a separate action, deleting the Pilatus

BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B, and BN–2T

series airplanes from its applicability.

This AD is prompted by several reports

of cracks in the upper engine mounting

brackets and a new terminating action to

eliminate the repetitive inspections for

Pilatus BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B, and BN–

2T series airplanes. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent the failure of the upper engine

mounting brackets on the wing mounted

engines, which could possibly cause

structural failure of the airplane.

DATES: Effective November 24, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of November

24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

Pilatus Britten-Norman Ltd., Bembridge,

Isle of Wight, United Kingdom PO35

5PR; telephone 44–19–83–872511;

facsimile 44–19–83–873246. This

information may also be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket 96–CE–17–AD, Room 1558, 601

E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,

suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

S. M. Nagarajan, Project Officer, Small

Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, FAA, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64105; telephone (816) 426–6932;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the Issuance of This

AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to Pilatus BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B,

and BN–2T series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

March 10, 1997 (62 FR 10754). The

action proposed to require initially

inspecting the upper engine mounting

brackets on the wing mounted engines

for:

(1) Cracks at the bolt-holes,

(2) Elongation of the bolt holes,

(3) Fretting within the holes,

(4) Cracks at the rivet holes,

(5) Distortion or delamination of the

lugs, and that

(6) The bearings are the correct length

and the bolts are not threadbound.

If there is no evidence of damage or

defects similar to any of the abovementioned items, the proposed AD

would require repetitive inspections at

regular intervals until the accumulation

of 2,000 hours time-in-service after the

effective date of the AD, at which time

the AD would require accomplishing

Pilatus Modification NB/M/1147.

If any damage or defects are found

similar to any of the six items

previously mentioned, this action

would require immediately

accomplishing Pilatus Modification NB/

M/1147. This modification consists of

replacing damaged brackets, bolts, and

bushes with parts of an improved

design. Accomplishing this

modification is considered a terminating

action to the repetitive inspections.

Accomplishment of the AD would be in

accordance with Pilatus Britten-Norman

Service Bulletin No. BN–2/SB.61, Issue

5, dated December 9, 1981.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were received on the

proposed rule or the FAA’s

determination of the cost to the public.

The FAA’s Aging Aircraft Policy

The FAA has determined that reliance

on critical repetitive inspections on

aging commuter-class airplanes carries

an unnecessary safety risk when a

design change exists that could

eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of those critical

inspections. In determining what

inspections are critical, the FAA

considers (1) the safety consequences if

the known problem is not detected

during the inspection; (2) the

probability of the problem not being

detected during the inspection; (3)

whether the inspection area is difficult

to access; and (4) the possibility of

damage to an adjacent structure as a

result of the problem.

These factors have led the FAA to

establish an aging commuter-class

aircraft policy that requires

incorporating a known design change

when it could replace a critical

repetitive inspection.

For Pilatus BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B,

and BN–2T series airplanes, the

manufacturer has incorporated a design

change that would replace damaged

bolts, brackets, and bushes with parts of

improved design, which would
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55501

terminate the repetitive inspections of

the upper engine mounting brackets on

the wing mounted engines required by

AD 84–23–06. It is AD 84–23–06 that

required the repetitive inspections on

the Pilatus BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2B, and

BN–2T series airplanes and the Pilatus

BN–2A MK. 111 series airplanes. A

separate action (Docket 84–CE–18–AD)

is being published concurrently with

this AD, and revises AD 84–23–06 so

that the BN–2A MK.111 series airplanes

will be the only airplanes to which AD

84–23–06 applies.

Based on its aging commuter-class

aircraft policy and after reviewing all

available information, the FAA has

determined that AD action should be

taken to modify the upper engine wing

mounting brackets of the affected

airplanes to eliminate the repetitive

short-interval inspections, and to

prevent failure of the upper engine wing

mounting brackets on wing mounted

engines, which could possibly cause

structural failure of the airplane.

The FAA’s Determination

After careful review of all available

information related to the subject

presented above, the FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for minor

editorial corrections. The FAA has

determined that these minor corrections

will not change the meaning of the AD

and will not add any additional burden

upon the public than was already

proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 112 airplanes

in the U.S. registry will be affected by

the AD, that it will take approximately

37 workhours per airplane to

accomplish the initial inspection and

modification, and that the average labor

rate is approximately $60 an hour. Parts

cost approximately $800 per airplane to

accomplish the modification. Based on

these figures, the total cost impact of the

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$338,240 or $3,020 per airplane. This

figure is based on the initial inspection

and modification only. It does not take

into account the cost for the repetitive

inspections that may be incurred over

the life of the airplane until the

modification is accomplished. The FAA

has no way of determining how many

owners/operators have accomplished

the proposed action and, therefore

assumes that none of the owners/

operators of the affected airplanes have

accomplished the proposed action.

The AD Action’s Impact Utilizing the

FAA’s Aging Commuter Class Aircraft

Policy

The intent of the FAA’s aging

commuter airplane program is to ensure

safe operation of commuter-class

airplanes that are in commercial service

without adversely impacting private

operators. Of the approximately 112

airplanes in the U.S. registry that will be

affected by this AD, the FAA has

determined that approximately 18

percent are operated in scheduled

passenger service by 11 different

operators. A significant number of the

remaining 82 percent are operated in

other forms of air transportation such as

air cargo and air taxi.

This AD allows 2,000 hours time-inservice (TIS) after the effective date of

the AD before mandatory

accomplishment of the design

modification. The average utilization of

the fleet for those airplanes in

commercial commuter service is

approximately 25 to 50 hours TIS per

week. Based on these figures, operators

of commuter-class airplanes involved in

commercial operation will have to

accomplish the modification within 10

to 20 calendar months after the effective

date of the AD. For private owners, who

typically operate between 100 to 200

hours TIS per year, this will allow 5 to

10 years before the modification will be

mandatory.

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 copy of the final

evaluation prepared for this action is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained by contacting 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 a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

97–22–02 Pilatus Britten-Norman LTD.:

Amendment 39–10173; Docket No. 96–

CE–17–AD.

Applicability: Models BN–2 (serial

numbers 1 through 2033), BN–2A and BN–

2B (serial numbers 1 through 2116), and BN–

2T (serial numbers 419, and 2030 through

2033) 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 (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 within the next 500

hours time-in-service (TIS) after the last

inspection required by AD 84–23–06, or

within the next 100 hours TIS after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, unless already accomplished, and

thereafter as indicated in the body of this AD.

To prevent failure of the upper mounting

brackets on both wing mounted engines,

which could cause structural failure of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Inspect the upper mounting brackets,

bolts, and bushes on both wing mounted

engines in accordance with the ‘‘ACTIONInspection’’ section in Pilatus BrittenNorman (Pilatus) Service Bulletin (SB) No.

BN–2/SB.61, Issue 5, dated December 9,

1981, for:

(1) Cracks at the bolt holes,

(2) Elongation of the bolt holes,

(3) Fretting within the bolt holes,

(4) Cracks at the rivet holes,

(5) Distortion or delamination of the lugs,

and
55502 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(6) Incorrect bearing length and

threadbound bolts, b) If the inspection

reveals any evidence of damage or defects

similar to the items in paragraphs (a)(1)

through (a)(6), prior to further flight,

accomplish Pilatus Modification NB/M/1147

by replacing the brackets, bushes, and bolts

with brackets, bushes, and bolts of improved

design in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2, 3,

and 5 of the ‘‘ACTION—Rectification/

Modification’’ section in Pilatus SB No. BN–

2/SB.61, Issue 5, dated December 9, 1981.

(c) If damage or defects are found on just

one of the two brackets on each engine, then

both brackets must be replaced, prior to

further flight, in accordance with paragraph

1 of the ‘‘ACTION—Rectification/

Modification’’ section in Pilatus SB No. BN–

2/SB.61, Issue 5, dated December 9, 1981.

(d) If no damage or defects are found

similar to the items in paragraphs (a)(1)

through (a)(6) of this AD, continue to inspect

at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS, until

the accumulation of 2,000 hours TIS after the

effective date of this AD, at which time

Modification NB/M/1147 must be

accomplished on both upper mounting

brackets on both engines in accordance with

paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the ‘‘ACTION—

Rectification/Modification’’ section of Pilatus

SB No. BN–2/SB.61, Issue 5, dated December

9, 1981.

(e) Accomplishing Modification NB/M/

1147 in the ‘‘ACTION—Rectification/

Modification’’ section of Pilatus SB No. BN–

2/SB.61, Issue 5, dated December 9, 1981, is

considered terminating action to the

repetitive inspections required in paragraph

(d) of this AD.

(f) 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.

(g) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial or repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, FAA, 1201 Walnut,

suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri 64105. The

request shall be forwarded through an

appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from Small Airplane Directorate.

(h) The inspections and modifications

required by this AD shall be done in

accordance with Pilatus Britten-Norman Ltd.

Service Bulletin No. BN–2/SB.61, Issue 5,

dated December 9, 1981. 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 Pilatus Britten-Norman

Ltd., Bembridge, Isle of Wight, United

Kingdom PO35 5PR. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E.

12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(i) This amendment (39–10173) becomes

effective on November 24, 1997.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

October 16, 1997.

Mary Ellen A. Schutt,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28082 Filed 10–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97–AWP–17]

RIN 2120–AA66

Establishment of VOR Federal Airway;

California

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule establishes Federal

Airway 607 (V–607) between

Mendocino, CA, and Arcata, CA. This

airway is necessary to efficiently

manage air traffic operations during

those periods when nonradar

procedures are in use.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, January 1,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken

McElroy, Airspace and Rules Division,

ATA–400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace

Management, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;

telephone: (202) 267–8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

On June 10, 1997, the FAA proposed

to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish

V–607 between Mendocino, CA, and

Arcata, CA (62 FR 33579). This airway

is necessary to efficiently manage air

traffic operations during those periods

when nonradar procedures are in use.

Interested parties were invited to

participate in this rulemaking

proceeding by submitting written

comments on the proposal to the FAA.

No comments objecting to the proposal

were received. Except for editorial

changes and a three degree radial

change in the legal description from

‘‘Arcata, CA, 156° radial’’ to ‘‘Arcata,

CA, 153° radial,’’ this amendment is the

same as that proposed in the notice.

Domestic VOR Federal Airways are

published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA

Order 7400.9E, dated September 10,

1997, and effective September 16, 1997,

which is incorporated by reference in 14

CFR 71.1. The airway listed in this

document will be published

subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

This amendment to part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 71) establishes V–607 between

Mendocino, CA, and Arcata, CA. This

airway is necessary to efficiently

manage air traffic operations during

those periods when nonradar

procedures are in use.

Approximately 25 to 30 air carrier and

general aviation flights per day

currently fly a direct route, which

coincides with the airway. During

nonradar operations, however, all north/

south traffic is forced onto V–27 and

over the Fortuna Very High Frequency

Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air

Navigation (VORTAC). This causes

delays to, and conflicts with, departure

aircraft that would not be necessary

with the airway. Currently, the only

alternative to V–27 is V–494; however,

V–494 has a 13,000-foot mean sea level

minimum en route altitude, and an over

water segment which renders V–494

unsuitable for a large number of general

aviation aircraft. Another problem arises

whenever the Fortuna VORTAC is out of

service since, at such times, both V–27

and V–494 cease to exist. This action

will provide controllers and pilots with

an alternative to V–27 and facilitate air

traffic operations.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation only involves an established

body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are

necessary to keep them operationally

current. It, therefore—(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)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. Since this is a

routine matter that will only affect air

traffic procedures and air navigation, it

is certified that this rule, when

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: