Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66317

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:

SAAB Aircraft AB: Docket 97–NM–289–AD.

Applicability: Model SAAB 2000 series

airplanes, serial numbers –004 through –040

inclusive, 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 (b) 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 hazardous amounts of flame,

fuel, and vapor from entering the passenger

compartment due to unsealed openings in

the firezone bulkhead, which could result in

an uncontrollable fire outside the auxiliary

power unit (APU) firezone compartment,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 400 flight hours or 2 months

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later, apply sealant to the APU

firezone bulkhead, in accordance with Saab

Service Bulletin 2000–53–024, dated

December 2, 1996.

(b) 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.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(c) 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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Swedish airworthiness directive SAD No.

1–105, dated December 4, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 11, 1997.

Gilbert L. Thompson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–32997 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–290–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and

4000 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Fokker Model F28 Mark 1000,

2000, 3000, and 4000 series airplanes.

This proposal would require

replacement of certain hinges on the

forward, center, and aft cargo doors with

improved hinges. This proposal is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent failure of the

cargo door hinges caused by stress

corrosion or fatigue cracks, which could

result in decompression of the airplane,

and possible in-flight separation of the

cargo door.

DATES: Comments must be received by

January 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

290–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Fokker Service B.V., Technical Support

Department, P. O. Box 75047, 1117 ZN

Schiphol Airport, the Netherlands. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 97–NM–290–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

97–NM–290–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the Netherlands, notified the FAA that

an unsafe condition may exist on certain

Fokker Model F28 Mark 1000, 2000,

3000, and 4000 series airplanes. The

RLD advises that it has received reports

of fracturing of the cargo door hinges

due to stress corrosion. Approximately

one-half of the lugs of the fuselagemounted hinge were cracked on one

airplane. In addition, the RLD received

one report of fatigue cracks in the cargo

door hinge on a test article. These

conditions, if not corrected, could result

in failure of the cargo door hinges,

which could result in decompression of

the airplane, and possible in-flight

separation of the cargo door.
66318 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Fokker has issued Service Bulletin

F28/52–110, dated April 7, 1993, which

describes procedures for replacement of

the hinges on the forward, center, and

aft cargo doors with improved hinges

made of a material that is less sensitive

to stress corrosion. Accomplishment of

the replacement is intended to

adequately address the identified unsafe

condition. The RLD classified this

service bulletin as mandatory and

issued Dutch airworthiness directive

93–055 (A), dated April 23, 1993, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in the

Netherlands.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in the Netherlands and

are type certificated for operation in the

United States under the provisions of

§ 21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral

airworthiness agreement, the RLD has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the RLD,

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.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletin described

previously, except as described below.

Differences Between the Proposal and

the Related Service Bulletin

Operators should note that this AD

proposes to require replacement of the

hinges on the forward, center, and aft

cargo doors within 12 months. The

Fokker service bulletin described

previously recommends that the

replacement be accomplished within

four years from the date of issuance of

the service bulletin. However, the FAA

has determined that, due to the safety

implications and consequences

associated with such cracking, a shorter

compliance time of 12 months is

necessary.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 37 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

It would take approximately 62 work

hours per airplane to replace the

forward cargo door hinge, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $5,740 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of this replacement proposed by this AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$350,020, or $9,460 per airplane.

It would take approximately 62 work

hours per airplane to replace the center

cargo door hinge, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. Required

parts would cost approximately $5,650

per airplane. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of this replacement

proposed by this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $346,690, or $9,370

per airplane.

It would take approximately 46 work

hours per airplane to replace the aft

cargo door hinge, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. Required

parts would cost approximately $6,470

per airplane. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of this replacement

proposed by this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $341,510, or $9,230

per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are 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 proposed herein

would 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

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, 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 draft

regulatory 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, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend 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:

Fokker: Docket 97–NM–290–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 1000, 2000,

3000, and 4000 series airplanes; serial

numbers 11003 through 11241 inclusive,

11991, and 11992; 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 (b) 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 failure of the cargo door hinges

caused by stress corrosion and/or fatigue

cracks, which could result in decompression

of the airplane, and possible in-flight

separation of the cargo door; accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace the hinges on the

forward, center, and aft belly cargo doors

with improved hinges in accordance with

Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3, as applicable, of

the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker

Service Bulletin F28/52–110, dated April 7,

1993.

(b) 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,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66319

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.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Dutch airworthiness directive 93–055 (A),

dated April 23, 1993.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 11, 1997.

Gilbert L. Thompson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–32996 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY

CORPORATION

29 CFR Part 4022

RIN 1212–AA87

PBGC Recoupment and

Reimbursement of Benefit

Overpayments and Underpayments

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation proposes to amend its

regulation governing recoupment of

benefit overpayments in trusteed plans

to stop the reduction of monthly

benefits under its actuarial recoupment

method once the amount of the benefit

overpayment is repaid. The amendment

also makes other related changes.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before January 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

the Office of the General Counsel,

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,

1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC

20005–4026, or delivered to Suite 340 at

the above address. Comments also may

be sent by Internet e-mail to

reg.comments@pbgc.gov. Comments

will be available for inspection at the

PBGC’s Communications and Public

Affairs Department in Suite 240 at the

above address during normal business

hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General

Counsel, or James L. Beller, Attorney,

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,

Office of the General Counsel, Suite 340,

1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC

20005–4026, 202–326–4024. For TTY/

TDD users, call the Federal relay service

toll free at 1–800–877–8339 and ask to

be connected to 202–325–4024.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Some

participants and beneficiaries in PBGCtrusteed plans receive benefit payments

in excess of their entitlements under

Title IV of ERISA after plan termination

and before the PBGC determines their

benefit entitlements. Under the PBGC’s

current recoupment regulation, unless a

participant or beneficiary elects to repay

a benefit overpayment in a single

payment, the overpayment is recouped

through a permanent actuarial reduction

in future benefit payments.

When overpayments are made,

recipients are generally unaware that

they are receiving amounts in excess of

their entitlements. In effect,

overpayments are unsolicited loans.

Many participants and beneficiaries are

unable to afford to repay the

overpayment in a single payment and

thus cannot avoid permanent actuarial

reductions. Participant and beneficiary

inquiries reflect their difficulty

understanding why the PBGC would

continue to reduce their monthly benefit

beyond the time the PBGC has fully

recouped the amount of the

overpayment.

The PBGC proposes to revise the

regulation to provide that recoupment

will cease when the amount of the

overpayment is repaid. This will help to

minimize hardship to participants and

beneficiaries as well as to cut down the

number of participant and beneficiary

inquiries about recoupment, thereby

reducing burden both on them and the

PBGC. The amendment also gives the

PBGC flexibility to waive recoupment of

de minimis amounts and to accept

repayment ahead of the recoupment

schedule, and modifies the rules

governing calculation of net

overpayments and underpayments.

E.O. 12866 and the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

The PBGC has determined that this

proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under the criteria set

forth in Executive Order 12866.

This rule affects only individuals.

Therefore, the PBGC certifies that, if

adopted, the amendment will not have

a significant economic effect on a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, as provided in section

605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

sections 603 and 604 do not apply.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4022

Pension insurance, Pensions.

For the reasons set forth above, the

PBGC proposes to amend 29 CFR Part

4022, subpart E as follows:

PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN

TERMINATED SINGLE EMPLOYER

PLANS

1. The authority citation for part 4022

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b,

1341(c)(3)(D) and 1344.

2. In § 4022.81, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the last two

sentences, adding a new phrase, and

paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) in their

place, and revising paragraphs (c) and

(d)(2) to read as follows:

§ 4022.81 General rules.

(a) Recoupment of benefit

overpayments. * * *

Notwithstanding the previous

sentence, the PBGC may, in its

discretion—

(1) Decide not to recoup net

overpayments that it determines to be

de minimis; and

(2) Recover overpayments by methods

other than recouping in accordance with

the rules in this subpart. The PBGC will

not normally do so unless net benefits

paid after the termination date exceed

those to which a participant or

beneficiary is entitled under the terms

of the plan before any reductions under

subpart D.

* * * * *

(c) Payments subject to recoupment or

reimbursement. The PBGC shall recoup

net overpayments made on or after the

latest of the proposed termination date,

the termination date, or, if no notice of

intent to terminate was issued, the date

on which proceedings to terminate the

plan are instituted pursuant to section

4042 of ERISA, and shall reimburse net

underpayments made on or after the

termination date.

(d) Interest. * * *

(2) Receipt of both overpayments and

underpayments. If both benefit

overpayments and benefit

underpayments are made with respect

to a participant, the PBGC shall compare

the net overpayment or underpayment

calculated without interest to the net

overpayment or underpayment

calculated with interest. (The interest

calculation shall be made by charging or

crediting interest from the first day of

the month after the date of payment to

the first day of the month in which

recoupment begins.) Of these two net

amounts, the PBGC shall use the one

more favorable to the participant or