Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7729

later, perform an eddy current rotating probe

inspection to detect fatigue cracking in the

fastener holes of the outer frame flanges of

left and right fuselage frames 37 through 41,

adjacent to Stringer 23, in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1026,

dated August 5, 1994.

Note 2: Prior to the effective date of this

AD, accomplishment of any modification in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–53–1025, dated August 5, 1994, is

considered acceptable for compliance with

the modification requirements of paragraphs

(b), (c)(1)(i), (c)(2) and (d) of this AD.

(b) If the inspection required by paragraph

(a) of this AD detects no cracking in any hole:

Prior to the accumulation of 6,000 landings

after this inspection, modify each hole in

accordance with Paragraph 2.B.(5) of Airbus

Service Bulletin A320–53–1025, Revision 1,

dated November 24, 1994. Thereafter, no

further action is required by this AD.

(c) If the inspection required by paragraph

(a) of this AD detects any cracking in no more

than one hole per frame cap, accomplish the

requirements of paragraph (c) (1) and (c)(2)

of this AD:

(1) Prior to further flight, repair this

cracked hole and conduct another rotating

probe inspection of this hole to detect

cracking, in accordance with Paragraph

2.B.(6) of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–

1025, Revision 1, dated November 24, 1994.

(i) If no cracking of this repaired hole is

detected: Prior to further flight, modify this

hole in accordance with Paragraph 2.B.(6)(c)

of this service bulletin. Thereafter, no further

action with regard to this hole is required by

this AD.

(ii) If any cracking of this repaired hole is

detected: Prior to further flight, repair this

hole in a manner approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Thereafter,

no further action with regard to this hole is

required by this AD.

(2) Prior to the accumulation of 6,000

landings after the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD; modify all other

holes in accordance with Paragraph 2.B.(5) of

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–53–1025,

Revision 1, dated November 24, 1994.

Thereafter, no further action is required by

this AD with respect to these holes.

(d) If the inspection required by paragraph

(a) of this AD detects any cracking in more

than one hole per frame cap, or if this

inspection detects any cracking in any frame:

Prior to further flight, repair the discrepant

area in a manner approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113; and

modify all other holes in accordance with

Paragraph 2.B.(5) of Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–53–1025, Revision 1, dated November

24, 1994. Thereafter, no further action is

required by this AD.

(e) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

12, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–4101 Filed 2–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–222–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 727 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: This action withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking that

proposed a new airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to all Boeing Model

727 series airplanes. That action would

have required inspections to detect

loose attach fitting bolts of the door

actuator of the main landing gear (MLG),

inspections to determine whether

serrations are fully mated, and various

follow-on corrective actions. It also

would have provided operators the

option of terminating all of the

requirements of the AD either by

replacing the aluminum rib fitting with

a new steel rib fitting, or by modifying

the rib fitting assembly and performing

various follow-on actions. The

requirements of that proposed AD were

intended to prevent an airplane from

landing with one MLG partially

extended. Since the issuance of the

NPRM, the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) has issued

separate rulemaking to require these

same actions. Accordingly, the proposed

rule is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Walter Sippel, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; telephone (206) 227–2774;

fax (206) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

add a new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Boeing Model 727

series airplanes, was published in the

Federal Register as a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) on April 1, 1996

(61 FR 14269). The NPRM would have

revised AD 93–01–14, amendment 39–

8468 (58 FR 5574, January 22, 1993). It

would have continued to require the

actions that were originally mandated

by AD 93–01–14, including: inspections

to detect loose attach fitting bolts of the

door actuator of the main landing gear

(MLG), inspections to determine

whether serrations are fully mated, and

various follow-on corrective actions.

The NPRM would have added the

option of terminating all of the

requirements of the AD either by

replacing the aluminum rib fitting with

a new steel rib fitting, or by modifying

the rib fitting assembly and performing

various follow-on actions.

That action was originally prompted

by reports of loose attach fitting bolts of

the door actuator of the MLG. The

requirements of the proposed AD were

intended to prevent an airplane from

landing with one MLG partially

extended.

Actions that Occurred Since the NPRM

Was Issued

Since the issuance of that NPRM, the

FAA has issued AD 97–02–09,

amendment 39–9894 (62 FR 3988,

January 28, 1997), which supersedes

both AD 93–01–14 as well as AD 90–02–

19 [amendment 39–6433 (55 FR 601,

January 8, 1990)]. It requires:

1. Repetitive eddy current or dye

penetrant inspections to detect cracking

of an expanded area of the actuator rib

fitting,

2. Inspections to detect loose attach

fitting bolts of the door actuator,

3. Inspections to determine whether

fitting serrations are fully mated,

4. and various follow-on corrective

actions.

It also provides an optional

terminating action for the inspections,

which consists of replacing the

aluminum rib fitting with a new steel

rib fitting.

That AD was prompted by a report of

a fractured rib fitting that had been

reworked previously in accordance with

one of the existing AD’s. The actions

specified by AD 97–02–09 are intended

to prevent damage to the airplane

caused by a failure of the landing gear

to extend due to a fractured rib fitting.

FAA’s Conclusions

Because AD 97–02–09 now

incorporates, as part of its required

actions, the same actions that were

proposed in Docket 95-NM–222-AD, the

FAA finds that the previously proposed
7730 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules

action is no longer necessary.

Accordingly, the NPRM is hereby

withdrawn.

Withdrawal of this NPRM constitutes

only such action, and does not preclude

the agency from issuing another notice

in the future, nor does it commit the

agency to any course of action in the

future.

Regulatory Impact

Since this action only withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking, it is

neither a proposed nor a final rule and

therefore, is not covered under

Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034,

February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Withdrawal

Accordingly, the notice of proposed

rulemaking, Docket 95–NM–222–AD,

published in the Federal Register on

April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14269), is

withdrawn.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

12, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–4100 Filed 2–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–ANE–24]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal

Inc. and Rajay Inc. Oil Scavenge

Pumps

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

AlliedSignal Inc. oil scavenge pumps,

Part Numbers (P/Ns) 101633–01 and –02

and Rajay Inc. oil scavenge pumps, P/

Ns 1025–1 and –2. This proposal would

require initial and repetitive inspections

of the oil scavenge pump for the

security of the snap ring installation,

snap ring and washer wear, and shaft

groove wear, and replacement, if

necessary, with serviceable parts. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

severe wear on the end plate of the oil

scavenge pump. The actions specified

by the proposed AD are intended to

prevent oil scavenge pump snap ring

failure causing severe wear on the pump

end plate, which could result in loss of

engine oil and subsequent engine

shutdown.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 21, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–ANE–24, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: ‘‘9-

ad-engineprop@dot.faa.gov’’. Comments

sent via the Internet must contain the

docket number in the subject line.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Simonson, Aerospace Engineer,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW, Renton, WA

98055–4056; telephone (206) 227–2597,

fax (206) 227–1181.

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

should 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 96–ANE–24.’’ 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, New England Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 96–ANE–24, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299.

Discussion

The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) has received reports of severe

wear on the pump end plate of

AlliedSignal Inc. oil scavenge pumps,

Part Numbers (P/Ns) 101633–01 and –02

and Rajay Inc. oil scavenge pumps, P/

Ns 1025–1 and –2. The investigation

revealed that the pump end plate failure

was caused by failure of the snap ring

that locates the pump rotor along the

longitudinal axis of the pump. Further

investigation revealed an incident

where the pump end plate was worn

completely through, resulting in loss of

engine oil and subsequent engine

shutdown. This condition, if not

corrected, could result in oil scavenge

pump snap ring failure causing severe

wear on the pump end plate, which

could result in loss of engine oil and

subsequent engine shutdown.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require initial and repetitive inspections

of the oil scavenge pump for security of

the snap ring installation, snap ring and

washer wear, and shaft groove wear, and

replacement, if necessary, with

serviceable parts. The FAA has

determined that changes in pump

design may warrant future rulemaking.

The FAA estimates that 3,000 pumps

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD.

The FAA estimates that it would take

approximately 4 work hours per oil

scavenge pump to accomplish the

proposed actions, and that the average

labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts, if the scavenge pump

requires replacement, would cost

approximately $1,000 per oil scavenge

pump. Based on these figures, the total

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $3,720,000.

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