7184 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

disconnect panel bracket, in accordance with

the service bulletin.

(3) Condition 3. If no riding, chafing, or

damage is found: Prior to further flight,

install a protective grommet along the entire

upper aft edge of the disconnect panel

bracket in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(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, Los

Angeles 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, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

10, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3841 Filed 2–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–64–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A310 and A300–600 Series Airplanes

Equipped with Pratt & Whitney

Turbofan Engines

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 Airbus Model A310 and A300–

600 series airplanes. This proposal

would require flow checks of the

hydraulic pump drain system to ensure

that the system is not clogged, and

correction of any discrepancy.

Additionally, the proposed AD would

require replacement of the existing seal

of the accessory gearbox with a new,

improved seal assembly; this

replacement would terminate the

requirement for repetitive flow checks.

This proposal is prompted by reports

indicating that hydraulic fluid had

contaminated the engine oil system as a

result of failure of the seal of the

hydraulic pump shaft. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent clogging of the

hydraulic pump drain system, which

could cause failure of the seal of the

hydraulic pump shaft and subsequent

contamination of the engine accessory

gearbox oil; this condition could result

in an in-flight engine shutdown.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

64–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

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Backman, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2797; fax (206) 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 96–NM–64–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.

96–NM–64–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Airbus

Model A310 and A300–600 series

airplanes. The DGAC advises that it has

received reports of engine oil

contamination on both of these models

of airplanes. Investigation revealed that

the contamination was due to failure of

the seal of the green hydraulic pump

shaft as a result of clogging of the

hydraulic pump drain system. The seal

is insufficient to handle the increase in

the backflow pressure when the

hydraulic pump drain system is

clogged. Failure of the seal of the green

hydraulic pump shaft, if not corrected,

could permit contamination of the

engine accessory gearbox oil, and result

in an in-flight engine shutdown.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued the following

service bulletins which describe

procedures for performing repetitive

flow checks of the hydraulic pump

drain system to ensure that the system

is not clogged, and correction of any

discrepancy.

1. For Model A310 series airplanes:

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–72–2022,

dated February 16, 1993 (for airplanes

on which Pratt & Whitney JT9D–7R4D1

and 7R4E1 engines are installed); and

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–72–2023,

Revision 1, dated December 22, 1993

(for airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney

PW4152 and PW 4156A engines are

installed).

2. For Model A300–600 series

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–72–6018, Revision 1, dated

December 22, 1993 (for airplanes on

which Pratt & Whitney JT9D–7R4H1

engines are installed); and Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–72–6019,

Revision 1, dated December 22, 1993

(for airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney

PW4158 engines are installed).
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7185

Additionally, Airbus has issued the

following service bulletins which

describe procedures to replace the

existing carbon seal of the accessory

gearbox with a new, improved seal

assembly that is capable of withstanding

a higher backflow pressure. This new

seal assembly will prevent hydraulic

fluid leakage into the gearbox, and will

eliminate the need to perform repetitive

flow checks.

1. For Model A300–600 series

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–72–6014, dated March 15, 1993

(for airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney

PW JT9D–7R4H1 engines are installed);

and Airbus Service Bulletin A300–72–

6015, Revision 2, dated December 22,

1993 (for airplanes on which Pratt &

Whitney PW4158 engines are installed).

2. For Model A310 series airplanes:

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–72–2018,

Revision 2, dated December 22, 1993

(for airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney

PW JT9D–7R4D1 and -7R4E1 engines

are installed); and Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–72–2019, Revision 2,

dated December 22, 1993 (for airplanes

on which Pratt & Whitney PW4152 and

PW 4156A engines are installed).

The DGAC classified these service

bulletins and previous editions of these

service bulletins as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

92–231–136(B)R2, dated October 13,

1993, in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in France 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 DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above. The

FAA has examined the findings of the

DGAC, reviewed all available

information, and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of these

type designs 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

repetitive flow checks of the hydraulic

pump drain system to ensure that the

system is not clogged, and correction of

any discrepancy. Additionally, the

proposed AD would require

replacement of the existing seal of the

accessory gearbox with a new, improved

seal assembly. This replacement, when

accomplished, would provide

terminating action for the repetitive

flow checks. The actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the service bulletins

described previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 3 Airbus

Model A300–600 and A310 series

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD. It would

take approximately 3 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

one-time inspection, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. It would take

approximately 10 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

terminating modification, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $1,500 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $6,840, or $2,280 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 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:

Airbus: Docket 96–NM–64–AD.

Applicability: Model A300B4–620, –622,

–622R, and A300C4–620; and Model A310–

221, –222, –322, –324, and –325 series

airplanes; equipped with Pratt & Whitney

turbofan engines; on which Airbus

Modification 10399 or 10400 has not been

accomplished; 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 clogging of the hydraulic pump

drain system, which could cause failure of

the seal of the hydraulic pump shaft and

subsequent contamination of the engine

accessory gearbox oil, and could result in an

in-flight engine shutdown, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 30 days after the effective date

of this AD, perform a flow check of the

hydraulic pump drain system to ensure that

it is not clogged and, prior to further flight,

correct any discrepancies, in accordance with

either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, as

applicable. Repeat the flow check, thereafter,

at intervals not to exceed 500 flight hours

until the modification required by paragraph

(b) of this AD is accomplished.

(1) For Model A310 series airplanes:

Perform the flow checks and correct

discrepancies in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A310–72–2022, dated

February 16, 1993 (for airplanes on which

Pratt & Whitney JT9D–7R4D1 and –7R4E1
7186 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

1The proposed rule would be codified at 17 CFR

230.146.

2 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.

3 15 U.S.C. 77r.

4Public Law 104–290, 110 Stat. 3416 (1996).

5The term ‘‘covered security’’ is defined in new

section 18(b) [15 U.S.C. 77r(b)].

6The term ‘‘offering document’’ is defined in new

section 18(d)(1) [15 U.S.C. 77r(d)(1)], as follows:

(1) Offering Document.—The term ‘‘offering

document’’—

(A) has the meaning given the term ‘‘prospectus’’

in section 2(10), but without regard to the

provisions of subparagraphs (A) and (B) of that

section; and

(B) includes a communication that is not deemed

to offer a security pursuant to a rule of the

Commission.

7New Section 18(d)(2) requires the Commission

to adopt this definition not later than six months

after the section’s enactment.

engines are installed); or Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–72–2023, Revision 1, dated

December 22, 1993 (for airplanes on which

Pratt & Whitney PW4152 and PW4156A

engines are installed); as applicable.

Note 2: Flow checks accomplished prior to

the effective date of this AD in accordance

with the original issuance of Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–72–2023 are considered

acceptable for compliance with the

applicable action specified in this AD.

(2) For Model A300–600 series airplanes:

Perform the flow checks and correct

discrepancies in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–72–6018, Revision 1,

dated December 22, 1993 (for airplanes on

which Pratt & Whitney JT9D–7R4H1 engines

are installed); or Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–72–6019, Revision 1, dated December

22, 1993 (for airplanes on which Pratt &

Whitney PW4158 engines are installed); as

applicable.

Note 3: Flow checks accomplished prior to

the effective date of this AD in accordance

with the original issuance of Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–72–6018 or Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–72–6019 are considered

acceptable for compliance with the

applicable action specified in this AD.

(b) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace (on both engines) the

existing seal of the green hydraulic system

gearbox with a new, improved seal assembly

in accordance with either paragraph (b)(1) or

(b)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

Accomplishment of this replacement

terminates the repetitive flow check

requirements for this AD.

(1) For Model A310 series airplanes:

Accomplish the replacement in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A310–72–2018,

Revision 2, dated December 22, 1993 (for

airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney PW

JT9D–7R4D1 and –7R4E1 engines are

installed); or Airbus Service Bulletin A310–

72–2019, Revision 2, dated December 22,

1993 (for airplanes on which Pratt & Whitney

PW4152 and PW4156A engines are

installed); as applicable.

Note 4: Replacement of the existing seal on

the green hydraulic system gearbox with a

new, improved seal assembly accomplished

prior to the effective date of this AD, in

accordance with the original issuance or

Revision 1 of Airbus Service Bulletin A310–

72–2019, or with the original issuance or

Revision 1 of Airbus Service A310–72–2018,

is considered acceptable for compliance with

the applicable action specified in this AD.

(2) Model A300–600 series airplanes:

Accomplish the replacement in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–72–6014,

dated March 15, 1993 (for airplanes on which

Pratt & Whitney PW JT9D–7R4H1 engines are

installed); or Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

72–6015, dated March 15, 1993 (for airplanes

on which Pratt & Whitney PW4158 engines

are installed); as applicable.

(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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, 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, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 5: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

10, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3840 Filed 2–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 230

[Release No. 33–7388; File Number S7–6–

97]

RIN 3235–AH14

Definition of ‘‘Prepared by or on Behalf

of the Issuer’’ for Purposes of

Determining if an Offering Document is

Subject to State Regulation.

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The National Securities

Markets Improvements Act of 1996

mandates that the Securities and

Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’)

adopt a definition of the phrase

‘‘prepared by or on behalf of the issuer’’

found in newly revised Section 18 of the

Securities Act of 1933. Today, the

Commission proposes such a definition.

DATES: Comments should be received on

or before March 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

submitted in triplicate to Jonathan G.

Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20549. Comments also

may be submitted electronically at the

following E-mail address: rulecomments@sec.gov. All comment letters

should refer to File No. S7–6–96; this

file number should be included in the

subject line if E-mail is used. Comment

letters will be available for inspection

and copying in the Commission’s Public

Reference Room, 450 Fifth Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20549. Electronically

submitted comment letters will be

posted on the Commission’s Internet

Web Site (http://www.sec.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James R. Budge, Division of Corporation

Finance, at (202) 942–2950, Securities

and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Commission proposes adding Rule 146 1

under the Securities Act of 1933

(‘‘Securities Act’’ or ‘‘the Act’’).2 The

Rule would define the term ‘‘prepared

by or on behalf of the issuer,’’ as that

term is used in newly revised Section 18

of the Act.3

I. Background and Proposed Definition

On October 11, 1996, President

Clinton signed into law the National

Securities Markets Improvement Act of

1996.4 One significant goal of this

legislation, embodied in revised Section

18 of the Act, is to reduce duplicative

and unnecessary regulatory

requirements resulting from the dual

system of federal and state securities

regulation. The statute reallocates

regulatory responsibility relating to

securities offerings between the federal

and state governments based on the

nature of the security or offering.

Among other things, it preempts state

laws requiring or with respect to

registration or qualification of ‘‘covered

securities’’ as defined in the Act.5 It also

prohibits states from directly or

indirectly prohibiting, limiting or

imposing any conditions on the use of

any offering document for a covered

security if the offering document is

‘‘prepared by or on behalf of the

issuer.’’ 6

The statute requires the Commission

to define by rule the phrase ‘‘prepared

by or on behalf of the issuer,’’ as used

in connection with the prohibition on

state regulation of offering documents

for covered securities.7 The Commission

today proposes a definition of this term.