7382 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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 Industrie: Docket 96–NM–155–AD.

Applicability: All Model A300, A310, and

A300–600 series 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 (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 detect and correct corrosion of the ram

air turbine (RAT) uplock pin/shaft and

needle that could result in failure of the RAT

to deploy and subsequent loss of emergency

hydraulic power to the flight controls in the

event that power is lost in both engines,

accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 30 months

total time-in-service, or within 3 months after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Accomplish the requirements of

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4) of

this AD in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–29–0108, dated April 1, 1996

(for Model A300 series airplanes); A310–29–

2076, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A310

series airplanes); A300–29–6037, dated April

1, 1996 (for Model A300–600 series

airplanes); as applicable. Thereafter, repeat

these actions at intervals not to exceed 30

months.

(1) Perform a RAT extension test on the

ground, in accordance with the procedures

specified in the Maintenance Manual.

(2) Disassemble and remove the lever

assembly of the RAT and perform a visual

inspection of the lever assembly to detect

corrosion, in accordance with the applicable

service bulletin.

(i) If no corrosion is detected: Prior to

further flight, clean and lubricate the lever

assembly and its associated parts, reinstall

the assembly, and perform a retraction/

extension/retraction of the RAT, in

accordance with the applicable service

bulletin.

(ii) If any corrosion is detected in any part

of the lever assembly: Prior to further flight,

replace the lever assembly with a new part

and perform a retraction/extension/retraction

of the RAT, in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin.

(b) Initial accomplishment of the actions

required by paragraph (a) of this AD that

have been performed in accordance with

Airbus All Operator Telex (AOT) 29–16,

Revision 01, dated January 10, 1996, is

considered acceptable for compliance with

the initial RAT extension test and an initial

visual inspection as required by paragraph (a)

of this AD. However, the first repetitive

inspection, as required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, must be performed within 30

months after that RAT extension test and

visual inspection were conducted, and

repeated thereafter at intervals not to exceed

30 months.

(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 2: 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

11, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3965 Filed 2–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–138–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives;

Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.

(CASA) Model CN–235 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 CASA Model CN–235 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

replacement of the guide hooks of the

cargo doors with new, improved guide

hooks. This proposal is prompted by

fatigue cracking found in the guide

hooks of the cargo door. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent such fatigue

cracking, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the cargo door

and, consequently, lead to rapid

decompression of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

138–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

Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.,

Getafe, Madrid, Spain. This information

may be examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg

Dunn, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2799; 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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7383

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–138–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–138–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 Spain,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain CASA

CN–235 series airplanes. The DGAC

advises that, during full-scale fatigue

tests on a Model CN–235 test article,

cracking was found in the guide hooks

of the cargo door. Such cracking is

attributed to fatigue-related stress.

Fatigue-related cracking in the guide

hooks of the cargo door, if not detected

and corrected in a timely manner, could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the cargo door and, consequently, lead

to rapid decompression of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

CASA has issued Service Bulletin SB–

235–52–23, Revision 2, dated June 9,

1994, and Service Bulletin SB–235–52–

23M, dated March 17, 1994. These

service bulletins describe procedures for

replacement of the guide hooks of the

cargo doors with new, improved guide

hooks. The replacement improves the

fatigue life of the cargo doors. The

DGAC classified these service bulletins

as mandatory and issued Spanish

airworthiness directive 02/94, dated

August 1994, in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in Spain.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Spain and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of section 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 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

replacement of the guide hooks of the

cargo doors with new, improved guide

hooks. The actions would be required to

be accomplished in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 1 airplane of

U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 150 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would cost approximately $6,100 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $15,100 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:

Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A., CASA:

Docket 96–NM–138–AD.

Applicability: Model CN–235 series

airplanes, as listed in CASA Service Bulletin

SB–235–52–23, Revision 2, dated June 9,

1994, and CASA Service Bulletin SB–235–

52–23M, dated March 17, 1994; 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.
7384 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules

To prevent fatigue-related cracking in the

guide hooks of the cargo door, which could

result in reduced structural integrity of the

cargo door and, consequently, lead to rapid

decompression of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

(a) Replace the guide hooks of the cargo

doors with new, improved guide hooks, in

accordance with CASA Service Bulletin SB–

235–52–23, Revision 2, dated June 9, 1994,

or CASA Service Bulletin SB–235–52–23M,

dated March 17, 1994; at the time specified

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

applicable.

Note 2: Replacements accomplished prior

to the effective date of this AD in accordance

with CASA Service Bulletin SB–235–52–23,

dated June 16, 1993, or Revision 1, dated

April 13, 1994, are considered acceptable for

compliance with the requirements of

paragraph (a) of this AD.

(1) For airplanes listed in CASA Service

Bulletin SB–235–52–23: Replace prior to the

accumulation of 17,000 total landings.

(2) For airplanes listed in CASA Service

Bulletin SB–235–52–23M: Replace prior to

the accumulation of 15,000 total landings.

(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,

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 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.

(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

11, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3968 Filed 2–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–141–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aerospatiale

Model ATR42 and ATR72 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 Aerospatiale Model ATR42 and

ATR72 series airplanes. This proposal

would require modification of the

handle of the passenger/crew door to

change the ‘‘down-to-open’’

configuration of the handle to an ‘‘upto-open’’ configuration. This proposal is

prompted by a report indicating that,

immediately after takeoff, the passenger/

crew door opened and separated from

the airplane, due to the inadvertent

operation of the door handle. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent inadvertent

opening of the passenger/crew door

during unpressurized flight, or delays in

opening the door during an emergency

evacuation.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM–

141-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

Aerospatiale, 316 Route de Bayonne,

31060 Toulouse, Cedex 03, France. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary

Lium, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–1112; 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–141–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–141–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received a report

indicating that, immediately after

takeoff, a passenger/crew door separated

from an Aerospatiale Model ATR72

series airplane. Investigation revealed

that the door may have separated from

the airplane due to inadvertent

operation of the door handle. That

passenger/crew door had been modified

(Aerospatiale Modification 04019) to

change the normal closing position

(‘‘down-to-lock’’) to a ‘‘down-to-open’’

configuration. Consequently, the FAA

reviewed the operation of the door

handle in the ‘‘down-to-open’’

configuration and has determined that

the reversed direction of operation of a

handle in this configuration may cause

confusion during an emergency

evacuation. Additionally, the normal

‘‘up-to-open’’ motion of a handle

requires that deliberate action be taken

to open the passenger/crew door, while

the ‘‘down-to-open’’ motion of a door

handle could permit inadvertent

opening of the door by a person leaning

or falling on the handle while the

airplane is flying unpressurized.

(Normal cabin pressurization during

flight will prevent operation of the door

handle.)

The ‘‘reversed’’ configuration of the

door handle, described above, could

result in the inadvertent opening of the

passenger/crew door during

unpressurized flight, or delays in

opening the door during an emergency

evacuation.

The configuration and operation of

the handle of the passenger/crew door

in Aerospatiale Model ATR72 series

airplanes are similar in design to those