12126 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 50 / Friday, March 14, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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:

BOEING: Docket 96-NM–152-AD.

Applicability: Boeing Model 737–100 and

-200 series airplanes equipped with Bendix

main wheel assemblies having part number

2601571–1, 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 failure of the wheel flanges,

which could result in damage to the

hydraulics systems, jammed flight controls,

loss of electrical power, or other

combinations of failures; and consequent

reduced controllability of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

(a) For airplanes equipped with a Bendix

main wheel assembly having part number (P/

N) 2601571–1 with an inboard wheel half

with serial number (S/N) B–5999 or lower, or

S/N H–1799 or lower; or with an outboard

wheel half with S/N B–5999 or lower, or S/

N H–1049 or lower; accomplish the

following:

(1) Within 180 days after the effective date

of this AD, and thereafter at each tire change

until the replacement required by paragraph

(b) of this AD is accomplished:

Accomplish the actions specified in

paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a)(1)(iii) of

this AD, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Allied

Signal Service Bulletin No. 737–32–026,

dated April 26, 1988, including Attachments

1 and 2.

(i) Clean any inboard and outboard wheel

half specified in paragraph (a) of this AD.

And

(ii) Inspect the wheel halves for corrosion

or missing paint. If any corrosion is found,

or if any paint is missing in large areas, prior

to further flight, strip or remove paint, and

remove any corrosion. And

(iii) Perform an eddy current inspection to

detect cracks of the bead seat area.

(2) If any cracking is found during the

inspections required by this paragraph, prior

to further flight, repair or replace the wheel

halves with serviceable wheel halves in

accordance with procedures specified in the

Component Maintenance Manual.

(b) For airplanes equipped with a Bendix

main wheel assembly having P/N 2601571–

1 with an inboard wheel half with S/N B–

5999 or lower, or S/N H–1799 or lower; or

with an outboard wheel half with S/N B–

5999 or lower, or S/N H–1049 or lower;

accomplish the following: Within 2 years

after the effective date of this AD, accomplish

the actions specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and

(b)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Bendix

Service Information Letter (SIL) 392,

Revision 1, dated November 15, 1979.

Accomplishment of the replacement

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required by paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(1) Remove any inboard wheel half

specified in paragraph (b) of this AD, and

replace it with an inboard wheel half having

P/N 2607046, S/N B–6000 or greater, or S/N

H–1800 or greater. And

(2) Remove any outboard wheel half

specified in paragraph (b) of this AD, and

replace it with an outboard wheel half having

P/N 2607047, S/N B–6000 or greater, or S/N

H–1050 or greater.

(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, Seattle

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, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(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 March 7, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6438 Filed 3–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–29–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–100, –200, –300, –400, and

–500 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of two existing

airworthiness directives (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737

series airplanes, that currently require

tests of the main rudder power control

unit (PCU) to detect excessive internal

leakage of hydraulic fluid, stalling, or

reversal, and to verify proper operation

of the PCU; and replacement of the PCU

with a unit having a different part

number, if necessary. This action would

add requirements for replacement of the

PCU and the vernier control rod bolt

with newly designed units. This action

also would add a requirement for leak

tests of the PCU, and replacement of the

PCU with a serviceable or newly

designed unit, if necessary. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

fracturing of the vernier control rod

bolts as a result of the shank of the bolt

running into the threads on the nutplate

during installation of the rod. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent such fracturing,

which could result in uncommanded

movements of the rudder, and

consequent reduced controllability of

the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 23, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

29–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.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 50 / Friday, March 14, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12127

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kenneth W. Frey, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130S, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2673; 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 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–29–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–29–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On January 3, 1994, the FAA issued

AD 94–01–07, amendment 39–8789 (59

FR 4570, February 1, 1994), applicable

to certain Boeing Model 737 series

airplanes, to require repetitive periodic

tests of the main rudder power control

unit (PCU) to detect excessive internal

leakage of hydraulic fluid, stalling, or

reversal, and the eventual replacement

of the PCU with an improved model.

That action was prompted by results of

an investigation, which revealed that

there was a remote possibility that the

secondary slide in the servo valve of

certain PCU’s could go past the

intended maximum-travel position. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

prevent secondary slide overtravel from

occurring, which could cause the rudder

actuator piston and the rudder to

operate with reduced force capability or

to move in a direction opposite to the

intended direction; this could result in

reduced controllability of the airplane.

On November 7, 1996, the FAA issued

AD 96–23–51, amendment 39–9818 (61

FR 59317, November 22, 1996),

applicable to all Boeing Model 737

series airplanes, to require repetitive

periodic tests to verify proper operation

of the main rudder PCU, and

replacement of the PCU with a new

unit, if necessary. That action was

prompted by tests of the PCU conducted

by the manufacturer, which

demonstrated another very remote

potential failure scenario that was

previously unknown. The requirements

of that AD are intended to prevent

rudder motion in the opposite direction

of the rudder command.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous

Rules

In the preamble to AD 96–23–51, the

FAA indicated that it considered that

AD to be interim action, and that further

rulemaking action would be considered

once final action was identified. Since

the issuance of that AD, Boeing has

advised the FAA that it is designing

new main rudder PCU’s and a new bolt

for the vernier control rod for

installation on the latest versions of

Model 737 series airplanes currently

undergoing certification. These new

PCU’s and bolts are capable of being

installed on the existing fleet of Model

737 series airplanes. At this time, the

testing and design analyses necessary

for FAA approval have not yet been

completed; therefore, Boeing has not yet

released a service bulletin reflecting

these changes. The FAA anticipates that

these tests and analyses will be

completed and the service bulletin

approved prior to issuance of a final

rule.

In addition, the FAA also received

reports indicating that the outer bolts for

the vernier control rod fractured in two

cases. Fracturing of the outer bolt was

caused by the shank of the bolt running

into the threads on the nutplate during

installation of the vernier control rod.

These bolts have a dual load path. If the

second load path of the bolt fractures,

the manual input link to the main

rudder PCU would be disconnected.

Such fracturing, if not corrected, could

result in uncommanded movements of

the rudder, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane.

FAA’s Determinations

In light of this information, the FAA

has determined the following:

1. The main rudder PCU’s must be

replaced with newly designed units.

These new PCU’s will have a valve that

is similar to the valve installed on the

existing units in that the valve is dualconcentric in design; however, the new

units will have different characteristics

for the flow of hydraulic fluid.

Installation of the new units will

eliminate the possibility of improper

flow of hydraulic fluid. Replacement of

the existing units with new units

constitutes terminating action for the

actions required by those existing AD’s.

2. The bolt for the vernier control rod

must be replaced with a newly designed

bolt. Installation of the new bolt will

eliminate the possibility of the shank of

the bolt running into the threads on the

nutplate.

3. Although the FAA has received no

reports indicating that an in-flight

engine out or loss of hinge moment has

resulted in reduced controllability of an

airplane, high internal leakage in the

main rudder PCU can exist. This high

internal leakage could be caused by a

jam in the slides of the servo valve or

by other failures or wear within the

PCU. Such leakage could result in

reduced hinge moment capability of the

rudder PCU, which could result in

reduced controllability of the airplane at

any time large rudder inputs are

required (such as failure of the engine

during takeoff). In light of this, the FAA

finds that periodic inspections must be

performed to detect high internal

leakage of the main rudder PCU in a

timely manner.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, this proposed AD would

supersede AD 94–01–07 and AD 96–23–

51. The following requirements from the

superseded AD’s have been carried over

into the proposed AD:

—Tests of the main rudder PCU to

detect excessive internal leakage of

hydraulic fluid, stalling, or reversal,

and to verify proper operation of the

PCU; and

—Replacement of the PCU with a unit

having a different part number, if

necessary.

It should be noted that paragraph (b)

of AD 94–01–07 requires replacement of

the PCU with a unit having part number
12128 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 50 / Friday, March 14, 1997 / Proposed Rules

65–44861–11 or 65C37052–2, –3, –4, –5,

–6, –7, –8, or –9. However, paragraph (b)

of this proposed AD would allow for

this replacement as an optional

terminating action (instead of a required

action) for the tests required by

paragraph (a) of AD 94–01–07.

The proposed AD would add

requirements for replacement of the

PCU and vernier control rod bolt with

newly designed units. Additionally, the

proposed AD would add a requirement

for repetitive leak tests of the PCU, and

replacement of the PCU with a

serviceable or newly designed unit, if

necessary. These new actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with a method approved by

the FAA.

In developing an appropriate

compliance time for the new

requirements of this proposed AD, the

FAA considered the safety implications,

the time necessary for design and

production of the new PCU’s and bolts,

and normal maintenance schedules for

timely accomplishment of the proposed

actions. In light of these items, the FAA

has determined that a compliance time

of two years for installation of the newly

designed parts, and 6,000 flight hours

for accomplishment of the repetitive

leak tests, is appropriate.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 2,900 Model

737 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 1,350 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

The tests that are currently required

by AD 94–01–07 take approximately 8

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the currently required tests on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$648,000, or $480 per airplane, per test.

The replacement that is currently

required by AD 94–01–07 takes

approximately 20 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts will be supplied by the

manufacturer at no cost to operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the currently required replacement on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$1,620,000, or $1,200 per airplane.

The tests that are currently required

by AD 96–23–51 take approximately 2

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the currently required tests on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$162,000, or $120 per airplane, per test.

The replacement of the PCU that is

proposed in this AD action would take

approximately 9 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would be supplied by

the manufacturer at no cost to operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed replacement of the PCU

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$729,000, or $540 per airplane.

The replacement of the vernier

control rod bolt that is proposed in this

AD action would take approximately 1

work hour per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts would be supplied

by the manufacturer at no cost to

operators. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed replacement

of the vernier control rod bolt on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $81,000, or

$60 per airplane.

The leak tests that are proposed in

this AD action would take

approximately 8 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed requirements of this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$648,000, or $480 per airplane, per leak

test.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or 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

removing amendments 39–8789 (59 FR

4570, February 1, 1994) and 39–9818

(61 FR 59317, November 22, 1996), and

by adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD), to read as follows:

Boeing: Docket 97–NM–29–AD. Supersedes

AD 94–01–07, Amendment 39–8789, and

AD 96–23–51, Amendment 39–9818.

Applicability: All Model 737–100, –200,

–300, –400, and –500 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

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 (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 as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent uncommanded movements of

the rudder, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 94–01–

07:

(a) Within 750 flight hours after March 3,

1994 (the effective date of AD 94–01–07,

amendment 39–8789), perform a test of the

main rudder PCU, part number 65–44861–2/

–3/–4/–5/–6/–7/–8/–9, to detect internal

leakage of hydraulic fluid, in accordance

with Boeing Service Letter 737–SL–27–82–B,

dated July 13, 1993.

(1) If no discrepancy, as described in

paragraph 3.B. of the Service Letter, is
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 50 / Friday, March 14, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12129

detected, repeat the test at intervals not to

exceed 750 flight hours.

(2) If any discrepancy, as described in

paragraph 3.B. of the Service Letter, is

detected during any check, prior to further

flight, accomplish either paragraph (a)(2)(i) or

(a)(2)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Replace the main rudder PCU with a

serviceable PCU in accordance with the

Model 737 Overhaul Manual. After such

replacement, repeat the test at intervals not

to exceed 750 flight hours.

(ii) Replace the main rudder PCU with a

new main rudder PCU having part number

65–44861–11 or 65C37052–2/–3/–4/–5/–6/–

7/–8/–9, in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 737–27–1185, dated April 15, 1993.

Such replacement constitutes terminating

action for the tests required by paragraph (a)

of this AD.

(b) Replacement of the main rudder PCU,

part number 65–44861–( ), with a new main

rudder PCU having part number 65–44861–

11 or 65C37052–2/–3/–4/–5/–6/–7/–8/–9, in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

737–27–1185, dated April 15, 1993,

constitutes terminating action for the tests

required by paragraph (a) of this AD.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 96–23–

51:

(c) Within 10 days after November 27, 1996

(the effective date of AD 96–23–51,

amendment 39–9818), perform a test to verify

proper operation of the rudder PCU, in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 737–27A1202, dated November 1,

1996.

(1) If the rudder PCU operates properly,

repeat the test thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 250 flight hours.

(2) If the rudder PCU operates improperly,

prior to further flight, replace the rudder PCU

with a new rudder PCU, in accordance with

the alert service bulletin. Repeat the test

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 flight

hours.

New Requirements of this AD:

(d) Within 2 years after the effective date

of this AD, accomplish paragraphs (d)(1) and

(d)(2) of this AD in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate.

Accomplishment of these actions terminates

the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and

(c) of this AD.

(1) Replace any main rudder PCU having

Boeing part number (P/N) 65–44861-( ) or P/

N 65C37052-( ) with a new main rudder PCU

that has been approved by the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

(2) Replace the vernier control rod bolt

having Boeing P/N 69–27229-( ) with a new

bolt that has been approved by the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

(e) Perform a leak test of the main rudder

PCU in accordance with a method approved

by the Manager, Seattle ACO, at the

applicable times specified in paragraph (e)(1)

or (e)(2) of this AD. If any discrepancy is

found, prior to further flight, replace the PCU

with a serviceable or newly designed unit in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: If the PCU is replaced in

accordance with the requirements of

paragraph (e) prior to accomplishing the

replacement required by paragraph (d) of this

AD, ‘‘serviceable’’ includes the newly

designed PCU referenced in paragraph (d)(1)

of this AD and PCU’s having part number 65–

44861–11 and 65C37052–2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7,

-8, and -9. However, after the PCU has been

replaced in accordance with paragraph (d)(1)

of this AD, ‘‘serviceable’’ is limited to the

newly designed PCU’s referenced in that

paragraph.

(1) For airplanes on which the replacement

specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii), (b), or (c)(2)

of this AD has been accomplished prior to

the effective date of this AD: Within 4,000

flight hours after the effective date of this AD,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000

flight hours.

(2) For airplanes other than those

identified in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD:

Within 6,000 flight hours after

accomplishment of the replacement required

by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD, and thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours.

(f) Once a newly designed PCU specified

in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD is installed on

an airplane, no operator shall install on that

airplane any PCU other than a newly

designed unit.

(g) 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, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(h) 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 March 7,

1997.

Ronald T. Wojnar,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6437 Filed 3–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 146

RIN 1515–AC05

Weekly Entry Procedure for Foreign

Trade Zones

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service,

Treasury.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

amend and expand the weekly entry

procedure for foreign trade zones under

certain circumstances to include

merchandise involved in activities other

than exclusively assembly-line type

production operations. Under the

proposed expanded procedure, weekly

entries covering the estimated removals

of merchandise for the weekly period

and the associated entry summaries

would have to be filed exclusively

through the Automated Broker Interface.

The expanded weekly procedure,

which, as is presently the case, would

remain an entirely optional procedure,

would thus be conducted in a fully

paperless environment. The expanded

weekly procedure would reduce the

number of entries from zones as well as

automate and expedite the processing of

such entries. The proposed expansion of

the weekly procedure would allow zone

users to not have to delay their

operations pending the acceptance of an

entry and Customs examination of the

subject merchandise. 2

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before April 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments

(preferably in triplicate) may be

addressed to the Regulations Branch,

Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S.

Customs Service, 1301 Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229.

Comments may be inspected at the

Regulations Branch, Office of

Regulations and Rulings, Franklin

Court, 1099 14th Street, N.W., Suite

4000, Washington, D.C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marsha Malbrough, Office of Field

Operations, (202–927–0457).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934,

as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–u) (the

‘‘FTZA’’), provides for the establishment

and regulation of foreign trade zones.

Foreign trade zones are secured areas to

which foreign and domestic

merchandise, except that prohibited by

law, may be brought for the purposes

enumerated in the FTZA without being

subject to the Customs laws of the U.S.

Foreign trade zones, by virtue of being

exempt from the Customs laws, are

intended to attract and promote

international trade and commerce. Part

146, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part

146), sets forth the documentation and

recordkeeping requirements governing

the admission of merchandise into a

zone, 3 its removal from the zone, and,

among other things, its manipulation,

manufacture, storage, destruction or

exhibition, while in the zone.