Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 62 / Tuesday, April 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules 15439

with Part A of the Accomplishment

Instructions of PW ASB No. A6110, Revision

1, dated October 15, 1993.

(3) At the next access to the third stage

turbine air sealing ring after November 14,

1994, but not later than December 31, 1998,

or 8,000 hours time in service since

November 14, 1994, or 7,000 cycles since

November 14, 1994, whichever occurs first,

install the improved third stage turbine air

sealing ring and associated hardware in

accordance with Part B of the

Accomplishment Instructions of PW ASB No.

A6110, Revision 1, dated October 15, 1993.

Note 2: Third stage turbine outer air seal,

P/N M2533, is an acceptable alternative to

PW P/N 811962 for compliance with this

paragraph.

(4) At the next shop visit after November

14, 1994, but not later than December 31,

1998, or 8,000 hours time in service since

November 14, 1994, or 7,000 cycles since

November 14, 1994, whichever occurs first,

install the improved No. 6 bearing scavenge

pump bracket bushing in accordance with

the Accomplishment Instructions of PW ASB

No. A6131, dated August 24, 1993.

(5) Accomplishment of the installations

required by paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), and

(a)(4) of this AD constitutes terminating

action to the repetitive inspections required

by paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.

(b) For engines that do contain fan exhaust

inner front duct segment assemblies that are

installed in accordance with PW ASB No.

6039, Revision 3, dated October 15, 1993, or

earlier revisions of PW ASB No. 6039, and

either PW honeycomb third stage outer

airseal P/N 801931, 802097, 797594, or

798279; or Pyromet Industries, Inc.,

honeycomb third stage outer airseal P/N

PI9336; or McClain International, Inc.,

honeycomb third stage outer airseal P/N

M2433; or a turbine case shield assembly

installed in accordance with PW ASB No.

6039, Revision 3, dated October 15, 1993, or

earlier revisions of PW ASB No. 6039; or a

third stage blade set that has third stage

turbine blades that were installed in

accordance with PW SB No. 5331, dated

October 27, 1982, perform the installations

required by paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), and

(a)(4) of this AD, at the times specified in

those respective paragraphs.

(c) For the purpose of this AD, a shop visit

is defined as an engine removal, where

engine maintenance entails separation of

pairs of major mating engine flanges or the

removal of a disk, hub, or spool at a

maintenance facility that is capable of

compliance with the instructions of this AD,

regardless of other planned maintenance,

except for field maintenance type activities

performed at this maintenance facility in lieu

of performing them on-wing or at another

peripheral facility.

(d) 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, Engine

Certification Office. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Engine Certification Office.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the Engine

Certification Office.

(e) 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 aircraft to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

March 24, 1997.

James C. Jones,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–8164 Filed 3–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–172–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A310 and A300–600 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 Airbus Model A310 and A300–

600 series airplanes. This proposal

would require a visual inspection to

detect cracks in the aft mount beam

assembly of the engine; and replacement

of any cracked beam with a new beam

or beam assembly. The proposal also

would require a fluorescent penetrant

inspection to detect cracks in the aft

mount beam assembly of the engine,

and various follow-on actions. This

proposal is prompted by reports

indicating that, apparently due to

manufacturing defects during the

forging process, cracking was found in

two engine aft mount beams. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to detect and correct such

cracking, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the aft mount

beam assembly of the engine.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

172–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;

or Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main Street,

East Hartford, Connecticut 06108. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2589; 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–172–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–172–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the
15440 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 62 / Tuesday, April 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules

airworthiness authority for France,

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 indicating that, during

overhaul maintenance following a

fluorescent penetrant inspection,

cracking was found in two engine aft

mount beams on Airbus Model A310

series airplanes. One of the beams had

a long surface crack, and the other beam

had smaller branch cracks. The apparent

cause of such cracking has been

attributed to the forging process during

manufacturing. Cracking in the aft

mount beam assembly of the engine, if

not detected and corrected, could result

in reduced structural integrity of the aft

mount beam assembly.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Pratt & Whitney has issued Alert

Service Bulletin PW7R4 A71–129,

Revision 1, dated August 30, 1995, and

Service Bulletin PW4NAC A71–149,

Revision 1, dated August 30, 1995.

These service bulletins describe

procedures for performing a visual

inspection to detect cracks in the aft

mount beam assembly of the engine;

and replacement of any cracked beam

with a new beam or beam assembly.

These service bulletins also describe

procedures for performing a fluorescent

penetrant inspection to detect cracks in

the aft mount beam assembly of the

engine, and various follow-on actions.

(These follow-on actions include an

eddy current inspection, reidentification

of the beam, and replacement of any

cracked beam.) The DGAC classified

these service bulletins as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

(C/N) 96–020–195(B), dated January 31,

1996, 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 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

a visual inspection to detect cracks in

the aft mount beam assembly of the

engine; and replacement of any cracked

beam with a new beam or beam

assembly. The proposed AD also would

require a fluorescent penetrant

inspection to detect cracks in the aft

mount beam assembly of the engine,

and various follow-on actions. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 8 Airbus

Model A310 and A300–6000 series

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD.

It would take approximately 2 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed visual inspection, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the visual inspection proposed by

this AD on U.S. operators is estimated

to be $960, or $120 per airplane.

It would take approximately 34 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed fluorescent penetrant

inspection, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

flourescent penetrant inspection

proposed by this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $16,320, or $2,040 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:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 96–NM–172–AD.

Applicability: Model A310 and A300–600

series airplanes, equipped with Pratt &

Whitney Model JT9D–7R4D1, JT9D–7R4E1,

JT9D–7R4H1, PW4151, PW4156A, PW4158

engines; 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 cracking in the aft

mount beam assembly of the engine, which

could result in reduced structural integrity of

the aft mount beam assembly, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 500 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, perform a visual

inspection to detect cracks in the aft mount
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 62 / Tuesday, April 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules 15441

beam assembly of the engine, in accordance

with Part 1 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Pratt & Whitney Alert Service

Bulletin PW7R4 A71–129, Revision 1, dated

August 30, 1995, or Pratt & Whitney Service

Bulletin PW4NAC A71–149, Revision 1,

dated August 30, 1995; as applicable.

(1) If no crack is detected, no further action

is required by this paragraph.

(2) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, replace the cracked beam with a new

beam or beam assembly, in accordance with

the applicable service bulletin.

(b) Within 4,000 flight cycles after the

effective date of this AD, perform a

fluorescent penetrant inspection to detect

cracks in the aft mount beam assembly of the

engine, in accordance with Part 2 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Pratt &

Whitney Alert Service Bulletin PW7R4 A71–

129, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1995, or

Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin PW4NAC

A71–149, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1995;

as applicable.

(1) If no crack is detected, prior to further

flight, perform an eddy current inspection to

detect cracks in the aft mount beam assembly

of the engine, in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin.

(i) If no crack is detected, prior to further

flight, reidentify the beam in accordance with

the applicable service bulletin.

(ii) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, replace the cracked beam with a new

beam or beam assembly, in accordance with

the applicable service bulletin.

(2) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, replace the cracked beam with a new

beam or beam assembly, in accordance with

the applicable service bulletin.

(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 March

26, 1997.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–8251 Filed 3–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–215–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300, A300–600, and A310 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 all

Airbus Model A300, A300–600, and

A310 series airplanes. This proposal

would require inspecting the bearings

located in the mechanical control

linkage of the nose landing gear (NLG)

free-fall mechanism for discrepancies,

replacing any discrepant bearings with

stainless steel bearings, and conducting

a test to ensure that the NLG free-fall

mechanism extends properly. This

proposal is prompted by a report

indicating that, during an operational

test of the NLG, the landing gear failed

to extend. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

the bearings from seizing, which could

lead to the loss of NLG free-fall

extension capability.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

215–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:

Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2589; 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–215–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–215–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 all Airbus Model

A300, A300–600, and A310 series

airplanes. The DGAC advises that one

Model A300 operator reported that,

during an operational test of free-fall

extension of the nose landing gear

(NLG), the free-fall handle could not be

rotated and the NLG failed to extend.

Investigations revealed that after

17,000 flight cycles and 27,000 flight

hours, four bearings of the NLG free-fall

mechanism were severely corroded and

had seized. The bearings are located in

the mechanical control linkage of the

NLG free-fall mechanism. Analysis

disclosed that the corroded bearings

were made of carbon steel instead of

stainless steel, as specified in the type

design.

Corrosion of the bearings could cause

them to seize, which, if not corrected,