This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

12768

Vol. 62, No. 52

Tuesday, March 18, 1997

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–73–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; de Havilland

Model DHC–8–100 and –300 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to all de

Havilland Model DHC–8–100 and –300

series airplanes, that currently requires

an inspection to detect discrepancies

and damage of the low fuel pressure

switch adapter/snubber (located on each

engine fuel heater), and replacement, if

necessary. That AD also requires an

inspection to detect gaps or openings in

each nacelle and engine-mounted

firewall area, and in certain weather

seals in the nacelles; and correction of

discrepancies. The proposed AD would

require certain new modifications to the

nacelles that will minimize the passage

of flammable fluid through the zones of

the nacelle of each engine. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent the spread of fire

through these zones in the event of an

explosion during flight, and consequent

structural damage to the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 25, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

73–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

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, Garratt Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario, Canada M3K 1Y5.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Fiesel, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, FAA, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7504; fax

(516) 568–2716.

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–73–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–73–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On July 15, 1992, the FAA issued AD

92–13–11, amendment 39–8281 (57 FR

37872, August 21, 1992), applicable to

all de Havilland Model DHC–8–100 and

–300 series airplanes, which requires

repetitive inspections to detect

discrepancies of the low fuel pressure

switch adapter/snubber (located on each

engine fuel heater), and replacement of

discrepant parts. The installation of de

Havilland Modification 8/1208 is

provided as an optional terminating

action for these repetitive inspections.

AD 92–13–11 also requires an

inspection for gaps and openings that

could allow flammable fluids to pass

through the firewall areas of each engine

nacelle; an inspection of the presence

and condition of weather seals around

certain access panels to each nacelle;

and the application or reapplication of

sealant to discrepant areas. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

prevent an in-flight explosion and fire

within the zones of the nacelle.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous AD

Since the issuance of that AD, the

manufacturer has developed several

modifications that are intended to

correct discrepancies within the nacelle

so that an engine fire can be contained

within this area. These additional

modifications will further minimize the

spread of fire through these zones

which, if not contained, could cause

structural damage to the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Bombardier, the manufacturer of this

airplane model, has issued 5 de

Havilland Dash 8 service bulletins

pertaining to modifications that are

intended to prevent the spread of fire

through the zones of the nacelle.

1. Service Bulletin S/B No. 8–54–12,

dated January 27, 1989, describes

procedures for modifying the firewalls

of the lower cowlings by installing new

angle-gasket assemblies; and applying

sealant to gaps and openings in this

area. This modification seals areas

where latch fittings penetrate the

firewalls of the lower cowlings; these

areas are potential paths for flammable

fluid to travel within the nacelle.

2. Service Bulletin S.B. 8–54–25,

Revision ‘A,’ dated July 29, 1994,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12769

describes procedures for conducting an

inspection of the upper access panels of

each nacelle for the presence and

condition of weather sealing, and

application or reapplication of sealant,

if necessary. It also describes procedures

for conducting an inspection of the

firewall areas of each nacelle for gaps

and openings at lap joints, between

bolts, and at carry-through fittings and

grommets; and the application of

sealant, if necessary. Furthermore, this

service bulletin describes procedures for

applying exterior labels on these access

panels so that maintenance personnel

will be notified of the requirement to

apply sealant whenever these panels are

re-installed.

3. Service Bulletin S.B. 8–54–30,

Revision ‘B,’ dated February 5, 1993,

describes procedures for modifying each

nacelle by replacing Camloc receptacles

made of silicon bronze with receptacles

of stainless steel. The replacement

receptacles are able to withstand higher

temperatures than those now being

used.

4. Service Bulletin S.B. 8–54–31,

dated March 8, 1994, describes

procedures for conducting another

inspection of the firewall areas of each

nacelle for gaps and openings after the

modification described in Service

Bulletin S.B. 8–54–30 has been

installed. This service bulletin also

describes procedures for applying

additional sealant to these areas.

5. Service Bulletin S.B. 8–71–19,

Revision ‘B,’ dated February 24, 1995,

describes procedures for replacing the

door seals of the cowlings with

improved seals.

Transport Canada Aviation classified

these service bulletins as mandatory and

issued Canadian airworthiness directive

CF–94–10R1, dated March 7, 1995, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

Canada.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Canada and is 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,

Transport Canada Aviation has kept the

FAA informed of the situation described

above. The FAA has examined the

findings of Transport Canada Aviation,

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

supersede AD 92–13–11. It would

continue to require the actions currently

required by that AD, and would add a

requirement that the following actions

be performed on each engine nacelle:

• Installation of new angle-gasket

assemblies on the firewalls of the lower

cowlings, and application of sealant to

gaps and openings in these areas;

• Inspection of the upper access

panels of each nacelle for the presence

and condition of weather sealing, and

application or reapplication of sealant,

if necessary;

• Inspection of the firewall areas for

gaps and openings at lap joints, between

bolts, and at carry-through fittings and

grommets; and the application of

sealant, if necessary;

• Modification of the nacelle by

replacing Camloc receptacles made of

silicon bronze with receptacles of

stainless steel;

• Application of additional sealant to

the firewall areas after the Camloc

receptacles have been replaced; and

• Replacement of the seals on the

cowling doors with improved seals.

These actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

applicable service bulletins described

previously.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 100 de

Havilland Model DHC–8–100 and -300

series airplanes of U.S. registry that

would be affected by this proposed AD.

Each inspection of the low fuel

pressure switch adapter/snubber that is

currently required by AD 92–13–11

takes approximately 4 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of this

currently required inspection on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $24,000, or

$240 per airplane, per inspection.

The inspection for gaps or openings in

each nacelle, engine-mounted firewall

area, and certain nacelle weather seals

that is currently required by AD 92–13–

11 takes approximately 12 work hours

per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of this currently required inspection on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$72,000, or $720 per airplane.

The installation of new angle-gasket

assemblies that is proposed in this new

AD would take approximately 2 work

hours per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would be provided by

the manufacturer at no cost to operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of this proposed action on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $12,000, or

$120 per airplane.

The inspection of the upper access

panels and firewalls of both nacelles,

and the application of labels, that is

proposed in this new AD would take

approximately 7 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $43 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of these

proposed actions on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $46,300, or $463 per

airplane.

The replacement of the Camloc

receptacles with improved receptacles

that is proposed in this new AD would

take approximately 8 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $15 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of this

proposed action on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $49,500, or $495 per

airplane.

The inspection and application of

additional sealant to the firewalls of the

nacelles that is proposed in this new AD

would take approximately 4 work hours

per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

The cost of required parts is estimated

to be minimal. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of these proposed

actions on U.S. operators is estimated to

be $24,000, or $240 per airplane.

The replacement of the seals on the

cowling doors that is proposed in this

new AD would take approximately 4

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts would be provided

at no cost to operators or would cost

$1,270, depending on the kit required.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

on U.S. operators of this proposed

action is estimated to be between

$24,000 and $151,000, or between $240

and $1,510 per airplane, depending on

the kit required.

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.
12770 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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 amendment 39–8281 (57 FR

37872, August 21, 1992), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

De Havilland, Inc.: Docket 96–NM–73–AD.

Supersedes AD 92–13–11, Amendment

39–8281.

Applicability: All Model DHC–8–100 and300 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 (h) 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 the spread of fire through the

zones of each nacelle, in the event of an

explosion during flight, and consequent

structural damage to the airplane, accomplish

the following:

Note 2: The requirements of paragraphs (a)

and (b) of this AD are restatements of the

same paragraphs that appeared in AD 92–13–

11, amendment 39–8281. These paragraphs

require no additional action by operators

who have already completed the specified

actions.

(a) For airplanes having serial numbers 3

through 248, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/1208 has not yet been

accomplished, accomplish the following:

(1) Within 30 days after September 8, 1992

(the effective date of AD 92–13–11,

amendment 39–8281), remove and inspect

the low fuel pressure switch adapter/snubber

located on each engine fuel heater for damage

to threads, indication of over-torque, and for

proper seating, in accordance with the

accomplishment instructions of de Havilland

Alert Service Bulletin A8–73–14, Revision B,

dated April 24, 1992. If the adapter/snubber

is damaged or if evidence of over-torque is

present, prior to further flight, replace the

adapter/snubber with a serviceable part, in

accordance with that service bulletin.

(2) Thereafter, at any time in which the low

fuel pressure switch adapter/snubber

assembly is removed, accomplish the

inspection of the assembly as described in

paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.

(3) Installation of Modification 8/1208, in

accordance with de Havilland Service

Bulletin 8–28–15, Revision A, dated April 17,

1992, constitutes terminating action for the

inspections required by paragraphs (a)(1) and

(a)(2) of this AD.

(b) For all Model DHC–8–100 and –300

series airplanes: Within 30 days after

September 8, 1992 (the effective date of AD

92–13–11, amendment 39–8281), accomplish

the procedures specified in paragraphs (b)(1)

and (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Inspect the nacelle vertical firewall

section, firewall extension, and engine

mounted firewall (reference: Maintenance

Manual section 71–30–00) for gaps and

openings that could permit flammable fluid

to pass through. Gaps and openings may be

found at lap joints, between bolts, and at

carry-through fittings and grommets. If gaps

are found, prior to further flight, seal the gaps

using PR812, Pro-Seal 700, or other approved

firewall sealants (reference: Maintenance

Manual section 20–21–20). Allow the sealant

to cure for at least 4 hours prior to further

flight.

(2) Inspect access panels 419AT and

429AT as specified in DHC–8 Maintenance

Manual [section 40–10, pages 12 and 14]

(reference: Illustrated Parts Catalog 54–30–

00, Figure 5, Items 410 and 420) for the

presence and condition of the weather seal in

the gap between the panels and the adjacent

structure. If the gap is not sealed, prior to

further flight, seal the panels using PR1422,

PR1435, or other sealant specified in the

DHC–8 Maintenance Manual, section 20–21–

16. A release agent, applied prior to sealing,

also may be used as specified in DHC–8

Maintenance Manual, section 20–21–19.

Allow the sealant or release agent to cure for

at least 4 hours, prior to further flight.

(c) For airplanes having serial numbers 3

through 137, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/1126 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, seal the firewall of the lower

cowling of each engine by installing anglegasket assemblies and applying sealant, in

accordance with de Havilland Service

Bulletin S/B No. 8–54–12, dated January 27,

1989.

(d) For airplanes having serial numbers 003

through 331, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/1885 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, accomplish the procedures

specified in paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and

(d)(3) of this AD in accordance with de

Havilland Service Bulletin S.B. 8–54–25,

Revision ‘A,’ dated July 29, 1994.

(1) Inspect the vertical firewall section,

firewall extension, and engine-mounted

firewall of the upper structure of each

nacelle, including the lap joints between

bolts and at carry-through fittings and

grommets, to detect gaps and openings

through which flammable fluid could pass,

in accordance with the service bulletin. If

any gap or opening is detected, prior to

further flight, seal the gap or opening, in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(2) Inspect the upper access panels of each

nacelle to detect the presence and condition

of sealant in any gap between each panel and

its adjacent structure, in accordance with the

service bulletin. If there is no sealant or the

sealant is discrepant, prior to further flight,

apply or replace sealant, as applicable, in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(3) Apply exterior labels and protective

coatings to each access panel of the left and

right nacelle in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(e) For airplanes having serial numbers 003

through 332, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/1887 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, replace the Camloc

receptacles in each nacelle with stainless

steel receptacles, and apply additional

sealant to the firewall of each nacelle, in

accordance with de Havilland Service

Bulletin S.B. 8–54–30, Revision ‘B,’ dated

February 5, 1993.

(f) For airplanes having serial numbers 003

through 357, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/1996 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, inspect the forward and

rearward faces of the firewall, firewall

extension, and engine mounted firewall of

the lower structure of each nacelle for any

gap or opening at lap joints, between bolts,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12771

and at carry-through fittings and grommets

through which flammable fluid could pass,

in accordance with de Havilland Service

Bulletin S.B. 8–54–31, dated March 8, 1994.

If any gap or opening is detected, prior to

further flight, apply sealant in accordance

with the service bulletin.

(g) For airplanes having serial numbers 003

through 369, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/2001 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, replace the existing seals on

the cowling doors of each nacelle with

improved seals, in accordance with de

Havilland Service Bulletin S.B. 8–71–19,

Revision ‘B,’ dated February 24, 1995.

(h) 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 New York Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Engine and

Propeller Directorate. Operators shall submit

their requests through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, New York ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(i) 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

11, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6718 Filed 3–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–53–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Aircraft Limited HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

Series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

82–20–04 R1, which currently requires

repetitively inspecting the main landing

gear (MLG) hinge fitting, support angles,

and attachment bolts on British

Aerospace (currently known as

Jetstream Aircraft Limited (JAL)) HP137

Mk1 and Jetstream series 200 airplanes,

and repairing or replacing any part that

is cracked beyond certain limits. The

Federal Aviation Administration’s

policy on aging commuter-class aircraft

is to eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of certain repetitive

short-interval inspections when

improved parts or modifications are

available. The proposed action would

require installing improved design MLG

fittings, as terminating action for the

repetitive inspections that are currently

required by AD 82–20–04 R1, and

would incorporate the Jetstream Model

3101 airplanes into the Applicability of

the AD. The actions specified in the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

structural failure of the MLG caused by

fatigue cracking, which could result in

loss of control of the airplane during

landing operations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–CE–53–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Prestwick

International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9

2RW, Scotland; telephone (44–292)

79888; facsimile (44–292) 79703; or

Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O.

Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, D.C. 20041–6029;

telephone (703) 406–1161; facsimile

(703) 406–1469. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Tom Rodriguez, Program Manager,

Brussels Aircraft Certification Division,

FAA, Europe, Africa, and Middle East

Office, c/o American Embassy, B–1000

Brussels, Belgium; telephone (32 2)

508.2715; facsimile (32 2) 230.6899; or

Mr. S.M. Nagarajan, Project Officer,

Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, FAA, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; telephone (816) 426–6932;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes 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 No. 95–CE–53–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, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–CE–53–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

The FAA has determined that reliance

on critical repetitive inspections on

aging commuter-class airplanes carries

an unnecessary safety risk when a

design change exists that could

eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of those critical

inspections. In determining what

inspections are critical, the FAA

considers (1) the safety consequences if

the known problem is not detected

during the inspection; (2) the

probability of the problem not being

detected during the inspection; (3)

whether the inspection area is difficult

to access; and (4) the possibility of

damage to an adjacent structure as a

result of the problem.

These factors have led the FAA to

establish an aging commuter-class

aircraft policy that requires

incorporating a known design change

when it could replace a critical

repetitive inspection. With this policy

in mind, the FAA conducted a review

of existing AD’s that apply to JAL

HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200, and

Jetstream Models 3101 airplanes.

Assisting the FAA in this review were

(1) Jetstream Aircraft Limited (JAL); (2)

the Regional Airlines Association

(RAA); (3) the Civil Aviation Authority