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,
15442 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 62 / Tuesday, April 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules

could lead to the loss of NLG free-fall

extension capability.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued the following

service bulletins, all dated April 29,

1996, which describe procedures for

inspecting the four bearings located in

the mechanical control linkage of the

NLG free-fall mechanism for

discrepancies, replacing carbon steel

bearings with stainless steel bearings,

and conducting a test to ensure that the

NLG free-fall mechanism extends

properly:

• Service Bulletin A300–32–0418,

Revision 1.

• Service Bulletin A300–32–6061,

Revision 1.

• Service Bulletin A310–32–2098,

Revision 1.

Accomplishment of these procedures

will preclude potential corrosion and

seizure of the bearings, which could

lead to the loss of NLG free-fall

extension capability.

The DGAC classified these service

bulletins as mandatory and issued

French airworthiness directive (C/N)

96–052–197(B), dated March 13, 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 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

inspecting the four bearings located in

the mechanical control linkage of the

NLG free-fall mechanism for

discrepancies, replacing discrepant

bearings with stainless steel bearings,

and conducting a test to ensure that the

NLG free-fall mechanism extends

properly. The actions would be required

to be accomplished in accordance with

the service bulletins described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 127 Model

A300, A300–600, and A310 series

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 14 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 $552 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $176,784, or $1,392 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 96–NM–215–AD.

Applicability: All Model A300, A300–600,

and A310 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 (d) 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 bearings in the mechanical

control linkage of the nose landing gear

(NLG) free-fall mechanism from seizing,

which could lead to the loss of NLG free-fall

extension capability, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 30 days after the effective date

of this AD, conduct an inspection to

determine whether carbon steel or stainless

steel bearings are installed in the mechanical

control linkage of the NLG free-fall

mechanism, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–32–0418 (for Model

A300 series airplanes), A300–32–6061 (for

Model A300–600 series airplanes), or A310–

32–2098 (for Model A310 series airplanes),

all Revision 1, all dated April 29, 1996.

(b) If stainless steel bearings are installed,

prior to further flight, conduct a test to

ensure that the NLG free-fall mechanism

extends properly, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–32–0418 (for Model

A300 series airplanes), A300–32–6061 (for

Model A300–600 series airplanes), or A310–

32–2098 (for Model A310 series airplanes),

all Revision 1, all dated April 29, 1996.

(c) If carbon steel bearings are installed,

prior to further flight, replace them with

stainless steel bearings, and conduct a test to

ensure that the NLG free-fall mechanism

extends properly, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–32–0418 (for Model

A300 series airplanes), A300–32–6061 (for

Model A300–600 series airplanes), or A310–

32–2098 (for Model A310 series airplanes),

all Revision 1, all dated April 29, 1996.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 62 / Tuesday, April 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules 15443

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.

(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 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. 97–8253 Filed 3–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 91–CE–87–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland

DHC–6 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM);

Reopening of the comment period.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an earlier proposed airworthiness

directive (AD), which would have

superseded AD 80–13–11 R2. That AD

currently requires repetitively

inspecting the elevator, flap, aileron,

and rudder control rods for cracks on

certain de Havilland DHC–6 series

airplanes, replacing any cracked rod,

and installing rod sleeves. The previous

document would have required

replacing the elevator trim and elevator/

flap interconnect rods, the aileron

control rods, the elevator control rods,

and the rudder control rods with parts

of improved design, and repetitively

inspecting these rods thereafter at

certain intervals. These replacements

would reduce the need for the number

of repetitions of the inspections

currently required by AD 80–13–11 R2.

The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) has determined that the flap

control rods should also be replaced

with parts of improved design as

terminating action for repetitive

inspections currently required by AD

80–03–08. The proposed action would

supersede both AD 80–13–11 R2 and

AD 80–03–08 and would require the

replacements as terminating action to

the repetitive inspections currently

required. The proposed action is part of

the FAA’s policy on commuter class

aircraft, which briefly states that, when

a modification exists that could

eliminate or reduce the number of

required critical inspections, the

modification should be incorporated.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent cracking of

these control rods, which, if not

detected and corrected, could result in

loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 91–CE–87–

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 de

Havilland, Inc., 123 Garratt Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario, Canada, M3K 1Y5.

This information also may be examined

at the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon

Hjelm, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, New

York Aircraft Certification Office, 10

Fifth Street, 3rd Floor, Valley Stream,

New York 11581; telephone (516) 256–

7523; facsimile (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

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. 91–CE–87–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of Supplemental NPRM

Any person may obtain a copy of this

supplemental NPRM by submitting a

request to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 91–CE–87–

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

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain de Havilland DHC–6

series airplanes was published in the

Federal Register as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) on October 12, 1993

(58 FR 52714). The NPRM proposed to

supersede AD 80–13–11 R2 with a new

AD that would (1) require replacing

elevator trim and elevator/flap

interconnect rods, and the flap, aileron,

elevator, and rudder control rods with

parts of improved design; and (2) retain

the aileron control rod inspections

currently required by AD 80–13–11 R2,

but reduce the number of repetitions of

these inspections. Accomplishment of

the proposed replacement as specified

in the NPRM would be in accordance

with de Havilland Service Bulletin (SB)

No. 6/502, dated March 24, 1989.

Accomplishment of the proposed

inspections as specified in the NPRM

would be in accordance with de

Havilland SB No. 6/390, Revision E,

dated December 20, 1991.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this AD. No comments were

received on the NPRM or on the FAA’s

determination of the cost on the public.

The FAA’s Aging Commuter-Class

Aircraft Policy

The actions specified in the NPRM are

part of the FAA’s aging commuter class

aircraft policy, which briefly states that,

when a modification exists that could

eliminate or reduce the number of

required critical inspections, the

modification should be incorporated.

This policy is based on the FAA’s

determination that reliance on critical

repetitive inspections on aging

commuter-class airplanes carries an

unnecessary safety risk when a design