17536 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 69 / Thursday, April 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Note 2: Although the procedures in Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–33A2252, dated

August 1, 1996, as revised by Boeing Notice

of Status Change 747–33A2252 NSC 01,

dated October 10, 1996, address replacing

only the switches located at door 4, they can

be used just as effectively for replacing the

switches located at door 2.

(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install at door 2 right or at door

4 right of any airplane an attendant’s panel

having switch part numbers identified in the

‘‘Old Switch’’ column of any table contained

in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

33A2252, dated August 1, 1996, as revised by

Boeing Notice of Status Change 747–33A2252

NSC 01, dated October 10, 1996.

(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 3: 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.

(e) The replacement shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–33A2252, dated August 1, 1996,

as revised by Boeing Notice of Status Change

747–33A2252 NSC 01, dated October 10,

1996. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

May 15, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 2,

1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–9010 Filed 4–9–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–196–AD; Amendment

39–9991; AD 97–08–03]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A310 and A300–600 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Airbus Model

A310 and A300–600 series airplanes,

that requires a functional flow test and

leak test to verify if the pressure

reducing valve in the cargo fire

extinguishing system is in a serviceable

condition, and replacement of any

faulty valve with a new valve prior to

extended range twin-engine operations

of the airplane. This amendment is

prompted by a report that, during a

scheduled maintenance check, an

inoperative pressure reducing valve was

found in the cargo fire extinguishing

system. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to ensure that a faulty

pressure reducing valve is not installed,

which could result in reduced fire

protection of the cargo compartment of

the airplane.

DATES: Effective May 15, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of May 15,

1997.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

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: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Airbus

Model A310 and A300–600 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on September 7, 1995 (60 FR

46541). That action proposed to require

a functional flow test and leak test to

verify if the pressure reducing valve in

the cargo fire extinguishing system is in

a serviceable condition.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Proposal

One commenter supports the

proposed AD.

Request To Make AD Effective

Immediately

One commenter supports the intent of

the proposed rule, but opposes the

FAA’s method of issuing the rule by

providing time for prior notice and

public comment. This commenter

considers that the potential unsafe

condition regarding the fire

extinguishing systems that qualify an

airplane for extend range twin-engine

operation (ETOPS) flights should have

been issued as an immediately adopted

rule. Further, the commenter contends

that the AD should prohibit extended

ETOPS operation beyond 60 minutes,

and include a temporary revision to the

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) alerting

the crew of the potentially unsafe

condition should a fire exist.

Terminating action for the restricted

operation and AFM revision should be

authorized after compliance with the

inspection and replacement criteria of

the AD. The commenter maintains that

the seriousness of a cargo fire during

ETOPS operation mandates such action.

While the FAA recognizes the

urgency of safety measures to ensure

that fire does not present an unsafe

condition onboard an airplane, the FAA

does not concur with the commenter’s

suggestion that notice and time for

public comment should have been

waived for this rulemaking action. The

FAA conducted a review of the

characteristics of the failure mode

relative to the subject pressure valve

and concluded that the safety

implications did not warrant

rulemaking without the opportunity for

public participation. The airplane on

which the inoperative pressure reducing

valve was found was not approved for

ETOPS operations. Further, at the time

the notice was issued, there were no

U.S.-registered Model A300–600 or

A310 series airplanes that were

approved for ETOPS operations. The

consequences of the subject faulty valve

are not as critical for non-ETOPS
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 69 / Thursday, April 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 17537

operations, since other additional fire

extinguishing features of the system can

address problems that occur within a

typical flight range (or 60 minutes).

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule as proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 48 Airbus

Model A310 and A300–600 series

airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected

by this AD, that it will take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane

to accomplish the required actions, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $2,880, or $60 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the 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 adopted herein will

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 final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

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

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 final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

97–08–03 Airbus Industrie: Amendment

39–9991. Docket 94–NM–196–AD.

Applicability: Model A310 and A300–600

series airplanes on which Airbus

Modification 6403 (reference Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–26–2010 or A300–600–26–

6011) has been installed; certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it otherwise

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 use the authority

provided in paragraph (b) of this AD to

request approval from the FAA. This

approval may address either no action, if the

current configuration eliminates the unsafe

condition; or different actions necessary to

address the unsafe condition described in

this AD. Such a request should include an

assessment of the effect of the changed

configuration on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. In no case does the

presence of any modification, alteration, or

repair remove any airplane from the

applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure that a faulty pressure reducing

valve in the cargo fire extinguishing system

is not installed, which could result in

reduced fire protection of the cargo

compartment of the airplane from 260

minutes to 60 minutes, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 600 total

flight hours after the effective date of this AD,

perform a functional flow test and leak test

to verify if the pressure reducing valve in the

cargo fire extinguishing system is in a

serviceable condition, in accordance with

paragraph 4.2., Description, of Airbus All

Operators Telex AOT 26–13, dated June 28,

1994. If a faulty pressure reducing valve is

installed, prior to extended range twinengine operations (ETOPS), replace it with a

new valve, in accordance with the aircraft

maintenance manual, reference 26–23–14,

Page block 401.

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 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.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) The tests shall be done in accordance

with Airbus All Operators Telex AOT 26–13,

dated June 28, 1994. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be

obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

May 15, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 2,

1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–9011 Filed 4–9–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 92–CE–41–AD; Amendment 39–

9994; AD 97–08–06]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Louis

L’Hotellier, S.A., Ball and Swivel Joint

Quick Connectors

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to Louis L’Hotellier S.A.

(L’Hotellier) ball and swivel joint quick

connectors installed on gliders and

sailplanes that are not equipped with a

‘‘Uerling’’ sleeve or an LS-safety sleeve.

These connectors allow the operator of

the gliders and sailplanes to quickly

connect and disconnect the control