Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 / Proposed Rules 19427

accordance with a method approved by

the FAA.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 126 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD. It would take

approximately 48 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspection, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the proposed

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$362,880, or $2,880 per airplane, per

inspection cycle.

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 98–NM–74–AD.

Applicability: Model A300 series airplanes

on which Airbus Modification 3599 or 3135

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

0188) has been accomplished, and all Model

A310 and A300–600 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 (e) 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 wear damage of the

aft attachment fittings of the articulated seats

and dummy tracks in the passenger

compartment, which could cause the floor

panels to sag and result in failure of flight

control systems and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

(a) Perform a detailed visual inspection for

wear damage of the aft attachment fittings of

the articulated seats and dummy tracks in the

passenger compartment, in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletins A300–53–0329,

Revision 01 (for Airbus Model A300 series

airplanes); A300–53–6105, Revision 01 (for

Airbus Model A300–600 series airplanes); or

A310–53–2101, Revision 01 (for Airbus

Model A310 series airplanes), all dated

October 17, 1997; at the applicable time

specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this

AD.

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated

less than 12,000 total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 6,000 total flight cycles, or

within 18 months after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later.

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated

12,000 or more total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect within 12

months after the effective date of this AD.

(b) If no wear damage is detected during

the inspection required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, repeat the detailed visual inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000

flight cycles.

(c) If any wear damage measuring 2 mm

(0.078 in.) or less is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletins

A300–53–0329, Revision 01 (for Airbus

Model A300 series airplanes); A300–53–

6105, Revision 01 (for Airbus Model A300–

600 series airplanes); or A310–53–2101,

Revision 01 (for Airbus Model A310 series

airplanes); all dated October 17, 1997. Repeat

the detailed visual inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles.

(d) If any wear damage measuring more

than 2 mm (0.078 in.) is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Repeat

the detailed visual inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles.

(e) 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,

International Branch, ANM–116. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(f) 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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 97–116–

222(B), dated May 21, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 13,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10279 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–25–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault

Model Mystere-Falcon 200, Fan Jet

Falcon, and Mystere-Falcon 20 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness
19428 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 / Proposed Rules

directive (AD) that is applicable to all

Dassault Model Mystere-Falcon 200,

Fan Jet Falcon, and Mystere-Falcon 20

series airplanes. This proposal would

require repetitive inspections to detect

cracks at the attaching holes of the

wing-to-fuselage fairings and to ensure

tightness of the attaching screws; and

repair of any discrepancy. This proposal

also would require installation of

cupwashers under the vertical seams of

the upper fairings. This proposal is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent loss of the

wing-to-fuselage upper fairings during

flight, which could result in the fairings

impacting the engines or tail sections,

and consequent reduced controllability

of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

25–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

Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000,

South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 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 98–NM–25–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–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

98–NM–25–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,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on all Dassault

Model Mystere-Falcon 200, Fan Jet

Falcon, and Mystere-Falcon 20 series

airplanes. The DGAC advises that it has

received reports of loss of wing-tofuselage upper fairings. The loss of these

fairings could be due to cracks and/or

incorrectly tightened fasteners. These

conditions, if not corrected, could result

in the fairings impacting the engines or

tail sections, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Dassault Aviation has issued Fan Jet

Falcon Dassault Aviation Maintenance

Manual Phase 34, dated June 1997,

including Chapter 53–50–0, dated May

1996 (for Model Fan Jet Falcon and

Mystere-Falcon 20 series airplanes), and

Mystere-Falcon 200 Dassault Aviation

Maintenance Manual, Revision 12,

dated April 30, 1996, including Chapter

53, Procedure 731–3 (for Model

Mystere-Falcon 200 series airplanes),

which describe procedures for repetitive

inspections to detect cracks at the

attaching holes of the wing-to-fuselage

fairings and to ensure tightness of the

attaching screws; and repair of certain

discrepancies. These documents also

describe procedures for installation of

cupwashers under the vertical seams of

the upper fairings. The DGAC classified

these documents as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directives

96–092–021(B), dated April 24, 1996,

and 96–246–022(B), dated November 6,

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

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service information described

previously, except as noted below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Information

Operators should note that, although

the service information described

previously does not specify appropriate

procedures for disposition of certain

repair conditions, this proposal would

require the repair of those conditions to

be accomplished in accordance with a

method approved by the FAA.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 239 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the proposed

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$28,680, or $120 per airplane, per

inspection cycle.

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.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 / Proposed Rules 19429

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:

Dassault Aviation: Docket 98–NM–25–AD.

Applicability: All Model Mystere-Falcon

200, Fan Jet Falcon, and Mystere-Falcon 20

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

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 (b) 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 loss of the wing-to-fuselage

upper fairings during flight, which could

result in the fairings impacting the engines or

tail sections, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

(a) Within 7 months or 330 flight hours

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs first, accomplish the requirements of

paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD in

accordance with Chapter 53–50–0, dated May

1996, of Fan Jet Falcon Dassault Aviation

Maintenance Manual Phase 34, dated June

1997, (for Model Fan Jet Falcon and MystereFalcon 20 series airplanes), or Chapter 53,

Procedure 731–3 of Mystere-Falcon 200

Dassault Aviation Maintenance Manual,

Revision 12, dated April 30, 1996 (for Model

Mystere-Falcon 200 series airplanes); as

applicable.

(1) Perform an inspection to detect cracks

at the attaching holes of the wing-to-fuselage

fairings and to ensure tightness of the screws.

If any discrepancy is found, prior to further

flight, repair. If a repair is not specified in the

applicable maintenance manual, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Thereafter,

repeat the inspection at intervals not to

exceed 6 months or 300 flight hours,

whichever occurs first.

(2) Install cupwashers under the vertical

seams of the upper fairings.

(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,

International Branch, ANM–116. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directives 96–092–

021(B), dated April 24, 1996, and 96–246–

022(B), dated November 6, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 13,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10278 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 98–AAL–7]

Proposed Revision of Class E

Airspace; Barrow, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This action revises Class E

airspace at Barrow, AK. The

establishment of Global Positioning

System (GPS) instrument approaches to

runway (RWY) 6 and RWY 24 at Wiley

Post-Will Rogers Memorial Airport,

Barrow, AK, has made this action

necessary. Adoption of this proposal

would result in the provision of

adequate controlled airspace for

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations

at Barrow, AK.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 4, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager,

Operations Branch, AAL–530, Docket

No. 98–AAL–7, Federal Aviation

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue,

Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Regional Counsel for

the Alaskan Region at the same address.

An informal docket may also be

examined during normal business hours

in the Office of the Manager, Operations

Branch, Air Traffic Division, at the

address shown above and on the

Internet at Alaskan Region’s homepage

at http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at or at

address http://162.58.28.41/at.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert van Haastert, Operations Branch,

AAL–538, Federal Aviation

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue,

Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587;

telephone number (907) 271–5863; fax:

(907) 271–2850; email:

Robert.van.Haastert@faa.dot.gov.

Internet address: http://

www.alaska.faa.gov/at or at address

http://162.58.28.41/at.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments