Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 20141

presentation of any depictions or

displays, of a prurient sexual nature.

3. Section 123.202(a) would be

amended by revising the first sentence

to read as follows:

§ 123.202 How much can my business

borrow with a physical disaster business

loan?

(a) Disaster business loans, including

both physical disaster and economic

injury loans to the same borrower,

together with its affiliates, cannot

exceed the lesser of the uncompensated

physical loss and economic injury or

$1.5 million. * * *

4. Section 123.301 would be amended

by removing ‘‘gambling’’ and ‘‘loan

packaging’’ in paragraph (a), removing

‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph (c),

removing the period and adding ‘‘; or’’

at the end of paragraph (d), and adding

paragraphs (e), (f), (g), and (h) to read as

follows:

§ 123.301 When would my business not be

eligible to apply for an economic injury

disaster loan?

* * * * *

(e) Deriving more than one-third of

gross annual revenue from legal

gambling activities;

(f) A loan packager which earns more

than one-third of its gross annual

revenue from packaging SBA loans;

(g) Principally engaged in teaching,

instructing, counselling or

indoctrinating religion or religious

beliefs, whether in a religious or secular

setting; or

(h) Primarily engaged in political or

lobbying activities.

Dated: April 14, 1998.

Aida Alvarez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–10757 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–102–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400, 500,

600, and 700 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

Fokker Model F27 Mark 100, 200, 300,

400, 500, 600, and 700 series airplanes.

This proposal would require a one-time

detailed visual inspection of the forward

fuel feed lines in the left- and right-hand

engine nacelles for chafing; replacement

of damaged parts with serviceable parts;

and modification of the supports and

improved routing for the high- and lowtension leads of the inboard ignition

units. 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 chafing on the

forward fuel feed lines, which could

result in fuel leakage and consequent

increased risk of fire in the engine

nacelles.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 26, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

102–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

Fokker Services B.V., Technical Support

Department, P.O. Box 75047, 1117 ZN

Schiphol Airport, the Netherlands. 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–102–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–102–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the Netherlands, notified the FAA that

an unsafe condition may exist on all

Fokker Model F27 Mark 100, 200, 300,

400, 500, 600, and 700 series airplanes.

The RLD advises that it has received a

report of fuel leakage from the righthand engine nacelle on a Fokker F27

Mark 500RF series airplane. Further

investigation revealed that the leak was

caused by a small hole in the forward

fuel feed line in the engine nacelle.

Closer examination showed that the

hole was caused by interference

between the high-tension leads of the

nearby ignition unit and the affected

fuel feed line. One lead appeared to be

incorrectly supported, resulting in

chafing and subsequent damage to the

fuel feed line. Such chafing, if not

corrected, could result in fuel leakage

and consequent increased risk of fire in

the engine nacelles.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The manufacturer has issued Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/28–62, dated

September 1, 1997, which describes

procedures for a one-time detailed

visual inspection of the forward fuel

feed lines in the left- and right-hand

engine nacelles for chafing; replacement

of damaged parts with serviceable parts;

and modification of the supports and

improved routing for the high- and lowtension leads of the inboard ignition
20142 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

units. Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition. The RLD

classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued Dutch

airworthiness directive BLA 1997–094

(A), dated September 30, 1997, in order

to assure the continued airworthiness of

these airplanes in the Netherlands.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in the Netherlands 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 RLD has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the RLD,

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 bulletin described

previously, except as discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

the Relevant Service Information

Operators should note that, unlike the

procedures described in Fokker Service

Bulletin F27/28–62, this proposed AD

would not permit further flight if

interference or damage is detected

between the specified forward fuel lines

and ignition high-tension leads. The

FAA has determined that, because of the

safety implications and consequences

associated with such interference and

damage, any related damage that is

found during the inspection must be

corrected prior to further flight.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 34 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

It would take approximately 1 work

hour 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

inspection proposed by this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $2,040, or

$60 per airplane.

It would take approximately 4 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed modification, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. The

cost of required parts would be

minimal. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the modification

proposed by this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $8,160, or $240 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:

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket 98–NM–102–

AD.

Applicability: All Model F27 Mark 100,

200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 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 (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 prevent chafing on the forward fuel feed

lines, which could result in fuel leakage and

consequent increased risk of fire in the

engine nacelles, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, perform a one-time detailed

visual inspection of the left- and right-hand

engine nacelles for chafing of the forward

fuel feed lines by the high- and low-tension

leads of the inboard ignition units, in

accordance with Part 1 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/28–62, dated September

1, 1997. If any chafing is detected, prior to

further flight, replace the fuel line with a new

fuel line in accordance with Part 1 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin.

(b) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, modify the supports and reroute

the high- and low-tension leads of the

inboard ignition units, in accordance with

Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Fokker Service Bulletin F27/28–62, dated

September 1, 1997.

(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,

International Branch, ANM–116, 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, 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.

(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.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 20143

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Dutch airworthiness directive BLA 1997–

094 (A), dated September 30, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 16,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10755 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–CE–72–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; All Models of

The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Formerly

Piper Aircraft Corporation) Airplanes

Equipped With Wing Lift Struts

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

93–10–06, which currently applies to all

models of The New Piper Aircraft, Inc.

(Piper) airplanes equipped with wing

lift struts. AD 93–10–06 requires

repetitively inspecting the wing lift

struts and wing lift strut forks for cracks

or corrosion, and replacing any strut or

fork found cracked or corroded. The

proposed AD results from reports,

questions, and information received

from the field on AD 93–10–06, which

show a need to clarify and add

information that will more fully achieve

the safety intent of that AD. This action

clarifies certain requirements of AD 93–

10–06, eliminates the lift strut fork

repetitive inspection requirement on the

Piper PA–25 series airplanes,

incorporates models inadvertently

omitted from AD 93–10–06, and

requires fabricating and installing a

placard on the lift strut. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent in-flight separation

of the wing from the airplane caused by

corroded wing lift struts or cracked

wing lift forks, which could result in

loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 1, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–CE–72–

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.

The service bulletins referenced in

this AD may be obtained from The New

Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services,

2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida

32960. Copies of the instructions to the

Jensen Aircraft STC’s may be obtained

from Jensen Aircraft, Inc., 9225 County

Road 140, Salida, Colorado 81201.

Copies of the instructions to the F. Atlee

Dodge STC may be obtained from F.

Atlee Dodge, Aircraft Services, Inc., P.O.

Box 190409, Anchorage, Alaska 99519–

0409. This information also may be

examined at the Rules Docket at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William O. Herderich, Aerospace

Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Certification

Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia

30349; telephone: (770) 703–6084;

facsimile: (770) 703–6097.

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. 96–CE–72–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

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 96–CE–72–AD, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Discussion

AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39–8586

(58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), currently

requires the following on Piper airplane

models equipped with wing lift struts:

repetitively inspecting the wing lift

struts and wing lift strut forks for cracks

or corrosion, and replacing any strut or

fork found cracked or corroded. AD 93–

10–06 provides the option of installing

certain lift struts and forks as

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirement. Accomplishing

the actions required by AD 93–10–06 is

in accordance with Piper Service

Bulletin No. 528D, dated October 19,

1990, or Piper Service Bulletin No.

910A, dated October 10, 1989, as

applicable.

AD 93–10–06 resulted from reports of

corroded wing lift struts and cracked

wing lift strut forks on several Piper

airplanes.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

AD 93–10–06 requires inspecting the

wing lift struts in accordance with Piper

Service Bulletin (SB) No. 528D, dated

October 19, 1990, and Piper SB No.

910A, dated October 10, 1989. These

SB’s specify these inspections using a

Maule ‘‘fabric tester.’’ After reviewing

data submitted with requests from

operators of the affected airplanes for

alternative inspection methods, the FAA

has determined that an alternative nondestructive inspection method for the

wing lift struts is available through the

use of ultrasonic equipment. The FAA

worked with a research facility to

develop ultrasound inspection

procedures for the wing lift struts.

The FAA inadvertently mandated the

inspections of the lift strut forks on

Piper PA–25 series airplanes through

AD 93–10–06. Lift strut fork inspections

are not necessary for Piper PA–25 series

airplanes. In addition, the FAA

inadvertently omitted certain models

equipped with lift struts. These models

(referenced in Piper SB 528D) are

equipped with lift strut assemblies of

the same type design and therefore

should be subjected to the repetitive

inspection requirement of AD 93–10–06.

Piper equipped all of the affected

airplanes with a ‘‘No Step’’ placard on

the wing lift struts. The reason for this

placard is to assure that no person steps

on the wing lift struts and puts

excessive pressure on the struts, which

could result in fatigue failure. The

intent was to include in AD 93–10–06