Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules 29153

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:

Boeing: Docket 97–NM–100–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–100, 747–200,

and 747–SP series airplanes and military

type E–4B airplanes; as listed in Boeing

Service Bulletin 747–57A2303, Revision 1,

dated September 25, 1997; 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 (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 detect and correct fatigue cracking of

the wing front spar web, which could result

in a fuel leak, and consequent increased risk

of a fire, accomplish the following:

(a) Perform an ultrasonic inspection to

detect cracking of the wing front spar

web at the fastener rows behind and

between the upper link fittings for the

number 2 and 3 engine struts, in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin

747–57A2303, Revision 1, dated

September 25, 1997, at the time

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

this AD, as applicable.

(1) For airplanes identified as Group

1, 2, 3, or 5 in the alert service bulletin:

Inspect prior to the accumulation of

12,500 total flight cycles, or within 15

months after the effective date of this

AD, whichever occurs later. Repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 2,200 flight cycles.

(2) For airplanes identified as Group

4, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 in the alert service

bulletin: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 18,000 total flight

cycles, or within 15 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later. Repeat the inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed

3,000 flight cycles.

(b) If any crack is found during any

inspection required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, prior to further flight,

accomplish either paragraph (b)(1) or

(b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Accomplish the terminating action

in accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin

747–57A2303, Revision 1, dated

September 25, 1997. Accomplishment of

this action constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspection

requirements of this AD; or

(2) Repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(c) Replacement of the affected wing

front spar web with a new shot-peened

wing front spar web in accordance with

the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57A2303,

Revision 1, dated September 25, 1997,

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

this AD.

(d) 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

ACO. 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 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(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 May 20,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–14028 Filed 5–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–116–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300, A310, and A300–600 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

certain Airbus Model A300, A310, and

A300–600 series airplanes. This

proposal would require repetitive

detailed visual inspections to detect

cracks in the pylon thrust and sideload

fitting of the wing, and replacement of

any cracked pylon thrust and sideload

fitting with a new fitting. 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 detect and correct

cracks in the pylon thrust and sideload

fitting of the wing, which could result

in reduced structural integrity of the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 29, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

116–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:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,
29154 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules

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–116–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–116–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 certain Airbus

Model A300, A310, and A300–600

series airplanes. The DGAC advises that

during a zonal inspection on a Model

A310 series airplane, a cracked pylon

thrust and sideload fitting was detected

on an in-service airplane which had

accumulated 2,170 total flight cycles.

Further investigation revealed that the

cracks were caused by improper

mounting of the fitting to the wing

reinforcing plate and built-in stresses

due to a surface flaw in the titanium

thrust and sideload fitting. Such cracks

in the pylon thrust and sideload fitting

of the wing, if not corrected, could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletins

A300–57–0232, Revision 01 (for Model

A300 series airplanes); A310–57–2075,

Revision 01 (for Model A310 series

airplanes); and A300–57–6079, Revision

02 (for Model A300–600 series

airplanes); all dated January 12, 1998;

which describe procedures for repetitive

detailed visual inspections to detect

cracks in the pylon thrust and sideload

fitting of the wing, and replacement of

any cracked pylon thrust and sideload

fitting with a new fitting.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletins is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition. The DGAC

classified these service bulletins as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive 97–358–232(B),

dated November 19, 1997, 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 § 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 bulletins described

previously, except as discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Foreign AD

The proposed AD would differ from

the parallel French airworthiness

directive in that it would not allow for

adjustment in compliance time based on

airplane utilization. In developing an

appropriate compliance time for this

AD, the FAA considered not only the

manufacturer’s recommendation, but

the degree of urgency associated with

addressing the subject unsafe condition,

and the average utilization of the

affected fleet. In light of these factors,

the FAA finds an 18-month compliance

time for initiating the required actions

to be warranted, in that it represents an

appropriate interval of time allowable

for affected airplanes to continue to

operate without compromising safety.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 126 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 3 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspection, 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 $22,680, or $180 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules 29155

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–116–AD.

Applicability: Model A300 series airplanes,

as listed in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–

0232, Revision 01, dated January 12, 1998;

Model A310 series airplanes, as listed in

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–57–2075,

Revision 01, dated January 12, 1998; and

Model A300–600 series airplanes, as listed in

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6079,

Revision 02, dated January 12, 1998;

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 detect and correct cracks in the pylon

thrust and sideload fitting of the wing, which

could result in reduced structural integrity of

the airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 2,800 total

flight cycles, or within 18 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform a detailed visual inspection to

detect cracks in the pylon thrust and sideload

fitting of the wing, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–57–0232, Revision 01

(for Model A300 series airplanes); A310–57–

2075, Revision 01 (for Model A310 series

airplanes); or A300–57–6079, Revision 02

(for Model A300–600 series airplanes); all

dated January 12, 1998; as applicable. Repeat

the detailed visual inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 2,800 flight cycles.

(b) If any crack is detected during any

inspection required by paragraph (a), prior to

further flight, replace the pylon thrust and

sideload fitting with a new fitting in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–57–0232, Revision 01 (for Model A300

series airplanes); A310–57–2075, Revision 01

(for Model A310 series airplanes); or A300–

57–6079, Revision 02 (for Model A300–600

series airplanes); all dated January 12, 1998;

as applicable. Thereafter, continue the

inspections in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 97–358–

232(B), dated November 19, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 20,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–14040 Filed 5–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–136–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model MD–90–30 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

certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD–

90–30 series airplanes. This proposal

would require modification of the

wiring of the strake ice protection

system (SIPS). This proposal is

prompted by a report of a fire in the

electrical and electronic compartment of

a Model MD–90–30 series airplane. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent an electrical

short circuit of the wiring of the SIPS,

which could result in a fire in the

electrical and electronic compartment of

the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 13, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

136–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

The Boeing Company, Douglas Products

Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,

Long Beach, California 90846,

Attention: Technical Publications

Business Administration, Dept. C1–L51

(2–60). This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Y. Mabuni, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5341;

fax (562) 627–5210.

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