Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 141 /Thursday, July 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 39485

(a) Replace the following in accordance

with pages 3 and 4 of Stemme GmbH & Co.

KG Service Bulletin No. 31–10–020, Amindex: 02.a, dated October 7, 1996:

(1) The propeller blade suspension fork,

part number (P/N) 0AP–V08 (or an FAAapproved equivalent P/N), with a new

propeller blade suspension fork, P/N A09–

10AP–V08 (or an FAA-approved equivalent

P/N);

(2) The propeller blade suspension fork

distance ring, P/N 10AP–V05 (or an FAAapproved equivalent P/N), with a new

propeller fork distance ring, P/N A09–10AP–

V05 (or an FAA-approved equivalent P/N);

and

(3) The propeller blade suspension fork

nut, P/N 10AP–V06 (or an FAA-approved

equivalent P/N), with a new propeller blade

suspension fork nut, P/N A09–10AP–V06 (or

an FAA-approved equivalent part number).

(b) 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 sailplane

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. The request

shall be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(d) Questions or technical information

related to pages 3 and 4 of Stemme GmbH &

Co. KG Service Bulletin No. A31–10–020,

Am-index: 02.a, dated October 7, 1996,

should be directed to Stemme GmbH & Co.

KG, Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25, D–13355 Berlin,

Federal Republic of Germany. This service

information may be examined at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Regional

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

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

(e) The replacements required by this AD

shall be done in accordance with pages 3 and

4 of Stemme GmbH & Co. KG Service

Bulletin No. A31–10–020, Am-index: 02.a,

dated October 7, 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 Stemme GmbH & Co. KG,

Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25, D–13355 Berlin,

Federal Republic of Germany.

Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Central Region, office of the Regional

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

Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,

NW, suite 700, Washington, DC.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in German AD 95–177/2, dated January 30,

1997.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

September 15, 1998.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 15,

1998.

James E. Jackson,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–19459 Filed 7–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–33–AD; Amendment

39–10673; AD 98–15–22]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all EMBRAER Model

EMB–120 series airplanes, that requires

a one-time inspection for delamination,

erosion, and condition of fillet sealant

and conductive edge sealer of the wing

and empennage leading edge area

behind the de-ice boots, and follow-on

corrective actions. This amendment is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent delamination of the

wing and empennage leading edge due

to improper installation of the wing deice boot, which could result in reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Effective August 27, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of August 27,

1998.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica

S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP

12.225, Sao Jose dos Campos—SP,

Brazil. 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 FAA, Small

Airplane Directorate, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center,

1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob

Capezzuto, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,

One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia

30337–2748; telephone (770) 703–6071;

fax (770) 703–6097.

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 all EMBRAER

Model EMB–120 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

March 27, 1998 (63 FR 14855). That

action proposed to require a one-time

inspection for delamination, erosion,

and condition of fillet sealant and

conductive edge sealer of the wing and

empennage leading edge area behind the

de-ice boots, and follow-on corrective

actions.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Two commenters support issuance of

the rule as proposed.

Request To Cite Original Service

Bulletin

One commenter requests that the

proposed AD add the original issue of

EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 120–

51–A004, dated September 13, 1997, as

an approved method to comply with the

required inspection specified in

paragraph (a) of the proposed AD. The

commenter indicates that it has

completed the inspection; however, the

inspection was accomplished in

accordance with the original issue of the

alert service bulletin, rather than

Change 01, which is referenced in the

proposed AD as the appropriate source

of service information. The commenter

states that the differences between the

two versions of the alert service bulletin

are not sufficient to warrant

accomplishment of the inspection a

second time on its fleet of Model EMB–

120 series airplanes.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request. The manufacturer

advises that operators that have

accomplished the inspections in

accordance with the original issue of

EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 120–

51–A004, dated September 13, 1997,

will need to accomplish additional

work, as described in Change 01 of the

alert service bulletin. While the FAA

concurs that the inspection procedures

did not change significantly between the
39486 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 141 /Thursday, July 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

original issue and Change 01 of the alert

service bulletin, the FAA has

determined that Change 01 should be

accomplished as it better addresses

inspection requirements and repair

procedures; therefore, no change to the

final rule is necessary. (Part II of the

alert service bulletin adds procedudres

for application of conductive edge sealer

over the anti-static paint.) However,

under the provisions of paragraph (c) of

the final rule, the FAA may approve

requests for an alternative method of

compliance if sufficient data are

submitted to substantiate that such a

method would provide an acceptable

level of safety.

Issuance of Change 2 of the Alert

Service Bulletin

Another commenter, the

manufacturer, advises that it soon will

publish Change 2 of EMBRAER Alert

Service Bulletin 120–51–A004. The

FAA notes this, and advises that it may

consider further rulemaking once it has

reviewed the revision to the alert service

bulletin. However, the FAA does not

consider it appropriate to delay issuance

of this final rule, which requires

accomplishment of actions in

accordance with Change 01 of the alert

service bulletin.

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 240 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, that it will take approximately 2

work hours per airplane to accomplish

the required inspection, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the inspection required by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$28,800, or $120 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:

98–15–22 Empresa Brasileira de

Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):

Amendment 39–10673. Docket 98–NM–

33–AD.

Applicability: All Model EMB–120 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 delamination of the wing and

empennage leading edge due to improper

installation of the wing de-ice boot, which

could result in reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 75 flight hours or 120 days after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Perform a one-time visual

inspection for delamination, erosion, and

condition of fillet sealant and conductive

edge sealer of the wing and empennage

leading edge area behind the de-ice boots, in

accordance with EMBRAER Alert Service

Bulletin 120–51–A004, Change 01, dated

November 10, 1997. Except as provided by

paragraph (b) of this AD, prior to further

flight, accomplish follow-on corrective

actions in accordance with the alert service

bulletin.

(b) If any discrepancy is found during

accomplishment of paragraph (a) of this AD,

and the alert service bulletin specifies to

contact EMBRAER: Prior to further flight,

repair the affected structure in accordance

with a method approved by the Manager,

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate.

(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, Atlanta

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Atlanta ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Atlanta 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) Except as provided by paragraph (b) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with EMBRAER Alert Service

Bulletin 120–51–A004, Change 01, dated

November 10, 1997. 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 Empresa Brasileira de

Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343–

CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos Campos—SP,

Brazil. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

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

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown

Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,

NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Brazilian airworthiness directive 97–09–

07.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

August 27, 1998.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 141 /Thursday, July 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 39487

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 15,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–19457 Filed 7–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–82–AD; Amendment

39–10672; AD 98–15–21]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–100 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 747–

100 series airplanes, that currently

requires repetitive inspections to detect

cracking of the wing front spar web

above engine numbers 2 and 3, and to

detect cracked or broken fasteners in the

web; and repair, if necessary. That AD

also provides an optional terminating

action for the repetitive inspections.

This amendment requires various

improved inspections. This amendment

is prompted by a report indicating that

the existing inspections do not

adequately detect vertical cracks. The

actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent fuel leakage onto an

engine and a resultant fire due to

cracked or broken fasteners in the wing

front spar.

DATES: Effective August 27, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

57A2266, Revision 5, dated August 3,

1995, as listed in the regulations, is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of August 27, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57A2266,

Revision 3, dated March 31, 1994; and

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57A2266,

Revision 4, dated November 3, 1994,

was approved previously by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 23,

1995 (60 FR 9613, February 21, 1995).

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. 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:

Tamara L. Anderson, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2771; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 95–02–15,

amendment 39–9134 (60 FR 9613,

February 21, 1995), which is applicable

to certain Boeing Model 747–100 series

airplanes, was published in the Federal

Register on April 14, 1998 (63 FR

18167). The action proposed to

supersede AD 95–02–15 to continue to

require repetitive inspections to detect

cracking of the wing front spar web

above engine numbers 2 and 3, and to

detect cracked or broken fasteners in the

web; and repair, if necessary. That

action also continues to provide for an

optional terminating action for the

repetitive inspections. The action

proposed to require various improved

inspections.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

single comment received.

The commenter supports the

proposed rule.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comment noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule as proposed.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 190 Boeing

Model 747–100 series airplanes of the

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The FAA estimates that 95 airplanes of

U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.

The actions that are currently

required by AD 95–02–15, and retained

in this AD, take approximately 70 work

hours per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the currently required inspection on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$399,000, or $4,200 per airplane, per

inspection cycle.

For airplanes identified as

Configuration A in the referenced alert

service bulletin, the new actions that are

required in this AD will take

approximately 60 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

new inspection requirements of this AD

on those U.S. operators is estimated to

be $3,600 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

For airplanes identified as

Configuration B in the referenced alert

service bulletin, the new actions that are

required in this AD will take

approximately 40 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

new inspection requirements of this AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$2,400 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are 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.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the optional terminating

action (fastener replacement between

FSS 570 and FSS 684) that is provided

by this AD action, it would take

approximately 306 work hours to

accomplish it, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. The cost of required

parts would be approximately $15,478.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the optional terminating action will

be $33,838 per airplane.

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