20458 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766, and 1781–

1790. Section 741.11 is also authorized by 31

U.S.C. 3717.

3. Section 741.3 is amended by

revising the heading and adding new

paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 741.3 Other requirements.

* * * * *

(c) Adhere to the requirements stated

in Part 703 of this chapter concerning

transacting business with corporate

credit unions.

[FR Doc. 95–10149 Filed 4–25–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–110–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace Model Viscount 744, 745D,

and 810 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

British Aerospace Model Viscount 744,

745D, and 810 series airplanes. This

proposal would require repetitive

inspections to detect discrepancies of

certain fittings and the actuator beam

structure of the nose landing gear, and

replacement of discrepant parts. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

fatigue cracking of the undercarriage

bracing of the nose wheel. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent such fatigue

cracking, which could result in the

failure of the structure and fittings, and

subsequent collapse of the nose landing

gear.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 5, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

110–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

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Ltd.,

Engineering Support Manager, Military

Business Unit, Chadderton Works,

Greengate, Middleton, Manchester M24

1SA, England. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2148; fax (206) 227–1320.

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 94–NM–110–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–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

94–NM–110–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the United Kingdom, recently notified

the FAA that an unsafe condition may

exist on all British Aerospace Model

Viscount 744, 745D, and 810 airplanes.

The CAA advises that reports have been

received of cracking in the bracing

structures of the nose wheel

undercarriage on these airplanes.

Investigation revealed that the cracking

was fatigue related, and that

deterioration of the structure also has

occurred. These conditions, if not

detected and corrected in a timely

manner, could result in the collapse of

the nose landing gear.

British Aerospace has issued Viscount

Alert Preliminary Technical Leaflet

(PTL) 331, VIS 1 Doc 12 (for Model 744

and 745D airplanes), and PTL 202, VIS

1 Doc. 4 (for Model 810 airplanes), both

dated November 1, 1991. These PTL’s

describe the following procedures:

1. Procedures for repetitive nondestructive testing (NDT) inspections to

detect cracking of the actuator

attachment fittings of the nose landing

gear.

2. Procedures for repetitive visual

inspections to detect signs of structural

deterioration of the central diaphragms

of the actuator beam structure.

3. Procedures to detect elongation,

cracking, buckling in the central

diaphragms and reinforcing angles, and

loosening of fasteners of the mounting

bolt holes of the actuator attachment.

And

4. Procedures for replacement of

deteriorated or cracked parts with new

parts. The CAA classified these alert

PTL’s as mandatory in order to assure

the continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in the United Kingdom.

This airplane model is manufactured

in the United Kingdom and is 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 CAA has kept the FAA informed of

the situation described above. The FAA

has examined the findings of the CAA,

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.

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

repetitive inspections to detect

discrepancies of certain fittings and the

actuator beam structure of the nose

landing gear, and replacement of

discrepant parts. The actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the alert PTL’s

described previously.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 26, 1995 / Proposed Rules 20459

As a result of recent communications

with the Air Transport Association

(ATA) of America, the FAA has learned

that, in general, some operators may

misunderstand the legal effect of AD’s

on airplanes that are identified in the

applicability provision of the AD, but

that have been altered or repaired in the

area addressed by the AD. The FAA

points out that all airplanes identified in

the applicability provision of an AD are

legally subject to the AD. If an airplane

has been altered or repaired in the

affected area in such a way as to affect

compliance with the AD, the owner or

operator is required to obtain FAA

approval for an alternative method of

compliance with the AD, in accordance

with the paragraph of each AD that

provides for such approvals. A note has

been included in this notice to clarify

this long-standing requirement.

The FAA estimates that 29 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 15 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 total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $26,100, or $900 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The total 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.

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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Limited

(Formerly British Aerospace

Commercial Aircraft Limited, VickersArmstrongs Aircraft Limited): Docket

94–NM–110–AD.

Applicability: All Model Viscount 744,

745D, and 810 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 use the authority

provided in paragraph (c) 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 prevent collapse of the nose landing

gear, accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 2,050

landings after the effective date of this AD,

or within 12 months after the effective date

of this AD, whichever occurs first: Perform a

visual inspection and non-destructive testing

(NDT) inspection to detect discrepancies of

the actuator beam structure and actuator

attachment fittings of the nose landing gear,

in accordance with Viscount Alert

Preliminary Technical Leaflet (PTL) 331 VIS

1 Doc 12 (for Model 744 and 745D airplanes),

or PTL 202, VIS 1 Doc. 4 (for Model Viscount

810 airplanes), both dated November 1, 1991,

as applicable. Thereafter, repeat these

inspections at intervals not to exceed 2,050

landings.

(b) If any discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, replace the discrepant part

with a new part, in accordance with Viscount

Alert PTL 331, VIS 1 Doc 12 (for Model 744

and 745D airplanes), or PTL 202, VIS 1 Doc.

4 (for Model 810 airplanes), both dated

November 1, 1991, as applicable.

(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,

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.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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 April 20,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–10199 Filed 4–25–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–27–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace Model BAe 146–100A,

–200A, and –300A 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 British Aerospace Model BAe

146–100A, –200A, and –300A airplanes.

This proposal would require

modification of the elevator control

system of the flight controls. This

proposal is prompted by reports of low

frequency constant amplitude

oscillations of the elevator control

system and non-centering of the pitch

control upon autopilot disconnect. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent uncommanded

descent upon autopilot disconnect and

reduced controllability of the airplane