25606 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(2) If any crack is found that is less than

or equal to 30 mm: Perform subsequent

inspections and repair in accordance with

the methods and times specified in the

service bulletin.

(3) If any crack is found that is greater than

30 mm, but less than 100 mm: Prior to the

accumulation of 250 landings after crack

discovery, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

(4) If any crack is found that is greater than

or equal to 100 mm: Prior to further flight,

repair in accordance with a method approved

by the Manager, Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(5) Accomplishment of the modification

specified in Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin

No. A300–54–6019, dated October 15, 1993,

increases the threshold and repetitive

interval of the inspections required by

paragraph (b) of this AD to the threshold and

interval specified in paragraph 2.D. of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus

Industrie Service Bulletin No. A300–54–

6011, Revision 1, dated October 15, 1993.

(c) For Model A310–221, –222, –322, –324,

and –325 series airplanes: Prior to the

accumulation of 25,000 total landings, or

within 500 landings after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later, perform an

internal eddy current inspection to detect

cracks in the lower spar axis of the pylon

between ribs 9 and 10, in accordance with

Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin No. A310–

54–2016, dated November 12, 1991; or

Revision 1, dated October 15, 1993.

(1) If no crack is found, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 2,500 landings.

(2) If any crack is found that is less than

or equal to 30 mm: Perform subsequent

inspections and repair in accordance with

the methods and times specified in the

service bulletin.

(3) If any crack is found that is greater than

30 mm, but less than 100 mm: Prior to the

accumulation of 250 landings after crack

discovery, repair in a accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

(4) If any crack is found that is greater than

or equal to 100 mm: Prior to further flight,

repair in accordance with a method approved

by the Manager, Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(5) Accomplishment of the modification

specified in Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin

No. A310–54–2022, dated October 15, 1993,

constitutes terminating action for the

inspections required by paragraph (c) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

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.

(e) 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.

(f) The actions shall be done in accordance

with the following Airbus Industrie service

bulletins, as applicable, which contain the

specified effective pages:

Service bulletin referenced and date Page No. Revision level shown on

page Date shown on page

A300–54–071, November 12, 1991 ..................................... 1–19 ...................... Original .................................. November 12, 1991.

A300–54–071, Revision 1, October 15, 1993 ...................... 1–20 ...................... 1 ............................................ October 15, 1993.

A300–54–0079, October 15, 1993 ....................................... 1–16 ...................... Original .................................. October 15, 1993.

A300–54–6011, November 12, 1991 ................................... 1–17 ...................... Original .................................. November 12, 1991.

Service Bulletin Change Notice O.A., A300–54–6011, July

10, 1992.

(This document is

not numbered).

Original .................................. July 10, 1992.

A300–54–6011, Revision 1, October 15, 1993 .................... 1–10, 12–19 .......... 1 ............................................ October 15, 1993.

11 .......................... Original .................................. November 12, 1991.

A300–54–6019, October 15, 1993 ....................................... 1–11 ...................... Original .................................. October 15, 1993.

A310–54–2016, November 12, 1991 ................................... 1–17 ...................... Original .................................. November 12, 1991.

A310–54–2016, Revision 1, October 15, 1993 .................... 1–10, 12, 17 .......... 1 ............................................ October 15, 1993.

11, 13–16 .............. Original .................................. November 12, 1991.

A310–54–2022, October 15, 1993 ....................................... 1–11 ...................... Original .................................. October 15, 1993.

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 Airbus Industrie, 1

Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707

Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(g) This amendment becomes effective

on June 12, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 28,

1995.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–10986 Filed 5–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–198–AD; Amendment

39–9222; AD 95–10–05]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737–

300, –400, and –500 series airplanes,

that requires replacement of the

horizontal stabilizer trim electric

actuator. This amendment is prompted

by reports of a binding condition in the

clutch disk in the horizontal stabilizer

trim electric actuator. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent reduced controllability of the

airplane due to binding of a clutch disk

in the horizontal stabilizer trim electric

actuator.

DATES: Effective June 12, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 12,

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:

Kenneth W. Frey, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 25607

132S, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2673; fax (206) 227–1181.

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 certain Boeing

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on November 22, 1994 (59 FR

60095). That action proposed to require

replacement of the horizontal stabilizer

trim electric actuator.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

One commenter requests that the

proposed compliance time of 12 months

for replacement of the actuator be

extended to 18 months. The commenter

states that timely accomplishment of the

replacement is dependent upon the

ability of BFGoodrich to quickly rework

and return a fixed number of rotable

actuator units. BFGoodrich has

indicated that ‘‘loaner units’’ are not

available, and that the initial retrofit/

production units of the newer

configuration will not be available to

affected operators in time to allow

replacement within the proposed

compliance interval. Consequently,

retrofit cannot be easily accelerated

unless more rotable units are made

available.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to extend the

compliance time for replacement. The

FAA has been advised by Boeing that 75

loaner units have been made available

to operators since the end of March

1995. These units are being

manufactured to support the

compliance time of this AD. (Boeing has

advised that operators should contact

Boeing Customer Service to arrange for

delivery of loaner units.) In addition,

the FAA has been advised that some

operators have several spare units inhouse which can be used as rotable

units during the compliance period for

the modification. In consideration of

these factors, the FAA has determined

that an extension of the compliance

time is not warranted.

Two commenters request that the

compliance time of proposed paragraph

(b) be revised to allow installation of the

unmodified actuators (having part

number 10–62033–3) for a longer period

of time after the effective date of the

final rule. One of these commenters

states that the inability to obtain spare

units will be most severe in the early

stages of the proposed retrofit; without

more time to provide for spare modified

units in the fleet, there is a high

likelihood that airplanes could be

grounded due to lack of airworthy parts.

The other commenter states that the

current operational procedures provide

background information on stabilizer

trim coasting, and that the current

runaway stabilizer procedures in the

Abnormal Procedures section of the

Airplane Flight Manual effectively

inhibit and limit an out-of-trim

condition. In light of this, the

commenter considers that the safety of

flight would not be compromised by

extending the compliance period by an

additional 6 months.

The FAA concurs with the

commenters’ request. Although, as

explained above, the FAA is confident

that enough modified units will be

available to all affected operators for

replacement within the 12-month

compliance time, there is a possibility

that a modified unit may not be

available, for example, in a situation

where replacement is necessary and the

airplane is in a remote location. For this

reason, and the fact that adequate

operational procedures are currently

available to address potential out-oftrim conditions, the FAA considers that

allowing unmodified units to be

installed for a period up to 6 months

after the effective date of the rule will

not adversely affect safety. Such an

extension also will ensure that no

affected airplane will be grounded

unnecessarily due to the unavailability

of required parts. Accordingly,

paragraph (b) of the final rule has been

revised to allow installation of

unmodified parts for 6 months after the

effective date.

One commenter requests that issuance

of the final rule be delayed until a new

electric motor assembly and

accompanying service document is

developed and available from the

airframe manufacturer. This commenter

states that the planned new assembly

will do the tasks of the autopilot

stabilizer trim servo and the stabilizer

trim electric actuator; the motor does

not incorporate directional clutches.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to delay the rule.

Delaying this action until after the

release of the manufacturer’s planned

modification and service document is

unwarranted, since parts are available at

this time to address the unsafe

condition within the compliance

interval. However, the FAA may

consider additional rulemaking once the

new modification is developed,

approved, and available.

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 with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

There are approximately 1,448 Model

737–300, –400, and –500 series

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

590 airplanes of U.S. registry will be

affected by this proposed AD.

Accomplishment of the required

replacement of the stabilizer trim

actuator will take approximately 4 work

hours per airplane, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. The cost of

required parts is approximately $600

per airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $495,600, or

$840 per airplane.

The total 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.

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.
25608 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 92 / Friday, May 12, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

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. 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:

95–10–05 Boeing: Amendment 39–9222.

Docket 94–NM–198–AD.

Applicability: Model 737–300, –400, and

–500 series airplanes; as listed in Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–27A1191,

Revision 1, dated November 3, 1994;

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 reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace the horizontal

stabilizer trim electric actuator having part

number 10–62033–3 with one that has been

modified and re-identified as P/N 10–62033–

4, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 737–27A1191, Revision 1, dated

November 3, 1994.

(b) As of a date 6 months after the effective

date of this AD, no person shall install a

horizontal stabilizer trim electric actuator

having part number 10–62033–3 on any

airplane.

(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, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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, 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.

(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.

(e) The replacement shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 737–27A1191, Revision 1, dated

November 3, 1994. 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 Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

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

the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

June 12, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 3,

1995.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11354 Filed 5–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–239–AD; Amendment

39–9223; AD 95–10–06]

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier

Model CL–600–1A11 (CL–600), –2A12

(CL–601), –2B16 (CL–601–3A, –3R),

and –2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100)

Series Airplanes, Equipped with

Sundstrand Air Driven Generator

(ADG) Uplock Assembly

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Bombardier Model

CL–600–1A11, –2A12, –2B16, and

–2B19 series airplanes, that requires an

inspection to verify the proper operation

of the uplock latch of the air driven

generator (ADG), and replacement of the

uplock latch with a serviceable part, if

necessary. This amendment also

requires replacing the uplock assembly

with a modified uplock assembly, and

performing a rigging inspection. This

amendment is prompted by a report

indicating that, upon operation of the

manual release system, the ADG did not

deploy due to failure of the shaft pin.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent failure of the shaft

pin, which could lead to the inability of

the pilot to manually deploy the ADG

when necessary (i.e., when an airplane’s

primary electrical power sources are lost

and the ADG fails to deploy

automatically).

DATES: Effective June 12, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 12,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Bombardier, Inc., Canadair

Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087,

Station Centre-ville, Quebec H3C 3G9,

Canada. 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, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream New York;

or at the Office of the Federal Register,

800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wing Chan, Electronics Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANE–

173, FAA, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7511; fax

(516) 568–2716.

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 certain Bombardier

Model CL–600–1A11, –2A12, –2B16,

and –2B19 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

February 17, 1995 (60 FR 9302). That

action proposed to require a one-time

inspection to verify the proper operation

of the uplock latch of the air driven

generator (ADG), and replacement of the

uplock latch with a serviceable part if

the uplock latch cannot be activated.

That action also proposed to require

replacing the uplock assembly with a

modified uplock assembly, and

performing a rigging inspection.

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.