Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules 3585

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:

Dassault Aviation: Docket 94–NM–200–AD.

Applicability: Model Mystere-Falcon 900

series airplanes having serial numbers 53

through 139 inclusive, equipped with

Fairchild Model F800 flight data recorders,

installed in accordance with Supplemental

Type Certificate (STC) SA7255SW–D;

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 loss of electrical power to the

airplane due to generator outage, accomplish

the following:

(a) At the next scheduled inspection, but

no later than 60 days after the effective date

of this AD, modify the electrical power

installation for the flight data recorder, in

accordance with paragraph 3.C.(1), Part 900–

54–1, of Falcon Jet Corporation Service

Bulletin 900–54 (F900 31–30), dated October

14, 1994, or Revision 1 (F900–31–1), dated

November 17, 1994. Prior to further flight

subsequent to the accomplishment of this

modification, perform the checks and tests in

accordance with paragraph 3.D.(1), Part 900–

54–1, of either service bulletin.

(b) Within 1 year after the effective date of

this AD, replace the currently installed

socket box for ground power with a modified

socket box, in accordance with paragraph

3.C.(2), Part 900–54–2, of Revision 1 of

Falcon Jet Corporation Service Bulletin 900–

54 (F900 31–1), dated November 17, 1994.

Prior to further flight, subsequent to the

accomplishment of this installation, perform

the checks and tests, in accordance with

paragraph 3.D.(2), Part 900–54–2, of Revision

1 of the service bulletin.

(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 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 January

11, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–1132 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–117–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0100 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 Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

series airplanes. This proposal would

require installation of additional ‘‘EXIT’’

signs at the overwing emergency exits.

This proposal is prompted by a report

indicating that the ‘‘EXIT’’ signs for the

overwing emergency exits, as currently

installed, would not be visible to

passengers during an emergency

evacuation when the emergency exit

doors are open. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to ensure

the ‘‘EXIT’’ signs for overwing

emergency exits are clearly visible

during an evacuation.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

117–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 Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North

Fairfax Street, Alexandria, Virginia

22314. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2141; 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
3586 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules

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–117–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–117–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the Netherlands, recently notified the

FAA that an unsafe condition may exist

on certain Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

series airplanes. The RLD advises that

the ‘‘EXIT’’ signs for the overwing

emergency exits are not installed next to

the overwing emergency exits, as

required by section 25.811 (d)(2) of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

25.811), ‘‘Emergency exit marking.’’

These signs are currently installed on

the covers of the operating handles of

the left- and right-hand overwing

emergency exits. In this configuration,

these signs are not visible when the

emergency exit doors are opened (i.e.,

during an evacuation). Consequently,

these signs, as positioned, do not fulfill

the intent of the regulations, which is to

ensure that the signs are ‘‘located next

to the exit’’ so that they are visible to

passengers in the event of an emergency

evacuation. This condition, if not

corrected, could delay or impede the

evacuation of passengers during an

emergency.

Fokker has issued Service Bulletin

SBF100–33–015, Revision 1, dated

March 21, 1994, which describes

procedures for installation of two

additional ‘‘EXIT’’ signs, one above and

between the left-hand overwing

emergency exits, and one above and

between the right-hand overwing

emergency exits. Accomplishment of

this installation will ensure that the exit

signs are visible whenever the exit doors

are open. The RLD classified this service

bulletin as mandatory and issued

Netherlands airworthiness directive

BLA 93–147/2 (A), dated April 29, 1994,

in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in the

Netherlands.

This airplane model is manufactured

in the Netherlands and is 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.

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

installation of two additional ‘‘EXIT’’

signs, one above and between the lefthand overwing emergency exits, and

one above and between the right-hand

overwing emergency exits. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

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 requirement.

The FAA estimates that 20 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 71 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would cost approximately $1,600 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$117,200, or $5,860 per airplane.

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:

Fokker: Docket 94–NM–117–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplanes, serial numbers 11244, 11245,

11248 through 11256 inclusive, 11261, 11268

through 11283 inclusive, 11286, 11289,

11290, 11291, 11293, 11295, 11296, 11297,

11300, 11303, 11306, 11307, 11308, and

11310 through 11315 inclusive, certificated

in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules 3587

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 (b) 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 ensure that the ‘‘EXIT’’ signs for the

overwing emergency exit are clearly visible

during an evacuation, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 8 months after the effective date

of this AD, install two additional ‘‘EXIT’’

signs, one above and between the left-hand

overwing emergency exits, and one above

and between the right-hand overwing

emergency exits, in accordance with Fokker

Service Bulletin SBF100–33–015, Revision 1,

dated March 21, 1994.

(b) 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.

(c) 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 January

11, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–1133 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 92–CE–21–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Glaser-Dirks

Flugzeugbau GmbH Model DG–100

Sailplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM);

Reopening of the comment period.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an earlier proposed airworthiness

directive (AD), which would have

required inspecting (one-time) the

tailplane main fitting on Glaser-Dirks

Flugzeugbau GmbH (Glaser-Dirks)

Model DG–100 sailplanes to ensure the

part is accurately welded, and

modifying if not accurately welded. A

report of tailplane main fitting failure on

one of the affected sailplanes, where the

welding did not completely cover the

entire wall thickness of the fitting,

prompted the proposed action. The

previous notice was written against all

DG–100’s; however, if the sailplane is

equipped with a horizontal stabilizer

and an elevator instead of a L4 tailplane

main fitting (main L4 fitting of the all

flying tailplane), the proposed AD

should not apply. The proposed action

would require the same one-time

inspection of the tailplane main fitting,

but would exclude those sailplanes

equipped with a horizontal stabilizer

and an elevator. The proposed actions

are intended to prevent loss of control

of the sailplane because of tailplane

main fitting failure.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 92–CE–21–

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.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Glaser-Dirks Flugzeugbau GmbH, Im

Schollengarten 19–20, 7520 Buchsal 4,

Germany. This information also may be

examined at the Rules Docket at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Herman Belderok, Project Officer,

Sailplanes, Small Airplane Directorate,

Airplane Certification Service, FAA,

1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 426–

6932; facsimile (816) 426–2169.

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. 92–CE–21–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

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 92–CE–21–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain Glaser-Dirks Model DG–

100 sailplanes was published in the

Federal Register on April 22, 1993 (58

FR 21547). That action proposed to

require inspecting (one-time) the

tailplane main fitting to ensure the part

is accurately welded, and modifying if

not accurately welded. The inspections

and possible modifications were

proposed to be accomplished in

accordance with Enclosure to Technical

Note 301/15, which is a supplement to

Glaser-Dirks Technical Note 301/15,

dated July 7, 1989.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. One

comment was received on the content of

the proposed AD and no comments

were received concerning the FAA’s

determination of the cost upon the

public.

The commenter states that the

proposed AD would apply to all Model

DG–100 sailplanes. In actuality, the

proposal should not apply to those