27016 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

AD No. Amendment

No.

Federal Register

citation Date of publication

86–08–03 ..................................................................................................................... 39–5289 51 FR 12836 April 16, 1986.

86–07–06 ..................................................................................................................... 39–5270 51 FR 10821 March 31, 1986.

86–05–11 ..................................................................................................................... 39–5255 51 FR 8479 March 12, 1986.

86–23–01 ..................................................................................................................... 39–5450 51 FR 37712 October 24, 1986.

82–22–02 ..................................................................................................................... 39–4476 47 FR 46842 October 21, 1982.

80–08–02 ..................................................................................................................... 39–3738 45 FR 24450 April 10, 1980.

79–17–07 ..................................................................................................................... 39–3533 44 FR 50033 August 27, 1979.

(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

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 7: 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.

(f) The modification, inspections, checks,

and correction of discrepancies shall be done

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–54A2159, 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.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

June 21, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 10,

1995.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11968 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–163–AD; Amendment

39–9232; AD 95–10–15]

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace Model BAe 146–100A,

–200A, –300A and Model Avro 146–

RJ70A, –RJ85A, and –RJ100A

Airplanes Equipped With Certain Air

Cruisers Evacuation Slides

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain British Aerospace

Model BAe 146–100A, –200A, –300A

and Model Avro 146–RJ70A, –RJ85A,

and –RJ100A airplanes, that requires

repetitive inspections to verify proper

deployment of the evacuation slide at

each door position, and various followon actions to correct discrepancies. This

amendment is prompted by a report

that, during operational checks of

evacuation slides on in-service

airplanes, the inflation valves failed to

deploy the evacuation slide properly.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent failure of the

evacuation slide to deploy automatically

on demand, which would necessitate

the flightcrew to manually deploy the

slide; this situation could delay or

impede the evacuation of passengers

during an emergency.

DATES: Effective June 21, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 21,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from British Aerospace Holdings, Inc.,

Avro International Aerospace Division,

P.O. Box 16039, Dulles International

Airport, Washington DC 20041–6039;

and Air Cruisers Company, P.O. Box

180, Belmar, New Jersey 07719–0180.

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:

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: 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 British

Aerospace Model BAe 146–100A,

–200A, –300A and Model Avro 146–

RJ70A, –RJ85A, and –RJ100A airplanes

was published in the Federal Register

on November 7, 1994 (59 FR 55382).

That action proposed to require

repetitive inspections to verify proper

deployment of the evacuation slide at

each door position, and various followon actions to correct discrepancies. That

action also proposed to require

modification of the inflation valve of the

evacuation slide, which would

terminate the repetitive inspection

requirements.

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 questions the need

for the rule since the major U.S.

operators of the affected airplanes have

accomplished the proposed actions. The

commenter also states that for over two

years there have been no reports of inservice deployment or inflation

problems in the field, since the issuance

of Air Cruisers Service Bulletin S.B.

201–25–17, dated June 4, 1992,

referenced in the proposal as the

appropriate source of service

information. However, the commenter

notes that, during an evacuation

demonstration, an isolated incident did

occur in which the inflation valve did

not inflate automatically.

From these comments, the FAA infers

that the commenter is requesting that

the rule be withdrawn. The FAA does

not concur. The FAA has received no

documentation to indicate that all

affected U.S. operators have

accomplished the actions required by

this AD. Even if that were the case,

issuance of this AD is necessary to

ensure that the required actions are

accomplished on any British Aerospace

Model BAe 146–100A, –200A, –300A

and Model Avro 146–RJ70A, –RJ85A,

and –RJ100A airplanes that may be

imported and added to the U.S. Register

in the future. Although the FAA

recognizes that there have been no cases

of failure of the slides in service, the

potential for such failures does exist
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 27017

with regard to these airplanes. This AD

action addresses that potential unsafe

condition.

This same commenter states that the

manufacturer of the inflation valve, Air

Cruisers Company, has not agreed to

provide the valves at no cost to the

operators, as was indicated in the

preamble to the notice. The commenter

states that the improved inflation valves

will cost approximately $600 each. The

FAA has verified with the manufacturer

that the required parts will cost $600

per valve. The economic impact

information, below, has been revised to

include the price of required parts.

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 added to this final rule to clarify

this long standing requirement.

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 this change will neither

significantly increase the economic

burden on any operator nor increase the

scope of the AD.

The FAA estimates that 41 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, that it will take approximately 3.5

work hours per airplane to accomplish

the required actions, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$600 per valve (4 valves per airplane).

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $107,010 or $2,610 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.

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:

95–10–15 British Aerospace Regional

Aircraft Limited, AVRO International

Aerospace Division (Formerly British

Aerospace, plc; British Aerospace

Commercial Aircraft Limited):

Amendment 39–9232. Docket 94–NM–

163–AD.

Applicability: Model British Aerospace

BAe 146–100A, –200A, –300A and Model

Avro 146–RJ70A, –RJ85A, and –RJ100A

airplanes; equipped with Air Cruisers

Company evacuation slides, as listed in

British Aerospace Service Bulletin S.B. 25–

328, Revision 2, dated July 10, 1993;

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 failure of the evacuation slide

to deploy automatically, which necessitates

the flight crew to manually deploy the slide

and subsequently could delay or impede the

evacuation of passengers during an

emergency, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 3 months after the effective date

of this AD, perform an inspection to verify

proper deployment of the evacuation slide at

each door position, in accordance with

British Aerospace Service Bulletin S.B. 25–

328, Revision 2, dated July 10, 1993.

(1) If the slide deploys properly, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 6 months.

(2) If any slide fails to deploy properly,

prior to further flight, conduct the actions

specified in paragraphs 2.A.3 through 2.A.6

of the Accomplishment Instructions of the

service bulletin.

(b) Within 8 months after the effective date

of this AD, modify the inflation valves of the

evacuation slide, in accordance with Air

Cruisers Company Service Bulletin S.B. 201–

25–17, dated June 4, 1992. Accomplishment

of this modification constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspection

requirements 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,

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.

(e) The modification shall be done in

accordance with Air Cruisers Company

Service Bulletin S.B. 201–25–17, dated June

4, 1992. The inspection shall be done in

accordance with British Aerospace Service
27018 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Bulletin S.B. 25–328, Revision 2, dated July

10, 1993, which contains the following list of

effective pages:

Page No.

Revision

level

shown

on page

Date shown on

page

1 ...................... 2 ........... July 10, 1993.

2 ...................... 1 ........... Sept. 24, 1992.

3,4 ................... Original . Aug. 21, 1992.

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 British Aerospace Holding, Inc., Avro

International Aerospace Division, P.O. Box

16039, Dulles International Airport,

Washington DC 20041–6039. 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 21, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11905 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–150–AD; Amendment

39–9236; AD 95–11–02]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10 and Model MD–

11 Series Airplanes and Model KC–10A

(Military) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all McDonnell Douglas

Model DC–10 series airplanes and

Model KC–10A (military) airplanes and

certain Model MD–11 series airplanes,

that currently requires inspections to

detect defects in the upper and lower

lock links on the nose landing gear

(NLG), and rework or replacement of

any defective link with a serviceable

link. The actions specified by that AD

are intended to prevent collapse of the

NLG. This amendment requires

accomplishment of a certain inspection

that constitutes terminating action for

the currently required inspections.

DATES: Effective June 21, 1995. The

incorporation by reference of

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Alert Service

Bulletin A32–238, dated July 15, 1994,

and McDonnell Douglas MC–11 Alert

Service Bulletin A32–47, dated July 15,

1994, listed in the regulations was

approved previously by the Director of

the Federal Register as of September 15,

1994 (59 FR 44900, August 31, 1994).

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from McDonnell Douglas Corporation,

3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,

California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Department C1–L51 (2–60). 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,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,

suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

Model DC–10 series airplanes and

Model KC–10A (military) airplanes:

Maureen Moreland, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,

Lakewood, California 90712; telephone

(310) 627–5238; fax (310) 627–5210.

For Model MD–11 series airplanes:

Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712; telephone (310) 627–

5324; fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 94–18–07,

amendment 39–9020 (59 FR 44900,

August 31, 1994), which is applicable to

all McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10

series airplanes and Model KC–10A

(military) airplanes and certain Model

MD–11 series airplanes, was published

in the Federal Register on December 8,

1994 (59 FR 63278). The action

proposed to continue to require

inspections to determine the serial

numbers and to detect defects in the

upper and lower lock links on the nose

landing gear (NLG), and rework of any

defective lock link, or replacement of

any defective lock link with a

serviceable lock link. The action also

proposed to require an off-aircraft

fluorescent penetrant inspection to

detect defects in the upper and lower

lock links on the NLG, and rework or

replacement of any defective link.

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 supports the

proposed rule.

The Air Transport Association (ATA)

of America supports the proposed rule.

However, on behalf of its members, the

ATA requests that AD 94–18–07 be

revised, rather than superseded, to

reduce the administrative time required

to incorporate the AD into maintenance

records and to avoid unnecessarily

complicated recordkeeping. The FAA

does not concur. The FAA’s current

policy is that, whenever a ‘‘substantive

change’’ is made to an existing AD that

imposes any new burden, the AD must

be superseded, rather than revised.

‘‘Substantive changes’’ are those made

to any instruction or reference that

affects the substance of the AD, and

includes part numbers, service bulletin

and manual references, compliance

times, applicability, methods of

compliance, corrective action,

inspection requirements, and effective

dates. In the case of this AD rulemaking

action, the changes being made to the

existing AD are considered substantive.

This superseding AD is assigned a new

amendment number and new AD

number; the previous amendment is

deleted from the system. This procedure

facilitates the efforts of the Principal

Maintenance Inspectors in tracking AD’s

and ensuring that the affected operators

have incorporated the latest changes

into their maintenance programs.

With regard to paperwork changes

required by affected operators, section

121.380(a)(2)(v) of the Federal Aviation

Regulations [14 CFR 121.380(a)(2)(v)],

‘‘Maintenance recording requirements,’’

requires that persons holding an

operating certificate and operating

under part 121 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR part 121) must

keep records ‘‘indicating the current

status of applicable airworthiness

directives, including the method of

compliance.’’ Whether an existing AD is

superseded or revised, the new AD is

assigned a new AD number: a

superseding AD is assigned a new 6-

digit AD number; a revising AD retains

the original 6-digit AD number, but an

‘‘R1’’ is added to it. In either case, the

new AD is identified by its ‘‘new’’ AD

number, not by the ‘‘old’’ AD number.

In light of this, affected operators

updating their maintenance records to

indicate the current AD status would

have to record a new AD number in all

cases, regardless of whether the AD is a

superseding or a revising AD. Further,

operators are always given credit for