Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules 26007

which could adversely affect the integrity of

the engine mount structure, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total

hours time-in-service since wing replacement

(for Model 382, 382B, 382E, and 382F series

airplanes on which the outer wings have

been replaced in accordance with MEP 12R/

13R or MEP 9T/10T); or prior to the

accumulation of 15,000 total hours time in

service (for Model 382G series airplanes); or

within 30 days after February 18, 1994 (the

effective date of AD 94–03–03, amendment

39–8809), whichever occurs later:

Accomplish the requirements of paragraphs

(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD. Repeat the

specified inspections thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 300 hours time-in-service or

100 landings, whichever occurs later, until

the requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD

are accomplished.

(1) Perform a general visual inspection to

detect loose, missing, or deformed fasteners

on the inboard and outboard upper truss

mounts of the No. 1 and No. 4 (left and right

outboard) engines, in accordance with

Lockheed Alert Service Bulletin A382–71 19/

A82–687, dated December 23, 1993. If any

loose, missing, or deformed fastener is found,

prior to further flight, replace it with a new

or serviceable fastener in accordance with

Hercules Structural Repair Manual (SRM),

Document Number SMP 583.

(2) Perform a general visual inspection to

detect cracking of the truss mount upper

tangs of the No. 1 and No. 4 engine truss

mounts in accordance with Lockheed Alert

Service Bulletin A382–71–19/A82–687,

dated December 23, 1993. If cracking is

detected in any truss mount upper tang, prior

to further flight, replace it with a new or

serviceable tang in accordance with Hercules

SRM, Document Number SMP 583, or in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA, Small Airplane Directorate.

(b) Perform an ultrasonic inspection to

detect cracking of the upper tangs of the No.

1 outboard and the No. 4 inboard engine

truss mounts, in accordance with Hercules

Service Bulletin 382–71–20, dated March 18,

1994, at the time specified in paragraph (b)(1)

or (b)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

Accomplishment of this inspection

terminates the inspections required by

paragraph (a) of this AD.

(1) For Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and

382G series airplanes on which the outer

wings have been replaced in accordance with

MEP 12R/13R or MEP 9T/10T: Accomplish

the inspection at the earlier of the times

specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(ii)

of this AD.

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total

hours time-in-service since replacement of

the outer wings, or within 90 days after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later. Or

(ii) Within 300 hours time-in-service or 100

landings, whichever occurs later, following

the immediately preceding visual inspection

accomplished in accordance with paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(2) For Model 382E and 382G series

airplanes having serial number 4561 through

5225 inclusive, other than those identified in

paragraph (b)(1) of this AD: Accomplish the

inspection at the earlier of the times specified

in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) of this

AD.

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total

hours time-in-service, or within 90 days after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later. Or

(ii) Within 300 hours time-in-service or 100

landings, whichever occurs later, following

the immediately preceding visual inspection

accomplished in accordance with paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(c) If no cracking is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (b) of this

AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 5,200 hours time-inservice.

(d) If any cracking is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (b) of this

AD: Prior to further flight, accomplish the

requirements of either paragraph (d)(1) or

(d)(2) of this AD.

(1) Replace the truss mount assembly with

a new or serviceable assembly having part

number 360013–15, –19, or –23 (for the

outboard truss mounts of the No. 1 engine),

or part number 360017–15, –19, or –23 (for

the inboard truss mounts of the No. 4

engine), as applicable, in accordance with

SRM 515C. Prior to the accumulation of

15,000 hours time-in-service after installation

of the engine truss mount assembly, perform

an ultrasonic inspection as specified in

paragraph (b) of this AD. Repeat that

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 5,200 hours time-in-service. Or

(2) Replace the truss mount assembly with

part number 360013–31 or subsequent (for

the truss mounts in the No. 1 outboard

engine), or part number 360017–31 or

subsequent (for the truss mounts of the No.

4 inboard engine), as applicable, in

accordance with SRM 515C. Such

replacement constitutes terminating action

for the requirements of this AD.

(e) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install a No. 1 outboard engine

truss mount (part number 360013–15, –19, or

–23), or a No. 4 inboard engine truss mount

(part number 360017–15, –19, or –23), on any

airplane unless the truss mount has been

inspected in accordance with SRM 151C.

(f) 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.

(g) 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 May 10,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11972 Filed 5–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–195–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9 Series Airplanes

and C–9 (Military) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9 series airplanes

and C–9 (military) airplanes, that

currently requires the implementation

of a program of structural inspections to

detect and correct fatigue cracking in

order to ensure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes as they

approach the manufacturer’s original

fatigue design life goal. This action

would require, among other things,

revision of the existing program to

require additional visual inspections of

additional structure. This proposal is

prompted by new data submitted by the

manufacturer indicating that certain

revisions to the program are necessary

in order to increase the confidence level

of the statistical program to ensure

timely detection of cracks in various

airplane structures. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent fatigue cracking that

could compromise the structural

integrity of these airplanes.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 10, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

195–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule 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
26008 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sol

Davis, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712–4137; telephone (310)

627–5233; fax (310) 627–5210.

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–195–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–195–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On January 20, 1994, the FAA issued

AD 94–03–01, amendment 39–8807 (59

FR 6538, February 11, 1994), applicable

to McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9

series airplanes and C–9 (military)

airplanes, to require implementation of

a program of structural inspections to

detect and correct fatigue cracking in

order to ensure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes as they

approach the manufacturer’s original

fatigue design life goal. That action was

prompted by new data submitted by the

manufacturer indicating that certain

revisions to the program are necessary

in order to increase the confidence level

of the statistical program to ensure

timely detection of cracks in various

airplane structures. The requirements of

that AD are intended to prevent fatigue

cracking that could compromise the

structural integrity of these airplanes.

The manufacturer has issued

McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26–

008, ‘‘DC–9 Supplemental Inspection

Document (SID),’’ Volume I, Revision 4,

dated July 1993; Volume II–10/20,

Revision 4, dated July 1993; Volume II–

20/30, Revision 5, dated July 1993;

Volume II–40, Revision 4, dated July

1993; Volume II–50, Revision 4, dated

July 1993; and Volume III–94, dated July

1994. These revisions of the SID revise

the sampling program by:

1. Deleting certain visual inspections

and adding certain other visual

inspections of certain Principal

Structural Elements (PSE’s) on certain

airplanes listed in the SID planning data

at least once during the interval between

the start date (SDATE) and the end date

(EDATE) established for each PSE (the

visual inspections are defined in

Volume III–94, Revision Highlights.);

2. Reporting the results of the new

visual inspections in addition to those

required by the existing AD; and

3. Increasing the sample size for one

PSE.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

the revised SID and has determined that

these revised procedures must be

incorporated into the affected operators’

SID programs in order to provide an

acceptable level of confidence that

cracks in PSE’s do not exist in the fleet.

Such cracking could compromise the

structural integrity of the airplane.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

supersede AD 94–03–01 to require

additional visual inspections of certain

PSE’s on certain airplanes listed in the

SID planning data, a revision of the

reporting requirements, and an increase

in the sample size for one PSE. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

revised SID described previously.

There are approximately 889 Model

DC–9 series airplanes and C–9 (military)

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

568 airplanes of U.S. registry and 38

U.S. operators would be affected by this

proposed AD.

Incorporation of the SID program into

an operator’s maintenance program, as

required by AD 94–03–01, is estimated

to necessitate 1,062 work hours (per

operator), at an average labor rate of $60

per work hour. Based on these figures,

the cost to the 38 affected U.S. operators

to incorporate the SID program is

estimated to be $2,421,360.

The incorporation of the revised

procedures proposed in this AD action

would require approximately 20

additional work hours per operator to

accomplish, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost to the 38 affected U.S.

operators to incorporate these revised

procedures into the SID program into an

operator’s maintenance program is

estimated to be $45,600.

The recurring inspection costs, as

required by AD 94–03–01, are estimated

to be 362 work hours per airplane per

year, at an average labor rate of $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

recurring inspection costs required by

AD 94–03–01 are estimated to be

$21,720 per airplane, or $12,336,960 for

the affected U.S. fleet.

The recurring inspection procedures

added to the program by this proposed

AD action would not add any new

additional economic burden on affected

operators, since certain inspections

would be added while others would be

deleted.

Based on the figures discussed above,

the total cost impact of this AD is

estimated to be $12,382,560 for the first

year, and $12,336,960 for each year

thereafter. These ‘‘total cost impact’’

figures assume that no operator has yet

accomplished any of the requirements

of this AD. However, it can be

reasonably assumed that a majority of

the affected operators has already

initiated the SID program (as required

by AD 94–03–01).

Additionally, the number of required

work hours for each proposed

inspection (and for the SID program), as

indicated above, is presented as if the

accomplishment of those actions were

to be conducted as ‘‘stand alone’’

actions. However, in actual practice,

these actions for the most part will be

accomplished coincidentally or in

combination with normally scheduled

airplane inspections and other

maintenance program tasks. Therefore,

the actual number of necessary

additional work hours will be minimal

in many instances. Further, any cost

associated with special airplane
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules 26009

scheduling can be expected to be

minimal.

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

removing amendment 39–8807 (59 FR

6538, February 11, 1994), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 94–NM–195–

AD. Supersedes AD 94–03–01,

Amendment 39–8807.

Applicability: Model DC–9–10, –20, –30,

–40, and –50 series airplanes, and C–9

(military) airplanes; certificated in any

category.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure the continuing structural

integrity of these airplanes, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within six months after March 14, 1994

(the effective date of AD 94–03–01,

amendment 39–8807), incorporate a revision

into the FAA-approved maintenance

inspection program which provides for

inspection(s) of the Principal Structural

Elements (PSE) defined in McDonnell

Douglas Report No. L26–008, ‘‘DC–9

Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),’’

Section 2 of Volume I of Revision 3, dated

April 1991, in accordance with Section 2 of

Volume III–92, dated July 1992, of the SID.

(1) Visual inspections of all PSE’s on

airplanes listed in Volume III–92, dated July

1992, of the SID planning data, are required

by the fleet leader-operator sampling (FLOS)

program at least once during the interval

between the start date (SDATE) and the end

date (EDATE) established for each PSE.

These visual inspections are defined in

Section 3 of Volume II, dated April 1991, of

the SID, and are required only for those

airplanes that have not been inspected

previously in accordance with Section 2 of

Volume II, dated April 1991, of the SID.

(2) The Non Destructive Inspection (NDI)

techniques set forth in Section 2 of Volume

II, dated April 1991, of the SID provide

acceptable methods for accomplishing the

inspections required by this paragraph.

(3) All inspection results (negative or

positive) must be reported to McDonnell

Douglas, in accordance with the instructions

contained in Section 2 of Volume III–92,

dated July 1992, of the SID. Information

collection requirements contained in this

regulation have been approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

Note 1: Volume II, dated April 1991, of the

SID is comprised of the following:

Volume designation

Revision

level

shown on

volume

Volume II–10/20 ........................... 3

Volume II–20/30 ........................... 4

Volume II–40 ................................ 3

Volume II–50 ................................ 3

Note 2: NDI inspections accomplished in

accordance with the following Volume II of

the SID provide acceptable methods for

accomplishing the inspections required by

this paragraph:

Volume designation Revision level Date of

revision

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II/20 ...................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 4 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 3 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 2 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 ........................ November 1987.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

(b) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, replace the revision of the FAAapproved maintenance inspection program

required by paragraph (a) of this AD, with a

revision that provides for inspection(s) of the

PSE’s defined in McDonnell Douglas Report

No. L26–008, ‘‘DC–9 Supplemental

Inspection Document (SID),’’ Section 2 of

Volume I of Revision 4, dated July 1993, in

accordance with Section 2 of Volume III–94,

dated July 1994, of the SID.

(1) Prior to reaching the threshold (Nth)

specified for any PSE listed in Volume III–

94, dated July 1994, of the SID, inspect each

PSE sample in accordance with the NDI

procedures set forth in Section 2 of Volume

II, dated July 1993. Thereafter, repeat the

inspection of the PSE at intervals not to

exceed DNDI/2 of the NDI procedure that is

specified in Volume III–94, dated July 1994,

of the SID.
26010 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 1995 / Proposed Rules

(2) The NDI techniques set forth in Section

2 of Volume II, dated July 1993, of the SID

provide acceptable methods for

accomplishing the inspections required by

this paragraph.

(3) Visual inspections of all PSE’s on

airplanes listed in Volume III–94, dated July

1994, of the SID planning data, are required

by the fleet leader-operator sampling (FLOS)

program at least once during the interval

between the start date (SDATE) and the end

date (EDATE) established for each PSE.

These visual inspections are defined in

Section 3 of Volume II, dated July 1993, of

the SID, and are required only for those

airplanes that have not been inspected

previously in accordance with Section 2 of

Volume II, dated July 1993, of the SID.

(4) For those FLOS PSE’s which do not

have a Normal Maintenance Visual

Inspection specified in Section 3 of Volume

II, dated July 1993, of the SID, the procedure

for general visual inspection is as follows:

Perform an inspection of the general PSE area

for cleanliness, presence of foreign objects,

security of parts, cracks, corrosion, and

damage.

(5) All inspection results (negative or

positive) must be reported to McDonnell

Douglas, in accordance with the instructions

contained in Section 2 of Volume III–94,

dated July 1994, of the SID. Information

collection requirements contained in this

regulation have been approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

Note 3: Volume II, dated July 1993, of the

SID is comprised of the following:

Volume designation

Revision

level

shown on

volume

Volume II–10/20 ........................... 4

Volume II–20/30 ........................... 5

Volume II–40 ................................ 4

Volume II–50 ................................ 4

Note 4: NDI inspections accomplished in

accordance with the following Volume II of

the SID provide acceptable methods for

accomplishing the inspections required by

this paragraph:

Volume designation Revision level Date of

revision

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 4 ........................ July 1993.

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–10/20 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II/20 ...................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 5 ........................ July 1993.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 4 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 3 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 2 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–20/30 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 ........................ November 1987.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 ........................ July 1993.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–40 ..................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 ........................ July 1993.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 ........................ April 1991.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 ........................ April 1990.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 ........................ June 1989.

Volume II–50 ..................................................................................................................................................... Original ............. November 1987.

(c) Any cracked structure detected during

the inspections required by either paragraph

(a) or (b) of this AD must be repaired before

further flight, in accordance with a method

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate.

Note 5: Requests for approval of any PSE

repair that would affect the FAA-approved

maintenance inspection program that is

required by this AD should include a damage

tolerance assessment for that PSE.

(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, Los

Angeles ACO. Operators shall submit their

requests through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Los Angeles ACO. Alternative

methods of compliance previously granted

for amendment 39–8807, AD 94–03–01,

continue to be considered as acceptable

alternative methods of compliance with this

amendment.

Note 6: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Manager, Los Angeles

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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 10,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11973 Filed 5–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Parole Commission

28 CFR Part 2

Parole Date Advancements for

Substance Abuse Treatment Program

Completion

AGENCY: United States Parole

Commission, Justice.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Parole Commission

is proposing to amend its regulations on

superior program achievement to permit

a prisoner to be considered for a special

advancement of the prisoner’s

presumptive release date, by up to

twelve months, if the prisoner is a nonviolent offender who has completed a

program of treatment for a recognized

problem of substance abuse and

dependence. Although the existing

regulation already sets forth a schedule

of permissible advancements for

superior program achievement, the