3588 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules

sailplanes equipped with a horizontal

stabilizer and elevator, and should only

be written against sailplanes equipped

with the ‘‘main L4 fitting of the all

flying tailplane’’ as specified in GlaserDirks Technical Note 301/15.

The FAA concurs and has changed

the Applicability section of the proposal

to include the following: ‘‘Model DG–

100 sailplanes equipped with the main

L4 fitting of the all flying tailplane.’’

Since sufficient time has elapsed

between the time the proposal was

issued and coordination of the comment

proposed above with the FAA, the

manufacturer, and foreign airworthiness

authority, the FAA has decided to

reopen the comment period to provide

additional time for public comment.

The FAA estimates that 16 sailplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 workhour per sailplane

to accomplish the proposed inspection,

and that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Based on

these figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $960. This figure is

based on the assumption that no

affected owner/operator has

accomplished the proposed one-time

inspection. The FAA anticipates that

several owners/operators have already

accomplished this inspection, thus

reducing the proposed cost impact upon

the public.

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 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) 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 has been placed 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 a new AD to read as follows:

Glaser-Dirks Flugzeugbau GMBH: Docket

No. 92–CE–21–AD.

Applicability: Model DG–100 sailplanes

(all serial numbers) that are equipped with

the main L4 fitting of the all flying tailplane,

certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required within the next 100

hours time-in-service after the effective date

of this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent loss of control of the sailplane

caused by failure of the tailplane main fitting,

accomplish the following:

(a) Inspect the tailplane main fitting to

ensure that the welding covers the entire wall

thickness of the fitting in accordance with

the instructions in paragraph 3 of the

Enclosure to Technical Note (TN) 301/15,

which is a supplement to Glaser-Dirks TN

301/15, dated July 7, 1989.

(b) If the welding does not cover the entire

wall thickness of the fitting, prior to further

flight, modify the tailplane main fitting in

accordance with instructions in paragraph 4

of the Enclosure to TN 301/15, which is a

supplement to Glaser-Dirks TN 301/15, dated

July 7, 1989.

Note 1: The service information specifies

inspection and possible modification for the

Model DG–100 Elan sailplanes, as well as the

Model DG–100 sailplanes. Even though the

Model DG–100 Elan sailplanes are not

certificated for operation in the United States

under the provisions of section 21.29 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29),

the actions in this AD are recommended for

any of these sailplanes certificated otherwise,

i.e., experimental category.

(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 sailplanes to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance times that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. The request

should be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(e) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the documents referred

to herein upon request to Glaser-Dirks

Flugzeugbau GmbH, lm Schollengarten 19–

20, 7520 Buchsal 4, Germany; or may

examine these documents at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January

10, 1995.

Barry D. Clements,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–1129 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 93–CE–59–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Grob Luft

Und Raumfahrt Models G102 Astir CS,

Club Astir IIb, Twin Astir, Speed Astir,

Standard Astir II, and Speed Astir IIb

Sailplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to certain Grob

Luft Und Raumfahrt (Grob) Models

G102 Astir CS, Club Astir IIb, Twin

Astir, Speed Astir, Standard Astir II,

and Speed Astir IIb sailplanes. The

proposed action would require

inspecting all elevator and rudder

hinges for damage (delamination,

cracks, corrosion, or buckling), and

repairing any damaged parts. Several

occurrences of inner elevator hinges

separating during flight prompted the

proposed action. The actions specified

by the proposed AD are intended to

prevent these hinges from separating,

which could result in loss of control of

the sailplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 93–CE–59–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules 3589

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

Grob Luft und Raumfahrt D–8939

Mattsies, Germany. This information

also may be examined at the Rules

Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Herman C. Belderok, Project Officer,

Sailplanes, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft 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. 93–CE–59–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. 93–CE–59–AD, Room

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

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

The Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

Germany, recently notified the FAA that

an unsafe condition may exist on certain

Grob Models G102 Astir CS, Club Astir

IIb, Twin Astir, Speed Astir, Standard

Astir II, and Speed Astir IIb sailplanes.

The LBA advises that inner elevator

hinges have separated on several of the

above referenced sailplanes. This

condition, if not detected and corrected,

could result in loss of control of the

sailplane.

Grob has issued Repair Instruction

No. 306–27/1 to Service Bulletin TM

306–27/1, dated June 4, 1991, which

specifies procedures for inspecting all

elevator and rudder hinges for damage

(delamination, cracks, corrosion, or

buckling), and repairing any damaged

hinges. The LBA classified this service

bulletin as mandatory and issued LBA

AD 89–209/2 Grob, dated June 26, 1991,

in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these sailplanes in

Germany.

This sailplane model is manufactured

in Germany 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 LBA has kept the FAA informed of

the situation described above.

The FAA has examined the findings

of the LBA, 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 in other Grob Models G102

Astir CS, Club Astir IIb, Twin Astir,

Speed Astir, Standard Astir II, and

Speed Astir IIb sailplanes of the same

type design, the proposed AD would

require inspecting all elevator and

rudder hinges for damage

(delamination, cracks, corrosion, or

buckling), and repairing any damaged

parts. The proposed actions would be

accomplished in accordance with the

III. Procedure section of Grob Repair

Instruction No. 306–27/1 to Service

Bulletin TM 306–27/1, dated June 4,

1991.

The compliance time for the proposed

AD is presented in calendar time

instead of hours TIS. The FAA has

determined that a calendar time for

compliance is the most desirable

method because the unsafe condition

described by the proposed AD is caused

by corrosion. Corrosion can occur on

sailplanes regardless of whether the

airplane is in service or in storage.

Therefore, to ensure that corrosion is

detected and corrected on all airplanes

within a reasonable period of time

without inadvertently grounding any

sailplanes, a compliance schedule based

upon calendar time instead of hours TIS

is proposed.

The FAA estimates that 146 sailplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 workhour per sailplane

to accomplish the proposed action, and

that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Based on

these figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $8,760. This figure is

based on the assumption that no

affected sailplane owner/operator has

accomplished the proposed inspection.

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 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) 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 has been placed 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.
3590 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Proposed Rules

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new AD to read as follows:

Grob Luft Und Raumfahrt: Docket No. 93–

CE–59–AD.

Applicability: Models G102 Astir CS, Club

Astir IIb, Twin Astir, Speed Astir, Standard

Astir II, and Speed Astir IIb Sailplanes (all

serial numbers), certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required within the next 30

calendar days after the effective date of this

AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent elevator and rudder hinge

separation, which could result in loss of

control of the sailplane, accomplish the

following:

(a) Visually inspect all elevator and rudder

hinges for damage (delamination, cracks,

corrosion, or buckling) in accordance with

the III. Procedure section of Grob Repair

Instruction No. 306–27/1 to Service Bulletin

TM 306–27/1, dated June 4, 1991. Prior to

further flight, repair any damaged parts in

accordance with the service information

referenced above.

Note 1: The service instructions of this AD

call for ‘‘the work to be carried out by a

competent person or an authorized aviation

workshop and has to be certified in the

logbook by an authorized inspector.’’ This

statement does not apply to sailplanes

registered in the United States and the AD is

to be accomplished using procedures in part

43 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14

CFR part 43).

(b) 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 sailplane

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. The request

should be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(d) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to Grob Luft und

Raumfahrt, D–8939 Mattsies, Germany; or

may examine this document at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January

10, 1995.

Barry D. Clements,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–1130 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–176–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10–10, –15, –30,

–40, and KC–10 (Military) 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 McDonnell Douglas DC–10 and

KC–10 series airplanes. This proposal

would require repetitive eddy current

inspections to detect fatigue cracking of

the pylon aft bulkhead flange, upper

pylon box web, fitting radius, and

adjacent tangent areas; and repair, if

necessary. This proposal is prompted by

fatigue cracking found in the wing

pylon aft bulkheads on two airplanes.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent failure of the

wing pylon aft bulkhead due to fatigue

cracking, which could lead to separation

of the engine and pylon from the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 14, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

176–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

McDonnell Douglas Corporation, P.O.

Box 1771, Long Beach, California

90801–1771, Attention: Business Unit

Manager, Technical Administrative

Support, Dept. L51, M.C. 2–98. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maureen Moreland, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L,

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,

Lakewood, California 90712; telephone

(310) 627–5238; 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–176–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–176–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On July 24, 1992, the FAA issued AD

92–17–13, amendment 39–8342 (57 FR

36894, August 17, 1992), which is

applicable to McDonnell Douglas Model

DC–10 series airplanes. That AD

requires a one-time visual inspection to

detect cracks of the wing pylon aft

bulkheads and upper spar webs, and

repair, if necessary; additionally, it

requires that operators submit a report

of their inspection findings to the FAA.

That AD was prompted by reports of

fatigue cracking that occurred in the

wing pylon aft bulkheads on two

airplanes. The fatigue cracking initiated

at fastener holes and/or at the lower

forward edge of the bulkhead flange.

Such cracking, if not detected and

corrected in a timely manner, could lead

to failure of the wing pylon aft bulkhead