27056 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

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 (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 prevent tube puncture of the ramp/slide

evacuation system, which could delay or

impede the evacuation of passengers during

an emergency, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 36 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the off-wing ramp/

slide evacuation systems in accordance with

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–25–0218, dated

December 15, 1994, and BFGoodrich Service

Bulletin 101630/655/656–25–269, dated

October 28, 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, Los

Angeles 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, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12442 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–51–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120 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 EMBRAER Model EMB–120

series airplanes. This proposal would

require removal of the upper channel

fairings and their shims; and rework of

the riveting holes, the aileron sealing

canvas (aerodynamic seals), and the

protective covers of the trim tab hinge

fittings of the aileron and elevator. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

binding of the aileron due to water

freezing between the upper channel

fairings and the surface of the leading

edge of the aileron. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent water from freezing

between the upper channel fairings and

the surface of the leading edge on the

aileron, which could result in binding of

the aileron and subsequent reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

51–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

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.

(EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225,

Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Small

Airplane Directorate, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, Campus Building,

1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite 2–160,

College Park, Georgia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Haynes, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ACE–117A, FAA,

Small Airplane Directorate, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office, Campus

Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite

2–160, College Park, Georgia 30337–

2748; telephone (404) 305–7377; fax

(404) 305–7348.

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 95–NM–51–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.

95–NM–51–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Departamento de Aviacao Civil

(DAC), which is the airworthiness

authority for Brazil, recently notified the

FAA that an unsafe condition may exist

on certain EMBRAER Model EMB–120

series airplanes. The DAC advises that

it has received reports of binding of the

aileron on Model EMB–120 series

airplanes. In these instances, movement

of the aileron was possible, but difficult.

All of the airplanes involved were

equipped with upper channel fairings

(Kevlar strips) on the aileron.

Investigation revealed that, when the

upper channel fairings are wet and

come in contact with a surface of the

leading edge of the aileron that is also

wet, water can freeze between the two

parts. This condition, if not corrected,

could result in binding of the aileron

and subsequent reduced controllability

of the airplane.

EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin

No. 120–57–0021, Change 1, dated

September 10, 1993, which describes

procedures for removal of the upper

channel fairings and their shims; and

rework of the riveting holes, the aileron
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27057

sealing canvas (aerodynamic seals), and

the protective covers of the trim tab

hinge fittings of the aileron and elevator.

Rework of the aileron sealing canvas

involves increasing the gaps between

the aileron sealing canvas and the wing

fittings, and enlarging the drain hole on

the protective covers of the trim tab

hinge fittings of the aileron and the

elevator. Removal of the fairings and

their shims will allow more water to

enter the region of the aileron sealing

canvas (aerodynamic seals). The DAC

classified this service bulletin as

mandatory in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in Brazil.

This airplane model is manufactured

in Brazil and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of § 21.29 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29)

and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the DAC has kept the FAA informed of

the situation described above. The FAA

has examined the findings of the DAC,

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

removal of the upper channel fairings

and their shims; and rework of the

riveting holes, the aileron sealing canvas

(aerodynamic seals), and the protective

covers of the trim tab hinge fittings of

the aileron and elevator. 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 long-standing requirement.

The FAA estimates that 263 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 10 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. The cost for

required parts would be negligible.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $157,800, or

$600 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:

Embraer: Docket 95–NM–51–AD.

Applicability: Model EMB–120 series

airplanes; as listed in EMBRAER Service

Bulletin No. 120–57–0021, Change 1, dated

September 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 binding of the aileron and

subsequent reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 3,000 hours time-in-service after

the effective date of this AD, remove the

upper channel fairings and their shims; and

rework the riveting holes, the aileron sealing

canvas (aerodynamic seals), and the

protective covers of the trim tab hinge fittings

of the aileron and elevator; in accordance

with EMBRAER Service Bulletin No. 120–

57–0021, Change 1, dated September 10,

1993.

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

person shall install any aileron sealing

canvas having part number (P/N) 120–08130–

001, 120–08131–001, or 120–08132–001, on

any airplane unless that canvas has been

reworked in accordance with EMBRAER

Service Bulletin No. 120–57–0021, Change 1,

dated September 10, 1993.

(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, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Small 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, 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.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.
27058 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12441 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 93–ANE–57]

Airworthiness Directives; International

Aero Engines AG Model V2500–A1

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: This action withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

that proposed a new airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to

International Aero Engines AG Model

V2500–A1 engines. That action would

have required the installation of

damping wires and anti-fret coating on

high pressure compressor disks and

blades. Since the issuance of the NPRM,

the FAA has determined that the

probability of an unsafe condition is

extremely remote, and that all affected

engines in service have been modified

as proposed. Accordingly, the proposed

rule is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marc Bouthillier, Aerospace Engineer,

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299; telephone (617) 238–7135,

fax (617) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

add a new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to International Aero Engines

AG (IAE) Model V2500–A1 engines, was

published in the Federal Register on

December 1, 1993 (58 FR 63307). The

proposed rule would have required the

installation of damping wires and an

anti-fret coating to high pressure

compressor (HPC) disks and blades.

That action was prompted by seven

occurrences of HPC stage 7 and 8 blade

failures. The proposed actions were

intended to prevent HPC blade failures,

which could result in engine inflight

shutdowns.

Since the issuance of that notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM), the FAA

has conducted additional airworthiness

assessment of the described problem,

and has determined that the probability

of a hazardous or unsafe condition is

extremely remote. This assessment was

conducted in accordance with the

guidelines of a continued airworthiness

assessment methodology process

currently in use.

In addition, the FAA has determined

that all affected engines have been

modified as proposed. Accordingly, the

proposed rule is hereby withdrawn.

Withdrawal of this notice of proposed

rulemaking constitutes only such action,

and does not preclude the agency from

issuing another notice in the future, nor

does it commit the agency to any course

of action in the future.

Since this action only withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking, it is

neither a proposed nor a final rule and

therefore, is not covered under

Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034,

February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Withdrawal

Accordingly, the notice of proposed

rulemaking, Docket 93–ANE–57,

published in the Federal Register on

December 1, 1993, (58 FR 63307), is

withdrawn.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

May 15, 1995.

James C. Jones,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12439 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Secretary

24 CFR Parts 10 and 966

[Docket No. R–95–1772; FR–3819–P–01]

RIN 2501–AB92

Public Housing Lease and Grievance

Procedures

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: HUD is proposing to amend

its regulations governing eviction from

public and Indian housing. If HUD

determines that local law requires a preeviction due process hearing in court

(known as a ‘‘due process

determination’’), a tenant is not entitled

to a hearing by the housing authority

before eviction for drug-related or other

criminal activity. This proposed rule

would clarify that HUD is not required

to use notice and comment rulemaking

procedures for issuance of a due process

determination.

DATES: Comments due date: July 21,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit comments regarding

this proposed rule to the Office of

General Counsel, Rules Docket Clerk,

Room 10276, Department of Housing

and Urban Development, 451 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410–

0500. Communications should refer to

the above docket number and title and

to the specific sections in the regulation.

Facsimile (FAX) comments are not

acceptable. A copy of each

communication submitted will be

available for public inspection and

copying during regular business hours

at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sherone Ivey, Acting Director,

Occupancy Division, Room 4206,

Department of Housing and Urban

Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20410; Telephone

numbers (202) 708–0744; (202) 708–

0850 (TDD). (These are not toll-free

numbers.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Issuance of Due Process

Determination

This proposed rule would clarify that

HUD is not required to use HUD’s notice

and comment rulemaking procedures

when HUD determines that the law of

a jurisdiction requires a due process

court hearing before eviction of a public

housing tenant.

Under 42 U.S.C. 1437d(k), a housing

authority is generally required to

provide a tenant with the opportunity

for an administrative hearing before the

commencement of eviction proceedings

in the local landlord-tenant courts.

However, the statute and the

implementing HUD regulations at 24

CFR part 966 permit the housing

authority to bypass the administrative

hearing for evictions involving a tenant

engaged in certain criminal activity.

Specifically, 24 CFR 966.51 requires

that the eviction involve ‘‘any drugrelated criminal activity’’ or ‘‘[a]ny

criminal activity that threatens the

health, safety or right to peaceful

enjoyment of the premises’’ of the

public housing residents and

employees. Furthermore, HUD must

first determine that the law of the

jurisdiction requires a pre-eviction court

hearing that provides the basic elements

of due process as further defined by 24

CFR 966.53(c). This determination is

known as a ‘‘due process

determination.’’ (24 CFR 966.51(2)(i)).