Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27705

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

replacement of the return filter

diaphragm assemblies on hydraulic

systems 1 and 2 with modified filter

units having new diaphragms. 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 119 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be provided by the parts

manufacturer at no cost to operators.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $14,280, or

$120 per airplane.

The total cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Fokker: Docket 95–NM–38–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplanes equipped with Aircraft Porous

Media Europe (APME) Limited hydraulic

return filter assemblies having part numbers

(P/N) QA07236 and QA07237, all serial

numbers; 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 overpressure in the hydraulic

return system, which could result in reduced

braking performance and/or blown tires due

to brake overheating, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, replace the return filters, P/N’s

QA07236 and QA07237, on hydraulic

systems 1 and 2, respectively, with modified

return filter units, in accordance with Fokker

Service Bulletin SBF100–29–025, dated

December 31, 1993.

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

person shall install on any airplane a return

filter unit, P/N QA07236 or QA07237, on

hydraulic system 1 or 2, respectively, unless

that unit has been modified in accordance

with Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100–29–

025, dated December 31, 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,

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 §§ 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 19,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12827 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–162–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model

400, 400A, and MU–300–10 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 Beech Model 400, 400A, and

MU–300–10 airplanes. This proposal

would require installation of an

improved adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seats and replacement of the

existing aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies with steel assemblies. This
27706 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules

proposal is prompted by reports of

incomplete latching of the existing

adjustment mechanism and cracked

reinforcement assemblies, which could

result in sudden shifting of a flightcrew

seat. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

such shifting of a flightcrew seat, which

could impair the flightcrew’s ability to

control the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 5, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

162–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

Raytheon Aircraft Company, P. O. Box

85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Small

Airplane Directorate, Wichita Aircraft

Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road,

Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport,

Wichita, Kansas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Engler, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ACE–118W, FAA,

Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita

Aircraft Certification Office, 1801

Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone (316) 946–4122; fax (316)

946–4407.

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–162–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–162–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received several reports

of incomplete latching of the adjustment

mechanism on a flightcrew seat on

Beech Model 400 series airplanes,

which can result in a sudden shift of the

seat position. The latching pins are

designed to go into an adjustment hole

on each rear leg assembly of the crew

seat. However, due to the rigidity of the

pin/tube assembly, both pins could not

slip completely into the latched position

unless the holes on both rear assemblies

were aligned. Additionally, the FAA has

received reports of cracking in the

aluminum reinforcement assemblies of

the flightcrew seat, which also may

contribute to shifting of the seat.

Shifting of a flightcrew seat during

flight, if not corrected, could impair the

flightcrews’s ability to control the

airplane.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2536,

Revision 1, dated April 1995, which

describes procedures for installing an

improved adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seats. This adjustment

mechanism will allow each pin to slide

into the latched position without both

rear leg assemblies being aligned. The

service bulletin also describes

procedures for replacing the existing

aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies with stronger steel

assemblies.

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

require installing an improved

adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seats, and replacing the

existing aluminum seat reinforcement

assemblies with steel assemblies. 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.

There are approximately 169 Model

400, 400A, and MU–300–10 airplanes of

the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 121

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 24 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed actions, and that the average

labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $700 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $258,940, or $2,140 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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27707

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:

Beech Aircraft Corporation: Docket 94–NM–

162–AD.

Applicability: Model 400 airplanes, serial

numbers RJ–1 through RJ–65 inclusive;

Model 400A airplanes, serial numbers RK–1

through RK–93 inclusive; and Model MU–

300–10 airplanes, serial numbers A1001SA

through A1011SA inclusive; certificated in

any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

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 reduced controllability of the

airplane due to a shifting of the flightcrew

seat during flight, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 200 hours time-in-service after

the effective date of this AD, install an

improved adjustment mechanism on the

flightcrew seat, and replace the existing

aluminum seat reinforcement assemblies

with steel assemblies, in accordance with

Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2536,

Revision 1, dated April 1995.

(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, Wichita

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, Wichita ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Wichita 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 19,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12828 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 91 and 135

[Docket No. 25149, Notice 95–6; Special

Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 50–

2]

RIN 2120–AF60

Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of

the Grand Canyon National Park

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM); correction.

SUMMARY: This document contains a

correction to a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM), Special Flight

Rules in the Vicinity of the Grand

Canyon National Park, SFAR No. 50–2,

published in the Federal Register on

April 12, 1995 (60 FR 18700).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mrs. Ellen Crum, Air Traffic Rules

Branch, ATP–230, Telephone (202) 267–

8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

Federal Register Document, Docket

No. 25149, published on April 12, 1995

(60 FR 18700), proposed to extend the

effectiveness of SFAR No. 50–2. The

Notice No. was omitted from the

heading.

Correction to NPRM

The NPRM, published in the Federal

Register on April 12, 1995 (60 FR

18700), is corrected as follows:

1. By adding the words ‘‘Notice 95–

6;’’, on page 18700, first column, in the

heading, after ‘‘Docket No. 25149,’’.

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 17,

1995.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of the Chief

Counsel.

[FR Doc. 95–12753 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

29 CFR Parts 1910, 1915, and 1926

[Docket No. H–049]

RIN 1218–0099

Respiratory Protection

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Scheduling of a technical panel

discussion on assigned protection

factors as part of the pending

rulemaking hearing.

SUMMARY: By this document, the

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) announces the

convening, pursuant to 29 CFR 1911.4,

of a panel to discuss certain sciencepolicy issues involved in respirator

selection, focusing on the need for, and

limitations of, assigning protection

factors for respirators by class. This

panel discussion will take place on June

15, 1995, as part of the scheduled

rulemaking hearing on respiratory

protection. Details on the process and

procedures associated with the panel

discussion are described below.

DATES: The hearing on the proposed rule

will begin on June 6, 1995. The panel

discussion is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on

June 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The hearing and panel

discussion will be held in the

auditorium of the U.S. Department of

Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Proposal: Mr. Richard Liblong, Office of

Information and Consumer Affairs,

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, 200 Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Room N3647,

Washington, D.C. 20210; (202) 219–

8151.

Hearing: Mr. Thomas Hall, Division of

Consumer Affairs, Occupational Safety