Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 8593

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 39–8970 (59 FR

35240, July 11, 1994), and by adding a

new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Boeing: Docket 94–NM–251–AD. Supersedes

AD 94–14–21, Amendment 39–8970.

Applicability: Model 747–400 series

airplanes having line numbers 696 through

1036 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 (d) 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.

Note 2: Paragraph (a) of this AD merely

restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of

AD 94–14–21, amendment 39–8970. As

allowed by the phrase, ‘‘unless accomplished

previously,’’ if those requirements of AD 94–

14–21 have already been accomplished, this

AD does not require that those actions be

repeated.

To prevent the possibility of an all-flapsup landing due to the loss of control of flap

operations, accomplish the following:

(a) For airplanes having serial numbers 696

through 1019 inclusive, and 1021 through

1026 inclusive: Within 30 days after August

10, 1994 (the effective date of AD 94–14–21,

amendment 39–8970), revise the input wiring

for the flap control unit (FCU) in accordance

with Boeing Service Bulletin 747–27A2346,

Revision 1, dated May 19, 1994, or Revision

2, dated January 12, 1995.

(b) For airplanes having serial numbers

1020, and 1027 through 1036 inclusive:

Within 30 days after the effective date of this

AD, revise the input wiring for the FCU in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

747–27A2346, Revision 2, dated January 12,

1995.

(c) For airplanes having serial numbers 696

through 1036 inclusive: Within 120 days

after the effective date of this AD, perform

the additional systems test for the wiring of

the trailing edge flap in accordance with

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–27A2346,

Revision 2, dated January 12, 1995.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Aircraft Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished. Issued in Renton,

Washington, on February 9, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–3752 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–218–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Aircraft Limited Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to all

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, that

currently requires modification of the

mounting structure of the elevator

controls on the rear pressure bulkhead.

That proposal was prompted by results

of a structural analysis which indicate

that certain structure in the elevator

control system may be subject to

deformation when maximum load is

exerted by the pilot(s) in the event of a

jam in the elevator control cables. This

action would limit the applicability of

the rule. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

reduced controllability of the airplane

due to structural deformation in the

elevator control system.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

218–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

Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029,

Dulles International Airport,

Washington, DC 20041–6029. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2148; fax (206) 227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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–218–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.
8594 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules

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–218–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On June 23, 1994, the FAA issued AD

94–14–07, amendment 39–8959 (59 FR

35247, July 11, 1994), applicable to all

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, to

require modification of the mounting

structure of the elevator controls on the

rear pressure bulkhead. That action was

prompted by the results of a structural

analysis which indicate that certain

structure in the elevator control system

may be subject to deformation when

maximum load is exerted by the pilot(s)

in the event of a jam in the elevator

control cables. The requirements of that

AD are intended to prevent reduced

controllability of the airplane due to

structural deformation in the elevator

control system.

Since the issuance of that AD,

Jetstream has issued Revision 1 (dated

October 3, 1994) to Service Bulletin J41–

53–012–41262A, which was referenced

in AD 94–17–04 as the appropriate

source of service information. This

revision of the service bulletin is

essentially the same as the originally

issued version, insofar as the

modification procedures described.

However, Revision 1 has been revised to

specify that, if previously installed, a

certain modification does not need to be

reinstalled. Additionally, the effectivity

listing in Revision 1 has been limited to

specify only those Model 4101 airplanes

on which the modification has not been

accomplished. The Civil Aviation

Authority (CAA), which is the

airworthiness authority for the United

Kingdom, classified Revision 1 as

mandatory.

Since AD 94–14–07 currently is

applicable to ‘‘all’’ Jetstream Model

4101 airplanes, the FAA finds that the

applicability of that AD must be revised

to limit it to only airplanes on which the

subject modification has not been

accomplished. Airplanes that have been

modified previously are considered to

be in compliance with the existing AD,

and are not subject to the unsafe

condition addressed by it. In accordance

with part 39 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR part 39) and

Executive Order 12866, the purpose of

AD’s is to mandate actions to correct

unsafe conditions while imposing the

least necessary burden on the public.

The unsafe condition addressed by this

AD action has been found not to exist

with regard to airplanes previously

modified; therefore, to make the AD

applicable to airplanes on which it has

been determined that the unsafe

condition does not exist would be

contrary to this purpose.

Additionally, the FAA considers that

revising the applicability of the existing

AD is necessary in order to eliminate

any ambiguity regarding whether or not

airplanes previously modified would be

required to be modified again. –

This airplane model is manufactured

in the United Kingdom 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 CAA has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the CAA,

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 revise

AD 94–14–07 to limit the applicability

to airplanes that have not been

previously modified in accordance with

the requirements of the AD. This

proposed revision would continue to

require modification of the mounting

structure of the elevator controls on the

rear pressure bulkhead on airplanes not

previously modified.

The FAA estimates that 8 airplanes of

U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 17 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be supplied by the manufacturer

at no cost to the operators. Based on

these figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $8,160, or $1,020 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

removing amendment 39–8959 (59 FR

35247, July 11, 1994), and by adding a

new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Jetstream Aircraft Limited: Docket 94–NM–

218–AD. Revises AD 94–14–07,

Amendment 39–8959.

Applicability: Model 4101 airplanes, as

listed in Jetstream Service Bulletin J41–53–

012–41262A, Revision 1, dated October 3,

1994, 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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 8595

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 structural deformation in the

elevator control system, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 6 months after August 10, 1994

(the effective date of AD 94–14–07,

amendment 39–8959), modify the mounting

structure of the elevator controls on the rear

pressure bulkhead, in accordance with

Jetstream Service Bulletin J41–53–012, dated

November 30, 1993, or Revision 1, dated

October 3, 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,

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.

(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 the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished. Issued in Renton,

Washington, on February 9, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–3753 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 91–NM–195–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–400 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: This action withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

that proposed to supersede an existing

airworthiness directive (AD), applicable

to certain Boeing Model 747–400 series

airplanes. That action would have

required the modification of certain

distance measuring equipment (DME),

which would terminate a previously

required limitation of the FAAapproved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) that prohibits terminal area and

enroute area navigation operations

under certain conditions. Since the

issuance of the NPRM, the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) has

issued separate rulemaking that requires

installation of the modification

proposed in the NPRM. Accordingly,

the proposed rule is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete

Skaves, Aerospace Engineer, Systems

and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2795; fax (206) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

supersede AD 91–12–08, amendment

39–7019 (56 FR 25362, June 4, 1991),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 747–

400 series airplanes, was published in

the Federal Register on November 1,

1991 (56 FR 56177). The proposed rule

would have required modification of

certain distance measuring equipment

(DME). Accomplishment of that

modification would have constituted

terminating action for a previously

required limitation of the FAAapproved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) that prohibits terminal area and

enroute area navigation operations

under certain conditions. That action

was prompted by the development of a

design change that would prevent

erroneous distance information from

being displayed to the flight crew and

sent to the flight management computer

(FMC). The proposed actions were

intended to prevent decreased enroute

area navigation (RNAV) accuracy or

decreased terminal area navigation

capabilities, which may then necessitate

missed approaches, the use of

alternative means of navigation for

approach, or diversion to an alternative

airport.

Since the issuance of that NPRM, the

FAA issued AD 94–02–02 (59 FR 2519,

January 18, 1994), applicable to

Rockwell International/Collins Air

Transport Division DME–700 Distance

Measuring Equipment. (A correction of

the rule was published in the Federal

Register on February 23, 1994 (59 FR

8519)). That AD requires, in part,

modification of certain DME units,

including those units installed on the

Boeing Model 747–400 series airplanes

that would have been applicable to the

rule proposed by the NPRM.

Since modification of the DME units

is now required by AD 94–02–02, the

FAA finds that the proposed

requirements of the NPRM are

unnecessary, since they would merely

duplicate those currently required by

AD 94–02–02. Accordingly, the

proposed rule is hereby withdrawn.

Additionally, since the modification

required by AD 94–02–02 eliminates the

need for the AFM limitation required by

AD 91–12–08, the FAA is considering

rescinding that AD by a separate

rulemaking action.

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 91–NM–195–AD,

published in the Federal Register on

November 1, 1991 (56 FR 56177), is

withdrawn.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

9, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–3751 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 876

[Docket No. 94N–0380]

Gastroenterology-Urology Devices;

Effective Date of the Requirement for

Premarket Approval of the Implanted

Mechanical/Hydraulic Urinary

Continence Device

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; opportunity to

request a change in classification.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is proposing to

require the filing of a premarket

approval application (PMA) or a notice