332 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Thereafter, prior to the accumulation of 4,000

landings, remove the jack pivot assembly and

replace it with a new assembly in accordance

with the service bulletin.

(c) If no cracks are found and the sidestay

assembly has not been overhauled prior to

accomplishment of the inspection required

by paragraph (a) of this AD: Prior to the

accumulation of 4,000 total landings on the

jack pivot assembly, or within 300 landings

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later, replace the jack pivot assembly

with a new assembly in accordance with

Raytheon Corporate Jets Service Bulletin SB

32–233, dated June 24, 1994. Thereafter,

prior to the accumulation of 4,000 landings

on the jack pivot assembly, replace it with a

new assembly in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(d) If any crack is found that does not

exceed the limits specified in Raytheon

Corporate Jets Service Bulletin SB 32–233,

dated June 24, 1994, accomplish the

requirements of paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), or

(d)(3) of this AD, as applicable, in accordance

with the service bulletin.

(1) For sidestay assemblies that have

accumulated 4,000 or more total landings

since new that have been overhauled prior to

accomplishment of the inspection specified

in paragraph (a) of this AD: Accomplish

paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Repeat the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 100 landings.

(ii) Prior to the accumulation of 4,000 total

landings on the jack pivot assembly since the

sidestay assembly was last overhauled, or

within 300 landings after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later: Replace the

jack pivot assembly with a new assembly.

Thereafter, prior to the accumulation of 4,000

landings on the jack pivot assembly, replace

it with a new assembly in accordance with

the service bulletin.

(2) For any sidestay assemblies that have

accumulated 4,000 or more total landings

since new that have not been overhauled:

Accomplish paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii)

of this AD.

(i) Repeat the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 100 landings.

(ii) Within 300 landings after the effective

date of this AD, replace the jack pivot

assembly with a new assembly. Thereafter,

prior to the accumulation of 4,000 landings

on the jack pivot assembly, replace it with a

new assembly in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(3) For sidestay assemblies that have

accumulated less than 4,000 total landings

since new: Accomplish paragraphs (d)(3)(i)

and (d)(3)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Repeat the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 100 landings.

(ii) Prior to the accumulation of 4,000 total

landings on the jack pivot assembly, or

within 300 landings after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later, replace the

jack pivot assembly with a new assembly.

Thereafter, prior to the accumulation of 4,000

landings on the jack pivot assembly, replace

it with a new assembly in accordance with

the service bulletin.

(e) If, during any inspection required by

this AD, any crack is found that exceeds the

limits specified in paragraph 2.B.(6)(c) of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Raytheon

Corporate Jets Service Bulletin SB 32–233,

dated June 24, 1994: Prior to further flight,

replace the cracked pivot assembly with a

new assembly in accordance with the service

bulletin. Thereafter, prior to the

accumulation of 4,000 landings on the jack

pivot assembly, replace it with a new

assembly in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(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,

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.

(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.

(h) The inspections and replacements shall

be done in accordance with Raytheon

Corporate Jets Service Bulletin SB 32–233,

dated June 24, 1994. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be

obtained from Raytheon Corporate Jets, Inc.,

3 Bishops Square Street, Albans Road West,

Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL109NE, United

Kingdom. Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(i) This amendment becomes effective on

February 3, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 21, 1994.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–50 Filed 1–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 93–NM–229–AD; Amendment

39–9103; AD 94–26–08]

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F27 Series Airplanes (Excluding

Mark 050 Series Airplanes)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Fokker Model F27

series airplanes, that requires

accomplishment of certain structural

modifications. This amendment is

prompted by reports of incidents

involving fatigue cracking and corrosion

in transport category airplanes that are

approaching or have exceeded their

economic design goal. These incidents

have jeopardized the airworthiness of

the affected airplanes. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent degradation in the structural

capabilities of the affected airplanes.

This action also reflects the FAA’s

decision that long term continued

operational safety should be assured by

actual modification of the airframe

rather than repetitive inspections.

DATES: Effective February 3, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of February 3,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199

North Fairfax Street, Alexandria,

Virginia 22314. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark Quam, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2145; fax (206) 227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Fokker

Model F27 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

March 14, 1994 (59 FR 11737). That

action proposed to require certain

structural modifications of certain

Fokker Model F27 series airplanes prior

to their economic design goal. –

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received. –

One commenter supports the

proposed rule. –

One commenter requests a revision to

the applicability statement to specify

the series of Fokker Model F27 airplanes
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 333

affected by the proposal. The

commenter states that listing the series

of the affected airplane model in the

proposal would avoid confusion. The

commenter notes that attempting to list

all exclusions, as in the proposal, would

require listing all future series and

derivatives of future models, which

would be impossible. The FAA concurs.

The final rule has been revised to

specify that the rule is applicable to

Model F27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400,

500, 600, and 700 airplanes.–

This commenter also requests that the

proposal be revised to specify the

service bulletins referenced in Fokker

Report Number SE–278, ‘‘F27 Aging

Aircraft Project—Final Document,’’

Issue 3, dated February 1, 1993

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Fokker

Report’’), rather than merely referencing

Part II of the Fokker Report, as was done

in the proposal. The commenter

requests this change because Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/57–68, which was

referenced in Part II of the Fokker

Report, has been revised since issuance

of the Fokker Report. Thus, this

commenter contends that referring to

the Fokker Report will not reflect this

latest revision to that service bulletin.

One commenter notes that the

Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD), which is

the airworthiness authority of the

Netherlands, has issued a correction to

Netherlands Airworthiness Directive

(BLA) 91–058/5 (A), dated July 16, 1993,

to reference Revision 1 of Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/57–58, dated May

17, 1993.

The FAA concurs in part. Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/57–68, Revision 1,

dated May 17, 1993, was revised to

correct the reference to the Netherlands

airworthiness directive number, to add

further explanatory information in the

Description section of the service

bulletin, and to make minor editorial

changes to the Accomplishment

Instructions. The FAA finds that none of

these changes are substantive in nature;

therefore, these changes do not warrant

a revision to the specific service

information referenced in the final rule.

However, the FAA recognizes that

operators may choose to comply with

Revision 1 of that service bulletin. For

those operators, a new NOTE 2 has been

added to paragraph (a) of the final rule

stating that compliance with Revision 1

of that service bulletin would constitute

compliance with the requirements of

Fokker Service Bulletin F27/57–68,

dated July 17, 1992, which is referenced

in the Fokker Report. Further, when the

Fokker Report is revised to incorporate

substantive revisions of service bulletins

referenced in it, the FAA may consider

further rulemaking to incorporate those

changes. –

Several commenters request that the

proposal be revised to include the

modification of certain lower stringers

in the outer wing of the airplane

described in Fokker Service Bulletin

F27/57–70. These commenters contend

that the threshold, resource

requirements, and modification

procedures specified in Fokker Service

Bulletin 57–70 are identical to those

described in Fokker Service Bulletin

57–68; the only difference is that Fokker

Service Bulletin 57–68 specifies

modification of certain upper stringers

in the outer wing of the airplane. Fokker

Service Bulletin 57–68 is referenced in

the Fokker Report. These commenters

assert that the modifications specified in

both of these service bulletins should be

included in the requirements of the

proposed rule. Further, these

commenters note that the RLD has

classified Fokker Service Bulletin F27/

57–70 as mandatory and has issued

Netherlands Airworthiness Directive

(BLA) 93–094 in order to ensure that the

modification is accomplished on

airplanes in the Netherlands. –

The FAA does not concur that a

revision to the rule to include a

requirement for the additional

modification should be made at this

time. To do so would necessitate, under

the provisions of the Administrative

Procedure Act, reissuing the notice,

reopening the period for public

comment, considering additional

comments received, and eventually

issuing a final rule. The FAA does not

consider it appropriate to delay issuance

of this final rule further in order to

undertake those procedures. However,

the FAA may consider further

rulemaking action to require

modification of the lower stringers in

which cracking was detected

coincidentally while accomplishing the

modification described in Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/57–68.–

Several commenters request an

extension of the proposed compliance

date of January 1, 1995, to accomplish

the modification described in Fokker

Service Bulletin F27/57–68, which is

one of the service bulletins referenced

in the Fokker Report. For airplanes that

have accumulated more than 30,000

total landings, that Fokker service

bulletin recommends accomplishment

of the modification of certain upper

stringers of the outer wing prior to

January 1, 1995. These commenters state

that such a compliance time would

impose a tremendous economic burden,

since a majority of the airplanes in their

fleet have already accumulated more

than 30,000 total landings; therefore,

some of these commenters suggest a

compliance date of January 1, 1996,

instead. One of these commenters

requests that the compliance time be

revised to an interval that coincides

with the operator’s regularly scheduled

maintenance.–

The FAA concurs that the compliance

time for accomplishing the modification

described in Fokker Service Bulletin

F27/57–68, Revision 1, dated May 17,

1993, may be extended to January 1,

1996, for airplanes that have

accumulated more than 30,000 total

landings. However, the FAA finds that

in order to ensure safety in the interim,

an additional x-ray inspection must be

performed until such time that the

airplane is modified, or prior to January

1, 1996. This extension to the

compliance time should allow operators

to accomplish the modification

coincidentally with regularly scheduled

maintenance. Accordingly, the final rule

has been revised to add a new paragraph

(b) to specify this provision. –

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 added to this final rule to clarify

this requirement. –

Additionally, the FAA has recently

reviewed the figures it has used over the

past several years in calculating the

economic impact of AD activity. In

order to account for various inflationary

costs in the airline industry, the FAA

has determined that it is necessary to

increase the labor rate used in these

calculations from $55 per work hour to

$60 per work hour. The economic

impact information, below, has been

revised to reflect this increase in the

specified hourly labor rate.–

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden
334 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.–

The FAA estimates that 58 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, within the initial threshold. Since

not all affected airplanes will be

required to accomplish every

modification referenced in each of the

service bulletins, the cost impact of the

modifications required by this AD is

estimated in the following table. This

cost includes the price of modification

kits, and the estimated labor rate is $60

per work hour. It does not include the

cost of downtime, planning, set up,

familiarization, or tool acquisition.

Service bulletin number

No. of affected airplanes

No. of work

hours

Cost of

parts per

airplane

Cost per

airplane

Total cost for

affected airplanes

55–33 (B–77) ........................................................................................ 5 40 $314 $2,714.00 $13,570.00

55–12 (B–67) ........................................................................................ 5 20 121 1,321.00 6,605.00

55–12 (Part II) ...................................................................................... 5 30 168 1,968.00 9,840.00

55–61 Revision 2 ................................................................................. 13 45 2,235 4,935.00– 64,155.00

57–68 Revision 1 ................................................................................. 58 556 1,279 34,639.00 2,009,062.00

53–19 (B–45) Issue 3 ........................................................................... 5 22 0 1,320.00 6,600.00

53–58 (B–149) ...................................................................................... 5 16 0 960.00 4,800.00

53–76 (B–211) ...................................................................................... 13 0.25 0 15.00 195.00

57–7 Issue 1 ......................................................................................... 5 32 400 2,320.00 11,600.00–

Based on the above figures, the total

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be 2,126,427.–

The total cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted. –

The FAA recognizes that the

modifications will require a large

number of work hours to accomplish.

However, the threshold specified in

each of the service bulletins referenced

by the Fokker Report should allow

ample time for the accomplishment of

the modifications coincidentally with

scheduled major airplane inspection

and maintenance activities, thereby

minimizing the costs associated with

special airplane scheduling.–

The FAA recognizes that the

obligation to maintain aircraft in an

airworthy condition is vital, but

sometimes expensive. Because AD’s

require specific actions to address

specific unsafe conditions, they appear

to impose costs that would not

otherwise be borne by operators.

However, because of the general

obligation of operators to maintain

aircraft in an airworthy condition, this

appearance is deceptive. Attributing

those costs solely to the issuance of this

AD is unrealistic because, in the interest

of maintaining safe aircraft, most

prudent operators would accomplish

the required actions even if they were

not required to do so by the AD. –

A full cost-benefit analysis has not

been accomplished for this AD. As a

matter of law, in order to be airworthy,

an aircraft must conform to its type

design and be in a condition for safe

operation. The type design is approved

only after the FAA makes a

determination that it complies with all

applicable airworthiness requirements.

In adopting and maintaining those

requirements, the FAA has already

made the determination that they

establish a level of safety that is costbeneficial. When the FAA, as in this

AD, makes a finding of an unsafe

condition, this means that the original

cost-beneficial level of safety is no

longer being achieved and that the

required actions are necessary to restore

that level of safety. Because this level of

safety has already been determined to be

cost-beneficial, a full cost-benefit

analysis for this AD would be redundant

and unnecessary.–

The regulations adopted herein will

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 final rule does

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)

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 final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39–

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment –

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

94–26–08 Fokker: Amendment 39–9103.

Docket 93–NM–229–AD.

Applicability: Model F27 Mark 100, 200,

300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes, as

listed in Fokker Report Number SE–278,

‘‘F27 Aging Aircraft Project—Final

Document,’’ Issue 3, dated February 1, 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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 335

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 structural failure, accomplish

the following: –

(a) Except as provided for by paragraph (b)

of this AD, prior to reaching the

incorporation thresholds listed in Part II of

Fokker Report Number SE–278, ‘‘F27 Aging

Aircraft Project—Final Document,’’ Issue 3,

dated February 1, 1993 (hereinafter referred

to as the ‘‘Fokker Report’’), accomplish the

structural modifications listed in Part II of

the Fokker Report.

Note 2: Compliance in accordance with

Fokker Service Bulletin F27/57–68, Revision

1, dated May 17, 1993, constitutes

compliance with Fokker Service Bulletin

F27/57–68, dated July 17, 1992, which is

referenced in the Fokker Report.–

Note 3: The modifications required by this

paragraph do not terminate the inspection

requirements of any other AD unless that AD

specifies that any such modification

constitutes terminating action for that

inspection requirement.

(b) For airplanes that have accumulated

30,000 total landings or more as of the

threshold specified in Fokker Service

Bulletin F27/57–68, Revision 1, dated May

17, 1993, referenced in the Fokker Report:

The incorporation threshold for

accomplishing the structural modification

may be extended to January 1, 1996, if an xray inspection of the stringers at stations

11260, 12660, and 13460 is performed in

accordance with Part 2 of Fokker Service

Bulletin F27/57–68, Revision 1, dated May

17, 1993, at the time specified in either

paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD, as

applicable. If cracking is detected, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with

paragraph 1.D.(1)(c) of the service bulletin.–

(1) For airplanes on which the inspections

of the top skin of stringers 4 through 7 are

currently being performed in accordance

with Part 2 of Fokker Service Bulletin F27/

57–68, Revision 1, dated May 17, 1993:

Within 4,000 landings from the immediately

preceding inspection.–

(2) For airplanes on which the inspections

of the top skin of stringers 4 through 7 are

not currently being performed in accordance

with Part 2 of Fokker Service Bulletin F27/

57–68, Revision 1, dated May 17, 1993:

Within 2 months after the effective date of

this AD, –

(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 4: 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 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. –

(e) The structural modifications shall be

done in accordance with Fokker Report

Number SE–278, ‘‘F27 Aging Aircraft

Project—Final Document,’’ Issue 3, dated

February 1, 1993, which contains the

following list of effective pages:–

Page number–

Revision

level shown

on page–

Date shown on page

1–3, II.3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 February 1, 1993.

4–7, I.2–I.14 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 February 1, 1993.

I.1, I.15, I.16, II.1, II.2, II.4, III.1, III.2 .............................................................................................................. 1 May 3, 1991.

APPENDIX A

APP. A–1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 February 1, 1993.

APPENDIX B

1–13 ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 February 1, 1993.

APPENDIX C

1 ....................................................................................................................................................................... Original September 27, 1990.

2–5– ................................................................................................................................................................. (These

pages are

not dated)

APPENDIX D

1–5– ................................................................................................................................................................. Original February 1, 1993.

APPENDIX E

‘‘Structural Maintenance Program Guidelines. . .’’ ........................................................................................ May 22, 1991.–

‘‘Structural Maintenance Program Task. . .’’ ................................................................................................. May 22, 1991.

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................ May 22, 1991.

1–17 ................................................................................................................................................................. Original May 22, 1991.

This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North

Fairfax Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.

Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.–

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

February 3, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 19, 1994.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–51 Filed 1–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U