11942 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules

120 and 122, chapter I, title 13, Code of

Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 120—BUSINESS LOAN POLICY

1. The authority citation for Part 120

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6) and 636 (a)

and (h).

2. Section 120.202–5 would be

amended by revising the introductory

text to read as follows:

§ 120.202–5 When SBA does not purchase.

SBA shall be released from its

obligation to purchase its share of the

guaranteed loan if the Lender has not

substantially complied with all of the

provisions of these regulations, the

Guaranty Agreement and the Loan

Authorization; has failed to disclose

material facts; has made material

misrepresentations to SBA with respect

to the loan; or has failed to utilize SBA

provided forms or exact computerized

facsimile copies thereof; provided that

any of these failures contributes or may

contribute to a substantial loss on the

loan by SBA; or upon the happening of

any one or more the following events:

* * * * *

PART 122—BUSINESS LOANS

1. The authority citation for part 122

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 636(a),

636(m).

2. Section 122.5–6 would be added to

read as follows:

§ 122.5–6 Facsimile Copies of SBA

Application Forms.

For guaranteed loans, a Participating

Lender may use computer generated

SBA application or closing forms which

are exact facsimile reproductions of

SBA’s forms. Lenders which use

computer generated application or

closing forms agree to accept liability for

a substantial SBA loss due to

deficiencies in the use of these forms.

(See § 120.202–5). All SBA Business

loan forms, including the following,

may be computer generated: 147 (Note),

148 (Guaranty), 155 (Standby

Agreement), 601 (Applicant’s

Agreement of compliance), 928

(Mortgage), 1050 (Settlement Sheet),

1059 (Security Agreement).

Dated: December 23, 1994.

Philip Lader,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–5126 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–226–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747 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 Boeing Model 747 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of the left and right

inboard elevator servo assemblies and

the hydraulic routing of the right

inboard elevator power control package

(PCP). This proposal is prompted by a

report of an uncommanded right

elevator deflection after takeoff and

reports of elevator/control column

bumps during landing gear retraction on

these airplanes. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent uncommanded elevator

deflection, which could result in

structural damage and reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

226–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

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207; and Parker Hannifin

Corporation, Customer Support

Operations, 16666 Von Karman Avenue,

Irvine, California 92714. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathi N. Ishimaru, 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) 227–2674; fax (206) 227–1181.

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–226–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–226–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received one report of

an uncommanded right elevator

deflection after takeoff and two reports

of elevator/control column bumps

during landing gear retraction on Boeing

Model 747–400 series airplanes

equipped with certain inboard elevator

Parker power control packages (PCP).

Investigation revealed that hydraulic

system number 4 is connected to the

sensitive side of the servo valve, which

may lead to an uncommanded elevator

motion when the return pressure for the

hydraulic system number 4 fluctuates.

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in structural damage and reduced

controllability of the airplane.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Parker Service Bulletin 327400–27–171,

dated December 2, 1994, which

describes procedures for modification of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11943

the left and right servo assemblies of the

PCP of the inboard elevator for Model

747–100, –200, –300, and –400 series

airplanes, equipped with certain Parker

PCP’s. The modification involves

rework of the dual tandem servo

assembly. This modification will

prevent blockage of the hydraulic

balance passageway by the spring guide,

which can contribute to the

uncommanded motion of the PCP.

However, for certain Model 747–400

series airplanes, Boeing has issued Alert

Service Bulletin 747–27A2348, Revision

1, January 26, 1995, which describes

additional procedures for modification

of the hydraulic tubing of the right

inboard elevator PCP. This modification

connects the hydraulic system number 3

to the sensitive side of the servo valve.

This modification will prevent an

uncommanded right elevator deflection

caused by hyraulic system number 4

pressure flucuations. The FAA has

reviewed and approved this alert service

bulletin.–

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 modification of the left and right

servo assemblies and re-routing the

hydraulic tubing of the inboard elevator

PCP. The actions would be required to

be accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletins 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 672 Model

747–100, –200, and –300 series

airplanes, and 357 Model 747–400

series airplanes of the affected design in

the worldwide fleet, a total of 1,000

airplanes. –

The FAA estimates that 114 Model

747–100, –200, and –300 series

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 73 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 $3,720 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $923,400, or

$8,100 per airplane. –

The FAA estimates that 65 Model

747–400 series airplanes of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD,

that it would take approximately 111

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 $8,549 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $988,585, or

$15,209 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:

Boeing: Docket 94–NM–226–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–100, –200, –300,

and –400 series airplanes, equipped with

Parker inboard elevator power control

packages (PCP) having part numbers (P/N)

327400–1001, –1003, –1005, and –1007;

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 uncommanded elevator

deflection, which could result in structural

damage and reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following: –

(a) For Model 747–400 series airplanes, as

listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

27A2348, dated November 17, 1994: Within

1 year after the effective date of this AD,

modify the hydraulic tubing of the right

inboard elevator PCP, in accordance with

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–27A2348,

Revision 1, dated January 26, 1995. –

(b) For all airplanes: Within 3 years after

the effective date of this AD, modify the left

and right servo assemblies of the inboard

elevator PCP, in accordance with Parker

Service Bulletin 327400–27–171, dated

December 2, 1994. –

(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, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANM–

100S, 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, Seattle ACO.
11944 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

27, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–5244 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–241–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0100 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 Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

series airplanes. This proposal would

require installation of reinforcement

plates at certain fuselage stations. This

proposal is prompted by a report

indicating that cracks were found in the

frame strips at certain fuselage stations

on a Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplane test article due to fatiguerelated stress. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent such fatigue-related cracking,

which could result in reduced structural

integrity of the fuselage pressure vessel.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

241–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

Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North

Fairfax Street, Alexandria, Virginia

22314. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2141; 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–241–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–241–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the Netherlands, recently notified the

FAA that an unsafe condition may exist

on certain Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

series airplanes. The RLD advises that,

during full-scale fatigue testing on a

Model F28 Mark 0100 series airplane

test article, cracks were found in the

frame strips at fuselage stations 14911

and 17011. The cause of such cracking

has been attributed to fatigue-related

stress. Such fatigue-related cracking, if

not detected and corrected in a timely

manner, could result in reduced

structural integrity of the fuselage

pressure vessel.

Fokker has issued Service Bulletin

SBF100–53–072, dated March 12, 1993,

which describes procedures for

installation of reinforcement plates at

left and right fuselage stations 14911

and 17011. Installation of the

reinforcement plates will reduce stress

in this area and increase the fatigue life

of the affected parts. The RLD classified

this service bulletin as mandatory and

issued Netherlands airworthiness

directive BLA 93–037(A), dated March

17, 1993, in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in the Netherlands.

This airplane model is manufactured

in the Netherlands 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 RLD has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the RLD,

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

installation of reinforcement plates at

left and right fuselage stations 14911

and 17011. 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 requirement.