Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11945

The FAA estimates that 45 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 160 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 $3,800 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$603,000, or $13,400 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 94–NM–241–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplanes, serial numbers 11244 through

11371 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 cracking in the frame strips at

fuselage stations 14911 and 17011, which

could result in reduced structural integrity of

the fuselage pressure vessel, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 24,000 total

flight cycles, or within 6 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, install reinforcement plates at left and

right fuselage stations 14911 and 17011, in

accordance with Fokker Service Bulletin

SBF100–53–072, dated March 12, 1993.

(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

27, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–5243 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–05–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 an inspection to determine the

adequacy of clearance between the

normal maximum (second) detent for

the reverse thrust control and the

surrounding moving parts and to detect

chafing or damage of the detent. This

proposal would also require eventual

replacement of the normal maximum

detent with an improved detent. This

proposal is prompted by a report

indicating that an inadequate level of

clearance between the normal maximum

detent and the surrounding parts may

exist on earlier production Model F28

Mark 0100 series airplanes. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to ensure proper operation of

the normal maximum detent for reverse

thrust control.

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. 95–NM–

05–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
11946 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–05–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–NM–05–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On June 29, 1992, the FAA issued AD

92–15–08, amendment 39–8302 (57 FR

34216, August 8, 1992), applicable to

certain Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

series airplanes, to require removing the

normal maximum (second) detent of the

reverse thrust control and installing an

improved unit. That action was

prompted by reports indicating that the

override force for the normal maximum

detent of the reverse thrust control is too

low. The actions required by that AD are

intended to prevent fatigue damage and

subsequent reduced structural

capability of the horizontal stabilizer

attachment.

The normal maximum detents that

were installed in accordance with AD

92–15–08 (reference Fokker Service

Bulletin SBF100–76–008, dated May 8,

1991) were intended to be functional

only with certain pulleys. Since the

issuance of that AD, however, the

Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD), which is

the airworthiness authority for the

Netherlands, has notified the FAA that

certain earlier production airplanes

affected by AD 92–15–08 are not fitted

with those specific pulleys. As a result,

compliance with AD 92–15–08 may

have produced an inadequate level of

clearance between the normal maximum

detent and the surrounding moving

parts on these airplanes. This condition,

if not corrected, could result in the

inability to select reverse thrust levels

above the normal maximum detent.

Fokker has issued Service Bulletin

SBF100–76–010, dated October 31,

1993, which describes procedures for:

1. Performing a one-time inspection of

certain airplanes to determine the

adequacy of clearance between the

normal maximum detent for the reverse

thrust control and the surrounding

moving parts and to detect chafing or

damage of the detent and/or

surrounding moving parts; and

2. Replacing the normal maximum

detent for reverse thrust control with an

improved detent.

The RLD classified this service

bulletin as mandatory and issued Dutch

airworthiness directive BLA 93–151(A),

dated November 1, 1993, in order to

assure the continued airworthiness of

these airplanes in the Netherlands.

The FAA is considering further

rulemaking action to revise AD 92–15–

08 to change the applicability of that AD

to remove certain earlier production

Model F28 Mark 0100 series airplanes

that could have a potential thrust

reverser detent interference problem.

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

a one-time inspection to determine the

adequacy of clearance between the

normal maximum detent for the reverse

thrust control and the surrounding

moving parts, and to detect chafing or

damage of the normal maximum detent;

and replacement of the normal

maximum detent with a new normal

maximum detent. 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 5 airplanes of

U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 10 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would cost approximately $400 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $5,000,

or $1,000 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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11947

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–05–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplanes, serial numbers 11244 through

11261 inclusive, 11263, and 11268 through

11283 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 (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 ensure proper operation of the normal

maximum detent for reverse thrust control,

accomplish the following:

(a) For airplanes on which Fokker Service

Bulletin SBF100–76–008, dated May 8, 1991,

has been accomplished: Within 1,500 flight

cycles after the effective date of this AD,

perform an inspection to determine the

adequacy of clearance between the normal

maximum (second) detent for the reverse

thrust control and the surrounding moving

parts and to detect chafing or damage of the

normal maximum detent, in accordance with

Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100–76–010,

dated October 31, 1993.

(1) If any chafing or damage is found

(regardless of clearance), prior to further

flight, replace the normal maximum detent

with an improved normal maximum detent,

in accordance with Part 2 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin

(2) If the clearance is found to be

inadequate, but no chafing or damage is

found, within 250 flight cycles following the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, replace the normal maximum detent

with an improved normal maximum detent,

in accordance with Part 2 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin.

(3) If the clearance is found to be adequate

and no damage or chafing is found, within

3,000 flight cycles following the inspection

required by pararaph (a) of this AD, replace

the detent with an improved normal

maximum detent, in accordance with Part 2

of the Accomplishment Instructions of the

service bulletin.

(b) For airplanes on which Fokker Service

Bulletin SBF100–76–008, dated May 8, 1991,

has not been accomplished: Within the next

500 flight cycles after the effective date of

this AD, replace the normal maximum detent

for reverse thrust control with an improved

normal maximum detent, in accordance with

Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100–76–010,

October 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 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. 95–5242 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

15 CFR Part 905

[Docket No. 950104002–5002–01; I.D.

061394C]

RIN 0648–AE40

Use in Enforcement Proceedings of

Information Collected by Voluntary

Fishery Data Collectors

AGENCY: National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Commerce

(Secretary), through NOAA, is

publishing proposed regulations that

would restrict the use of information

collected by voluntary fishery data

collectors (VFDC). These regulations

would limit the extent to which such

information could be used in civil and

criminal enforcement proceedings

conducted pursuant to the Magnuson

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (Magnuson Act), the Endangered

Species Act (ESA), and the Marine

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). In

promulgating these regulations, NOAA

seeks to encourage the use of VFDCs by

the fishing industry, while protecting

the necessary use of observer

information by law enforcement

personnel.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by

May 2, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Office of General

Counsel, Enforcement and Litigation

Section, 8484 Georgia Avenue, 4th

Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel

La Bissonniere, (301) 427–2202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Magnuson Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801, et

seq. and the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 et

seq. specifically authorize the stationing

of observers aboard fishing vessels.

Observers serve two separate and

essential purposes. First, observers

collect scientific information essential

to the effective management and

protection by the National Marine

Fisheries Service (NMFS) of ocean

fisheries and protected species. Second,

observers monitor compliance with

existing Federal laws. Information

collected by an observer that establishes

a violation of the Magnuson Act, the

MMPA or the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et