Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 9619

receipt of telegraphic AD T94–25–51:

Incorporate the following into the

Limitations Section of the FAA-approved

AFM. This may be accomplished by inserting

a copy of this AD in the AFM.

‘‘(1) Operation of the airplane into forecast

or reported icing conditions, as such

conditions are defined in the AFM, is

prohibited.

‘‘(2) Use of the autopilot is prohibited

during inadvertent flight in icing conditions,

as defined in the AFM, or when the airplane

is operated in moderate or greater turbulence.

‘‘(3) If any unusual lateral trim situations

are observed, such as excessive trim

displacement; illumination of the message

‘RETRIM ROLL R WING DN’ or ‘RETRIM

ROLL L WING DN’ on the advisory display

unit (ADU); illumination of the message

‘AILERON MISTRIM’ on the ADU; or

abnormal flight characteristics of the

airplane: Disconnect the autopilot and

manually fly the airplane prior to adjusting

the lateral trim. The autopilot may be reengaged following manual adjustment of the

lateral trim.’’

(b) Between the effective date of this AD

and June 1, 1995, the limitations contained

in paragraph (a) of this AD may be removed

from the AFM upon accomplishment of the

actions specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),

(b)(3), and (b)(4) of this AD, as applicable.

Dispatch into or operation in known or

forecast icing conditions, as defined in the

AFM, may occur if the actions specified in

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(4) of

this AD have been accomplished previously.

Except as provided by paragraph (c) of this

AD, the limitation required by paragraph (a)

of this AD must be reinserted in the AFM no

later than June 1, 1995.

(1) ATR–42 AFM Temporary Revision 18,

dated January 10, 1995; or ATR–72 AFM

Temporary Revision 14, dated January 10,

1995; as applicable; shall be incorporated

into the Limitations Section of the FAAapproved AFM.

(2) ATR–42 and ATR–72 flight crew

members shall receive FAA-approved

training, which consists of the following

items.

(i) ATR Icing Procedures Brochure, Version

1.0.

Note 1: The ATR Icing Procedure Brochure

specified in this paragraph also has been

published as ‘‘Version 2.0.’’ That version is

acceptable for compliance with this

paragraph.

(ii) ATR Technical Background Paper,

Version 1.0, dated January 6, 1995.

(iii) ATR–42 AFM Temporary Revision 18,

dated January 10, 1995; or ATR–72 AFM

Temporary Revision 14, dated January 10,

1995; as applicable.

(iv) Flight Crew Operation Manual,

Revision 20, dated January 11, 1995 (for

Model ATR–42 series airplanes); or Flight

Crew Operation Manual, Revision 13, dated

January 11, 1995 (for Model ATR–72 series

airplanes); as applicable.

(3) Operators of Model ATR–42 and ATR–

72 series airplanes shall establish an FAAapproved system to provide forecasts and

reports of freezing rain and freezing drizzle

at enroute altitudes along the route of flight

and at all airports considered in the flight

planning process. Training concerning the

use of these icing forecasts and reports shall

be accomplished in accordance with Flight

Standards Information Bulletin ‘‘ATR–42 and

ATR–72 Airworthiness Directive T95–02–51

Compliance Procedures,’’ dated January 11,

1995.

(4) For Model ATR–72 series airplanes

only: Install ATR Modification Number

04213 in accordance with ATR Service

Bulletin ATR72–27–1039, dated January 12,

1995.

(c) Installation of a modification that

precludes the formation of hazardous ice

accumulation during flight in freezing rain or

freezing drizzle conditions constitutes

terminating action for the requirements of

this AD. This modification must be approved

by the Manager, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Standardization Branch, ANM–

113. Following installation of such

modification, the modification required by

paragraph (b)(4) of this AD shall be removed

from Model ATR–72 series airplanes.

(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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Operations

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.

(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.

(f) Certain actions, when accomplished in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD,

shall be done in accordance with ATR–42

AFM Temporary Revision 18, dated January

10, 1995; ATR–72 AFM Temporary Revision

14, dated January 10, 1995; ATR Icing

Procedures Brochure, Version 1.0; ATR

Technical Background Paper, Version 1.0,

dated January 6, 1995; ATR–42 Flight Crew

Operation Manual, Revision 20, dated

January 11, 1995; and ATR–72 Flight Crew

Operation Manual, Revision 13, dated

January 11, 1995; as applicable. Training

concerning the use of certain icing forecasts

and reports [as specified in paragraph (b)(3)

of this AD] shall be accomplished in

accordance with Flight Standards

Information Bulletin, ‘‘ATR–42 and ATR–72

Airworthiness Directive T95–02–51

Compliance Procedures,’’ dated January 11,

1995. Installation of ATR Modification

Number 04213 [as specified in paragraph

(b)(4) of this AD] shall be accomplished in

accordance with ATR Service Bulletin

ATR72–27–1039, dated January 12, 1995.

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 Aerospatiale, 316 Route de Bayonne,

31060 Toulouse, Cedex 03, France. 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.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

March 8, 1995, to all persons except those

persons to whom it was made immediately

effective by telegraphic AD T95–02–51,

issued January 11, 1995, which contained the

requirements of this amendment.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

13, 1995.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–4001 Filed 2–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–11–AD; Amendment

39–9153; AD 95–04–01]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Models 727, 737, and 747 Series

Airplanes; McDonnell Douglas Models

DC–8 and DC–9 Series Airplanes,

Model MD–88 Airplanes, and Models

MD–11 and MD–90–30 Series

Airplanes; Lockheed Models L–1011–

385–1, –385–1–14, –385–1–15, and

–385–3 Series Airplanes; and Fokker

Models F28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000,

4000, and 0100 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain transport category

airplanes equipped with Honeywell

Standard Windshear Detection and

Recovery Guidance System (WSS). This

action requires a revision to the FAAapproved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to alert the flight crew of the

potential for significant delays in the

WSS detecting windshear when the

flaps of the airplane are in transition.

This amendment is prompted by a

report of an accident during which an

airplane encountered severe windshear

during a missed approached. The

actions specified in this AD are

intended to ensure that the flight crew

is aware that there may be significant

delays in the WSS detecting windshear

when the flaps of the airplane are in

transition.

DATES: Effective March 8, 1995.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

April 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation
9620 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

11–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Information concerning this

amendment may be obtained from or

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J.

Kirk Baker, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

133L, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (310) 627–5345; fax (310)

627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Recently,

the FAA has received a report of an

accident during which the flight crew

executed a missed approach following

an instrument landing system (ILS)

approach. A McDonnell Douglas Model

DC–9–31 series airplane equipped with

Honeywell Standard Windshear

Detection System (WSS) was involved

in this accident. Investigation into the

cause of this accident revealed that the

airplane encountered severe windshear

during the missed approach. The FAA

has determined that a design feature in

the windshear computer delayed

detection of windshear when the

airplane’s flaps were in transition. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in the flight crew being unaware of the

potential for significant delays in the

WSS detecting windshear when the

flaps of the airplane are in transition.

The Honeywell WSS is also installed

on certain Boeing Models 727, 737, and

747 series airplanes; McDonnell Douglas

Models DC–8 and DC–9–10, –21, –41,

–51, and –80 series airplanes, Model

MD–88 airplanes, and Models MD–11

and MD–90–30 series airplanes;

Lockheed Models L–1011–385 series

airplanes; and Fokker Models F28 Mark

1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, and 0100 series

airplanes. In light of this, the FAA has

determined that these airplanes are also

subject to this same unsafe condition.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design, this AD is being issued to

ensure that the flight crew is aware that

there may be significant delays in the

WSS detecting windshear when the

flaps of the airplane are in transition.

This AD requires a revision to the FAAapproved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to alert the flight crew of the

potential for significant delays in the

WSS detecting windshear when the

flaps of the airplane are in transition.

This is considered to be interim

action. Once a modification is

developed, approved, and available, the

FAA may consider additional

rulemaking.

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this 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

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the 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 that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–11–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

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.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, 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, 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:

95–04–01 Boeing, McDonnell Douglas,

Lockheed, and Fokker: Amendment 39–

9153. Docket 95–NM–11–AD.

Applicability: The following models and

series of airplanes, certificated in any

category, equipped with Honeywell Standard

Windshear Detection and Recovery Guidance

System (WSS):

Boeing Model 727–100 and –200 series

airplanes;

Boeing Model 737–100, –200, and –300 series

airplanes;

Boeing Model 747–100, –200, and –300 series

airplanes;

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–50, –60,

and –70 series airplanes;

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9–10, –21,

–30, –41, –51, and –80 series airplanes;
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 9621

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–88 airplanes;

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–

90–30 series airplanes;

Lockheed Model L–1011–385–1, –385–1–14,

–385–1–15, and –385–3 series airplanes;

and

Fokker Model F28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000,

4000, and 0100 series airplanes;

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure that the flight crew is aware of

significant delays in the Windshear Detection

and Recovery Guidance System (WSS)

detecting windshear when the flaps of the

airplane are in transition, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 14 days after the effective date

of this AD, revise the Limitations Section of

the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to include the following statement.

This may be accomplished by inserting a

copy of this AD in the AFM.

‘‘During sustained banks of greater than 15

degrees or during flap configuration changes,

the Honeywell Windshear Detection and

Recovery Guidance System (WSS) is

desensitized and alerts resulting from

encountering windshear conditions will be

delayed.’’

(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, Los Angles

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Operations

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note: Information concerning the existence

of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(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.

(d) This amendment becomes effective on

March 8, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

14, 1995.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–4123 Filed 2–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–CE–12–AD; Amendment 39–

9155; AD 95–04–03]

Airworthiness Directives; Beech

Aircraft Corporation 33, 35, and 36

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 92–08–07,

which currently requires inspecting

(one-time) the wing front spar carrythrough frame structure for cracks on

certain Beech 33, 35, and 36 series

airplanes, and repairing or reinforcing

any cracked wing front spar carrythrough frame structure. This action

would make this one-time inspection

repetitive. This action was prompted by

numerous (43) reports received by the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

of cracks found on the wing front spar

carry-through frame structure of the

affected airplanes. These cracks were

found during the inspection required by

AD 92–08–07. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent spar carry-through frame

structure failure caused by cracking,

which, if not detected and corrected,

could result in severe structural damage

to the wing.

DATES: Effective April 7, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations was previously approved by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

March 18, 1992.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

the Beech Aircraft Corporation, P.O. Box

85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085. This

information may also be examined at

the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,

suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Larry Engler, Aerospace Engineer,

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone (316) 946–4122; facsimile

(316) 946–4407.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an AD that would apply to

certain Beech 33, 35, and 36 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on November 2, 1994 (59 FR

54847). The action proposed to

supersede AD 92–08–07 with a new AD

that would require repetitively

inspecting the wing front spar carrythrough frame structure for cracks, and

repairing or reinforcing any cracked

wing carry-through frame structure. The

proposed action would be accomplished

in accordance with Beech Service

Bulletin No. 2360, dated November

1990. The only difference between the

proposal and AD 92–08–07 is that the

initial inspection required by the

existing AD would become repetitive.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received from four different

commenters.

One commenter points out that the

actual AD portion of the proposal

specifies no directions for what to do if

there are no cracks found, whereas the

preamble specifies repetitive

inspections, and the AD portion

specifies these repetitive inspections

after cracks are repaired. The

commenter feels that this may have

been an oversight on the FAA’s part.

The FAA concurs. The intent of the

proposal was to make the inspection

repetitive regardless of whether cracks

are found. A paragraph has been added

to the AD to ensure that the inspection

is repetitive if no cracks are found.

This commenter also states that those

owners/operators that have already

inspected the airplane as required by

AD 92–08–07 (superseded by this

action) should not have to inspect again

until the next annual inspection. The

FAA concurs that a grace period should

be given for those airplane owners/

operators that have already inspected as

required by AD 92–08–07. In addition,

AD 92–08–07 superseded AD 91–14–13,

which required repetitive inspections.

The Compliance section of the AD has

been revised to give credit to those

airplane operators that have already

inspected the wing front spar carrythrough frame structure as required by

one of the above-referenced AD’s.

Two commenters state that AD action

requiring a repetitive inspection of the

wing front spar carry-through frame

structure is unjustified because there are

only reports of cracks in this structure

on 43 out of over 10,000 affected

airplanes. The FAA does not concur that

AD action is unjustified. AD’s are not

issued based on the percentage of the

airplanes that have reported problems,

but are issued when an unsafe condition

exists in a product, and when that

condition is likely to exist or develop in

other products of the same type design.

The FAA reviewed all information

relating to the wing front spar carrythrough frame structure crack reports on

the affected airplanes and determined

that AD action was justified and the

proposed actions, when accomplished

correctly, would eliminate the unsafe

condition and prevent it from reoccurring. The AD is unchanged as a

result of these comments.

Three of the four commenters state

that inspecting the wing front spar

carry-through frame structure is part of

the affected airplanes’ annual inspection

program, and thus no AD action is