Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Proposed Rules 9645

defined in the plant Technical Specifications

those failures must be assessed for

Emergency Notification System reporting

under §§ 50.72(b)(1)(ii) and 50.72(b)(2)(i),

and for a Licensee Event Report under

§§ 50.73(a)(2)(ii).

V. Implementation

A. Applicability

The requirements in either or both Option

B, III.A for Type A tests, and Option B, III.B

for Type B and C tests, may be adopted on

a voluntary basis by an operating nuclear

power reactor licensee as specified in § 50.54

in substitution of the requirements for those

tests contained in Option A of this appendix.

If the requirements for tests in Option B, III.A

or Option B, III.B are implemented, the

recordkeeping requirements in Option B, IV

for these tests must be substituted for the

reporting requirements of these tests

contained in Option A of this appendix.

B. Effective Date

1. Specific exemptions to Option A of this

appendix that have been formally approved

by the AEC or NRC, according to 10 CFR

50.12, are still applicable to Option B of this

appendix if necessary, unless specifically

revoked by the NRC.

2. This amendment to this appendix, by

inclusion of an additional option for meeting

the requirements of the appendix, is effective

(30 days after the publication of the final

rule). At any time hereafter a licensee or

applicant for an operating license can adopt

Option B, or parts thereof, as specified in

Section V.A of this appendix, by submitting

a notification of its implementation plan and

request for revision to technical

specifications to the Director of the Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

The regulatory guide or other

implementation document used by a

licensee, or applicant for an operating

license, to develop a performance-based

leakage testing program must be included, by

general reference, in the plant’s technical

specifications. The detailed licensee

programs must be available at the plant site

for inspection thereafter. The programs must

contain justification, including supporting

analyses, if they deviate from methods

approved by the Commission and endorsed

in a regulatory guide. The deviations and

their justifications must be described in the

notification provided by the licensee of its

implementation plan and the submittal for

revision of plant technical specifications.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 14th day of

February, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle,

Acting Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 95–4167 Filed 2–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–120–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747SP Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This document revises an

earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to certain Boeing

Model 747SP series airplanes, that

would have superseded an existing AD

to require inspections to detect cracks in

the web of the wing front spar, and

modification, if necessary. That

proposal was prompted by a report of

cracking in the web in an area outside

the inspection zone specified in the

existing AD. A crack in the web that is

not detected before it extends outside

the chord footprints can allow fuel

leakage. This action revises the

proposed rule by reducing the

compliance time for inspections of

certain airplanes. The actions specified

by this proposed AD are intended to

prevent fuel leakage onto an engine and

a resultant fire due to cracking in the

web of the wing front spar.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 7, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

120–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. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Backman, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Seattle Aircraft

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056;

telephone (206) 227–2776; 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–120–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–120–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to add an airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Boeing Model 747SP series airplanes,

was published as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal

Register on October 28, 1994 (59 FR

54134). That NPRM would have

superseded an existing AD to require

repetitive inspections to detect cracks in

the web of the wing front spar over

engine numbers 2 and 3, and repair, if

necessary. That NPRM was prompted by

a report of cracking in the web in an

area outside the inspection zone

specified in the existing AD. That

condition, if not corrected, could result

in fuel leakage onto an engine and a

resultant fire.
9646 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Two commenters support the

proposed rule.

One commenter to the NPRM, Boeing,

requests that the proposed compliance

time of 1,000 landings, specified in

paragraph (b) of the NPRM for airplanes

on which the terminating modification

has not been accomplished, be

shortened to 6 months, as recommended

in the manufacturer’s service bulletin.

The FAA concurs with the commenter’s

request. Due to an error during

publication of the NPRM, an incorrect

compliance time was specified in

paragraph (b). The FAA’s intent was

that this compliance time coincide with

the recommendation of the

manufacturer’s service bulletin.

Paragraph (b) of this supplemental

NPRM has been revised to specify a

compliance time of ‘‘prior to the

accumulation of 4,000 total landings on

the airplane, or within 6 months after

the effective date of the AD, whichever

occurs later.’’

Since this change expands the scope

of the originally proposed rule, the FAA

has determined that it is necessary to

reopen the comment period to provide

additional opportunity for public

comment.

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.

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 supplemental

NPRM to clarify this requirement.

The manufacturer has advised that it

is currently developing a modification

program for the engine struts on these

airplanes that will positively address

the fatigue cracking condition and other

items associated with the engine struts.

Once this modification program is

developed and approved, the FAA may

consider additional rulemaking.

There are approximately 35 Model

747SP series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 11 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

The FAA estimates that it would take

approximately 22 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspections (between front spar stations

628 and 675) specified in this AD, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$14,520, or $1,320 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.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the terminating

modification that would be provided by

this AD action, it would take

approximately 644 work hours to

accomplish it, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. The cost of required

parts would be $21,800. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

terminating modification would be

$60,440 per airplane.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–6702 (55 FR

33279, August 15, 1990), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD) to

read as follows:

Boeing: Docket 94–NM–120–AD.

Applicability: Model 747SP series

airplanes; variable numbers RG001 through

RG142 inclusive, and RG171 through RG222

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 (f) 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 fuel leakage onto an engine and

a resultant fire, accomplish the following:

(a) For airplanes on which the ‘‘terminating

modification’’ [between front spar station

(FSS) 640 and FSS 670] specified in Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–57A2259, dated

February 15, 1990; or Revision 1, dated

September 6, 1990; has not been

accomplished: Within the next six months

after September 21, 1990 (the effective date

of AD 90–17–18, amendment 39–6702),

perform a visual and an ultrasonic inspection

of the front spar web between front spar

station (FSS) 636 and FSS 675 in accordance

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 1995 / Proposed Rules 9647

57A2259, dated February 15, 1990, or

Revision 1, dated September 6, 1990. If no

crack is found, repeat these inspections at

intervals not to exceed 1,000 landings until

the inspections required by paragraph (b) of

this AD are accomplished.

(b) For airplanes on which the

‘‘terminating modification’’ [between front

spar station (FSS) 640 and FSS 670] specified

in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

57A2259, dated February 15, 1990; or

Revision 1, dated September 6, 1990; has not

been accomplished: Prior to the

accumulation of 4,000 total landings on the

airplane, or within 6 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform the inspections specified in

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this AD

to detect cracks in the web between FSS 628

and FSS 675, in accordance with Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–57A2259,

Revision 2, dated June 9, 1994.

Accomplishment of these inspections

terminates the repetitive inspection

requirement of paragraph (a) of this AD. If no

crack is found, repeat these inspections

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000

landings.

(1) Perform an ultrasonic inspection in the

web under the upper and lower chord

footprints; and

(2) Perform a high frequency eddy current

inspection in the web in an area one inch

below the upper chord and one inch above

the lower chord footprints; and

(3) Perform a detailed visual inspection in

the forward face of the web of the wing front

spar at fastener locations in the web-tostiffeners and web-to-rib posts.

(c) For airplanes on which the ‘‘terminating

modification’’ specified in Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–57A2259, dated

February 15, 1990; or Revision 1, dated

September 6, 1990; has been accomplished:

Prior to the accumulation of 4,000 total

landings on the airplane, or within 6 months

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later, perform the inspections

specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and

(c)(3) of this AD to detect cracks in the web

between FSS 628 and FSS 636, in accordance

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

57A2259, Revision 2, dated June 9, 1994. If

no crack is found, repeat these inspections

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000

landings.

(1) Perform an ultrasonic inspection of the

web under the upper and lower chord

footprints; and

(2) Perform a high frequency eddy current

inspection of the web in an area one inch

below the upper chord and one inch above

the lower chord footprints; and

(3) Perform a detailed visual inspection of

the forward face of the web of the wing front

spar at fastener locations in the web-tostiffeners and web-to-rib posts.

(d) If any crack is found during any

inspection required by this AD, prior to

further flight, accomplish a terminating

modification (between FSS 623 and FSS 670)

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–57A2259, Revision 2, dated

June 9, 1994; or in accordance with a method

approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate.

(e) Installation of a terminating

modification (between FSS 623 and FSS 670)

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–57A2259, Revision 2, dated

June 9, 1994; or in accordance with a method

approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO;

constitutes terminating action for the

requirements of this AD.

(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, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

14, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–4122 Filed 2–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–12–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland

Model DHC–8–102, –103, –106, –301,

–311, and –314 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 de Havilland Model DHC–8

series airplanes. This proposal would

require modification of a certain battery

temperature monitor. This proposal is

prompted by reports of failure of the

battery temperature monitor, which

resulted in smoke in the flight

compartment. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent failure of the battery monitor,

which could result in smoke in the

flight compartment.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

12–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, Garratt Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario, Canada M3K 1Y5.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

Engine and Propeller Directorate, New

York Aircraft Certification Office, 10

Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream,

New York.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Cuneo, Electrical Engineer, ANE–

172, FAA, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7506; fax

(516) 568–2716.

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 95–NM–12–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