Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 19551

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:

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Limited

(Formerly British Aerospace

Commercial Aircraft Limited, VickersArmstrongs Aircraft Limited): Docket

94–NM–166–AD.

Applicability: All Model Viscount 744,

754D, and 810 airplanes, 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 or corrosion of the

main spar forward booms or the upper root

joint attachment fitting, which consequently

could lead to the failure of the tailplane

assemblies and reduce the controllability of

the airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 8 years of

service since date of manufacture of this

airplane, or within 18 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform an inspection to detect

corrosion of the tailplane assemblies, in

accordance with British Aerospace Regional

Aircraft Limited Viscount Alert Preliminary

Technical Leaflet (PTL) 182, Issue 2, dated

August 7, 1992 (for Model Viscount 810

airplanes), or Viscount PTL 313, Issue 2,

dated February 1, 1993 (for Model Viscount

744, 754D, airplanes), as applicable. If

corrosion is detected during the inspection,

prior to further flight, correct the

discrepancies in accordance with the service

bulletin. Thereafter, repeat the inspection at

intervals not to exceed 8 years.

(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 April 13,

1995.

John J. Hickey,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–9624 Filed 4–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–112–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace Model Viscount 744, 745D,

and 810 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 all

British Aerospace Model Viscount 744,

745D, and 810 airplanes. This proposal

would require an inspection of certain

fittings of the engine mount structure to

determine whether fasteners have been

installed in inspection holes and to

determine whether those holes are

oversized. It would also require various

follow-on actions, depending upon the

results of the inspection. This proposal

is prompted by reports indicating that

fasteners were installed in the

inspection hole of the engine ‘‘W’’ frame

socket fittings and the inspection hole

was oversized due to fatigue cracking.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent such fatigue

cracking, which could lead to failure of

the fasteners and consequent separation

of the engine from the airframe.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 30, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM–

112–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

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Ltd.,

Engineering Support Manager, Military

Business Unit, Chadderton Works,

Greengate, Middleton, Manchester M24

1SA, England. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue

SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2148; 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–112–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–112–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the United Kingdom, recently notified

the FAA that an unsafe condition may

exist on certain British Aerospace
19552 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Model Viscount 744, 745D, and 810

airplanes. The CAA advises that it has

received a report indicating that drive

screws were installed in the inspection

hole of engine ‘‘W’’ frame socket

fittings. Investigation revealed that these

drive screws were installed in

accordance with Gulfstream Customer

Bulletin No. 241C. However, the fitting

of the drive screws into the inspection

holes has caused fatigue cracking. In

another report, the inspection hole was

oversized in excess of the original 0.125-

inch diameter; with such oversizing of

the inspection hole, the fitting is

susceptible to the problems associated

with premature fatigue cracking. These

conditions, if not detected and corrected

in a timely manner, could lead to failure

of the fitting and consequent separation

of the engine from the airframe.

British Aerospace has issued

Preliminary Technical Leaflet (PTL)

501, dated May 1, 1994, which describes

procedures for performing a detailed

visual inspection of ‘‘W’’ frame socket

fittings of the engine mount structure to

determine whether drive screws or

blind rivets have been installed in

inspection holes, and to determine

whether those holes are oversized. The

PTL also describes various follow-on

actions, including a nondestructive test

(NDT) to detect discontinuity (i.e.,

cracks, corrosion, and mechanical

damage) of holes, rework of the hole,

and replacement of the ‘‘W’’ frame

fitting with a new or serviceable part.

The CAA classified this PTL as

mandatory.

These airplane models are

manufactured in the United Kingdom

and are 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 CAA has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the CAA,

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

performing a detailed visual inspection

of ‘‘W’’ frame socket fittings of the

engine mount structure to determine

whether drive screws or blind rivets

have been installed in inspection holes

and to determine whether those holes

are oversized. It would also require

various follow-on actions, depending

upon the results of the inspection. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

PTL 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 29 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 25 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, 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 $43,500, or $1,500 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:

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Limited

(Formerly British Aerospace

Commercial Aircraft Limited, VickersArmstrongs Aircraft Limited): Docket

94–NM–112–AD.

Applicability: All Model Viscount 744,

745D, and 810 airplanes, 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 fatigue cracking, which could

lead to the possible separation of the engine

from the airframe, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, perform a detailed visual

inspection of ‘‘W’’ frame socket fittings of the

engine mount structure to determine whether

drive screws or blind rivets have been

installed in inspection holes and to

determine whether those holes are oversized,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 19553

in accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions, section 2.1 PART ONE,

paragraphs A., B., C., D., E. and F., of British

Aerospace Preliminary Technical Leaflet

(PTL) 501, dated May 1, 1994.

(b) If drive screws or blind rivets are found

installed, or if the inspection holes are found

to be oversized, during the inspection

required by paragraph (a) of this AD, at the

next scheduled engine removal, but no later

than 12 months after the effective date of this

AD, perform a nondestructive test (NDT) to

detect discontinuities (i.e., cracks, corrosion,

and mechanical damage) at inspection holes;

rework the hole or replace the ‘‘W’’ frame

fitting with a new or serviceable part; and

perform the specified follow-on actions; in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions, section 2.2 PART TWO,

paragraphs A., B., C., D., E., and F., of British

Aerospace Preliminary Technical Leaflet

(PTL) 501, dated May 1, 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,

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 April 13,

1995.

John J. Hickey,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–9625 Filed 4–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 94–ACE–17]

Proposed Amendment to Class E

Airspace; Washington, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to

amend the Class E airspace area at

Washington, IA. The development of a

new standard instrument approach

procedure (SIAP) at Washington

Municipal Airport, Washington, IA, has

made the proposal necessary. The

intended effect of this proposal is to

provide controlled airspace for aircraft

executing the SIAP at Washington, IA.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 30, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager, Air

Traffic Operations Branch, ACE–530,

Federal Aviation Administration,

Docket No. 94–ACE–17, 601 East 12th

Street, Kansas City, MO 64106.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel for the Central Region at the

same address between 9 a.m. and 3

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

An informal docket may also be

examined during normal business hours

in the office of the Manager, Air Traffic

Operations Branch, Air Traffic Division,

at the address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathy Randolph, ACE–530c, Federal

Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106;

telephone: (816) 426–3408.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, economic, environmental,

and energy-related aspects of the

proposal. Communications should

identify the airspace docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

listed above. Commenters wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this notice must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket No. 94–ACE–17.’’

The postcard will be date/time stamped

and returned to the commenter. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposal contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of comments received. All comments

submitted will be available for

examination in the Rules Docket both

before and after the closing date for

comments. A report summarizing each

substantive public contact with FAA

personnel concerned with this

rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

by submitting a request to the Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of

Public Affairs, Attention: Public Inquiry

Center, APA–230, 800 Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or

by calling (202) 267–3484.

Communications must identify the

notice number of this NPRM. Persons

interested in being placed on a mailing

list for future NPRMs should also

request a copy of Advisory Circular No.

11–2A, which describes the application

procedures.

The Proposal

The FAA is considering an

amendment to part 71 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to

provide additional controlled airspace

for a new Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)

procedure at the Washington Municipal

Airport. The additional airspace would

segregate aircraft operating under VFR

conditions from aircraft operating under

IFR procedures. The area would be

depicted on appropriate aeronautical

charts thereby enabling pilots to

circumnavigate the area or otherwise

comply with IFR procedures. Class E

airspace designations for airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the earth are

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9B, dated July 18, 1994, and

effective September 16, 1994, which is

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR

71.1. The Class E airspace designation

listed in this document would be

published subsequently in the Order.

The FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation only involves an

established body of technical

regulations for which frequent and

routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current.

Therefore, this proposed regulation—(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)

does not warrant preparation of a

Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. Since this is a

routine matter that will only affect air

traffic procedures and air navigation, it

is certified that this proposed rule will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me, the Federal