Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18705

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in France 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 DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above. The

FAA has examined the findings of the

DGAC, 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.

Explanation of the Requirements of the

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design, the proposed AD would

require modification of the shock

absorber sub-assembly of the MLG. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletin described previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 115 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 24 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be provided by the manufacturer

at no cost to the operator. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $165,600, or $1,440 per

airplane.

The 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.

Regulatory Impact

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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 95–NM–267–AD.

Applicability: Model A320–200 series

airplanes on which Airbus Modification

24594 (reference Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–32–1144) has not been installed,

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent damage to the internal area of

the shock absorber sub-assembly, which

could cause an overextension of the shock

absorber and failure of the torque link,

accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 6,000 total

landings since the shock absorber of the main

landing gear (MLG) was removed, built, or

overhauled; or within 6 months after the

effective date of this AD; whichever occurs

later: Modify the shock absorber assembly of

the MLG, in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–32–1144, dated December 8,

1994.

Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–

1144 references Dowty Aerospace Service

Bulletin 200–32–215, dated July 7, 1994, and

Dowty Aerospace Service Bulletin 200–32–

216, Revision 1, dated November 18, 1994, as

additional sources of service information for

modification of the shock absorber.

(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 3: 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 23,

1996.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10507 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–218–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–400 Series Airplanes

Equipped With BFGoodrich Evacuation

Slide/Rafts

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 747–400 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of door 5 evacuation slide/

rafts. This proposal is prompted by

reports that the door 5 evacuation slide/

raft failed to deploy properly due to

adverse loads caused by the geometry of

this evacuation slide/raft. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are
18706 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

intended to prevent failure of the door

5 evacuation slide/raft to deploy

properly, which could contribute to

injury of passengers on the slide and

could delay or impede the evacuation of

passengers during an emergency.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

218–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

BFGoodrich Company, Aircraft

Evacuation Systems, Department 7916,

Phoenix, Arizona 85040. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

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:

Andrew Gfrerer, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (310) 627–5338; fax (310)

627–5210.

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–218–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–218–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received reports

indicating that the door 5 evacuation

slide/raft installed on Boeing Model

747–400 series airplanes failed to

deploy properly. Investigation revealed

that the apparent cause of one of these

failures has been attributed to the

improper gluing method used during

the manufacturing process. The FAA

finds this situation to be isolated to a

specific builder and limited to only

seven units in which only one unit

failed.

However, further investigation has

revealed that, during the initial

deployment stages of door 5 evacuation

slide/raft, the inflation bottle bag can

apply adverse loads to both the forward

side bottle hanger strap and the lower

girt attachment on the forward side of

this evacuation slide/raft. Such adverse

loads could pull the center girt

attachment partially loose at the forward

side, or could tear the lower inflation

tube assembly at the forward edge of the

center girt. The cause of such adverse

loads has been attributed to the

geometry of this particular evacuation

slide/raft. This condition, if not

corrected, could result in failure of door

5 evacuation slide/raft to deploy

properly, which could contribute to

injury of passengers on the slide, and

could delay or impede the evacuation of

passengers during an emergency.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

BFGoodrich Service Bulletin 7A1469–

25–283, dated November 6, 1995, which

describes procedures for modification of

door 5 evacuation slide/rafts. The

modification involves replacing the

bottle support straps of door 5 with new

support straps, relocating these straps,

and directly lacing them to the center

girt attachment. Accomplishment of the

modification will eliminate bonded

attachments from the load path and

prevent damage to the slide/raft fabric.

Explanation of the Requirements of the

Proposed Rule

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 door 5

evacuation slide/rafts. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the alert service

bulletin described previously.

Explanation of the Applicability of the

Proposed Rule

Operators should note that the

applicability of this proposed rule

affects Boeing Model 747–400 series

airplanes that are equipped with certain

BFGoodrich escape slide/rafts. The

FAA’s general policy is that, when an

unsafe condition results from the

installation of an appliance or other

item that is installed in only one

particular make and model of aircraft,

the AD is issued so that it is applicable

to the aircraft, rather than the item. The

reason is simple: Making the AD

applicable to the airplane model on

which the item is installed ensures that

operators of those airplanes will be

notified directly of the unsafe condition

and the action required to correct it.

While it is assumed that an operator

will know the models of airplanes that

it operates, there is a potential that the

operator will not know or be aware of

specific items that are installed on its

airplanes. It is for this reason that this

proposed AD would be applicable to

Model 747–400’s rather than to the

BFGoodrich escape slide/rafts.

Additionally, calling out the airplane

model as the subject of the AD prevent

‘‘unknowing non-compliance’’ on the

part of the operator.

The FAA recognizes that there are

situations when an unsafe condition

exists in an item that is installed in

many different aircraft. In those cases,

the FAA considers it impractical to

issue AD’s against each aircraft; in fact,

many times, the exact models and

number of aircraft on which the item is

installed may not be known. Therefore,

in those situations, the AD is issued so

that it is applicable to the item;

furthermore, those AD’s usually indicate

that the item is known to be installed

on, but not limited to, various aircraft

models.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 150

BFGoodrich evacuation slide/rafts

installed on 75 Boeing Model 747–400
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18707

series airplanes (2 slides per airplane) of

U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 work hour per slide to

accomplish the proposed actions, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $84 per slide. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $21,600, or $144 per

slide.

The 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.

Regulatory Impact

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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Boeing: Docket 95–NM–218–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–400 series

airplanes equipped with BFGoodrich

Evacuation Slide/Rafts at door 5; having

slide/raft assembly part number

7A1469–1, –2, –3, –4, –7, –8, –9, –10,

–11, or –12 (all unit serial numbers);

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent failure of the door 5 evacuation

slide/raft to deploy properly, which could

contribute to injury of passengers on the slide

and could delay or impede the evacuation of

passengers during an emergency, accomplish

the following:

(a) Within 36 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the door 5 evacuation

slide/raft in accordance with BFGoodrich

Service Bulletin 7A1469–25–283, dated

November 6, 1995.

Note 2: Modification previous to the

effective date of this AD in accordance with

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–25A3096,

which references BFGoodrich Service

Bulletin 7A1469–25–283, dated November 6,

1995, is considered acceptable for

compliance with the modification

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(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

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

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, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 3: 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23,

1996.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10506 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–49–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, that

currently requires inspection to

determine the number of hours time-inservice on the landing gear control unit,

and modification of the cable (electrical

wiring circuit) of the landing gear

control unit. That AD was prompted by

a report of failure of a micro-switch in

the landing gear control unit. This

action would require installation of a

new landing gear control unit. This

action also would expand the

applicability of the existing AD to

include additional airplanes. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent uncommanded

retraction of a landing gear, which could

adversely affect airplane controllability.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

49–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

Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029,

Dulles International Airport,

Washington, DC 20041–6029. 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,