27028 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / Proposed Rules

SUMMARY: A supplementary notice of

proposed rulemaking for certification of

the U.S. Advanced Boiling-Water

Reactor (ABWR) and System 80+

designs was published in the Federal

Register on April 24, 1996 (61 FR

18099). The supplementary comment

period expired on May 24, 1996. On

May 17, 1996, the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC) received

a request for a 60-day extension of the

supplementary comment period from

the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). NEI

requested the extension in order to

provide substantive comments on new

issues, as well as on longstanding issues

that NEI stated have not yet been

resolved to its satisfaction. Therefore,

the Commission is extending the

comment period to July 23, 1996.

The final design certification rules for

the ABWR and System 80+ designs,

which are under consideration by the

Commission, are contained in SECY–

96–077, ‘‘Certification of Two

Evolutionary Designs,’’ which was

prepared by the NRC staff. This SECY

paper has been placed in the NRC

Public Document Room (PDR), and

comments on the proposed rules,

focusing specifically on staffrecommended changes from the rules

originally proposed, are solicited. These

changes are discussed in the

supplementary information section of

the recommended notices of final

rulemaking contained in SECY–96–077.

In addition, GE Nuclear Energy (GE)

submitted draft changes to the ABWR

Design Control Document (DCD) to the

NRC in a letter dated April 16, 1996 that

GE intends to include in its final DCD.

Comments are also solicited on GE’s

letter of April 16, 1996, which is

available in the NRC PDR.

DATES: Comments are due by July 23,

1996. Comments received after this date

will be considered if it is practical to do

so, but the Commission will only assure

consideration for comments received on

or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Docketing and Service Branch.

Comments may also be hand delivered

to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15

p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of

SECY–96–077, including the Federal

Register notices for both rules, and the

comments received will be available for

examination at the NRC Public

Document Room at 2120 L Street NW

(Lower Level), Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry

N. Wilson, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation, telephone (301) 415–3145,

or Geary S. Mizuno, Office of the

General Counsel, telephone (301) 415–

1639, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day

of May, 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 96–13574 Filed 5–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–166–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Beech

(Raytheon) Model BAe 125 Series

1000A and Model Hawker 1000

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 Beech (Raytheon) Model BAe

125 series 1000A and Model Hawker

1000 airplanes. This proposal would

require a one-time inspection for correct

sleeve lengths, an inspection to detect

discrepancies of the elevator pulley

assembly, and correction of any

discrepancy. This proposal is prompted

by reports indicating that some aircraft

have been fitted with an elevator pulley

that was assembled incorrectly during

manufacture. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent reduced structural integrity of

the elevator control circuit due to failure

of one or more outer lugs or malfunction

of the elevator pulley assembly as a

result of incorrect assembly of the

pulley.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

166–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

Raytheon Aircraft Company, Manager

Service Engineering, Hawker Customer

Support Department, P.O. Box 85,

Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085. 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) 227–1149.

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–166–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–166–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
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / Proposed Rules 27029

the FAA that an unsafe condition may

exist on certain Beech (Raytheon) Model

BAe 125 series 1000A and Model

Hawker 1000 airplanes. The CAA

advises that it has received reports

indicating that some aircraft have been

fitted with an elevator pulley that was

assembled incorrectly during

manufacture. Failure of one or more

outer lugs or malfunction of the elevator

pulley assembly, if not corrected, could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the elevator control circuit.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The manufacturer has issued Hawker

Service Bulletin SB 27–161, Revision 1,

dated July 29, 1994, which describes

procedures for a one-time inspection for

correct sleeve lengths, and a one-time

visual inspection to detect discrepancies

of the elevator pulley assembly. The

CAA classified this service bulletin as

mandatory in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in the United Kingdom.

FAA’s Conclusions

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.

Explanation of Requirements of

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 a one-time inspection for correct

sleeve lengths, a one-time visual

inspection to detect discrepancies of the

elevator pulley assembly, and correction

of any discrepancy. The inspections

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletin

described previously. Correction of

discrepancies would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with a

method approved by the FAA.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 40 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane

to accomplish the proposed actions, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $2,400, or

$60 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 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Beech Aircraft Company (Formerly

DeHavilland; Hawker Siddeley; British

Aerospace, PLC; Raytheon Corporate

Jets, Inc.): Docket 95–NM–166–AD.

Applicability: Model BAe 125 series 1000A

and Model Hawker 1000 airplanes; as listed

in Hawker Service Bulletin SB 27–161,

Revision 1, dated July 29, 1994; 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 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.

Note 2: Beech (Raytheon) Model BAe 125

series 1000B airplanes are similar in design

to the airplanes that are subject to the

requirements of this AD and, therefore, also

may be subject to the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. However, as of the

effective date of this AD, those models are

not type certificated for operation in the

United States. Airworthiness authorities of

countries in which Model BAe 125 series

1000B series airplanes are approved for

operation should consider adopting

corrective action, applicable to those models,

that is similar to the corrective action

required by this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of

the elevator control circuit, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD: Perform a one-time inspection for

correct sleeve lengths, and a one-time visual

inspection to detect discrepancies of the

elevator pulley assembly, in accordance with

Hawker Service Bulletin SB 27–161, Revision

1, dated July 29, 1994.

(1) If no discrepancy is found, no further

action is required by this AD.

(2) If any discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, correct the discrepancy in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

(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.
27030 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / Proposed Rules

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 May 22,

1996.

John J. Hickey,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–13497 Filed 5–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–240–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet

Model 60 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 Learjet Model 60 airplanes. This

proposal would require modification of

the aft core cowl nozzle of the engine

nacelles. This proposal is prompted by

a report that the sealant material in the

aft core cowl nozzle of the engine

nacelle was found to extend higher than

the nozzle’s forward flange, which can

allow it to interfere with the proper

operation of the emergency fuel shutoff

actuating mechanism. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent physical

interference of the emergency fuel

shutoff actuating mechanism and

resultant engine shutdown.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

240–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

Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita,

Kansas 67209–2942. This information

may be examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,

1801 Airport Road, Room 100, MidContinent Airport, Wichita, Kansas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Janusz, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE–

116W, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,

1801 Airport Road, Room 100, MidContinent Airport, Wichita, Kansas

67209; telephone (316) 946–4148; fax

(316) 946–4407.

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–240–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–240–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received a report that,

during installation of the aft core cowl

nozzle of the engine nacelle on a Learjet

Model 60 airplane, the sealant material

in the aft core cowl nozzle was found to

be improperly extended higher than the

nozzle’s forward flange. The cause has

been attributed to the apparent

improper installation of the sealant

material during production. Sealant

material in the aft core cowl nozzle that

extends too high, if not corrected, could

interfere with proper operation of the

lever of the emergency fuel shutoff

actuating mechanism. Such interference

could result in the failure of the

emergency fuel shutoff actuating

mechanism and resultant engine

shutdown.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Learjet Service Bulletin SB 60–71–2,

dated May 12, 1995, which describes

procedures for modification of the aft

core cowl nozzle of the engine nacelles.

Among other actions, the modification

involves replacing the sealant on the aft

core cowl nozzle with a filler made from

6061 aluminum, and reidentifying the

aft core cowl nozzle. The modification

will ensure that the sealant does not

interfere with the function of the

emergency fuel shutoff actuating

mechanism.

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 aft core cowl

nozzle of the engine nacelles. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletin described previously.

There are approximately 39 Learjet

Model 60 airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 26 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 44 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be supplied by the manufacturer

at no cost to the operators. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $68,640, or $2,640 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.

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