This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

5477

Vol. 69, No. 24

Thursday, February 5, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 2003–CE–60–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Glasflugel—

Ing. E. Hanle Model GLASFLUGEL 

Kestrel Sailplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Glasflugel—Ing. E. Hanle (Glasflugel) 

Model GLASFLUGEL Kestrel sailplanes. 

This proposed AD would require you to 

inspect the airbrake actuating shaft for 

deformation and cracks (hereon referred 

to as damage). If any damage is found, 

this proposed AD would also require 

you to repair or replace the airbrake 

actuation shaft. This proposed AD is the 

result of mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by the airworthiness authority for 

Germany. We are issuing this proposed 

AD to detect and correct damage to the 

airbrake actuation shaft, which could 

result in failure of the airbrake control. 

This failure could lead to loss of control 

of the sailplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by March 4, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to 

submit comments on this proposed AD: 

• By mail: FAA, Central Region, 

Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–CE–

60–AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106. 

• By fax: (816) 329–3771. 

• By e-mail: 9–ACE–7–

Docket@faa.gov. Comments sent 

electronically must contain ‘‘Docket No. 

2003–CE–60–AD’’ in the subject line. If 

you send comments electronically as 

attached electronic files, the files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 

Windows or ASCII. 

You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from 

Hansjorg Streifeneder, GlasfaserFlugzeug-Service GmbH, Hofener Weg, 

D–72582, Grabenstetten, Germany; 

telephone: 07382 1032; facsimile: 07382 

1629; e-mail: streifly@aol.com.

You may view the AD docket at FAA, 

Central Region, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

2003–CE–60–AD, 901 Locust, Room 

506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office 

hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg 

Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: 

(816) 329–4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

How do I comment on this proposed 

AD? We invite you to submit any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments regarding this proposal. Send 

your comments to an address listed 

under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket 

No. 2003–CE–60–AD’’ in the subject 

line of your comments. If you want us 

to acknowledge receipt of your mailed 

comments, send us a self-addressed, 

stamped postcard with the docket 

number written on it. We will datestamp your postcard and mail it back to 

you. 

Are there any specific portions of this 

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

We specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

this proposed AD. If you contact us 

through a nonwritten communication 

and that contact relates to a substantive 

part of this proposed AD, we will 

summarize the contact and place the 

summary in the docket. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD in light of those comments 

and contacts. 

Discussion 

What events have caused this 

proposed AD? The Lutfahrt-Bundesamt 

(LBA), which is the airworthiness 

authority for Germany, recently notified 

FAA that an unsafe condition may exist 

on all Glasflugel Model GLASFLUGEL 

Kestrel sailplanes. The LBA reports that, 

on one of the affected sailplanes, the 

airbrakes would not completely open or 

close. 

A visual inspection of that sailplane 

revealed cracks and deformity (damage) 

on the airbrake actuating shaft. Incorrect 

locking forces of the airbrake control 

caused the damage. 

What are the consequences if the 

condition is not corrected? If not 

detected and corrected, damage to the 

airbrake actuating shaft could result in 

failure of airbrake control. This failure 

could lead to loss of control of the 

sailplane. 

Is there service information that 

applies to this subject? H. Streifeneder 

has issued Technical Note TN 401–26, 

dated November 22, 2001. 

What are the provisions of this service 

information? The service bulletin 

includes procedures for:

—Inspecting the airbrake actuation shaft 

for damage; and 

—Repairing or replacing any damaged 

airbrake actuation shaft.

What action did the LBA take? The 

LBA classified this technical note as 

mandatory and issued German AD 

Number 2002–051, dated March 7, 2002, 

to ensure the continued airworthiness of 

these sailplanes in Germany. 

Did the LBA inform the United States 

under the bilateral airworthiness 

agreement? These Glasflugel Model 

GLASFLUGEL Kestrel sailplanes are 

manufactured in Germany and are typecertificated 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. 

Under this bilateral airworthiness 

agreement, the LBA has kept us 

informed of the situation described 

above. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

What has FAA decided? We have 

examined the LBA’s findings, 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 the unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

on other Glasflugel Model 

GLASFLUGEL Kestrel sailplanes of the 

5478 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

same type design that are registered in 

the United States, we are proposing AD 

action to detect and correct damage to 

the airbrake actuating shaft, which 

could result in failure of airbrake 

control. This failure could lead to loss 

of control of the sailplane. 

What would this proposed AD 

require? This proposed AD would 

require you to incorporate the actions in 

the previously-referenced service 

bulletin. 

How does the revision to 14 CFR part 

39 affect this proposed AD? On July 10, 

2002, we published a new version of 14 

CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 

2002), which governs FAA’s AD system. 

This regulation now includes material 

that relates to altered products, special 

flight permits, and alternative methods 

of compliance. This material previously 

was included in each individual AD. 

Since this material is included in 14 

CFR part 39, we will not include it in 

future AD actions.

Costs of Compliance 

How many sailplanes would this 

proposed AD impact? We estimate that 

this proposed AD affects 16 sailplanes 

in the U.S. registry. 

What would be the cost impact of this 

proposed AD on owners/operators of the 

affected sailplanes? We estimate the 

following costs to accomplish this 

proposed inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost 

Total cost 

per

airplane 

Total cost on U.S.

operators 

1 workhour × $65 per hour = $65 ........................... Not applicable ........................................................ $65 $65 × 16 = $1,040. 

We estimate the following costs to 

accomplish any necessary repairs or 

replacements that would be required 

based on the results of this proposed 

inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of sailplanes 

that may need this repair or 

replacement:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane 

5 workhours × $65 per hour = $325 ............................................................................................................ $40 $325 + $40 = $365. 

Regulatory Findings 

Would this proposed AD impact 

various entities? We have determined 

that this proposed AD would not have 

federalism implications under Executive 

Order 13132. This proposed AD would 

not have a substantial direct effect 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. 

Would this proposed AD involve a 

significant rule or regulatory action? For 

the reasons discussed above, I certify 

that this proposed AD: 

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. 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. 

We prepared a summary of the costs 

to comply with this proposed AD and 

placed it in the AD Docket. You may get 

a copy of this summary by sending a 

request to us at the address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 

2003–CE–60–AD’’ in your request.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

Glasflugel—Ing. E. Hanle: Docket No. 2003–

CE–60–AD 

When Is the Last Date I Can Submit 

Comments on This Proposed AD? 

(a) We must receive comments on this 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) by 

March 4, 2004. 

What Other ADs Are Affected by This 

Action? 

(b) None.

What Sailplanes Are Affected by This AD? 

(c) This AD affects Model GLASFLUGEL 

Kestrel sailplanes, all serial numbers, that are 

certificated in any category. 

What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in 

This AD? 

(d) This AD is the result of mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by the airworthiness authority for 

Germany. The actions specified in this AD 

are intended to detect and correct damage to 

the airbrake actuation shaft, which could 

result in failure of the airbrake control. This 

failure could lead to loss of control of the 

sailplane. 

What Must I Do To Address This Problem? 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following:

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2004 / Proposed Rules 5479

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(1) Inspect the airbrake actuation shaft for 

cracks and deformation (damage).

Within the next 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) 

after the effective date of this AD. Repetitively inspect thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 12 calendar months.

Follow H. Streifeneder Technical Note TN 

401–26, dated November 22, 2001. 

(2) Repair or replace any cracked or deformed 

airbrake actuation shaft found during any inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of the 

AD.

Before further flight after any inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD in 

which damage is found. Continue with repetitive inspections after repairs or replacements are made.

Follow H. Streifeneder Technical Note TN 

401–26, dated November 22, 2001. 

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.13. Send your request to the Manager, 

Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate, 

FAA. For information on any already 

approved alternative methods of compliance, 

contact Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: (816) 

329–4090. 

May I Get Copies of the Documents 

Referenced in This AD? 

(g) You may get copies of the documents 

referenced in this AD from Hansjorg 

Streifeneder, Glasfaser-Flugzeug-Service 

GmbH, Hofener Weg, D–72582 Grabenstetten, 

Germany; telephone: 07382 1032; facsimile: 

07382 1629; e-mail: streifly@aol.com. You 

may view these documents at FAA, Central 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106. 

Is There Other Information That Relates to 

This Subject? 

(h) Germany AD Number 2002–051, dated 

March 7, 2002.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 

26, 2004. 

Dorenda D. Baker, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–2484 Filed 2–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA–2003–16707; Airspace 

Docket No. 2003–ANE–104] 

Proposed Establishment of Class E 

Airspace; Manchester, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes the 

Establishment of a Class E airspace area 

at Manchester, NH (KMHT) to provide 

for controlled airspace upward from the 

surface during the times when the air 

traffic controller tower at Manchester 

will be closed.

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 5, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the 

proposal to the Docket Management 

System, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

2050–0001. You must identify the 

docket Number at the beginning of your 

comments, FAA–2003–16707/Airspace 

Docket 2003–ANE–104. You may also 

submit comments using the Internet at: 

http://dms.dot.gov. You may review the 

public docket in person in the Dockets 

Office between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The docket contains the 

proposal, any comments received, and 

any final disposition. The Docket Office 

(telephone 1–800–647–5527) is located 

on the plaza level of the Department of 

Transportation NASSIF Building at the 

same address. 

You may examine an informal docket 

by appointment at the New England 

Region, Air Traffic Division, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803–5299; telephone (781) 238–7520.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angel Cases, Air Traffic Division, 

Airspace Branch, ANE–520, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803–5299; telephone (781) 238–7520; 

fax (781) 238–7596.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting written data, views, or 

arguments. Comments that provide a 

factual basis supporting the views and 

suggestions presented are particularly 

helpful in developing reasoned 

regulatory decisions on the proposal 

and determining whether additional 

rulemaking action is needed. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal that might 

suggest a need to modify the proposed 

rule. comments must identify both 

docket numbers and must be submitted 

to the address listed under ADDRESSES.

If you want the FAA to acknowledge 

receipt of your comment then with your 

comment send a self-addressed, 

stamped postcard with the following 

statement: ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 

FAA–2003–16707, Airspace Docket No. 

2003–ANE–104.’’ We will date/time 

stamp the postcard and return it to you. 

We will consider all comments received 

on or before the closing date for 

comments, and may change the 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. All comments submitted are 

available for examination in the Rules 

Docket and on the Internet, both before 

and after the closing date for comments. 

A report that summarizes each FAApublic contact concerned with the 

substance of this action will be filed in 

the Rules Docket. 

Availability of NRPM’s 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at: http://dms.dot.gov. Recently 

published rulemaking documents can 

also be accessed through the FAA’s Web 

page, http://www.faa.voc, or the 

Superintendent of Document’s Web 

page, http://access.gpo.gov/nara. 

In addition, any person may obtain a 

copy of this NRPM by submitting a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Air Traffic 

Airspace Management, ATA–400, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591, or by calling 

(202) 267–8783. Requests must contain 

both docket numbers for this notice. If 

you are interested in being placed on a 

mailing list for future NPRMs, you 

should contact the FAA’s Office of 

Rulemaking, (202) 267–9677, to request 

a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

Distribution System, which describes 

the application procedures. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is proposing to establish a 

Class E airspace area extending upward 

from the surface at Manchester Airport,