Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 113 / Monday, June 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36801

proposed retermination of the circuit

ground wires of the EPCU, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. The

manufacturer has committed previously

to its customers that it will bear the cost

of replacement parts. As a result, the

cost of those parts is not attributable to

this proposed AD. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

retermination proposed by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,260,

or $60 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are 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 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.

Therefore, it is determined that this

proposal would not have federalism

implications under Executive Order

13132.

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:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 99–NM–329–

AD.

Applicability: Model MD–90–30 series

airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas

Alert Service Bulletin MD90–24A060,

Revision 01, dated September 2, 1999, and

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD90–

24–062, dated Feburary 3, 2000; 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 (c) 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 a loose electrical ground block

of the circuit ground wires of the electrical

power control unit (EPCU), accomplish the

following:

Replacement

(a) For airplanes listed in McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD90–

24A060, Revision 01, dated September 2,

1999: Within 30 days after the effective of

this AD, replace the electrical ground block

screws with new screws in accordance with

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin

MD90–24A060, Revision 01, dated

September 2, 1999.

Note 2: Accomplishment of the

replacement of electrical ground block

screws prior to the effective date of this AD

in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin MD90–24A060, dated July

28, 1999, is acceptable for compliance with

the requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

Modification of the Electrical Power Control

Unit

(b) For airplanes listed in McDonnell

Douglas Service Bulletin MD90–24–062,

dated February 3, 2000: Within 12 months

after the effective date of this AD, reterminate

the circuit ground wires of the EPCU to

separate grounding points to ensure that a

single point failure does not occur, in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin MD90–24–062, dated February 3,

2000.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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, Los

Angeles ACO. 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.

Special Flight Permits

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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 June 6,

2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–14795 Filed 6–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–104–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300, A300–600, and A310 Series

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

Airbus Model A300 and all Model

A300–600 and A310 series airplanes,

that currently requires performing a

pitch trim system test to detect any

continuity defect in the autotrim

function, and follow-on corrective

actions, if necessary. This action would

require repetitive inspections of the

autotrim function to detect such defects,

and corrective actions, if necessary. This

action also would expand the

applicability to include additional

airplanes. This proposal is prompted by

issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent a sudden change

in pitch due to an out-of-trim condition

combined with an autopilot disconnect,

which could result in reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 12, 2000.

36802 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 113 / Monday, June 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

104–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

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 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 2000–NM–104–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–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

2000–NM–104–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On January 18, 2000, the FAA issued

AD 2000–02–04, amendment 39–11522

(65 FR 3799, January 25, 2000),

applicable to certain Airbus Model

A300 and all Model A300–600 and

A310 series airplanes. That AD requires

performing a pitch trim system test to

detect any continuity defect in the

autotrim function, and follow-on

corrective actions, if necessary. That

action was prompted by issuance of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information by a foreign civil

airworthiness authority. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

prevent a sudden change in pitch due to

an out-of-trim condition combined with

an autopilot disconnect, which could

result in reduced controllability of the

airplane.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since issuance of AD 2000–02–04, the

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile

(DGAC), which is the airworthiness

authority for France, has advised the

FAA that repetitive inspections are

necessary to maintain the fleet in an

airworthy condition, and that additional

airplanes may be subject to the

identified unsafe condition. In light of

the DGAC’s recommendation, the FAA

has determined that further rulemaking

action is necessary; this proposed AD

follows from that determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletins

A300–22A6042, Revision 01 (for Model

A300–600 series airplanes); A300–

22A0115, Revision 02 (for Model A300

series airplanes); and A310–22A2053,

Revision 01 (for Model A310 series

airplanes); all dated March 7, 2000.

These service bulletins describe

procedures for repetitive inspections of

the autotrim function by testing the

integrity of the flight control computer

(FCC) and flight augmentation computer

(FAC) in logic activation of the autotrim.

For any default found during the test,

the service bulletins describe

procedures for trouble-shooting and

follow-on corrective actions, including

replacing the FCC and/or FAC, retesting,

checking the wires between certain FCC

and FAC pins, and repairing damaged

wires.

The DGAC classified these service

bulletins as mandatory and issued

French airworthiness directive 2000–

115–304(B) R1, dated May 3, 2000, in

order to ensure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in France and are type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of § 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 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 registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would

supersede AD 2000–02–04 to require

repetitive inspections to detect

continuity defects in the autotrim

function and to expand the applicability

to include additional airplanes. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin described

previously. The proposed AD also

would require that operators report

results of inspection findings to Airbus.

Interim Action

This is considered to be interim

action for Model A300–600 and A310

series airplanes. The manufacturer has

advised that it currently is developing a

modification that will positively address

the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD. Once this modification is

developed, approved, and available, the

FAA may consider additional

rulemaking for these airplanes.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 120

airplanes of U.S. registry that would be

affected by this proposed AD. The

inspection that is proposed by this AD

would take approximately 1 work hour

per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed actions on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $7,200, or

$60 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or proposed requirements of

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 113 / Monday, June 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36803

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 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. Therefore,

it is determined that this proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

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

removing amendment 39–11522 (65 FR

3799, January 25, 2000), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 2000–NM–104–AD.

Supersedes AD 2000–02–04, Amendment

39–11522.

Applicability: Model A300 B2–203 and

B4–203 series airplanes in a forward facing

cockpit version, as listed in Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–22A0115, Revision 02, dated

March 7, 2000; and all Model A300–600 and

A310 series 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) 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 a sudden change in pitch due

to an out-of-trim condition combined with an

autopilot disconnect, which could result in

reduced controllability of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

Repetitive Inspections

(a) At the applicable time specified by

paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD: Perform

an inspection of the autotrim function by

testing the flight control computer (FCC)/

flight augmentation computer (FAC) integrity

in logic activation of the autotrim, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–22A6042, Revision 01 (for Model

A300–600 series airplanes); A300–22A0115,

Revision 02 (for Model A300 series

airplanes); or A310–22A2053, Revision 01

(for Model A310 series airplanes); all dated

March 7, 2000; as applicable. If any

discrepancy is found, prior to further flight,

perform all applicable corrective actions

(including trouble-shooting, replacing the

FCC and/or FAC, retesting, checking the

wires between certain FCC and FAC pins,

and repairing damaged wires) in accordance

with the applicable service bulletin. Repeat

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 500 flight hours.

(1) For airplanes on which the pitch trim

system test has been performed in

accordance with the requirements of AD

2000–02–04, amendment 39–11522: Inspect

within 500 flight hours after accomplishment

of the test required by that AD, or within 20

days after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(2) For all other airplanes: Inspect within

20 days after the effective date of this AD.

Reporting Requirement

(b) For all inspections required by

paragraph (a) of this AD: At the applicable

time specified by paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of

this AD, submit a report of the inspection

results (both positive and negative findings)

to AI/SE-D32 Technical Data and

Documentation Services, Airbus Industrie

Customer Services Directorate, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex

France; fax (+33) 5 61 93 28 06.

(1) For inspections accomplished after the

effective date of this AD: Submit the report

within 10 days after performing the

inspection.

(2) For inspections accomplished prior to

the effective date of this AD: Submit the

report within 10 days after the effective date

of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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,

International Branch, ANM–116, 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, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2000–115–

304(B) R1, dated May 3, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 6,

2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–14794 Filed 6–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–107–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 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 all

Boeing Model 737–300, –400, and –500

series airplanes. This proposal would

require replacement of the existing

autothrottle computer with a new,

improved autothrottle computer. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

asymmetric thrust conditions during

flight caused by irregular autothrottle

operation in which the thrust levers

slowly move apart causing the airplane