Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules 4941

Employment Security (Unemployment

Insurance and Employment Services), Social

Security Act (Title III), as amended by the

Social Security Act Amendments of 1939,

Section 301, on August 10, 1939, and the

Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended by Pub. L.

81–775, section 2, on September 8, 1950; 42

U.S.C. 503(a)(1) and 29 U.S.C. 49d(b).

Aid to Families with Dependent Children,

Social Security Act (Title IV–A), as amended

by the Social Security Act Amendments of

1939, section 401, on August 10, 1939; 42

U.S.C. 602(a)(5).

Aid to the Blind, Social Security Act (Title

X), as amended by the Social Security Act

Amendments of 1939, section 701, on August

10, 1939; 42 U.S.C. 1202(a)(5)(A).1

Aid to the Permanently and Totally

Disabled, Social Security Act (Title XIV), as

amended by the Social Security Act

Amendments of 1950, section 1402, on

August 28, 1950; 42 U.S.C. 1352(a)(5)(A).1

Aid to the Aged, Blind or Disabled. Social

Security Act (Title XVI), as amended by the

Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, section

1602, on July 25, 1962; 42 U.S.C.

1382(a)(5)(A).1

Medical Assistance (Medicaid), Social

Security Act (Title XIX), as amended by the

Social Security Amendments of 1965, section

1902, on July 30,1965; 42 U.S.C.

1396(a)(4)(A).

State and Community Programs on A&V

(Older Americans), Older Americans Act of

1965 (Title III), as amended by the

Comprehensive Older Americans Act

Amendments of 1976, section 307 on October

18,1978; 42 U.S.C. 3027(a)(4).

Foster Care and Adoption Assistance,

Social Security Act (Title IV–E) as amended

by the Adoption Assistance and Child

Welfare Act of 1980; 42 U.S.C. 671(a)(5).

Part II

The following programs have a regulatory

requirement for the establishment and

maintenance of personnel standards on a

merit basis.

Program, Legislation, and Regulatory

Reference

Occupational Safety and Health Standards,

Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and

Health Act of 1970; Occupational Safety and

Health State Plans for the Development and

Enforcement of State Standards; Department

of Labor, 29 CFR 1902.3(h).

Occupational Safety and Health Statistics,

Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and

Health Act of 1970; BLS Grant Application

Kit, May 1, 1973, Supplemental Assurance

No. 15A.

Robert T. Stafford Disaster Assistance and

Emergency Relief Act (42 U.S.C. 5196b), as

amended; 44 CFR 302.4.

[FR Doc. 97–2616 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Civilian and Radioactive

Waste Management

10 CFR Part 960

RIN 1901–1172

General Guidelines for the

Recommendation of Sites for Nuclear

Waste Repositories

AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management, Energy.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

public comment period.

SUMMARY: In response to requests from

several interested persons, the

Department of Energy has granted

additional time to comment on

proposed amendments to 10 CFR part

960 that were published at 61 FR 66157

December 16, 1996.

DATES: Comments should be received no

later than March 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: All written comments are to

be submitted to April V. Gil, U.S.

Department of Energy, Office of Civilian

Radioactive Waste Management, Yucca

Mountain Site Characterization Office,

P.O. Box 98608, or provided by

electronic mail to

10 CFR960@notes.ymp.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

April V. Gil, U.S. Department of Energy,

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management, Yucca Mountain Site

Characterization Office, P.O. Box 98608,

Las Vegas, Nevada 89193–8608, (800)

967–3477.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on this 28th

day of January, 1997.

Lake H. Barrett,

Acting Director, U.S. Department of Energy,

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management.

[FR Doc. 97–2553 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–108–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier

Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet

Series 100) 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

Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19

(Regional Jet Series 100) series

airplanes. That AD currently requires

revisions to the Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to advise the flight crew of the

need to perform daily checks to verify

proper operation of the elevator control

system, and to restrict altitude and

airspeed operations under certain

conditions. That AD also requires

removal of all elevator flutter dampers.

That AD was prompted by reports that

the installation of certain shear pins

may jam or restrict movement of the

elevator. The actions specified by that

AD are intended to prevent such

jamming or restricting movement of the

elevator and the resultant adverse effect

on the controllability of the airplane.

This new proposed action would add

inspections of certain airplanes to detect

deformation or discrepancies of the

flutter damper hinge fittings and lug of

the horizontal stabilizer, the elevator

hinge/damper fitting, and the shear pin

lugs; and require replacement of

discrepant parts with serviceable parts.

This proposed action also would require

installation of new elevator flutter

dampers, and replacement of shear pins

and shear links with new, improved

pins and links.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

108–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

Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace

Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centreville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9,

Canada. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 181 South Franklin

Avenue, Valley Stream, New York.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Franco Pieri, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, New York Aircraft Certification

Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor,

Valley Stream, New York 11581;
4942 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules

telephone (516) 256–7526; fax (516)

568–2716.

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 96–NM–108–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.

96–NM–108–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On November 17, 1994, the FAA

issued AD 94–24–02, amendment 39–

9075 (59 FR 60888, November 29, 1994),

applicable to certain Bombardier Model

CL–600–2B19 series airplanes. That AD

requires:

1. the removal of all elevator flutter

dampers; and

2. a revision to the FAA-Approved

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to advise

the flight crew of the need to perform

daily checks to verify proper operation

of the elevator control system.

In addition, that AD retained the

requirements from AD 94–01–09,

amendment 39–8791 (59 FR 1471,

January 11, 1994), to revise the AFM to

restrict altitude and airspeed operations

under conditions of single or double

hydraulic system failure.

That AD was prompted by reports that

the installation of certain shear pins

may jam or restrict movement of the

elevator. The requirements of that AD

are intended to prevent failure of the

lugs and/or pins. Such failure could

increase the likelihood of jamming or

restricting movement of the elevator,

which could result in an adverse effect

on the controllability of the airplane.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since the issuance of that AD, the

manufacturer has issued Canadair

Regional Jet Service Bulletin S.B. 601R–

27–040, Revision ‘B,’ dated September

11, 1995. For certain airplanes, this

service bulletin describes procedures for

a visual inspection to detect

deformation or discrepancies of the

flutter damper hinge fitting and lug of

the horizontal stabilizer, and of the

elevator hinge/damper fitting and shear

pin lugs; a fluorescent penetrant

inspection and a dimensional

inspection to detect any deformation or

discrepancy of the shear pin lugs; and

replacement of discrepant parts with

serviceable parts. For these and other

airplanes, this service bulletin also

describes procedures for installation of

a new elevator flutter damper having a

reduced load capacity, and for

replacement of the shear pins and shear

links with new, improved shear pins

and links.

Accomplishment of the actions

described in that service bulletin will

improve the integrity of the elevator

damping system and increase the

service fatigue life of the flutter damper.

The manufacturer also has issued two

general revisions to the AFM for these

airplanes:

• Revision 32, dated March 30, 1995,

which advises the flight crew of the

need to perform daily checks to verify

proper operation of the elevator control

system.

• Revision 34, dated June 12, 1995,

which specifies certain altitude and

airspeed restrictions to prevent flight

control undamped vibration during

hydraulic system failure.

Transport Canada Aviation, which is

the airworthiness authority for Canada,

classified the service bulletin and AFM

revisions as mandatory, and issued

Canadian airworthiness directive CF–

94–21R1, dated November 3, 1995, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

Canada.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Canada 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,

Transport Canada Aviation has kept the

FAA informed of the situation described

above. The FAA has examined the

findings of Transport Canada Aviation,

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 94–24–02. It would

continue to require the removal of the

originally installed elevator dampers. It

also would continue to require revisions

to the Limitations Section of the FAAapproved AFM to restrict altitude and

airspeed operations under conditions of

single or double hydraulic system

failure, and to advise the flight crew of

the need to perform daily checks to

verify proper operation of the elevator

control system. As stated in this

proposal, these revisions could be

accomplished by inserting a copy of this

AD or the new AFM revisions,

described previously, in the AFM.

For certain airplanes, this new

proposed AD would require inspections

to detect deformation or discrepancies

of the flutter damper hinge fitting and

lug of the horizontal stabilizer, the

elevator hinge/damper fitting, and the

shear pin lugs; and replacement of

discrepant parts with serviceable parts.

For those and other airplanes, the

proposed AD also would require

installation of new elevator flutter

dampers, and replacement of shear pins

and shear links with new, improved

pins and links. These actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

Interim Action

This is considered to be interim

action until final action is identified, at

which time the FAA may consider

further rulemaking.

Difference Between the Proposed AD

and the Service Information

Operators should note that, the

effectivity listing of AFM Revision 32,

dated March 30, 1995 (which advises

the flight crew of the need to perform
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules 4943

daily checks of the elevator control

system), indicates that it applies only to

those airplanes having serial numbers

7002 through 7054 and on which

Canadair Regional Jet Service Bulletin

S.B. 601R–27–040 (Part A) has not been

accomplished. However, this proposed

AD would require that the AFM revision

be accomplished for those airplanes,

regardless of whether or not the

procedures specified in the Canadair

service bulletin have been

accomplished. The FAA has been

specifically advised by Transport

Canada Aviation that the

accomplishment of the service bulletin

procedures should not be considered as

a ‘‘terminating action’’ for the AFM

revision. Further, the parallel Canadian

airworthiness directive continues to

require this revision of the AFM.

In light of this, the FAA has

determined that, until final action

addressing the unsafe condition is

developed, the revision of the AFM

must be required in addition to the

procedures specified in the Canadair

Regional Jet service bulletin.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 21

Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19

(Regional Jet Series 100) series airplanes

of U.S. registry that would be affected

by this proposed AD.

The actions that are currently

required by AD 94–24–02, and retained

in this proposal, take approximately 6

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact on U.S. operators of the actions

currently required is estimated to be

$7,560, or $360 per airplane. The FAA

estimates that all affected U.S. operators

have previously accomplished these

requirements, therefore, the future cost

impact of these requirements is

minimal.

For airplanes that would require the

inspections that are proposed in this

AD, it would take approximately 26

work hours per airplane to accomplish

them, at an average labor rate of $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed inspections

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$1,560 per airplane.

The installations that are proposed in

this AD would take approximately 12

work hours per airplane to accomplish

them, at an average labor rate of $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 on U.S. operators of the

proposed installations is estimated to be

$15,120, or $720 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or 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

removing amendment 39–9075 (59 FR

60888, November 29, 1994), and by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD), to read as follows:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair):

Docket 96–NM–108–AD. Supersedes AD

94–24–02, Amendment 39–9075.

Applicability: Model CL–600–2B19

(Regional Jet Series 100) series airplanes

having serial numbers 7003 through 7054

inclusive, 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 (d) 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 lugs and/or pins,

which may increase the likelihood of

jamming or restricting movement of the

elevator and the resultant adverse effect on

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 94–01–

09

(a) Within 30 days after January 26, 1994

(the effective date of AD 94–01–09,

amendment 39–8791), revise the Limitations

Section of the FAA-approved Airplane Flight

Manual (AFM) to include the following

restrictions of altitude and airspeed

operations under conditions of single or

double hydraulic system failure; and advise

the flight crew of these revised limits.

Revision of the AFM may be accomplished

by inserting a copy of this AD or AFM

Revision 34, dated June 12, 1995, in the

AFM.

Altitude limit (maximum) Airspeed limit

(maximum)

Single Hydraulic System Failure

31,000 feet ............................. 0.55 Mach

(199 KIAS).

30,000 feet ............................. 0.55 Mach

(204 KIAS).

28,000 feet ............................. 0.55 Mach

(213 KIAS).

26,00 feet ............................... 0.55 Mach

(222 KIAS).

24,000 feet ............................. 0.55 Mach

(232 KIAS).

22,000 feet ............................. 0.55 Mach

(241 KIAS).

20,000 feet and below ........... 252 KIAS.

Double Hydraulic System Failure

10,000 feet ............................. 200 KIAS.

Note 2: The restrictions described in the

AFM Temporary Revision (TR) RJ/30, dated

December 16, 1993; meet the requirements of

this paragraph. Therefore, inserting a copy of

TR RJ/30 in lieu of this AD in the AFM is

considered an acceptable means of

compliance with this paragraph.
4944 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Restatement of Requirements of AD 94–24–

02

(b) Within 7 days after December 14, 1994

(the effective date of AD 94–24–02,

amendment 39–9075), accomplish the

requirements of paragraph (b)(1) and (b)(2) of

this AD:

(1) Until the requirements of paragraph

(c)(2) of this AD are accomplished, remove

the elevator dampers in accordance with

Canadair Regional Jet Alert Service Bulletin

S.B. A601R–27–041, dated October 28, 1994.

(2) Revise the Limitations Section of the

FAA-approved AFM to include the

following, which advises the flight crew of

daily checks to verify proper operation of the

elevator control system. Revision of the AFM

may be accomplished by inserting a copy of

this AD or AFM Revision 32, dated March 30,

1995, in the AFM.

Note 3: The daily check described in the

AFM Temporary Revision (TR)RJ/40, dated

October 28, 1994, meets the requirements of

this paragraph. Therefore, inserting a copy of

TR RJ/40 into the AFM in lieu of this AD is

considered an acceptable means of

compliance with this paragraph.

‘‘Elevator, Before Engine Start (First Flight of Day)

(1) Elevator ................................................. Check ...... Travel range (to approximately 1/2 travel) using each hydraulic system in turn,

with the other hydraulic systems depressurized.’’

New Requirements of this AD

(c) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, perform the requirements of

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, as

applicable, in accordance with Canadair

Regional Jet Service Bulletin S.B. 601R–27–

040, Revision ‘B,’ dated September 11, 1995.

(1) For airplanes having serial numbers

7003 through 7049, inclusive: Perform the

inspections specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i),

(c)(1)(ii), and (c)(1)(iii) of this AD in

accordance with Section 2.B., Part A, of the

service bulletin.

(i) Remove the shear pins and shear links

of the flutter dampers and perform a visual

inspection to detect any deformation or

discrepancy of the flutter damper hinge

fitting and lug of the horizontal stabilizer.

Prior to further flight, replace any deformed

or discrepant part with a serviceable part in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(ii) Perform a visual inspection to detect

any deformation or discrepancy of the

elevator hinge/damper fitting and shear pin

lugs. Prior to further flight, replace any

discrepant part with a serviceable part in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(iii) Perform a fluorescent penetrant

inspection and a dimensional inspection to

detect any deformation or discrepancy of the

shear pin lugs. If any deformation or

discrepancy is found on the lugs, prior to

further flight, replace the elevator with a new

or serviceable elevator in accordance with

the service bulletin.

(2) For airplanes having serial numbers

7003 through 7054, inclusive: Install new

shear pins [part number (P/N) 601R24063–

953] and new elevator flutter dampers (P/N

601R75142–7) in accordance with Section

2.B., Part B, of the service bulletin:

(d) 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, New York

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Engine and Propeller Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, New York ACO.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(e) 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 January

27, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–2519 Filed 1–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–29–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This document revises an

earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to certain Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 series

airplanes, that would have required a

one-time operational test of the pitot

heating system, and repair or

replacement of failed elements. That

action also proposed to require the

replacement of the pitot heating system

with a new improved system. This new

action would revise the proposal by

adding a requirement to install power

supply wiring with increased gauge

thickness and a circuit breaker with an

increased amperage rating. This action

also would add additional airplanes to

the applicability of the rule. The actions

specified by this proposed AD are

intended to prevent icing of the No. 1

pitot tube, which could result in failure

of the No. 1 Air Data Computer, or

output of erroneous airspeed data to all

on-side subsidiary systems, including

the Automatic Flight Control and

Augmentation System.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

29–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

Fokker Services B.V., Technical Support

Department, P. O. Box 75047, 1117 ZN

Schiphol Airport, The Netherlands. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2141; 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