61706 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 96–NM–184–AD.

Applicability: Model A320–111, –211, and

–231 series airplanes, manufacturer’s serial

numbers 002 through 008 inclusive, 010

through 014 inclusive, 016 through 078

inclusive, and 080 through 107 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 (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 detect and correct reduced structural

integrity of the wing-fuselage support and

fuselage pressure vessel resulting from

structural fatigue cracking in the transition

and pick-up angles, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 16,000 total

landings, or within 6 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, accomplish paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)

of this AD, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A320–53–1028, dated March

1, 1994.

(1) Perform a visual inspection to detect

cracks of the transition angle, in accordance

with the service bulletin.

(i) If no crack is detected during the visual

inspection required by paragraph (a)(1) of

this AD, accomplish either paragraph

(a)(1)(i)(A) or paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) of this

AD.

(A) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 12,000 landings. Or

(B) Prior to further flight, modify the center

fuselage in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–53–1027, dated March 1,

1994; Revision 1, dated September 5, 1994;

or Revision 2, dated June 8, 1995.

Accomplishment of the modification

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of this AD.

(ii) If any crack is detected during the

visual inspection required by paragraph (a)(1)

of this AD, prior to further flight, replace the

transition angle with a new transition angle,

in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–53–1027, dated March 1, 1994;

Revision 1, dated September 5, 1994; or

Revision 2, dated June 8, 1995.

(2) Perform a rotating probe inspection to

detect cracks of the pick-up angle, in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(i) If no crack is detected during the

rotating probe inspection required by

paragraph (a)(2) of this AD, accomplish either

paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A) or (a)(2)(i)(B) of this

AD.

(A) Repeat the visual and rotating probe

inspections thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 12,000 landings. Or

(B) Prior to further flight, modify the center

fuselage in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–53–1027, dated March 1,

1994; Revision 1, dated September 5, 1994;

or Revision 2, dated June 8, 1995.

Accomplishment of the modification

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A) of this AD.

(ii) If any crack is detected and it is less

than 1.9 mm in length, prior to further flight,

accomplish the applicable corrective actions

specified in the service bulletin. For holes

that have not been modified in accordance

with the service bulletin, repeat the rotating

probe inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 12,000 landings.

(iii) If any crack is detected and it is 1.9

mm or greater in length, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with the

method approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, 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,

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 Manager, International

Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 95–097–

065(B), dated May 24, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 13, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30330 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–256–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier

Model CL–600–1A11 and CL–600–2A12

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 certain

Bombardier Model CL–600–1A11 and

CL–600–2A12 series airplanes. This

proposal would require replacement of

the anti-noise filter on the standby and

auxiliary power unit (APU) fuel pump

assemblies with a new filter. 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 electrical arcing

between the internal wiring and casing

of the anti-noise filter on the standby
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules 61707

and APU fuel pump assemblies, and

consequent increased risk of fuel tank

explosion or fire.

DATES: Comments must be received by

December 19, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

256–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 A,

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, 10

Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream,

New York.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wing Chan, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANE–

172, FAA, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7511; 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 97–NM–256–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.

97–NM–256–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

Transport Canada Aviation (TCA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

Canada, notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain

Bombardier Model CL–600–1A11 and

CL–600–2A12 series airplanes. TCA

advises it has received a report of an

auxiliary power unit (APU) stopping

while the airplane was on the ground.

Investigation revealed that the problem

was caused by a failure of the anti-noise

(electromagnetic interference) filter on

the APU fuel pump assembly. The filter

had a hole through the metal casing

caused by electrical arcing between the

internal wiring and the casing of the

filter. This condition, if not corrected,

could result in fuel tank explosion or

fire.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The manufacturer has issued

Bombardier Canadair Challenger Alert

Service Bulletin A600–0644, Revision

01, dated March 31, 1995 (for Model

CL–600–1A11 series airplanes), and

Alert Service Bulletin A601–0441,

Revision 01, dated March 31, 1995 (for

Model CL–600–2A12 series airplanes).

These service bulletins describe

procedures for replacement of the antinoise filter on the standby and APU fuel

pump assemblies with a new filter.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the alert service bulletins is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

TCA classified these alert service

bulletins as mandatory and issued

Canadian airworthiness directive CF–

97–02, dated February 25, 1997, in order

to assure the continued airworthiness of

these airplanes in Canada.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in Canada 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, TCA has kept

the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of TCA, 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 require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the alert service bulletins described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 84

Bombardier Model CL–600–1A11 and

CL–600–2A12 series airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 20 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would cost approximately $5,689 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $578,676, or

$6,889 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
61708 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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:

Bombardier Inc. (Formerly Canadair):

Docket 97–NM–256–AD.

Applicability: Model CL–600–1A11 series

airplanes, as listed in Bombardier Canadair

Challenger Alert Service Bulletin A600–0644,

Revision 01, dated March 31, 1995; and

Model CL–600–2A12 series airplanes, as

listed in Bombardier Canadair Challenger

Alert Service Bulletin A601–0441, Revision

01, dated March 31, 1995; 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 (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 electrical arcing between the

internal wiring and casing of the anti-noise

filter on the standby and auxiliary power unit

(APU) fuel pump assemblies, and consequent

increased risk of fuel tank explosion or fire,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 100 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, replace the antinoise filter on the standby and auxiliary

power unit (APU) fuel pump assemblies with

a new filter, in accordance with Part B of

Bombardier Canadair Challenger Alert

Service Bulletin A600–0644, Revision 01,

dated March 31, 1995 (for Model CL–600–

1A11 series airplanes), or Bombardier

Canadair Challenger Alert Service Bulletin

A601–0441, Revision 01, dated March 31,

1995 (for Model CL–600–2A12 series

airplanes); as applicable.

(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install on any airplane a fuel

pump having part number (P/N) 600–62966–

25 or 600–62966–27 with an anti-noise filter

having P/N 160–151501 (prior to revision H

stamped on the part) installed, on any

airplane.

(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, 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 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(d) 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.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Canadian airworthiness directive CF–97–

02, dated February 25, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 13, 1997.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30328 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97–ANM–13]

Proposed Establishment of Class C

Airspace; Hayden, CO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This proposal would establish

Class E Airspace at Hayden, CO. The

development of two new Standard

Instrument Approach Procedures

(SIAP’s) at the Yampa Valley Airport,

Hayden, CO, utilizing the Global

Positioning System (GPS) has made this

proposition necessary. Controlled

airspace extending upward from 700

feet above ground level (AGL) is needed

to accommodate these SIAP’s and for

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations

to the airport. The area would be

depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot

reference.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before January 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager,

Airspace Branch, ANM–520, Federal

Aviation Administration, Docket No.

97–ANM–13, 1601 Lind Avenue SW,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The official docket may be examined

in the office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel for the Northwest Mountain

Region at the same address.

An informal docket may also be

examined during normal hours in the

office of the Manager, Air Traffic

Division, Airspace Branch, at the

address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dennis Ripley, ANM–520.6, Federal

Aviation Administration, Docket No.

97–ANM–13, 1601 Lind Avenue SW,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056;

telephone number: (425) 227–2527.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy related

aspects of the proposal.

Communications should identify the

airspace docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

listed above. Commenters wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this notice must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 97–

ANM–13.’’ The postcard will be date/

time stamped and returned to the

commenter. All communications

received on or before the specified

closing date for comments will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposal contained

in this notice may be changed in the

light of comments received. All

comments submitted will be available

for examination at the address listed