57296 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Proposed Rules

the State or political subdivision, as

defined in part 1 of this chapter, and for

which the lending bank has an opinion

of counsel or the opinion of that State

Attorney General, or other State legal

official with authority to opine on the

obligation in question, that the loan or

extension of credit is a valid and

enforceable general obligation of the

borrower; and

(ii) A loan or extension of credit,

including portions thereof, to the extent

guaranteed or secured by a general

obligation of a State or political

subdivision and for which the lending

bank has an opinion of counsel or the

opinion of that State Attorney General,

or other State legal official with

authority to opine on the guarantee or

collateral in question, that the guarantee

or collateral is a valid and enforceable

general obligation of that public body.

* * * * *

Dated: September 15, 2000.

John D. Hawke, Jr.,

Comptroller of the Currency.

[FR Doc. 00–24280 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–CE–16–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair

S.p.A. Models P 68 ‘‘OBSERVER’’, P68

‘‘OBSERVER 2’’, and P68TC

‘‘OBSERVER’’ Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to certain

Vulcanair S.p.A. (Vulcanair) Models P

68 ‘‘OBSERVER’’, P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’,

and P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER’’ airplanes. The

proposed AD would require you to

inspect the nose landing gear (NLG)

upper strut for evidence of cracking

(cracks or crack beginnings), and replace

the NLG upper strut if you find

evidence of cracking. The proposed AD

is the result of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information (MCAI)

issued by the airworthiness authority for

Italy. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

failure of the NLG upper strut caused by

cracking in the area of the seeger

retaining ring groove, which could

result in loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this proposed rule on or

before October 25, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 2000–CE–16–AD, 901

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106. Comments may be

inspected at this location between 8

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Vulcanair S.p.A., Via G. Poscoli, 7,

80026 Casoria (Naples), Italy; telephone:

+39–081–5918111; facsimile: +39–081–

5918172. This information also may be

examined at the Rules Docket at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roman Gabrys, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4141; facsimile: (816) 329–4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

How do I comment on the proposed

AD? The FAA invites comments on this

proposed rule. You may submit

whatever written data, views, or

arguments you choose. You need to

include the rule’s docket number and

submit your comments in triplicate to

the address specified under the caption

ADDRESSES. The FAA will consider all

comments received on or before the

closing date. We may amend the

proposed rule in light of comments

received. Factual information that

supports your ideas and suggestions is

extremely helpful in evaluating the

effectiveness of the proposed AD action

and determining whether we need to

take additional rulemaking action.

Are there any specific portions of the

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

The FAA specifically invites comments

on the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule that might suggest a

need to modify the rule. You may

examine all comments we receive before

and after the closing date of the rule in

the Rules Docket. We will file a report

in the Rules Docket that summarizes

each FAA contact with the public that

concerns the substantive parts of the

proposed AD.

We are re-examining the writing style

we currently use in regulatory

documents, in response to the

Presidential memorandum of June 1,

1998. That memorandum requires

federal agencies to communicate more

clearly with the public. We are

interested in your comments on whether

the style of this document is clearer, and

any other suggestions you might have to

improve the clarity of FAA

communications that affect you. You

can get more information about the

Presidential memorandum and the plain

language initiative at http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

How can I be sure FAA receives my

comment? If you want us to

acknowledge the receipt of your

comments, you must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard. On the

postcard, write ‘‘Comments to Docket

No. 2000–CE–16–AD.’’ We will date

stamp and mail the postcard back to

you.

Discussion

What events have caused this

proposed AD? The Ente Nazionale per

l’Aviazione Civile (ENAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for Italy,

recently notified FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain

Vulcanair Models P 68 ‘‘OBSERVER’’,

P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’, and P68TC

‘‘OBSERVER’’ airplanes. The ENAC

reports three instances of cracking of the

nose landing gear (NLG) upper strut,

part number 4.4173–1, in the area of the

seeger retaining ring groove.

Investigation of these instances reveals

a work defect found during surface

finishing within the groove. The groove

is then susceptible to cracks after a hard

landing.

What are the consequences if the

condition is not corrected? Such

cracking, if not detected and corrected,

could result in failure of the NLG upper

strut, which could result in loss of

control of the airplane.

Is there service information that

applies to this subject? Vulcanair has

issued Service Bulletin No. 98, dated

July 31, 1999.

What are the provisions of this service

bulletin? The service bulletin:

• Includes procedures for inspecting

the NLG upper strut in the area of the

seeger retaining ring groove for evidence

of cracking (cracks or crack beginnings);

and

• Specifies replacing the upper strut

if evidence of cracking is found.

What action did the ENAC take? The

ENAC classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued Italian AD No.

2000–004, dated January 10, 2000, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in Italy.

Was this in accordance with the

bilateral airworthiness agreement?

These airplane models are

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Proposed Rules 57297

manufactured in Italy 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 ENAC has

kept FAA informed of the situation

described above.

The FAA’s Determination and an

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

What has FAA decided? The FAA has

examined the findings of the ENAC;

reviewed all available information,

including the service information

referenced above; and determined that:

• The unsafe condition referenced in

this document exists or could develop

on other Vulcanair Models P 68

‘‘OBSERVER’’, P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’, and

P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER’’ airplanes of the

same type design;

• The actions specified in the

previously-referenced service

information should be accomplished on

the affected airplanes; and

• AD action should be taken in order

to correct this unsafe condition.

What does the proposed AD require?

This proposed AD would require you to

inspect the NLG upper strut for

evidence of cracking (cracks or crack

beginnings), and replace the NLG upper

strut if you find evidence of cracking.

You would accomplish the proposed

action in accordance with the

previously referenced service bulletin.

Cost Impact

How many airplanes does the

proposed AD impact? We estimate that

the proposed AD affects 15 airplanes in

the U.S. registry.

What is the cost impact of the

proposed AD on owners/operators of the

affected airplanes? We estimate the

following costs to accomplish the

proposed inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost

per airplane

Total cost

on U.S.

airplane

operators

10 workhours × $60 per hour = $600 ............................................ No parts required for inspection ......................... $600 $9,000

We estimate the following costs to

accomplish any necessary replacements

that would be required based on the

results of the proposed inspection. We

have no way of determining the number

of airplanes that may need such

replacement:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost

per airplane

10 workhours × $60 per hour = $600 .............................................................................................................................. $600 $1,200

Regulatory Impact

Does this proposed AD impact various

entities? 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 proposed rule

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

Does this proposed AD involve a

significant rule or regulatory action? For

the reasons discussed above, I certify

that this proposed action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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 has been placed 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 a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

Vulcanair S.P.A. (Partenavia Costruzioni

Aeronauticas S.p.A previously held Type

Certificate A31EU): Docket No. 2000–CE–

16–AD

(a) What airplanes are affected by this AD?

This AD affects Models P 68 ‘‘OBSERVER’’,

P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’, and P68TC

‘‘OBSERVER’’ airplanes, all serial numbers

up to and including 400, that are certificated

in any category.

(b) Who must comply with this AD?

Anyone who wishes to operate any of the

above airplanes on the U.S. Register must

comply with this AD.

(c) What problem does this AD address?

The actions specified by this AD are intended

to prevent failure of the nose landing gear

(NLG) upper strut caused by cracking in the

area of the seeger retaining ring groove,

which could result in loss of control of the

airplane.

(d) What actions must I accomplish to

address this problem? To address this

problem, you must accomplish the following:

57298 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Action Compliance time Procedures

(1) Inspect, using magnetic particle

methods, the NLG upper strut,

part number 4.4173–1 (or FAAapproved equivalent part number), for evidence of cracking

(cracks or crack beginnings).

Within the next 200 hours time-in-service (TIS) after

the effective date of this AD.

Do this inspection in accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS section of

Vulcanair Service Bulletin No. 98, dated July 31,

1999.

.

(2) If there is evidence of cracking,

replace the NLG upper strut with

a new NLG upper strut, part

number 4.4173–1 (or FAA-approved equivalent part number).

Prior to further flight after the inspection where evidence of cracking is found.Use the procedures in the maintenance manual.

.

(3) Do not install any NLG upper

strut, part number 4.4173–1, unless it is new from the factory, or

has been inspected as required

in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD

and is found to not have any evidence of cracking.

As of the effective date of this AD ............................ Not Applicable.

(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other

way? You may use an alternative method of

compliance or adjust the compliance time if:

(1) Your alternative method of compliance

provides an equivalent level of safety; and

(2) The Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, approves your alternative.

Submit your request through an FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in paragraph (a) of this AD,

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 (e)

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 you have not

eliminated the unsafe condition, specific

actions you propose to address it.

(f) Where can I get information about any

already-approved alternative methods of

compliance? Contact Roman Gabrys,

Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane

Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4141; facsimile: (816) 329–4090.

(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to

another location to comply with this AD?

The FAA can issue a special flight permit

under sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a

location where you can accomplish the

requirements of this AD.

(h) How do I get copies of the documents

referenced in this AD? You may obtain copies

of the documents referenced in this AD from

Vulcanair S.p.A., Via G. Poscoli, 7, 80026

Casoria (Naples), Italy. You may examine

these documents at FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust,

Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Italian AD 2000–004, dated January 10,

2000.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

September 13, 2000.

Larry E. Werth,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–24370 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–SW–07–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta

S.p.A. (Agusta) Model A109E

Helicopters

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 Agusta

Model A109E helicopters, that currently

requires inspections of the exhaust

ejector locking system, clamp, and

dampers for each engine. The existing

AD also requires verifying the torque of

the metallic clamps and installing safety

wire on the metallic clamps; inspecting

and modifying the ejector saddles and

the locking metallic clamps; and

inspecting the metallic clamps, locking

mechanisms, and dampers. This action

would require modifying the engine

exhaust ejectors. This proposal is

prompted by the development of a kit to

modify the engine exhaust ejectors to

provide terminating action from the

requirements of the current AD. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent loss of the

metallic clamp or the engine exhaust

ejector, damage to the main or tail rotor

system and subsequent loss of control of

the helicopter.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before November 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit mailed comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–SW–

07–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may

also send comments electronically to

the Rules Docket at the following

address: 9-asw-adcomments@faa.gov.

You may inspect comments at the Office

of the Regional Attorney between 9:00

a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

Madej, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA,

Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft

Standards Staff, Fort Worth, Texas

76193–0110, telephone (817) 222–5125,

fax (817) 222–5961.

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

should 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