Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Proposed Rules 63817

forth in the Department of Energy’s

regulation and guidance on contractor legal

management requirements, and that the costs

and charges set forth herein are necessary.’’

2. Model Bill Format

I. FOR FEES

Date of service Description of service

(see note 1 below)

Name or

initials of

attorney

Approved rate Time charged Amount

(rate ×

time)

II. FOR DISBURSEMENTS

Date Description of

disbursement

(see note 2 below)

Amount

Note 1—Description of Service: All fees

must be itemized and described in sufficient

detail and specificity to reflect the purpose

and nature of the work performed (e.g.,

subject matter researched or discussed;

names of participants of calls/meetings; type

of documents reviewed).

Note 2—Description of Disbursement:

Description should be in sufficient detail to

determine that the disbursement expense was

in accordance with all applicable Department

policies on reimbursement of contractor legal

costs and the terms of engagement between

the contractor and the retained legal counsel.

The date the expense was incurred or

disbursed should be listed rather than the

date the expense was processed. The

following should be itemized: copy charge

(i.e., number of pages times a maximum of

10 cents per page); fax charges (date, phone

number and actual amount); overnight

delivery (date and amount); electronic

research (date and amount); extraordinary

postage (i.e., bulk or certified mail); court

reporters; expert witness fees; filing fees;

outside copying or binding charges;

temporary help (assuming prior approval).

Note 3—Receipts: Receipts for all expenses

equal to or above $75 must be attached.

2. The authority citation for Parts 928

and 952 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101, et seq.; 40

U.S.C. 486(c); 50 U.S.C. 2401, et seq.; 42

U.S.C. 2201.

PART 928—BONDS AND INSURANCE

3. Section 928.311–2 is added to read

as follows:

§ 928.311–2 Agency solicitation provisions

and contract clauses. (Department

coverage—paragraph (b)).

(b) Cost reimbursement contracts for

an amount exceeding $10,000,000,

involving work performed at facilities

owned or leased by the Department,

must use the clause at 952.228–1.

4. Part 944 is added to read as follows:

PART 944—SUBCONTRACTING

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 40 U.S.C.

486(c); 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2201.

§ 944.102 Policy. (Department coverage—

paragraph (c)).

(c) Contractor purchases of litigation

and other legal services are subject to

the requirements in 10 CFR part 719 and

this part 944 of 48 CFR (DEAR).

PART 952—SOLICITATION

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT

CLAUSES

5. Section 952.228–1 is added to read

as follows:

§ 952.228–1 Insurance—Litigation and

Claims.

As prescribed at 928.311–2(b), insert

the clause at 970.5204–31. The

contracting officer shall substitute these

paragraphs of the clause:

(e) (2) For liabilities (and reasonable

expenses incidental to such liabilities,

including litigation costs) to third

persons not compensated by insurance

or otherwise without regard to and as an

exception to the limitation of cost or

limitation of funds clause of this

contract.

(h) In addition to the cost

reimbursement limitations contained in

FAR 31.201–3 and DEAR 931.205–33,

and notwithstanding any other

provision of this contract, the

contractor’s liabilities to third persons,

including employees but excluding

costs incidental to workers’

compensation actions, (and any

expenses incidental to such liabilities,

including litigation costs, counsel fees,

judgments and settlements) shall not be

reimbursed if such liabilities were

caused by contractor managerial

personnel’s.

(j) (4) The term ‘‘contractor’s managerial

personnel’’ is defined in the Property clause

in this contract.

PART 970—DOE MANAGEMENT AND

OPERATING CONTRACTS

6. The authority citation for Part 970

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42

U.S.C. 2201); Department of Energy

Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101, et seq.);

and National Nuclear Security

Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401, et seq.)

7. Section 970.5204–31 is amended by

adding clause paragraph (m) to read as

follows:

§ 970.5204–31 Insurance—litigation and

claims.

* * * * *

(m) Reasonable litigation and other legal

expenses are allowable when incurred in

accordance with 10 CFR part 719, Contractor

Legal Management Requirements, which

includes a requirement to submit a Legal

Management Plan within 60 days of

execution of a contract, and if not otherwise

made unallowable by law or the provisions

of this contract.

10. Section 970.7103 is amended by

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 970.7103 Contractor purchasing system.

* * * * *

(e) Contractor purchases of litigation

and other legal services are subject to

the requirements in10 CFR part 719, 48

CFR (FAR) part 44 and this subpart, 48

CFR (DEAR) 970.71.

[FR Doc. 00–26995 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–214–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A310 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

Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.

This proposal would require repetitive

detailed visual inspections to detect

cracks propagating from the fastener

holes that attach the left- and right-hand

pick-up angles at frame 40 to the wing

lower skin and fuselage panel, and

63818 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Proposed Rules

corrective actions, if necessary. This

action is necessary to prevent reduced

structural integrity of the airplane due

to fatigue damage and consequent

cracking of the pick-up angles at frame

40. This action is intended to address

the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

214–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–214–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

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 action may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

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 action

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2000–NM–214–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–214–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on all Airbus Model

A310 series airplanes. The DGAC

advises that, during unscheduled

inspections of these airplanes, structural

damage was found on the pick-up

angles at the junction between the wing

lower surface and the fuselage skin at

frame 40. Investigation revealed that the

maintenance requirements defined

currently for Structural Significant Item

(SSI) 57–10–19 in the A310

Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALI’s)

in Revision 2 of the A310 Maintenance

Review Board (MRB) report are not

sufficient to detect fatigue damage in a

timely manner. Such fatigue damage

could result in cracking of the pick-up

angles at frame 40. This condition, if not

corrected, could result in reduced

structural integrity of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A310–53A2111, Revision 01, dated June

21, 2000. The service bulletin describes

procedures for repetitive detailed visual

inspections to detect cracks propagating

from the fastener holes that attach the

left- and right-hand pick-up angles at

frame 40 to the wing lower skin and

fuselage panel, and corrective actions, if

necessary. The corrective actions

include repair (drilling and reaming a

crack stop hole in the pick-up angle,

performing a Rototest inspection and

repetitive detailed visual inspections,

and replacing the pick-up angle with a

new angle); or immediate replacement

of any cracked angle with a new angle;

as applicable. The DGAC classified this

service bulletin as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

2000–209–310(B), dated June 14, 2000,

in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in France and is 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 require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 47 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspection, and that the average labor

rate is $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $5,640, or $120 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

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 proposed AD were not adopted. The

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Proposed Rules 63819

cost impact figures discussed in AD

rulemaking actions represent only the

time necessary to perform the specific

actions actually required by the AD.

These figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

other administrative actions.

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:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 2000–NM–214–

AD.

Applicability: All Model 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 (g) 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 reduced structural integrity of

the airplane due to fatigue damage and

consequent cracking of the pick-up angles at

frame 40, accomplish the following:

Inspections and Corrective Actions

(a) Perform a detailed visual inspection to

detect cracks propagating from the fastener

holes that attach the left-and right-hand pickup angles at frame 40 to the wing lower skin

and fuselage panel, at the time specified in

paragraph (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) of this AD,

as applicable. Perform the actions in

accordance with Figure 2, Sheet 1, ‘‘Synoptic

Chart,’’ of Airbus Service Bulletin A310–

53A2111, Revision 01, dated June 21, 2000.

(1) If no cracking is found during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, repeat the detailed visual inspection

thereafter at the interval specified in

paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this AD, as

applicable.

(i) For Model A310–200 series airplanes:

Except as provided by paragraph (d) of this

AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles or

2,600 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

(ii) For Model A310–300 series airplanes:

Except as provided by paragraph (d) of this

AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 850 flight cycles or

2,800 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

(2) If any cracking is found during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, perform applicable

corrective actions [including repair (drilling

and reaming a crack stop hole in the pickup angle, performing a Rototest inspection

and repetitive detailed visual inspections at

the time specified in the service bulletin, and

replacing the pick-up angle with a new angle

at the time specified in the service bulletin);

or immediate replacement of any cracked

angle with a new angle]. Perform the actions

and repetitive inspections in accordance with

Figure 2, Sheet 1, ‘‘Synoptic Chart,’’ of

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53A2111,

Revision 01, dated June 21, 2000.

Note 2: Accomplishment of the actions

required by paragraph (a) of this AD in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A310–53A2111, dated April 21, 2000, is

considered to be acceptable for compliance

with the requirements of that paragraph.

Compliance Times

(b) For Model A310–200 series airplanes:

Except as provided by paragraphs (d), (e),

and (f) of this AD, perform the initial

inspection at the later of the times specified

in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 7,900 total

flight cycles or 23,600 total flight hours,

whichever occurs first.

(2) Within 700 flight cycles or 1,200 flight

hours after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs first.

(c) For Model A310–300 series airplanes:

Except as provided by paragraphs (d), (e),

and (f) of this AD, perform the initial

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD at the later of the times specified in

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 6,700 total

flight cycles or 24,700 total flight hours,

whichever occurs first.

(2) Within 700 flight cycles or 1,200 flight

hours after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs first.

(d) For airplanes that have accumulated

more than 18,000 total flight cycles or 53,000

total flight hours as of the effective date of

this AD: Perform the initial inspection

required by paragraph (a) of this AD within

350 flight cycles or 600 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

first. Repeat the inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 350 flight cycles or

600 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

(e) For airplanes having manufacturer’s

serial number 0162 through 0326 inclusive,

on which Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–

2014 has been accomplished prior to the

effective date of this AD: The initial

inspection threshold may be counted from

the date of accomplishment of Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–53–2014.

(f) For airplanes on which a pick-up angle

has been replaced: For that pick-up angle

only, the initial inspection threshold may be

counted from the date of installation of the

new pick-up angle.

Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g) 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 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

63820 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Special Flight Permits

(h) 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 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2000–209–

310(B), dated June 14, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October

19, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–27432 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 00–AAL–5]

Proposed Revision of Class E

Airspace; Gulkana, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This action revises Class E

airspace at Gulkana, AK. The

establishment of two new Area

Navigation (RNAV) instrument

approaches and the revision of the Very

High Frequency (VHF) Omni-directional

Radio Range (VOR) and Non-directional

Radio Beacon (NDB) instrument

approaches to runway (RWY) 14 and

RWY 32 at Gulkana Airport, Gulkana,

AK, have made this action necessary.

Adoption of this proposal would result

in the provision of adequate controlled

airspace for Instrument Flight Rules

(IFR) operations at Gulkana, AK.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before December 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager,

Operations Branch, AAL–530, Docket

No. 00–AAL–5, Federal Aviation

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue,

Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Regional Counsel for

the Alaskan Region at the same address.

An informal docket may also be

examined during normal business hours

in the Office of the Manager, Operations

Branch, Air Traffic Division, at the

address shown above and on the

Internet at Alaskan Region’s homepage

at http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at or at

address http://162.58.28.41/at.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert van Haastert, Operations Branch,

Federal Aviation Administration, 222

West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage,

AK 99513–7587; telephone number

(907) 271–5863; fax: (907) 271–2850;

email: Robert.ctr.van-Haastert@faa.gov.

Internet address: http://

www.alaska.faa.gov/at or at address

http://162.58.28.41/at.

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. Commentors wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this action must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 00–

AAL–5.’’ The postcard will be date/time

stamped and returned to the

commentor. 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 action may be changed in light

of comments received. All comments

submitted will be available for

examination in the Operations Branch,

Air Traffic Division, Federal Aviation

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue,

Box 14, Anchorage, AK, both before and

after the closing date for comments. A

report summarizing each substantive

public contact with FAA personnel

concerned with this rulemaking will be

filed in the docket.

Availability of Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking’s (NPRM’s)

An electronic copy of this document

may be downloaded, using a modem

and suitable communications software,

from the FAA regulations section of the

Fedworld electronic bulletin board

service (telephone: 703–321–3339) or

the Federal Register’s electronic

bulletin board service (telephone: 202–

512–1661).

Internet users may reach the Federal

Register’s web page for access to

recently published rulemaking

documents at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/

aces140.html.

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

Operations Branch, AAL–530, Federal

Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th

Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–

7587. Communications must identify

the docket number of this NPRM.

Persons interested in being placed on a

mailing list for future NPRM’s should

contact the individual(s) identified in

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section.

The Proposal

The FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR

part 71 by revising Class E airspace at

Gulkana, AK, due to the establishment

of two new RNAV instrument

approaches and revision of the VOR and

NDB instrument approach procedures to

RWY 14 and RWY 32. The intended

effect of this proposal is to provide

additional controlled airspace for IFR

operations at Gulkana, AK.

The area would be depicted on

aeronautical charts for pilot reference.

The coordinates for this airspace docket

are based on North American Datum 83.

The Class E airspace areas designated as

Surface Areas are published in

paragraph 6002 and the Class E airspace

areas extending upward from 700 feet or

more above the surface of the Earth are

published in paragraph 6005 in FAA

Order 7400.9H, Airspace Designations

and Reporting Points, dated September

1, 2000, and effective September 16,

2000, which is incorporated by

reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E

airspace designations listed in this

document would be published

subsequently in the Order.

The FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation only involves an

established body of technical

regulations for which frequent and

routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current. It,

therefore—(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) does not warrant

preparation of a regulatory evaluation as

the anticipated impact is so minimal.

Since this is a routine matter that will

only affect air traffic procedures and air

navigation, it is certified that this rule,

when promulgated, will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.