Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 18, 2000 / Proposed Rules 62313

(b) * * *

(4) Multiplying this result by your

share.

Example 1:

Assume you have a 100 percent share

in a unit of 100 acres of sugarcane, with

a guarantee of 4,000 pounds of raw

sugar per acre and a price election of

$0.12 per pound. You are only able to

harvest 200,000 pounds because the

unit was damaged by an insurable cause

of loss. Your indemnity would be

calculated as follows:

(1) 100 acres × 4,000 pounds =

400,000 pound guarantee;

(2) 400,000 pound

guarantee¥200,000 pounds harvested

production = 200,000 pound production

loss;

(3) 200,000 pound production loss ×

$0.12 price election = $24,000 value of

production loss; and

(4) $24,000 value of production loss ×

100 percent share = $24,000 indemnity

payment.

Example 2:

Assume you have a 100 percent share

in a unit of 100 acres of sugarcane. Your

approved yield is 6,000 pounds of raw

sugar per acre. You have selected the 65

percent coverage level, which

multiplied by your approved yield

equals a guarantee of 3,900 pounds of

raw sugar per acre, and a price election

of $0.12 per pound. You cut 20 acres of

this unit for seed without giving notice

that you were cutting this acreage for

seed. You are only able to harvest

200,000 pounds from the remaining 80

acres. Your indemnity would be

calculated as follows:

(1) 100 acres × 3,900 pounds =

390,000 pound guarantee;

(2) 390,000 pound

guarantee¥200,000 pounds harvested

production¥120,000 pound production

guarantee for putting acreage to another

use without consent (20 acres × 6,000

approved yield per acre) = 70,000

production loss;

(3) 70,000 pound production loss ×

$0.12 price election = $8,400 value of

production loss; and

(4) $8,400 value of production loss ×

100 percent share = $8,400 indemnity

payment.

* * * * *

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 3,

2000.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 00–25987 Filed 10–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–08–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–380–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 737–300, –400,

and –500 series airplanes. This proposal

would require repetitive inspections to

detect cracking of certain areas of the

forward pressure bulkhead, and repair,

if necessary. This proposal also would

require certain preventive

modifications, which, when

accomplished, would terminate the

repetitive inspections for the affected

areas. This action is necessary to

prevent fatigue cracking on critical areas

of the forward pressure bulkhead, which

could result in rapid decompression of

the airplane fuselage. This action is

intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

December 4, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

380–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. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 99–NM–380–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

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nenita K. Odesa, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2557; fax (425) 227–1181.

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.

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 notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 99–NM–380–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.

99–NM–380–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

62314 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 18, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Discussion

The FAA has received reports

indicating that operators have found

numerous fatigue cracks on the body

station 178 forward pressure bulkhead

on certain Boeing Model 737 series

airplanes. The longest fatigue crack was

approximately 25 inches in length. The

fatigue cracks were found at three

critical structural areas of the bulkhead,

namely, at the side chord areas of the

bulkhead, at certain vertical chords of

the bulkhead; and on the bulkhead web

itself between left and right buttock

lines 17.0. Such fatigue cracking, if not

corrected, could result in rapid

decompression of the airplane fuselage.

Related Rulemaking

On March 10, 2000, the FAA issued

AD 2000–05–29, amendment 39–11639

(65 FR 14834, March 20, 2000),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737–

100, –200, –300, –400, and –500 series

airplanes, that requires repetitive

inspections to detect cracking of various

areas of the forward pressure bulkhead,

and repair, if necessary. That action also

provides for certain optional preventive

modifications, which, if accomplished,

would terminate the repetitive

inspections for the affected areas. That

action was prompted by reports

indicating that numerous fatigue cracks

were found on critical areas of the

forward pressure bulkhead. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

prevent such fatigue cracking, which

could result in rapid decompression of

the airplane fuselage.

In the preamble to AD 2000–05–29,

the FAA specified that the actions

required by that AD were considered

interim action. The FAA indicated that

it may consider further rulemaking

action to mandate certain inspections

and modifications to address fatigue

cracking in the bulkhead of Model 737

series airplanes having line numbers

2738 through 3071, inclusive. The FAA

has determined that further rulemaking

action is indeed necessary; this

proposed AD follows from that

determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–

53A1208, dated May 6, 1999, which

describes procedures for repetitive

inspections to detect cracking of the

vertical and side chord areas on the

body station 178 forward pressure

bulkhead; and repair, if necessary. The

service bulletin lists several types of

inspections to be performed on the

vertical and side chord areas of the

forward pressure bulkhead. The

inspections applicable to these areas

consist of detailed visual/borescope

inspections, eddy current inspections,

and ultrasonic inspections.

The service bulletin also describes

procedures for certain preventive

modifications, which, if accomplished,

would eliminate the need for the

repetitive inspections. Specifically,

these modifications consist of installing

certain angles and straps to strengthen

the vertical chord area at waterline 184,

and the side chord area at waterline 207.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Alert Service Bulletin

Operators should note that the alert

service bulletin refers to certain

preventive modifications as optional.

However, this proposed AD would make

these preventive modifications

mandatory, and would require

accomplishment prior to the

accumulation of 75,000 total flight

cycles or within 12,000 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later. The proposed

grace period of 12,000 flight cycles was

developed to correspond with a typical

operator’s heavy maintenance check

schedule in order to minimize

disruption to scheduled operations. As

with the compliance times proposed for

the inspections, the FAA considered not

only the manufacturer’s

recommendation, but the degree of

urgency associated with addressing the

subject unsafe condition, the average

utilization of the affected fleet, and the

high number of airplanes that have

already been found to be affected by the

unsafe condition. These mandatory

preventive modifications, when

accomplished, would constitute

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of this

proposed AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 330 Model

737 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 115 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

It would take approximately 2 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed inspection, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $13,800, or $120 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

It would take approximately 38 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed modification of the vertical

chords, at an average labor rate of $60

per work hour. Required parts would

cost approximately $2,789 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $582,935, or $5,069 per

airplane.

It would take approximately 274 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed modification of the side chord

areas, at an average labor rate of $60 per

work hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $6,629 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,652,935, or $23,069

per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this proposed AD were not adopted. The

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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 18, 2000 / Proposed Rules 62315

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:

Boeing: Docket 99–NM–380–AD. 

Applicability: Model 737–300, –400, and

–500 series airplanes, certificated in any

category; as listed in Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 737–53A1208, dated May 6, 1999.

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 (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 detect fatigue cracking of the forward

pressure bulkhead, which could result in

rapid decompression of the airplane fuselage,

accomplish the following:

Initial and Repetitive Inspections

(a) Before the accumulation of 20,000 total

flight cycles, or within 3,000 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Perform the applicable

inspections of the vertical and side chord

areas of the forward pressure bulkhead to

detect cracking, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 737–53A1208, dated May 6,

1999. Thereafter, repeat the inspections at

intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles

until the preventive modifications required

by paragraph (c) of this AD have been

accomplished.

Repair

(b) If any cracking is detected during any

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, before further flight, repair the area in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

737–53A1208, dated May 6, 1999.

Terminating Action

(c) Before the accumulation of 75,000 total

flight cycles, or within 12,000 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Accomplish preventive

modifications of the vertical and side chord

areas of the forward pressure bulkhead, in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

737–53A1208, dated May 6, 1999.

Accomplishment of these modifications

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required by paragraph

(a) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permit

(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 October

12, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–26711 Filed 10–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–CE–63–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon

Aircraft Company Beech Models 35–

C33A, E33A, E33C, F33A, F33C, S35,

V35, V35A, V35B, 36, and A36

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 all Raytheon

Aircraft Company (Raytheon) Beech

Models 35–C33A, E33A, E33C, F33A,

F33C, S35, V35, V35A, V35B, 36, and

A36 airplanes that incorporate a certain

Teledyne Continental engine

configuration. The proposed AD would

require you to repetitively replace the

existing Aeroquip V-band exhaust

clamp. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

the exhaust stack from detaching from

the turbocharger due to failure of the Vband exhaust clamp. Clamp failure

could result in the release of high

temperature gases inside the engine

compartment with a consequent fire in

the engine compartment.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this rule on or before

December 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–CE–63–

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.

You may get the service information

referenced in the proposed AD from

Tornado Alley Turbo, Inc., 300 Airport

Road, Ada, Oklahoma 74820; telephone:

toll free 1–800–FLY–GAMI, or (580)

332–3510; facsimile: (580) 332–4577.

You may examine this information at

the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Peter W. Hakala, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Special

Certification Office, 2601 Meacham

Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0190;

telephone: (817) 222–5145; facsimile:

(817) 222–5785.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: