Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 70785

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

2000–23–31 McDonnell Douglas:

Amendment 39–12004. Docket 2000–

NM–356–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9–82 (MD–82)

and DC–9–83 (MD–83) series airplanes, and

Model MD–88 airplanes, certificated in any

category, as listed in Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin MD80–33A115, dated August 10,

2000.

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 (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 prevent arcing and heat damage of the

Luminator fluorescent lamp holders located

outboard of the Passenger Service Unit panel,

which could result in smoke and fire in the

passenger compartment, accomplish the

following:

Deactivation

(a) Within 90 days after the effective date

of this AD, deactivate the left and right lower

sidewall lights located in the passenger

compartment, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin MD80–33A115, dated

August 10, 2000.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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, Los

Angeles 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,

Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Manager, Los Angeles

ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(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.

Incorporation by Reference

(d) The deactivation shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin MD80–33A115, dated August 10,

2000. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group,

Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846,

Attention: Technical Publications Business

Administration, Dept. C1–L51 (2–60). Copies

may be inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California;

or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

Effective Date

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

December 13, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 15, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–29802 Filed 11–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–131–AD; Amendment

39–12003; AD 2000–23–30]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain EMBRAER Model

EMB–120 series airplanes, that requires

installation of an additional drain at the

fuselage aft section. This action is

necessary to prevent mechanical

blockage of the elevator control cables

due to the freezing of water collected

inside the fuselage between the rear

pressure bulkhead and the fire wall of

the auxiliary power unit. Such cable

blockage could result in reduced

controllability of the airplane. This

action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective January 2, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of January 2,

2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica

S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP

12.225, Sao Jose dos Campos—SP,

Brazil. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown

Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite

450, Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Capezzuto, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center,

1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone (770)

703–6071; fax (770) 703–6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

70786 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

that is applicable to certain EMBRAER

Model EMB–120 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

August 29, 2000 (65 FR 52367). That

action proposed to require installation

of an additional drain at the fuselage aft

section.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Request To Revise Compliance Time

One commenter requests that the

compliance time be relaxed beyond the

400 flight hours specified in the

proposed AD. The commenter indicates

that a 400-flight-hour compliance time

would impose a burden on operators. In

addition, the commenter points out that

the referenced service bulletin was

issued five years ago. The commenter

states that if the actions described in the

service bulletin are urgent enough to

drive a compliance time of 400 flight

hours, then it should not take five years

to determine that the operator has that

amount of time to take corrective action.

The commenter suggests that the

compliance time be revised to align

with the time recommended in the

referenced service bulletin, which states

‘‘at operator’s discretion.’’

The FAA concurs partially. The FAA

does not agree that definition of the

compliance time should be left to the

discretion of operators. However, the

FAA agrees that a 400-flight-hour

compliance time is too restrictive. The

FAA finds that extending the

compliance time to 1,200 flight hours

should coincide with an operator’s

‘‘3A’’ check and will not adversely

affect safety. Paragraph (a) of the final

rule has been revised accordingly.

Request To Add Requirement

The same commenter expresses

concern that because the original drain

line has a bend, and since the new drain

line is located in an unlit area, it is

difficult to visually inspect for blockage.

The commenter suggests passing an

object through the drain line to check

for obstructions.

The FAA does not concur.

Accomplishment of the inspection

should be able to be accomplished by

shining a flashlight through the new

drain, which has a straight port. The

inspection should not require passing

an object through the drain line, which

could damage the drain line. No change

to the final rule is necessary.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the change

described previously. The FAA has

determined that this change will neither

increase the economic burden on any

operator nor increase the scope of the

AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 200 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, that it will take approximately 10

work hours per airplane to accomplish

the required actions, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$34 per airplane. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $126,800, or

$634 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this 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 adopted herein will

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 final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this 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)

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 final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

2000–23–30 Empresa Brasileira de

Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):

Amendment 39–12003. Docket 2000–

NM–131–AD.

Applicability: Model EMB–120 series

airplanes, certificated in any category, as

listed in EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–53–

0064, dated October 31, 1995.

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 (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 prevent mechanical blockage of the

elevator control cable due to the freezing of

water collected inside the fuselage between

the rear pressure bulkhead and the fire wall

of the auxiliary power unit, which could

result in reduced controllability of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

Drain Installation

(a) Within 1,200 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, install an additional

drain at the fuselage aft section, in

accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin

120–53–0064, dated October 31, 1995.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 70787

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Atlanta ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Atlanta ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(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.

Incorporation by Reference

(d) The installation shall be done in

accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin

120–53–0064, dated October 31, 1995. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.

(EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, Sao

Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center, 1895

Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta,

Georgia; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Brazilian airworthiness directive 95–11–

01, dated November 22, 1995.

Effective Date

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

January 2, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 15, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–29801 Filed 11–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–163–AD; Amendment

39–12001; AD 2000–23–28]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 777 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Boeing Model 777

series airplanes, that currently requires

repetitive testing of the engine fire

shutoff switch (EFSS) to determine if

the override mechanism and the switch

handle are operational, and replacement

of the EFSS, if necessary. That AD also

requires, for certain airplanes,

installation of a collar on a specific

circuit breaker of the standby power

management panel, and installation of

placards to advise the flightcrew that

the override mechanism must be pushed

in order to pull the fire switch. This

amendment adds various actions that

would terminate the repetitive testing

requirements. This amendment is

prompted by a report indicating that a

solenoid and an override mechanism of

the EFSS were not operational due to

overheating of the solenoid. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent damage to the EFSS solenoid

and to the override mechanism, and

consequent failure of the EFSS due to

overheating of the solenoid; such failure

could result in the inability of the

flightcrew to discharge the fire

extinguishing agent in the event of an

engine fire.

DATES: Effective January 2, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–

26A0009, dated October 23, 1997, as

listed in the regulations, is approved by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

January 2, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–

26A0012, dated May 1, 1997, as listed

in the regulations, was approved

previously by the Director of the Federal

Register as of May 27, 1997 (62 FR

25837, May 12, 1997).

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. This

information may be examined at the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Reising, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2683; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 97–10–11,

amendment 39–10023 (62 FR 25837,

May 12, 1997), which is applicable to all

Boeing Model 777 series airplanes, was

published in the Federal Register on

May 19, 2000 (65 FR 31837). The action

proposed to terminate the repetitive

testing of the engine fire shutoff switch

(EFSS) required by AD 97–10–11.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Supportive Comment

One commenter concurs with the

proposed rule and indicates that it has

almost completed the terminating action

on its entire fleet.

Request for Exemption

One commenter, an operator, requests

that an exemption be added to the

proposed rule for airplanes recently

delivered, if the operator can prove by

inventory records that it has at no time

purchased or borrowed the EFSS with

the part numbers specified in this

proposed rule. The commenter states

that the proposal does not affect

operators with recently delivered

airplanes that were not affected by AD

97–10–11. Additionally, the commenter

notes that at no time did it have the old

EFSS in its system nor did it replace an

EFSS on any of its in-service airplanes.

The commenter concludes that this

proposed rule should not be applicable

to it.

The FAA is unable to grant an

exemption in light of the fact that

paragraph (d) of this final rule prohibits

future installation of the defective EFSS

[engine fire control module having part

number (P/N) 233W6201–1, or engine

fire switches having P/N S231W263–1

or –2]. Therefore, this requirement

affects any airplanes delivered after this

final rule is issued. However, the FAA

recognizes from the commenter’s

interpretation of paragraph (c) of the

final rule that this paragraph requires

further clarification. The FAA’s intent is

to require removal and replacement of

the engine fire control module only if it

contains a defective EFSS. Therefore,

paragraph (c) of this final rule has been

revised to add an option to verify that

the improved engine fire control module

is installed, which would constitute

terminating action for the repetitive

testing requirements in paragraph (b) of

the final rule.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the change