Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70815

‘‘FSIS Agenda for Change: Regulatory

Review’’ (60 FR 67469, December 29,

1995), and Reference 1.) In this regard,

issues that need to be considered

include the following: What

amendments to the regulations and

other materials that cover residue

control are needed; are additional efforts

at interagency coordination regarding

residue control necessary, and if so,

what should they be?

FSIS has adopted the practice of

supplementing its regulations with

guidance material for industry. Issues

that need to be considered include the

following: What new or improved

guidance materials are needed regarding

residue control; what improvements in

these materials can be made to ensure

that industry members obtain the

greatest benefit possible from them?

(9) Useful Information Systems

Implementation of HACCP has

significantly modified most of the

Agency’s information system needs.

Considering residue control alone, what

are the critical information system

needs in this area?

FSIS knows that EPA and FDA both

need information regarding residues.

The following issues need to be

considered here: Who else needs

information regarding residues, and

who has the needed information; what

are the constraints on sharing

information regarding residues; how can

obstacles to the sharing of information

be overcome; and what resources are

available for obtaining and sharing

information?

(10) Priorities Are Set Through an Open

Process

The NAS strongly suggested that an

open process, readily available to a wide

spectrum of constituents, be used to

establish priorities for the control of

chemical hazards in the meat and

poultry supply. The upcoming public

meeting is a first step in an effort to

meet that goal. FSIS would like to know

what other efforts might be useful in

opening up the process.

Additional Public Notification

Public awareness of all segments of

rulemaking and policy development is

important. Consequently, in an effort to

better ensure that minorities, women,

and persons with disabilities are aware

of this rule, FSIS will announce the

publication of this document in the

FSIS Constituent Update. FSIS provides

a weekly FSIS Constituent Update,

which is communicated via fax to over

300 organizations and individuals. In

addition, the update is available on line

through the FSIS web page located at

http://www.fsis.usda.gov. The update is

used to provide information regarding

FSIS policies, procedures, regulations,

Federal Register notices, FSIS public

meetings, recalls, and any other types of

information that could affect or will be

of interest to our constituents/

stakeholders. The constituent fax list

consists of industry, trade, and farm

groups, consumer interest groups, allied

health professionals, scientific

professionals, and other individuals that

have requested to be included. Through

these various channels, FSIS is able to

provide information to a much broader,

more diverse audience. For more

information and to be added to the

constituent fax list, fax your request to

the Congressional and Public Affairs

Office, at (202) 720–5704.

Done at Washington, DC, on November 22,

2000.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–30309 Filed 11–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–p

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–139–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aerospatiale

Model ATR42–200, –300, and –320

Series Airplanes

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 all

Aerospatiale Model ATR42–300 and

–320 series airplanes. The existing AD

requires repetitive ultrasonic

inspections to detect cracking of certain

lugs on the main landing gear (MLG),

replacement of cracked lugs with new or

serviceable parts, and a follow-on

inspection; and provides for an optional

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections. This action would remove

that terminating action and require new

repetitive inspections of the rubber

sealant to detect shearing, and

corrective action, if necessary. This

action also would require new one-time

visual and fluorescent penetrant

inspections to detect discrepancies of

certain lugs and refurbishment of the

MLG barrel and swing lever assemblies,

which would terminate the

requirements of this proposed AD. This

action would also revise the

applicability of the existing AD. 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 detect and correct

discrepancies of the MLG barrel lower

lugs, which could result in reduced

structural integrity and possible

collapse of the MLG.

DATES: Comments must be received by

December 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

139–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

Aerospatiale, 316 Route de Bayonne,

31060 Toulouse, Cedex 03, 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.

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

70816 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Proposed Rules

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 98–NM–139–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.

98–NM–139–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On December 15, 1997, the FAA

issued AD 97–26–19, amendment 39–

10262 (62 FR 66980, December 23,

1997), applicable to all Aerospatiale

Model ATR42–300 and –320 series

airplanes, to require repetitive

ultrasonic inspections to detect fatigue

cracks of the lower lugs of the barrel of

the main landing gear (MLG); and

replacement of cracked lower lugs with

new or serviceable parts, and a followon inspection. The existing AD further

provides for an optional terminating

action for the repetitive inspections.

That action was prompted by issuance

of mandatory continuing airworthiness

information by a foreign civil

airworthiness authority. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

detect and correct fatigue cracking of the

lower lugs of the barrel of the MLG,

which could lead to collapse of the

MLG.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since the issuance of that AD, the

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile

(DGAC), which is the airworthiness

authority for France, has advised the

FAA of cases of rotation of the MLG

bushings at the swinging lever hinge.

This rotation damaged the anticorrosion

protection of the MLG barrel. These

cases occurred on airplanes on which

the optional terminating action

provided in the existing AD had been

accomplished. Corrosion of the MLG

barrel, if not corrected, could result in

reduced structural integrity and possible

collapse of the MLG.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Messier-Dowty (the manufacturer of

landing gears installed on Model ATR42

series airplanes) has issued Service

Bulletin 631–32–144, dated January 19,

1998, which describes procedures for

repetitive visual inspections of the

rubber sealant around the bushings at

the MLG barrel and swinging lever

hinge point to detect discrepancies

(including shearing or separation).

Corrective actions for discrepancies

include repeating the actions (including

an ultrasonic inspection to detect

fatigue cracks of the lower lugs of the

MLG barrel, and, if necessary,

replacement of the MLG barrel assembly

with a new or serviceable MLG barrel

assembly) specified by Messier-Dowty

Service Bulletin 631–32–132, dated

January 21, 1997.

Messier-Dowty has also issued

Service Bulletin 631–32–145, dated

February 16, 1998, which describes

procedures for one-time detailed visual

and fluorescent penetrant inspections of

the MLG barrel lower lugs; and

refurbishment of the barrel lower lug

and swinging lever assemblies,

including restoration of the protective

coating, replacement of the old bushings

with new bushings, and installation of

lubrication fittings. This service bulletin

replaces Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin

631–32–133 (which the existing AD

refers to for accomplishment of the

optional terminating action).

Accomplishment of the actions

specified by the service bulletins is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition. The DGAC

classified these service bulletins as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive 1996–294(B) R4,

dated March 10, 1999, in order to ensure

the continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in France.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in France 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 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

supersede AD 97–26–19 to:

• Continue to require repetitive

ultrasonic inspections to detect fatigue

cracks of the lower lugs of the MLG

barrel, replacement of cracked lower

lugs with new or serviceable parts, and

a follow-on inspection;

• Require new one-time visual and

fluorescent penetrant inspections to

detect discrepancies of certain lugs, and

refurbishment of the MLG barrel and

swing lever assemblies; which would

terminate the repetitive inspections;

• Reduce the repetitive interval for

the ultrasonic inspection for certain

airplanes;

• Revise the applicability to include

Model ATR42–200 series airplanes,

which have been determined to be

subject to the identified unsafe

condition;

• Revise the applicability to exclude

airplanes that have been refurbished in

accordance with Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–145; and

• Require operators to report results

of inspection findings to Messier-Dowty.

The actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletins described previously,

except as discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed AD and

French Airworthiness Directive

The proposed AD would require an

inspection of the rubber sealant around

the bushings at the MLG barrel and

swinging lever point within 400 flight

hours; the parallel French airworthiness

directive recommends accomplishment

of the inspection prior to the next ‘‘A’’

check. In developing an appropriate

compliance time for this proposed AD,

the FAA considered the minimum

maintenance intervals recommended by

the Maintenance Review Board, the

DGAC’s recommendation, the degree of

urgency associated with addressing the

subject unsafe condition, and the

average utilization of the affected fleet.

Further, because maintenance

schedules, including ‘‘A’’ checks, may

vary from operator to operator, there

would be no assurance that the actions

would be accomplished within the

proposed compliance time. In light of

these factors, the FAA finds that the

compliance time of 400 flight hours, as

proposed, represents the maximum

interval of time allowable for the

affected airplanes to continue to operate

prior to accomplishing the proposed

actions without compromising safety.

Operators should note that, unlike the

procedures described in Messier-Dowty

Service Bulletin 631–32–144, this

proposed AD would not permit further

flight with discrepant sealant. The FAA

has determined that, because of the

safety implications and consequences

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70817

associated with such discrepancies, any

subject sealant that is found to be

discrepant must be repaired or modified

prior to further flight.

Operators should note that, although

Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 631–

32–145 specifies that the manufacturer

may be contacted for disposition of

certain repair conditions, this proposal

would require either replacing the

discrepant MLG barrel, or repairing the

discrepant part in accordance with a

method approved by the FAA or the

DGAC (or its delegated agent). In light

of the type of repair that would be

required to address the identified unsafe

condition, and in consonance with

existing bilateral airworthiness

agreements, the FAA has determined

that, for this proposed AD, a repair

approved by either the FAA or the

DGAC would be acceptable for

compliance with this proposed AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 84 airplanes

of U.S. registry that would be affected

by this proposed AD.

The inspection that is currently

required by AD 97–26–19, and retained

in this proposed AD, takes

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

currently required actions on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $120 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The new inspections and

refurbishment that are proposed in this

AD action would take approximately 29

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $4,822 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed requirements of this AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$551,208, or $6,562 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or 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 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

removing amendment 39–10262 (62 FR

66980, December 23, 1997), and by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD), to read as follows:

Aerospatiale: Docket 98–NM–139–AD.

Supersedes AD 97–26–19, Amendment

39–10262.

Applicability: Model ATR42–200, –300,

and –320 series airplanes; certificated in any

category; except airplanes that have been

refurbished in accordance with MessierDowty Service Bulletin 631–32–145, dated

February 16, 1998.

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 (k)(1) 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 discrepancies of the

main landing gear (MLG) barrel lower lugs,

which could result in reduced structural

integrity and possible collapse of the MLG,

accomplish the following:

Ultrasonic Inspection

(a) For airplanes on which the actions

specified by Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin

631–32–133, dated February 24, 1997, as

revised by Change Notice No. 1, dated March

18, 1997, have not been accomplished prior

to the effective date of this AD: Perform an

ultrasonic inspection to detect fatigue cracks

of the lower lugs of the barrel of the MLG,

in accordance with Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–132, dated January 21, 1997,

at the applicable time specified in paragraph

(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(4) of this AD.

(1) For Model ATR42–300 and –320 series

airplanes: Inspect within 2 years after the last

overhaul or repair of the lower lugs of the

barrel of the MLG; or within 60 days after

March 7, 1997 (the effective date of AD 97–

04–09, amendment 39–9933); whichever

occurs later.

(2) For Model ATR42–300 and –320 series

airplanes: Inspect within 5 years after the

installation of a new MLG barrel assembly, or

within 60 days after January 7, 1998 (the

effective date of AD 97–26–19, amendment

39–10262); whichever occurs later.

(3) For Model ATR42–200 series airplanes:

Inspect within 2 years after the last overhaul

or repair of the lower lugs of the barrel of the

MLG, or within 60 days after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(4) For Model ATR42–200 series airplanes:

Inspect within 5 years after the installation

of a new MLG barrel assembly, or within 60

days after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(b) If, during any inspection specified in

paragraph (a) of this AD, no ultrasonic echo

(as described in Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–133, dated February 24,

1997, as revised by Change Notice No. 1,

dated March 18, 1997) is detected, or if the

echo is less than 20%: Except as required by

paragraph (c) of this AD, repeat the ultrasonic

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 900 landings.

(c) For airplanes that are subject to the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (b) of this AD: As of the effective

date of this AD, repeat the inspection, as

specified by Table 1 of this AD, until the

requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD are

accomplished. Table 1 is as follows:

70818 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1.—REPETITIVE INTERVAL

If the first ultrasonic inspection specified by paragraph (a) of this AD

was done . . . Then repeat the ultrasonic inspection . . .

(1) At least 24 months, and less than 42 months, before the effective

date of this AD.

Within 500 landings after the first ultrasonic inspection, or within 60

days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later; and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 landings.

(2) Less than 24 months before the effective date of this AD, or at any

time on or after the effective date of this AD.

At intervals not to exceed 900 landings, for a period not to exceed 24

months after the first ultrasonic inspection of (a) of this AD; and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 landings.

(d) If, during any inspection specified in

paragraph (a) of this AD, the echo is greater

than or equal to 20%: Prior to further flight,

replace the MLG barrel assembly with a new

or serviceable MLG barrel assembly, in

accordance with Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–132, dated January 21, 1997.

(1) If the damaged barrel assembly is

replaced with an overhauled or repaired

assembly, within 2 years after installation of

that overhauled or repaired part, accomplish

the actions specified in paragraph (a) of this

AD.

(2) If the damaged barrel assembly is

replaced with a new barrel assembly, within

5 years after installation of that new part,

accomplish the actions specified in

paragraph (a) of this AD.

Inspection of Sealant

(e) For airplanes on which the actions

specified by Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–133, dated February 24,

1997, as revised by Change Notice No. 1,

dated March 18, 1997, have been

accomplished prior to the effective date of

this AD: Within 400 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, perform a detailed

visual inspection to detect discrepancies

(including shearing or separation) of the

rubber sealant between the bushings and the

MLG barrel lower lugs, and between the

bushing and the swinging lever lug, in

accordance with Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–144, dated January 19, 1998.

Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 400 flight hours, until

accomplishment of the actions required by

paragraph (f) of this AD.

Note 2: 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.’’

(1) If no discrepancy is detected, repeat the

detailed visual inspection specified in

paragraph (e) of this AD thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 300 landings, until

accomplishment of the actions required by

paragraph (f) of this AD.

(2) If any discrepancy is detected, prior to

further flight, repeat the ultrasonic inspection

and all applicable corrective actions

specified by paragraphs (a), (b), and (d) of

this AD.

Inspections and MLG Refurbishment

(f) For all airplanes: At the applicable time

specified by paragraph (g) or (h) of this AD,

accomplish the actions required by

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD, in

accordance with Messier-Dowty Service

Bulletin 631–32–145, dated February 16,

1998, or Revision 1, dated May 31, 1999.

Accomplishment of the inspections and

refurbishment required by this paragraph

constitutes terminating action for the

requirements of this AD.

(1) Perform a one-time detailed visual

inspection and a one-time fluorescent

penetrant inspection to detect discrepancies

(cracks, corrosion, and material defects) of

the barrel lower lugs (outboard and inboard).

(i) If no discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, refurbish the lugs in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(ii) If any discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, refurbish the lugs in

accordance with the service bulletin and

repeat the detailed visual inspection and

fluorescent penetrant inspection. If any

discrepancy remains, prior to further flight,

do the actions specified by either paragraph

(f)(1)(ii)(A) or (f)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.

(A) Replace the damaged MLG barrel with

a new or reconditioned barrel.

(B) Repair in accordance with a method

approved by either the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate; or the

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile

(DGAC) (or its delegated agent). For a repair

method to be approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, as required

by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval

letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Refurbish the MLG (including restoring

the protective treatments, installing new

bushings, and installing new lubrication

points of the MLG barrel and swinging lever

assemblies).

Compliance Times for Inspections and

Refurbishment

(g) For airplanes on which the actions

specified by Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin

631–32–133, dated February 24, 1997, have

not been accomplished prior to the effective

date of this AD: Do the actions required by

paragraph (f) of this AD at the earlier of the

times specified by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)

of this AD.

(1) At the next overhaul of the MLG leg,

not to exceed 42 months after the effective

date of this AD.

(2) Within 42 months after the first

ultrasonic inspection in accordance with

paragraph (a) of this AD, or within 60 days

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later.

(h) For airplanes on which the actions

specified by Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin

631–32–133, dated February 24, 1997, have

been accomplished prior the effective date of

this AD: Do the actions required by

paragraph (f) of this AD within 24 months

after the initial sealant inspection required by

paragraph (e) of this AD.

Reporting Requirement

(i) At the applicable time specified by

paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, submit

a report of the results (both positive and

negative findings) of the initial inspections

required by paragraphs (a) and (e) of this AD

to Messier-Dowty, BP 10–78142 Ve ́lizy

Cedex, France. Information collection

requirements contained in this regulation

have been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

(1) For airplanes on which the inspections

are accomplished after the effective date of

this AD: Submit a report of each inspection

within 10 days after performing the

applicable inspection.

(2) For airplanes on which the inspections

have been accomplished prior to the effective

date of this AD: Submit the report within 10

days after the effective date of this AD.

Spares

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

person shall install a bushing, part number

D66349, on the MLG barrel and swinging

lever assemblies on any airplane.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(k)(1) 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. 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–114.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance

approved previously in accordance with AD

97–26–19, amendment 39–10262, are

approved as alternative methods of

compliance with this AD.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70819

Special Flight Permits

(l) 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 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 1996–

294(B) R4, dated March 10, 1999.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 20, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–30122 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–279–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 707 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 707 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of certain areas of the

upper skin of the wing. This action is

necessary to prevent cracking of the

upper skin of the wing, which could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the wing. This action is intended to

address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

January 12, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

279–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. 2000–NM–279–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:

James Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2783; 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 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–279–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–279–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received reports

indicating that cracking has been

detected in the upper skin of the wing

at wing stringers 10A and 11A on both

the left- and right-hand wings of certain

Boeing Model 707 series airplanes. The

cracking has been attributed to skin

fatigue. This condition, if not corrected,

could result in reduced structural

integrity of the wing.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Service Bulletin 2378, Revision

1, dated June 30, 1967, which, among

other actions, describes procedures for

modification of the upper skin of the

wing at wing stringers 10A and 11A.

The modification involves removing

fasteners at the inboard and outboard

ends of the stringer, inspecting these

fastener holes using an eddy current

method to detect cracking,

counterboring the inner surface of the

stringer at each fastener hole, installing

an anti-fretting strip between the wing

and stringer, enlarging fastener holes to

remove fatigued metal, and installing

new, improved fasteners.

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

modification specified in the service

bulletin described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between the Proposed Rule

and Service Bulletin

Operators should note that the service

bulletin recommends, and describes

procedures for, an initial ultrasonic

inspection of the wing upper skin prior

to the accumulation of 18,000 flight

hours or within 800 flight hours after

receipt of the service bulletin,

whichever occurs later. The service

bulletin also recommends repetitive

inspections at intervals not to exceed

1,600 flight hours, until

accomplishment of a repair or