Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12771

and at carry-through fittings and grommets

through which flammable fluid could pass,

in accordance with de Havilland Service

Bulletin S.B. 8–54–31, dated March 8, 1994.

If any gap or opening is detected, prior to

further flight, apply sealant in accordance

with the service bulletin.

(g) For airplanes having serial numbers 003

through 369, inclusive, on which

Modification No. 8/2001 has not been

installed: Within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, replace the existing seals on

the cowling doors of each nacelle with

improved seals, in accordance with de

Havilland Service Bulletin S.B. 8–71–19,

Revision ‘B,’ dated February 24, 1995.

(h) 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 New York Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Engine and

Propeller Directorate. Operators shall submit

their requests through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, New York ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

(i) 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 March

11, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6718 Filed 3–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–53–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Aircraft Limited HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

Series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

82–20–04 R1, which currently requires

repetitively inspecting the main landing

gear (MLG) hinge fitting, support angles,

and attachment bolts on British

Aerospace (currently known as

Jetstream Aircraft Limited (JAL)) HP137

Mk1 and Jetstream series 200 airplanes,

and repairing or replacing any part that

is cracked beyond certain limits. The

Federal Aviation Administration’s

policy on aging commuter-class aircraft

is to eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of certain repetitive

short-interval inspections when

improved parts or modifications are

available. The proposed action would

require installing improved design MLG

fittings, as terminating action for the

repetitive inspections that are currently

required by AD 82–20–04 R1, and

would incorporate the Jetstream Model

3101 airplanes into the Applicability of

the AD. The actions specified in the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

structural failure of the MLG caused by

fatigue cracking, which could result in

loss of control of the airplane during

landing operations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–CE–53–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Prestwick

International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9

2RW, Scotland; telephone (44–292)

79888; facsimile (44–292) 79703; or

Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O.

Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, D.C. 20041–6029;

telephone (703) 406–1161; facsimile

(703) 406–1469. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Tom Rodriguez, Program Manager,

Brussels Aircraft Certification Division,

FAA, Europe, Africa, and Middle East

Office, c/o American Embassy, B–1000

Brussels, Belgium; telephone (32 2)

508.2715; facsimile (32 2) 230.6899; or

Mr. S.M. Nagarajan, Project Officer,

Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, FAA, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; telephone (816) 426–6932;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

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 that

summarizes 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 No. 95–CE–53–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, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–CE–53–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

The FAA has determined that reliance

on critical repetitive inspections on

aging commuter-class airplanes carries

an unnecessary safety risk when a

design change exists that could

eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of those critical

inspections. In determining what

inspections are critical, the FAA

considers (1) the safety consequences if

the known problem is not detected

during the inspection; (2) the

probability of the problem not being

detected during the inspection; (3)

whether the inspection area is difficult

to access; and (4) the possibility of

damage to an adjacent structure as a

result of the problem.

These factors have led the FAA to

establish an aging commuter-class

aircraft policy that requires

incorporating a known design change

when it could replace a critical

repetitive inspection. With this policy

in mind, the FAA conducted a review

of existing AD’s that apply to JAL

HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200, and

Jetstream Models 3101 airplanes.

Assisting the FAA in this review were

(1) Jetstream Aircraft Limited (JAL); (2)

the Regional Airlines Association

(RAA); (3) the Civil Aviation Authority
12772 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

(CAA) for the United Kingdom; and (4)

several operators of the affected

airplanes.

From this review, the FAA identified

AD 82–20–04 R1, Amendment 39–4586,

as one to which the FAA’s aging aircraft

policy applies, and which should be

superseded with a new AD that would

require a modification that would

eliminate the need for short-interval and

critical repetitive inspections. AD 82–

20–04 R1 currently requires repetitively

inspecting the main landing gear (MLG)

hinge fitting, support angles, and

attachment bolts on British Aerospace

(currently known as JAL) HP137 Mk1

and Jetstream series 200 airplanes, and

repairing or replacing any part that is

cracked beyond certain limits.

Relevant Service Information

The following service information is

relevant to this subject:

—British Aerospace Jetstream

Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB)

No. 7/5, which includes procedures

for inspecting the left main landing

gear hinge attachment nuts to the

auxiliary and aft spars for signs of

relevant movement between the nuts

and hinge fitting on HP137 Mk1 and

Jetstream series 200 airplanes. This

MSB incorporates the following

effective pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

2 and 4 ....... Original

Issue.

March 31, 1982.

1 and 3 ....... Revision 1 .. May 23, 1988.

—British Aerospace MSB No. 7/8,

which includes procedures for

inspecting the MLG hinge fitting for

cracks, and repairing cracked hinge

fittings on HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream

series 200 airplanes. This MSB

incorporates the following effective

pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

2, 5, 6, 7,

and 8.

Revision 2 .. January 6,

1983.

1, 3, and 4 Revision 3 .. May 23, 1988.

—Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)

32–A–JA 850127, which includes

procedures for inspecting the MLG

hinge fitting and support angle for

cracks on Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes. This ASB incorporates the

following effective pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

5 through 14 Original

Issue.

April 17, 1985.

Pages Revision

level Date

1 through 4 Revision 2 .. November 11,

1994.

—Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB) 57–JM

5218, which includes procedures for

installing improved design MLG

fittings, part number (P/N) 1379133B1

and 1379133B2 (Modification 5218)

on HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200,

and certain Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes. This SB incorporates the

following effective pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

3, 5, 6, 7, 8,

9, 11, 12,

17, 18,

19, 21,

22, 23,

24, 27,

28, 29,

30, and

31.

Revision 1 .. September 29,

1987.

25 and 26 ... Revision 2 .. August 24,

1988.

10 and 20 ... Revision 3 .. January 29,

1990.

1, 2, 4, 13,

14, 15,

and 16.

Revision 4 .. October 31,

1990.

The FAA’s Determination

Based on its aging commuter-class

aircraft policy and after reviewing all

available information, including the

referenced service information, the FAA

has determined that AD action should

be taken to (1) require the incorporation

of Modification 5218 on the affected

airplanes, as terminating action for the

repetitive short-interval inspections

required by AD 82–20–04 R1; and (2)

prevent structural failure of the MLG

caused by fatigue cracking, which could

result in loss of control of the airplane

during landing operations.

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other JAL HP137 Mk1,

Jetstream series 200, and Jetstream

Model 3101 airplanes of the same type

design, the FAA is proposing to

supersede AD 82–20–04 R1 with a new

AD. The proposed AD would (1) retain

the requirement of repetitively

inspecting the MLG hinge fitting,

support angles, and attachment bolts,

and repairing or replacing any part that

is cracked; (2) incorporate the Jetstream

Model 3101 airplanes into the

Applicability of the AD; and (3) require

the installation of improved design MLG

fittings, part number (P/N) 1379133B1

and 1379133B2 (Modification 5218), as

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections. Accomplishment of the

proposed actions would be in

accordance with the service bulletins

referenced previously.

Differences Between the Proposed AD,

CAA for the United Kingdom AD, and

Existing AD 82–20–04 R1

AD 82–20–04 R1 allows continued

flight if cracks are found in the MLG

hinge fitting support angles that

propagate no further than the tooling

holes. The applicable service bulletin

specifies replacement of the support

angles only if cracks are found

exceeding this limit, as does CAA AD

015–05–85. The proposed AD, if

adopted, would not allow continued

flight if any crack is found. FAA policy

is to disallow airplane operation when

known cracks exist in primary structure,

unless the ability to sustain ultimate

load with these cracks is proven. The

main landing gear is considered primary

structure, and the FAA has not received

any analysis to prove that ultimate load

can be sustained with cracks in this

area.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 71 airplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 271 workhours

(inspections: 61 workhours; installation:

210 workhours) per airplane to

accomplish the proposed actions, and

that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Parts to

accomplish the proposed AD are

provided by the manufacturer at no cost

to the owners/operators of the affected

airplanes. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$1,154,460 or $16,260 per airplane. This

figure only takes into account the cost

of the initial inspections and inspectionterminating modification and does not

take into account the cost of repetitive

inspections. The FAA has no way of

determining the number of repetitive

inspections each HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplane owner/operator would incur.

This figure is also based on the

presumption that no affected airplane

operator has accomplished the proposed

installation. This action would

eliminate the repetitive inspections

required by AD 82–20–04 R1. The FAA

has no way of determining the operation

levels of each individual owner/

operator of the affected airplanes, and

subsequently cannot determine the

repetitive inspection costs that would be

eliminated by the proposed action. The
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 12773

FAA estimates these costs to be

substantial over the long term.

In addition, JAL has informed the

FAA that parts have been distributed to

owners/operators that would equip

approximately 39 of the affected

airplanes. Presuming that each set of

parts has been installed on an affected

airplane, the cost impact of the

proposed modification upon the public

would be reduced $634,140 from

$1,154,460 to $520,320.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

and Analysis

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

(RFA) was enacted by Congress to

ensure that small entities are not

unnecessarily or disproportionally

burdened by government regulations.

The RFA requires government agencies

to determine whether rules would have

a ‘‘significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities,’’

and, in cases where they would,

conduct a Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis in which alternatives to the

rule are considered. FAA Order

2100.14A, Regulatory Flexibility Criteria

and Guidance, outlines FAA procedures

and criteria for complying with the

RFA. Small entities are defined as small

businesses and small not-for-profit

organizations that are independently

owned and operated or airports

operated by small governmental

jurisdictions. A ‘‘substantial number’’ is

defined as a number that is not less than

11 and that is more than one-third of the

small entities subject to a proposed rule,

or any number of small entities judged

to be substantial by the rulemaking

official. A ‘‘significant economic

impact’’ is defined by an annualized net

compliance cost, adjusted for inflation,

which is greater than a threshold cost

level for defined entity types.

FAA Order 2100.14A, Regulatory

Flexibility Criteria and Guidance,

defines a small entity as ‘‘a small

business or small not-for-profit

organization which is independentlyowned and operated and has no more

than a specified number of employees or

aircraft.’’ For operators of aircraft for

hire (those entities that are affected by

14 CFR parts 121, 127, and 135), the size

threshold specified in FAA Order

2100.14A is nine aircraft.

There are only nine different

operators of JAL HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes. Of these nine, only four

operate less than nine airplanes.

Because four is a number that is less

than 11 and the rulemaking official has

not determined this number to be

substantial, the proposed AD would not

significantly affect a number of small

entities.

A copy of the full Cost Analysis and

Regulatory Flexibility Determination for

the proposed action may be examined at

the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–CE–53–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

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) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action has been placed in the Rules

Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)

82–20–04 R1, Amendment 39–4468, and

adding a new AD to read as follows:

Jetstream Aircraft Limited: Docket No. 95–

CE–53–AD. Supersedes 82–20–04 R1,

Amendment 39–4468.

Applicability: The following model and

serial number airplanes, certificated in any

category, that do not have improved design

MLG fittings, part number (P/N) 1379133B1

and 1379133B2 (Modification 5218),

installed in accordance with Jetstream

Service Bulletin (SB) 57–JM 5218:

Model Serial Nos.

HP137 Mk1 ............... All serial numbers.

Jetstream Series 200 All serial numbers.

Jetstream 3101 ......... 601 through 695.

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 (f) 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 after

the effective date of this AD, unless already

accomplished.

To prevent structural failure of the MLG

caused by fatigue cracking, which could

result in loss of control of the airplane during

landing operations, accomplish the

following:

Note 2: The compliance times of this AD

are presented in landings. If the total number

of airplane landings is not kept or is

unknown, hours time-in-service (TIS) may be

used by multiplying the total number of

airplane hours TIS by 0.75.

(a) For the HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream series

200 airplanes, within the next 50 landings

after the effective date of this AD or within

200 landings after the last inspection

required by AD 82–20–04 R1 (superseded by

this AD), whichever occurs first, and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 200

landings, accomplish the following in

accordance with British Aerospace

Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 7/5,

which incorporates the following pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

2 and 4 ....... Original

Issue.

March 31, 1982.

1 and 3 ....... Revision 1 .. May 23, 1988.

(1) Inspect the MLG hinge attachment nuts

to auxiliary and aft spars on both the left and

right MLG for signs of fuel leakage or signs

of relative movement between the nuts and

hinge fitting.
12774 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

(2) If any signs of fuel leakage or relative

movement between the nuts and hinge fitting

are found, prior to further flight, resecure the

MLG hinge fitting to auxiliary spar in

accordance with actions 3.8 through 3.15 of

British Aerospace MSB No. 7/5.

(b) Upon accumulating 4,000 landings or

within the next 50 landings after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs later, and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 400

landings, inspect the MLG hinge support

angles for cracks in accordance with the

following, as applicable:

(1) For the HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream series

200 airplanes: British Aerospace MSB 7/8,

which incorporates the following effective

pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

2, 5, 6, 7,

and 8.

Revision 2 .. January 6,

1983.

1, 3, and 4 Revision 3 .. May 23, 1988.

(2) For the Jetstream Model 3101 airplanes:

Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 32–A–

JA 850127, which incorporates the following

effective pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

5 through 14 Original

Issue.

April 17, 1985.

1 through 4 Revision 2 .. November 11,

1994.

(c) Install improved design MLG fittings,

part number (P/N) 1379133B1 and

1379133B2 (Modification 5218). Perform this

installation at the compliance time

(presented in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of

this AD) which occurs first. Accomplish this

installation in accordance with Jetstream

Service Bulletin (SB) 57–JM 5218, which

incorporates the following effective pages:

Pages Revision

level Date

3, 5, 6, 7, 8,

9, 11, 12,

17, 18,

19, 21,

22, 23,

24, 27,

28, 29,

30, and

31.

Revision 1 .. September 29,

1987.

25 and 26 ... Revision 2 .. August 24,

1988.

10 and 20 ... Revision 3 .. January 29,

1990.

1, 2, 4, 13,

14, 15,

and 16.

Revision 4 .. October 31,

1990.

(1) Prior to further flight after finding any

crack during an inspection required by

paragraph (b) of this AD; or

(2) Upon accumulating 20,000 landings or

within the next 50 landings after the effective

date of this AD (whichever occurs later).

(d) Incorporating Modification 5218 as

required by paragraph (c) of this AD

terminates the repetitive inspection

requirement of this AD (paragraphs (a) and

(b) of this AD).

(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.

(f) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial or repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Brussels Aircraft Certification

Division, Europe, Africa, Middle East office,

FAA, c/o American Embassy, 1000 Brussels,

Belgium. The request should be forwarded

through an appropriate FAA Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Brussels Aircraft

Certification Division. Alternative methods of

compliance approved in accordance with AD

82–20–04 R1 (superseded by this action) are

not considered 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 Brussels Aircraft

Certification Division.

(g) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to Jetstream Aircraft

Limited, Manager Product Support,

Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW

Scotland; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian,

P.O. Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, DC; or may examine this

document at the FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

(h) This amendment supersedes AD 82–

20–04 R1, Amendment 39–4468.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March

10, 1997.

Michael Gallagher,

Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6716 Filed 3–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–ANE–03]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal

Inc. TSCP700–4B and –5 Auxiliary

Power Units

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

AlliedSignal Inc. (formerly AirResearch

and Garrett) TSCP700–4B and –5 Series

Auxiliary Power Units, that currently

requires restretching the first stage low

pressure compressor (LPC) tie rods, or

replacing affected disks at or before

8,000 cycles since new (CSN). This

action would eliminate the option of

restretching the tie rods, and would

require removing from service affected

disks, replacing them with serviceable

parts, and establishing a life limit of

8,000 CSN for affected disks. This

proposal is prompted by a report of a

first stage LPC disk rim separation due

to low cycle fatigue on an APU that had

its tie rods restretched in accordance

with the current AD. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent first stage LPC disk

rim separation due to low cycle fatigue,

which could result in an uncontained

APU failure and damage to the aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 19, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

97–ANE–03, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: ‘‘9-

ad-engineprop@faa.dot.gov’’. Comments

sent via the Internet must contain the

docket number in the subject line.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

AlliedSignal Aerospace, Attn: Data

Distribution, M/S 64–3/2101–201, P.O.

Box 29003, Phoenix, AZ 85038–9003;

telephone (602) 365–2493, fax (602)

365–5577. This information may be

examined at the FAA, New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Baitoo, Aerospace Engineer, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA

90712–4137; telephone (310) 627–5245;

fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before