Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules 17131

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:

Dornier: Docket 96–NM–113–AD.

Applicability: Model 328–100 series

airplanes, excluding serial numbers 3006,

3007, and 3010; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of

the lower part of the MLG fairing, and

subsequent separation of part of the fairing

from the airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 300 hours time-in-service after

the effective date of this AD, perform a visual

inspection to detect cracking of the lower

attachment flanges in the area of the bend

radii of the forward and aft support beams of

the main landing gear (MLG), in accordance

with Dornier Alert Service Bulletin ASB–

328–53–010, dated October 13,

1995.

(1) If no cracking is found, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 300 hours time-in-service.

(2) If any cracking is found, prior to further

flight, accomplish the permanent repair in

accordance with the alert service bulletin.

(b) Accomplishment of the permanent

repair in accordance with Dornier Alert

Service Bulletin ASB–328–53–010, dated

October 13, 1995, constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspections required

by this AD.

(c) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(d) 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 April 2,

1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–9015 Filed 4–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–41–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A310 and A300–600 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 Airbus

Model A310 and A300–600 series

airplanes, that currently requires a

revision to the Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) that warns the flight crew of

certain consequences associated with

overriding the autopilot when it is in

the pitch control axis. That AD also

requires modification of certain flight

control computers (FCC). That AD was

prompted by the results of an FAA

review of the requirements of an earlier

AD. This proposed action would require

a modification to the autopilot that

would enable the flight crew to

manually disconnect the autopilot,

regardless of its mode and the altitude

of the airplane; accomplishment of that

modification would terminate the

current requirement to revise the AFM.

This proposed action also would require

repetitive operational testing of the

modified autopilot to determine if the

disconnect function operates properly,

and repair, if necessary. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent an out-of-trim

condition between the trimmable

horizontal stabilizer and the elevator,

which could severely reduce

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 19, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

41–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

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2589; fax (206) 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 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

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this
17132 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / 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 notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 97–NM–41–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–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

97–NM–41–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On April 10, 1996, the FAA issued

AD 96–08–07, amendment 39–9573 (61

FR 16873, April 18, 1996), which is

applicable to all Airbus Model A310

and A300–600 series airplanes. That AD

requires a revision to the Limitations

Section of the FAA-approved Airplane

Flight Manual (AFM) that warns the

flight crew about certain consequences

of overriding the autopilot when it is in

the pitch control axis. That AD also

requires the modification of certain

flight control computers (FCC).

The requirements of AD 96–08–07 are

intended to prevent an out-of-trim

condition between the trimmable

horizontal stabilizer and the elevator,

which could severely reduce

controllability of the airplane.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

In the preamble of the proposal for

AD 96–08–07, the FAA specified that

the actions proposed by that AD were

considered interim action because the

manufacturer was developing a

modification that will positively address

the unsafe condition described in the

AD. The FAA also indicated that it

would consider further rulemaking

action once the modification was

developed, approved, and available. The

manufacturer now has developed such a

modification, and the FAA has

determined that further rulemaking is,

indeed, necessary. This proposed AD

follows from that determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A310–22–2044, Revision 1 (for Model

A310 series airplanes), and Service

Bulletin A300–22–6032, Revision 1 (for

Model A300–600 series airplanes); both

dated January 8, 1997. These service

bulletins describe procedures for

modifying the autopilot so that, by

applying a counteracting force to the

control column, the flight crew can

immediately disconnect the autopilot,

regardless of its mode and the altitude

of the airplane.

Prior to the development of this

modification, the flight crew, under

certain conditions, could not manually

disconnect the pitch control axis.

Should the flight crew attempt to do so

for an extended time, that counteracting

force would be interpreted by the

autotrim as a force to which it must

respond, and the airplane would be

trimmed accordingly. Consequently, the

trimmable horizontal stabilizer could

become significantly out-of-trim with

the elevator.

Airbus also has issued Service

Bulletin A310–22–2047 (for Model

A310 series airplanes), and Service

Bulletin A300–22–6035 (for Model

A300–600 series airplanes); both dated

July 16, 1996. These service bulletins

describe procedures for conducting

repetitive operational tests of the

autopilot’s disconnect function to

determine if it is working properly, and

repair, if necessary. These actions are to

be accomplished after the autopilot has

been modified in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A310–22–2044,

Revision 1, or Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–22–6032, Revision 1, both dated

January 8, 1997, as applicable.

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

classified these service bulletins as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive (C/N) 96–150–

203(B), dated July 31, 1996, in order to

assure 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 96–08–07 to continue to

require a revision to the Limitations

Section of the AFM that warns the flight

crew of certain consequences associated

with overriding the autopilot when it is

in the pitch control axis, and

modification of certain FCC’s.

The proposed AD also would require

a modification to the autopilot that

would enable the flight crew to

manually disconnect it, regardless of the

autopilot mode and the altitude of the

airplane. After this modification has

been accomplished, the proposed AD

would require removal of the revision to

the AFM that is currently required by

AD 96–08–07. In addition, the proposed

action would require repetitive

operational testing of the modified

autopilot to determine if the disconnect

function operates properly, and repair,

if necessary. The actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the applicable service

bulletins described previously.

Related AD Actions

Operators of Airbus Model A310 and

A300–600 airplanes that are subject to

the requirements of AD 95–25–09,

amendment 39–9455 (60 FR 63412,

December 11, 1995) should be aware

that certain FCC’s must be modified

before or at the same time the

requirements of this proposed AD

would be accomplished.

AD 95–25–09 requires modification of

certain FCC’s so that the autopilot will

disengage when the airplane is in the

‘‘GO-AROUND’’ mode under certain

conditions. The requirements of that AD

are intended to prevent an out-of-trim

condition between the trimmable

horizontal stabilizer and the elevator,

which may severely reduce

controllability of the airplane. That AD

was prompted by an accident in which

the flight crew may have initiated an

inadvertent ‘‘go-around,’’ which,

following several subsequent actions by

the flight crew and automated system,

placed the airplane in a severe out-oftrim condition.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 77 Airbus

Model A300–600 and A310 series

airplanes of U.S. registry that would be

affected by this proposed AD.

The modification of certain FCC’s that

is currently required by AD 96–08–07

takes approximately 1 work hour per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts are supplied by the

manufacturer at no cost to operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules 17133

of the currently required modification

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$4,620, or $60 per airplane.

The AFM revision that is currently

required by AD 96–08–07 takes

approximately 1 work hour 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 AFM revision on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $4,620, or

$60 per airplane.

The modification of the autopilot that

is proposed by this AD action would

take approximately 25 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $1,578 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed modification on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $237,006, or

$3,078 per airplane.

The operational test that is proposed

by this AD action would take

approximately 7 work hours per

airplane, per test cycle, to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the proposed operational test

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$32,340 per test cycle, or $420 per

airplane, per test cycle.

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 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 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 39–9573 (61 FR

16873, April 18, 1996), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 97–NM–41–AD.

Supersedes AD 96–08–07, Amendment

39–9573.

Applicability: All Model A300–600 and

A310 series airplanes; certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

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 (e) 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 an out-of-trim condition

between the trimmable horizontal stabilizer

and the elevator, which could severely

reduce controllability of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

Restatement of Actions Required by AD 96–

08–07, Amendment 39–9573

(a) Within 10 days after May 23, 1996 (the

effective date of AD 96–08–07, amendment

39–9573), revise the Limitations Section of

the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to include the information contained

in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, as

applicable. This may be accomplished by

inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. The

AFM limitation required by AD 94–21–07,

amendment 39–9049, may be removed

following accomplishment of the

requirements of this paragraph.

(1) For airplanes on which the flight

control computers (FCC) have not been

modified in accordance with the

requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD:

‘‘Overriding the autopilot (AP) in pitch

axis does not cancel the AP autotrim when

LAND TRACK mode [green LAND on both

Flight Mode Annunciators (FMA)] or GOAROUND mode is engaged. In these modes,

if the pilot counteracts the AP, the autotrim

will trim against pilot input. This could lead

to a severe out-of-trim situation in a critical

phase of flight.’’

(2) For airplanes on which the FCC’s have

been modified in accordance with

requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD:

‘‘Overriding the autopilot (AP) in pitch

axis does not cancel the AP autotrim when

LAND TRACK mode (green LAND on both

FMA’s) is engaged, or GO-AROUND mode is

engaged below 400 feet radio altitude (RA).

In these modes, if the pilot counteracts the

AP, the autotrim will trim against pilot input.

This could lead to a severe out-of-trim

situation in a critical phase of flight.’’

Restatement of Actions Required by AD 94–

21–07, Amendment 39–9049

(b) For airplanes equipped with FCC’s

having either part number (P/N) B470ABM1

(for Model A310 series airplanes) or

B470AAM1 (for Model A300–600 series

airplanes): Within 60 days after November 2,

1994 (the effective date of AD 94–21–07,

amendment 39–9049), modify the FCC’s in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A310–22–2036, dated December 14, 1993 (for

Model A310 series airplanes), or Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–22–6021, Revision 1,

dated December 24, 1993 (for Model A300–

600 series airplanes), as applicable.

(c) As of November 2, 1994, no person

shall install a FCC having either P/N

B470ABM1 or B470AAM1 on any airplane.

New Actions Required by This AD

(d) For airplanes on which Modification

No. 11454 [reference Airbus Service Bulletin

A310–22–2044 (for Model A310 series

airplanes) or Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

22–6032 (for Model A300–600 series

airplanes)] has not been installed:

Accomplish paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2)(i) and

(d)(2)(ii) of this AD.

(1) Within 24 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the autopilot in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A310–22–2044, Revision 1, dated January 8,

1997 (for Model A310 series airplanes), or

Service Bulletin A300–22–6032, Revision 1,

dated January 8, 1997 (for Model A300–600

series airplanes), as applicable. The

requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 95–25–

09, amendment 39–9455, if applicable, must

be accomplished prior to or at the same time

the requirements of this paragraph are

accomplished.

(2) Prior to further flight following

accomplishment of paragraph (d)(1) of this

AD:

(i) Remove the AFM revisions required by

paragraph (b) of this AD; and

(ii) Perform an operational test of the

autopilot disconnect to determine if the
17134 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules

direct disconnect is operating properly, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A310–22–2047, dated July 16, 1996 (for

Model A310 series airplanes), or Service

Bulletin A300–22–6035, dated July 16, 1996

(for Model A300–600 series airplanes), as

applicable. If any discrepancy is detected,

prior to further flight, repair it in accordance

with the applicable service bulletin. Repeat

this test thereafter at intervals not to exceed

18 months.

(e) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(f) 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 April 2,

1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–9016 Filed 4–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97–ANM–5]

Proposed Amendment of Class D

Airspace; Idaho Falls, ID

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would

amend the Idaho Falls, Idaho, Class D

airspace. This action is necessary to

facilitate Lifeflight helicopter operations

at the Regional Medical Center. The area

would be depicted on aeronautical

charts for pilot reference.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager,

Operations Branch, ANM–530, Federal

Aviation Administration, Docket No.

97–ANM–5, 1601 Lind Avenue, S.W.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The official docket may be examined

at the same address.

An informal docket may also be

examined during normal business hours

at the address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Riley, ANM–532.2, Federal

Aviation Administration, Docket No.

97–ANM–5, 1601 Lind Avenue S.W.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056;

telephone number: (206) 227–2537.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy related

aspects of the proposal.

Communications should identify the

airspace docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

listed above. Commenters wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this notice must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 97–

ANM–5.’’ The postcard will be date/

time stamped and returned to the

commenter. All communications

received on or before the specified

closing date for comments will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposal contained

in this notice may be changed in the

light of comments received. All

comments submitted will be available

for examination at the address listed

above both before and after the closing

date for comments. A report

summarizing each substantive public

contact with FAA personnel concerned

with this rulemaking will be filed in the

docket.

Availability of NPRM’s

Any person may obtain a copy of this

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

by submitting a request to the Federal

Aviation Administration, Operations

Branch, ANM–530, 1601 Lind Avenue

S.W., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Communications must identify the

notice number of this NPRM. Persons

interested in being placed on a mailing

list for future NPRM’s should also

request a copy of Advisory Circular No.

11–2A, which describes the application

procedure.

The Proposal

The FAA is considering an

amendment to part 71 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to

amend Class D airspace at Idaho Falls,

Idaho, to facilitate Lifeflight helicopter

operations at the Regional Medical

Center. Presently, aircraft operating in

the vicinity of the medical center are

experiencing difficulty establishing

communications with Idaho Falls air

traffic control tower, when operational,

or Salt Lake City Center during other

hours. This amendment would exclude

the airspace immediately surrounding

that medical center from the Class D

airspace thereby eliminating any

communications requirements on

aircraft operating to/from that location.

The coordinates for this airspace docket

are based on North American Datum 83.

Class D airspace areas extending

upward from the surface of the earth are

published in Paragraph 5000 of FAA

Order 7400.9D dated September 4, 1996,

and effective September 16, 1996, which

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR

71.1. The Class D airspace designation

listed in this document would be

published subsequently in the Order.

The FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation only involves an

established body of technical

regulations for which frequent and

routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current. It,

therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant

preparation of a regulatory evaluation as

the anticipated impact is so minimal.

Since this is a routine matter that will

only affect air traffic procedures and air

navigation, it is certified that this rule,

when promulgated, will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as

follows:

PART 71—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

part 71 continues to read as follows: