20922 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules

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 require

modification of the position 1 flap

control screw jack. The actions would

be required to be accomplished in

accordance with the Airbus service

bulletin described previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 41 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

modification, and that the average labor

rate is $60 per work hour. Required

parts would cost approximately $105

per airplane. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed

modification AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $9,225, or $225 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this 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

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 2000–NM–77–AD.

Applicability: Model A310 series airplanes,

certificated in any category, except those

airplanes on which Airbus Modification

10855 or Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–

2075 has been accomplished.

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 (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 fracture of the lead screw of the

position 1 flap screw jack, which could result

in failure of the tie bar and possible

disconnection of the flap structure from the

airplane, accomplish the following:

Modification

(a) Within 18 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the position 1 flap

screw jack in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–27–2075, Revision 02, dated

February 8, 2000.

Note 2: Modifications accomplished prior

to the effective date of this AD, in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2075,

dated November 18, 1994, or Revision 01,

dated July 20, 1995, are considered

acceptable for compliance with the

modification specified by this AD.

Note 3: The Airbus service bulletin

references Lucas/Liebherr Service Bulletin

537–27–M537–15, dated May 12, 1994, as an

additional source of service information for

accomplishing the applicable action required

by this AD.

Spares

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

person shall install on any airplane a

position 1 flap screw jack having part

number 537G0000–02, unless modified in

accordance with this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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,

International Branch, ANM–116, 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, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(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.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 1999–510–

299(B), dated December 29, 1999.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 13,

2000.

Charles D. Huber,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–9823 Filed 4–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–54–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300, A300–600, and A310 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 Airbus Model A300, A300–600,

and A310 series airplanes. This

proposal would require replacement of

the transformer rectifier units (TRU) in

the avionics compartment with new,

improved TRU’s. This proposal is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules 20923

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent failure of the

TRU’s. Failure of multiple TRU’s could

result in loss of the thrust reversers,

autothrottle, flaps, and various systems

(wing/cockpit window anti-ice, trim

tank pumps, and windshield wipers) on

the airplane; or incorrect information

displayed to the flight crew.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

54–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 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:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116,

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 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

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 2000–NM–54–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–54–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Airbus

Model A300, A300–600, and A310

series airplanes. The DGAC advises that

it has received reports of failures in

operation of the direct current (DC)

electrical power transformer rectifier

units (TRU). Investigation of these

failures revealed that the temperature

level that triggers the fan may lead to

the overheat and failure of one or more

TRU’s. Failure of multiple TRU’s, if not

corrected, could result in loss of the

thrust reversers, autothrottle, flaps, and

various systems (wing/cockpit window

anti-ice, trim tank pumps, and

windshield wipers) on the airplane; or

incorrect information displayed to the

flight crew.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The manufacturer has issued Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–24–0089, dated

March 4, 1998 (for Model A300 series

airplanes), A300–24–6068, dated

January 28, 1998 (for Model A300–600

series airplanes), and A310–24–2077,

dated January 21, 1998 (for Model A310

series airplanes). These service bulletins

describe procedures for replacement of

the TRU’s in the avionics compartment

with new, improved TRU’s. The new

TRU’s utilize a reduced working

temperature, thus improving the

reliability of the TRU’s. The DGAC

classified these service bulletins as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive 1999–435–

296(B), dated November 3, 1999, in

order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

The Airbus service bulletins reference

AUXILEC Service Bulletin F11QB3121–

24–007, dated February 2, 1998, as an

additional source of service information

for accomplishing the replacement

proposed by this AD.

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 require

replacement of the TRU’s in the

avionics compartment with new,

improved TRU’s. The actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the service bulletins

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Foreign Airworthiness Directive

The proposed rule would differ from

the French airworthiness directive in

that it would require accomplishment of

the replacement described previously,

within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD. The parallel French

airworthiness directive specifies

accomplishment of the replacement

prior to September 30, 2001 (18 months

after the effective date). In developing

an appropriate compliance time for this

AD, the FAA considered not only the

DGAC’s and the manufacturer’s

recommendations, but the degree of

urgency associated with addressing the

subject unsafe condition and the average

utilization of the affected fleet. In light

of these factors, the FAA finds a 6-

month compliance time for the required

actions to be warranted, in that it

represents an appropriate interval of

time allowable for affected airplanes to

continue to operate without

compromising safety.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 122 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

replacement, and that the average labor

rate is $60 per work hour. Required

20924 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules

parts would be provided by the

manufacturer at no cost to the operators

if modification of the TRU’s is

accomplished at the vendor’s

(AUXILEC) facilities, otherwise the

required parts would cost

approximately $253 per TRU. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be between $120 and

$1,132 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this 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

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 2000–NM–54–AD.

Applicability: Model A300, A300–600, and

A310 series airplanes; certificated in any

category; equipped with AUXILEC

transformer rectifier units (TRU) having part

number (P/N) F11QB3121.

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 failure of multiple TRU’s,

which could result in loss of the thrust

reversers, autothrottle, flaps, and various

systems (wing/cockpit window anti-ice, trim

tank pumps, and windshield wipers) on the

airplane; or incorrect information displayed

to the flight crew; accomplish the following:

Replacement

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, replace the TRU’s in the avionics

compartment with new, improved TRU’s, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletins

A300–24–0089, dated March 4, 1998 (for

Model A300 series airplanes); A300–24–

6068, dated January 28, 1998 (for Model

A300–600 series airplanes); or A310–24–

2077, dated January 21, 1998 (for Model

A310 series airplanes); as applicable.

Note 2: The Airbus service bulletins

reference AUXILEC Service Bulletin

F11QB3121–24–007, dated February 2, 1998,

as an additional source of service information

for accomplishing the replacement required

by this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, 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, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Manager, International

Branch, ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 1999–435–

296(B), dated November 3, 1999.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 13,

2000.

Charles D. Huber,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–9822 Filed 4–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–363–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 707, 727C, and 727–100C 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 certain

Boeing Model 707, 727C, and 727–100C

series airplanes, that currently requires

repetitive inspections to detect cracking

of the main cargo door skin and frames,

and repair, if necessary. The existing AD

also provides optional terminating

modifications. This action would

mandate follow-on repetitive

inspections of repaired or modified

areas for certain airplanes. This

proposal is prompted by reports of

cracking and/or tearing of the main

cargo door outer skin and subsequent

failure of the door frame. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to detect and correct such

cracking and/or tearing, which could

result in failure of the door frame and

consequent rapid decompression of the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 5, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

363–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.