21700 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

would require revising the Normal

Procedures section of the AFM.

Cost of Compliance

We estimate that this AD would affect

69 airplanes of U.S. registry. The

proposed actions would take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, we

estimate the cost of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators to be $4,140, or $60 per

airplane.

We base these cost estimates on

assumptions that no operator has yet

done any of the actions in this proposed

AD, and that no operator would do

those actions in the future unless this

proposed AD is adopted. The cost

figures discussed in AD rulemaking

actions represent only the time

necessary to do the specific actions

required by the AD. These figures

typically do not include incidental

costs, such as the time required for

access and close, or for planning or

other administrative actions.

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:

Aerospatiale: Docket 2000–NM–380–AD.

Applicability: All Model ATR42–200,

–300, –320, –500, and ATR72 series

airplanes; certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure that the flightcrew is advised of

the hazard associated with selecting reverse

thrust during propeller thrust dissymmetry,

which could result in reduced controllability

of the airplane during landing, accomplish

the following:

Revision of Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

(a) Within 5 days after the effective date of

this AD, revise the Normal Procedures

section of the FAA-approved AFM, under

‘‘APPROACH AND LANDING,’’ to include

the following. This may be accomplished by

inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.

‘‘NORMAL LANDING

• After nose wheel touchdown

Both PL—GI

Both LO PITCH lights—Check illuminated

CAUTION: If a thrust dissymmetry occurs

or if one LO PITCH light is not illuminated,

the use of any reverse is not allowed.’’

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 Operations

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 1: 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

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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 2: French airworthiness directives

2000–436–080(B) and 2000–437–052(B), both

dated October 18, 2000, also address the

subject of this AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 24,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10725 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–367–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737 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 737 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

initial and repetitive inspections of

certain areas of the wing spars to detect

cracking or corrosion; and follow-on

corrective actions and repair, if

necessary. This proposal is prompted by

reports of cracks and corrosion in the

upper chord of the front and rear spars

of the wing and reports of cracks

propagating from previously repaired

areas. The actions specified in the

proposed AD are intended to detect and

correct such cracking or corrosion of the

upper and lower chords of the wing

spars, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the wing.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 15, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

367–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. 99–NM–367–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.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 21701

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:

Nenita Odesa, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2557; 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.

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 99–NM–367–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.

99–NM–367–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received numerous

reports of cracking and corrosion in the

upper chord of both the front and rear

spars of the wing. Cracks were reported

by 18 operators in the upper and rear

spar chord on 38 airplanes. In addition,

5 operators reported cracks propagating

from repairs that were accomplished

previously on 6 airplanes per Boeing

Service Bulletin 737–57–1067, Revision

3, dated May 24, 1990, or earlier

revisions. Findings indicate that 2 of

those cracks were found in the front

spar upper chord, and 4 cracks in the

rear spar upper chord. Corrosion also

was found in the external surfaces of the

upper and lower chords of the front and

rear spars on 64 airplanes. Such

cracking and corrosion, 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 737–57–1067,

Revision 4, dated November 7, 1991.

Revision 4 adds initial and repetitive

inspections for airplanes on which a

previous repair to the upper chord of

the front or rear spar was made per

Revision 3, or earlier revisions, of the

service bulletin. Revision 4 includes the

following procedures:

• An initial (detailed) visual

inspection for cracks of the external

surfaces of the upper and lower chords

of the front spar outboard of the engine

nacelle, upper and lower chords of the

rear spar, and the lower chord of the

front spar inboard of the engine nacelle.

• An initial eddy current inspection

for cracks of the external surfaces of the

vertical legs of the upper chords of the

front and rear spars.

• Repetitive close (detailed) visual

inspections for cracks and corrosion of

the external surfaces of the upper and

lower chords of the front and rear spars.

• Repetitive eddy current inspections

for cracks of the external surfaces of the

vertical legs of the upper chords of the

front and rear spars.

• Follow-on corrective actions that

include cleaning the exposed front and

rear spar cavities, removing corrosion by

blending out the damaged surface areas,

and applying a corrosion-inhibiting

compound to the accessible areas of the

upper and lower chords of the front and

rear spars.

• Crack and corrosion repair that

includes removing corrosion; inspecting

the rework area for cracks, and repairing

any cracks found in the specific chord

surfaces of the front and rear spars,

which includes installing a nesting

angle if necessary and refinishing the

blend out area; and applying a

corrosion-inhibiting compound.

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 actions

specified in the service described

previously, except as discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Bulletin

Operators should note that this

proposed AD differs from the service

bulletin in that it would NOT allow the

following actions:

1. Repair of certain damage (that

exceeds the limits specified in the

service bulletin) to be accomplished by

contacting Boeing for repair

instructions; rather, it would require

that such repairs be accomplished per a

method approved by the FAA.

2. Flight with a horizontal crack in the

upper chords of the front or rear spars;

rather, it would require repair per a

method approved by the FAA.

3. ‘‘Close visual inspections’’; rather,

it would require ‘‘detailed visual

inspections.’’ A note has been added

following paragraph (a) of this proposed

AD to clarify this.

Operators also should note that Part II

of the service bulletin does not include

repair procedures if a horizontal crack is

found in the upper chords of the front

or rear spars. However, paragraph (d)(3)

of this proposed AD requires repair of

such cracking per a method approved by

the FAA, as cited in paragraph (f) of this

AD.

Operators also should note that the

service bulletin specifies initial detailed

visual and eddy current inspections

‘‘upon the accumulation of 20 years

airframe age or within 1 year after

receipt of Revision 3 of the service

bulletin.’’ However, since all airplanes

in the applicability of this AD are over

20 years old, the FAA has determined

that it is unnecessary to include the

specification for the airframe age in this

proposed AD.

Clarification of Action Required for

Previous Repair

The Accomplishment Instructions of

the previously referenced service

bulletin do not specifically include

procedures for repetitive eddy current

inspections for airplanes on which a

previous repair to the upper chord of

the front or rear spar was made per

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57–1067,

Revision 3, or earlier revisions.

However, such action is specified in the

service bulletin in an ‘‘Action’’

paragraph of the Summary, and in

paragraph C., ‘‘Description.’’ Paragraphs

(d)(3), (d)(4)(ii), and (e) of this AD

specify repair per a method approved by

the FAA, which is cited in paragraph (f)

of this AD.

21702 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

Cost Impact

There are approximately 168 Boeing

Model 737 series airplanes of the

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The FAA estimates that 45 airplanes of

U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

The FAA estimates that it would take

approximately 30 work hours per

airplane to do the initial detailed visual

and eddy current inspections, and that

the average labor rate is $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the initial inspections on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $81,000, or

$1,800 per airplane.

The FAA estimates that it would take

approximately 30 work hours per

airplane to do the repetitive inspections,

and that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $81,000, or

$1,800 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would do

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:

Boeing: Docket 99–NM–367–AD.

Applicability: Model 737 series airplanes,

line numbers 1 through 310 inclusive, and

323; 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 per

paragraph (g) 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 cracking or corrosion

of the upper and lower chords of the front

and rear spars of the wing, which could

result in reduced structural integrity of the

wing, do the following:

Initial Detailed Visual and Eddy Current

Inspections (Part I)

(a) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD: Do an initial detailed visual

inspection to detect cracking or corrosion of

the upper and lower chords of the front and

rear spars, and an eddy current inspection to

detect cracking of the vertical legs of the

upper chords of the front and rear spars, per

Part I of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57–1067,

Revision 4, dated November 7, 1991. Before

further flight following the inspections, do

the follow-on corrective actions required by

paragraph (d) of this AD.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive 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 an

intensity deemed appropriate by the

inspector. Inspection aids such as mirrors,

magnifying lenses, etc. may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

Repetitive Detailed Visual and Eddy Current

Inspections (Part II)

(b) Repeat the initial detailed visual

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD at intervals not to exceed 12 months per

Part II of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57–1067,

Revision 4, dated November 7, 1991. Before

further flight following the inspection, do the

follow-on corrective actions required by

paragraph (d) of this AD.

(c) Repeat the initial eddy current

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD at intervals not to exceed 48 months per

Part II of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57–1067,

Revision 4, dated November 7, 1991. Before

further flight following the inspection, do the

follow-on corrective actions required by

paragraph (d) of this AD.

Follow-on Corrective Actions (Parts I, II, and

III)

(d) Do the follow-on corrective actions

(including cleaning spar cavities, removing

corrosion, and applying corrosion-inhibiting

compound) required by paragraphs (d)(1),

(d)(2), (d)(3), and (d)(4) of this AD, as

applicable.

(1) If no cracking or corrosion is found,

apply a corrosion-inhibiting compound to the

accessible areas of the upper and lower

chords of both the front and rear spars per

Part I or Part II of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–

57–1067, Revision 4, dated November 7,

1991, as applicable.

(2) If any corrosion is found, repair per Part

III of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57–1067,

Revision 4, dated November 7, 1991.

(3) If a horizontal crack is found in the

upper chords of the front or rear spars, repair

per paragraph (f) of this AD.

(4) If any cracking is found other than that

identified in paragraph (d)(3) of this AD,

repair per paragraph (d)(4)(i) or (d)(4)(ii) of

this AD, as applicable.

(i) If damage of the chords of the front or

rear spar is within the limits specified in the

service bulletin, before further flight, repair

per Part III of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–

57–1067, Revision 4, dated November 7,

1991.

(ii) If damage of the chords of the front or

rear spar exceeds the limits specified in the

service bulletin, before further flight, repair

per paragraph (f) of this AD.

Initial and Repetitive Eddy Current

Inspections of Previous Repairs

(e) For airplanes on which a previous

repair to the upper chord of the front or rear

spar was made per Boeing Service Bulletin

737–57–1067, Revision 3, dated May 24,

1990, or earlier revisions: Within 12 months

after the effective date of this AD, do an eddy

current inspection of the repair area to detect

cracking per a method approved by the

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA. Repeat this inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 21703

months. If any discrepancy is found, before

further flight, repair per paragraph (f) of this

AD. For a repair method to be approved by

the Manager, SACO, as required by this

paragraph, the approval letter must

specifically reference this AD.

Repair

(f) Repair (including removing corrosion;

inspecting the rework area for cracks;

refinishing the blend-out area; installing a

nesting angle repair; and applying chemical

film treatment, primer, sealant, and

corrosion-inhibiting compound) any

discrepancy specified in paragraphs (d)(3),

(d)(4)(ii), and (e) of this AD, per a method

approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO; or

per data meeting the type certification basis

of the airplane approved by a Boeing

Designated Engineering Representative who

has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle

ACO, to make such findings. For a repair

method to be approved by the Manager,

Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph,

the approval letter must specifically

reference this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g) 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, Seattle

ACO, FAA. Operators shall submit their

requests through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permit

(h) Special flight permits may be issued per

§§ 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 24,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10729 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–211–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAe

Systems (Operations) Limited Model

Avro 146–RJ 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 BAe Systems (Operations)

Limited Model Avro 146–RJ series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of the passenger service

units. This action is necessary to

prevent failure of the passenger service

units to deliver oxygen to the passengers

in the event of decompression of the

airplane, which could result in injury to

the passengers. This action is intended

to address the identified unsafe

condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 31, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

211–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–211–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

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft

American Support, 13850 Mclearen

Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2125;

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.

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 No. 2000–NM–211–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

2000–NM–211–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),

which is the airworthiness authority for,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain BAe

Systems (Operations) Limited Model

Avro 146–RJ series airplanes. The CAA

advises that the current design of the

support lanyards on the passenger

service units (PSUs) could restrict

operation of the oxygen generator dropdown lids. Failure of the PSUs to

deliver oxygen to the passengers in the

event of decompression of the airplane

could result in injury to the passengers.

Relevant Service Information

The manufacturer has issued BAe

Systems (Operations) Limited Service

Bulletin SB.25–418–36215A, dated