21892 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Proposed Rules

or under supervision of the inspection

agency. Upon approval by the Board

and the inspection agency, sampling

may be accomplished at the accepted

user’s destination. The edible and

inedible almond meat content of each

delivery shall be determined by the

inspection agency and reported by the

inspection agency to the Board and the

handler. The handler’s disposition

obligation will be credited upon

satisfactory completion of ABC Form 8.

ABC Form 8, Part A, is filled out by the

handler, and Part B by the accepted

user. Deliveries containing less than 50

percent almond meat content shall not

be credited against the disposition

obligation. At least 25 percent of a

handler’s total crop year inedible

disposition obligation shall be satisfied

with dispositions consisting of inedible

kernels as defined in § 981.408:

Provided, That this 25 percent

requirement shall not apply to handlers

with total annual obligations of less

than 1,000 pounds. Each handler’s

disposition obligation shall be satisfied

when the almond meat content of the

material delivered to accepted users

equals the disposition obligation, but no

later than August 31 succeeding the

crop year in which the obligation was

incurred.

* * * * *

Dated: April 25, 2001.

Kenneth C. Clayton,

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10892 Filed 5–1–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–12–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model

SAAB 2000 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 Saab Model SAAB 2000 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

testing of certain components of the

emergency pitch trim system (EPTS),

and corrective action, if necessary. This

action is necessary to prevent faulty

activation of the emergency pitch trim

actuator (EPTA), which could cause

damage to the elevator front spar,

resulting in reduced structural integrity

of the elevator and a non-functioning

EPTS. This action is intended to address

the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 1, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

12–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. 2001–NM–

12–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

Saab Aircraft AB, SAAB Aircraft

Product Support, S–581.88, Linko ̈ping,

Sweden. 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 Number 2001–NM–12–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.

2001–NM–12–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Luftfartsverket (LFV), which is

the airworthiness authority for Sweden,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Saab

Model SAAB 2000 series airplanes. The

LFV advises that, in one case, it has

been reported that wires to an

emergency pitch trim actuator (EPTA)

mode control relay were wired

incorrectly in production. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in faulty activation of the EPTA, causing

damage to the elevator front spar and

resulting in reduced structural integrity

of the elevator and a non-functioning

emergency pitch trim system (EPTS).

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Saab has issued Service Bulletin

2000–27–046, dated November 30, 2000,

which describes procedures for

conducting a functional test of the

EPTS, and checking and replacing the

wiring, if necessary. Accomplishment of

the actions specified in the service

bulletin is intended to adequately

address the identified unsafe condition.

The LFV classified this service bulletin

as mandatory and issued Swedish

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Proposed Rules 21893

airworthiness directive 1–162, dated

November 30, 2000, in order to assure

the continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in Sweden.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Sweden and is 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 LFV has kept the FAA informed of

the situation described above. The FAA

has examined the findings of the LFV,

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

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 3 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

testing, 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

$360, or $120 per airplane.

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

accomplish those actions in the future if

this proposed AD were not adopted. The

cost impact figures discussed in AD

rulemaking actions represent only the

time necessary to perform the specific

actions actually required by the AD.

These figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

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:

SAAB Aircraft AB: Docket 2001–NM–12–

AD.

Applicability: Model SAAB 2000 series

airplanes, certificated in any category, serial

numbers –004 through –063, inclusive.

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 (b) 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 faulty activation of the

emergency pitch trim actuator (EPTA), which

could cause damage to the elevator front

spar, resulting in reduced structural integrity

of the elevator and a non-functioning

emergency pitch trim system (EPTS),

accomplish the following:

Testing and Corrective Actions

(a) Within 400 flight hours from the

effective date of this AD, perform a

functional test of the EPTS in accordance

with Saab Service Bulletin 2000–27–046,

dated November 30, 2000. If the left or right

EPTA is not working according to the

functional test, before further flight, check

the wiring and perform all applicable followon corrective actions, in accordance with

paragraph 2. C. of Saab Service Bulletin

2000–27–046, dated November 30, 2000.

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, Transport

Airplane Directorate, FAA. 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 2: 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 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 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Swedish airworthiness directive 1–162,

dated November 30, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10941 Filed 5–1–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–412–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 B2 and B4; A310; and A300 B4–

600, B4–600R, and F4–600R

(Collectively Called A300–600) Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.