Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 15, 2001 / Proposed Rules 26815

regulatory options and economic

impacts.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit

regulatory actions to the scale of

business subject to such actions in order

that small businesses will not be unduly

or disproportionately burdened.

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the

Act, and rules thereunder, are unique in

that they are brought about through

group action of essentially small entities

acting on their own behalf. Thus, both

statutes have small entity orientation

and compatibility.

There are approximately 40 handlers

of tart cherries who are subject to

regulation under the order and

approximately 900 producers of tart

cherries in the regulated area. Small

agricultural service firms, which

include handlers, have been defined by

the Small Business Administration (13

CFR 121.201) as those having annual

receipts of less than $5,000,000, and

small agricultural producers are defined

as those having annual receipts of less

than $500,000. The majority of handlers

and producers of tart cherries may be

classified as small entities.

This proposed rule would temporarily

suspend the provision in § 930.83(d) of

the order which specifies the month in

which a continuance referendum should

be conducted to determine if producers

and processors favor the continuance of

the tart cherry marketing order.

Pursuant to this, the next continuance

referendum is scheduled for March

2002. Section 930.83(b) authorizes the

Secretary to terminate or suspend the

operation of any or all of the provisions

of this part whenever the Secretary finds

that such provisions do not tend to

effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

One alternative to this action would

be to continue the status quo. However,

without a postponement of the

continuance referendum, the

Department would have to conduct two

referenda closely together, one for the

second series of amendments and one

for a continuance referendum. This

could be confusing to growers and

processors. Further, growers and

processors would not have had time to

determine how any amendments that

are adopted could affect order

operations and evaluate the results. A

temporary delay in holding the

continuance referendum until March

2003 would allow the amendments to be

evaluated by growers and processors.

Thus, the vote on continuance would be

a more reliable determiner of industry

support for the order.

In compliance with Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

regulations (5 CFR part 1320) which

implement the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the

information collection and

recordkeeping requirements imposed by

this order have been previously

approved by OMB and assigned OMB

Number 0581–0177. This action

imposes no additional reporting or

recordkeeping requirements on either

small or large tart cherry handlers. As

with all Federal marketing order

programs, reports and forms are

periodically reviewed to reduce

information requirements and

duplication by industry and public

sector agencies. In addition, the

Department has not identified any

relevant Federal rules that duplicate,

overlap, or conflict with this rule.

The Board’s meeting was publicized

and all Board members and alternate

Board members, representing both large

and small entities, were invited to

attend the meeting and participate in

Board deliberations. The Board itself is

composed of 18 members, of which 17

members are growers and handlers and

one represents the public. Also, the

Board has a number of appointed

committees to review certain issues and

make recommendations.

Finally, interested persons are invited

to submit information on the regulatory

and informational impacts of this action

on small businesses.

A small business guide on complying

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop

marketing agreements and orders may

be viewed at the following website:

http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/

moab.html. Any questions about the

compliance guide should be sent to Jay

Guerber at the previously mentioned

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

A 60-day comment period is provided

to allow interested persons to respond

to this proposal. All written comments

timely received will be considered

before a final determination is made on

this matter.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 929

Tart cherries, Marketing agreements,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR Part 930 is proposed to

be amended as follows:

PART 930—TART CHERRIES GROWN

IN THE STATES OF MICHIGAN, NEW

YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, OREGON,

UTAH, WASHINGTON, AND

WISCONSIN

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

Part 930 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 1–19, 48 Stat. 31, as

amended; 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

§ 930.83 [Amended]

2. In paragraph (d), the sentence ‘‘The

Secretary shall conduct a referendum

within the month of March of every

sixth year after the effective date of this

part to ascertain whether continuation

of this part is favored by the growers

and processors.’’ is suspended effective

March 1 through March 31, 2002.

Dated: May 9, 2001.

Kenneth C. Clayton,

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 01–12139 Filed 5–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–383–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A319, A320, and A321 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 A319, A320, and

A321 series airplanes. This proposal

would require modifications of route

segregation between the low voltage

wire bundles of the fuel quantity

indicating system and the high voltage

wire bundles of the ground power

control unit. This action is necessary to

prevent injection of 115 volt alternating

current (VAC) into 28 volt direct current

(VDC) wire bundles, which could result

in high voltage conditions within the

fuel tank and the potential for damage

to equipment, electrical arcing, and fuel

vapor ignition on the ground. This

action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 14, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

383–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.

26816 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 15, 2001 / Proposed Rules

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–383–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

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: Tim

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2141;

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 notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2000–NM–383–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–383–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 A319, A320, and A321 series

airplanes. The DGAC advises that, in

response to industry concerns, a review

of the routing of wires that terminate/

enter the fuel tank was performed on

production aircraft. The review

identified an unsafe condition in a 700-

millimeter span of wiring at the back of

shelf 92VU in the forward avionics

compartment. Along that 700-millimeter

span there is no permanent segregation

between the electrical wire bundle

connected to the fuel quantity

indicating system (FQIS) and the bundle

connected to the ground power control

unit (GPCU). In the event that both

bundles had wires damaged down to the

core, and an electrical path, such as

fluid or metallic contamination,

occurred between the two wire bundles,

conditions would exist that could result

in the injection of 115 volts, alternating

current (VAC), from the GPCU wires

into the 28 volts, direct current (VDC),

FQIS wires down to the fuel tanks. Such

a high voltage injection into low voltage

wiring could result in the potential for

damage to equipment, electrical arcing,

and fuel vapor ignition on the ground.

This result could not occur in flight

because the GPCU is powered only on

the ground.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Revision 02 of

Service Bulletin A320–92–1007, dated

August 4, 2000, which describes

procedures for installing an additional

protective conduit for each wiring route

and a dual branch tubular ramp to

ensure physical separation of the wiring

routes. Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition. The DGAC

classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive 2000–407–

150(B), dated September 20, 2000, in

order to ensure 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 require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletin described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 291 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 24 to 42 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

modifications, depending on the wiring

configuration of the airplane, and that

the average labor rate is $60 per work

hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $1,300 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be between $797,340 and

$1,111,620 or between $2,740 and

$3,820 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.

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,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 15, 2001 / Proposed Rules 26817

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–383–AD.

Applicability: Model A319, A320, and

A321 series airplanes, certificated in any

category, except those on which Airbus

Industrie Modification 28289 has been

installed.

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 (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 injection of 115 volt alternating

current (VAC) into 28 volt direct current

(VDC) wire bundles, which could result in

high voltage conditions within the fuel tank

and the potential for damage to equipment,

electrical arcing, and fuel vapor ignition on

the ground, accomplish the following:

Modification

(a) Within 4 years after the effective date

of this AD, install additional protective

conduits and new supports to ensure

physical route segregation between the low

voltage wire bundles of the fuel quantity

indicating system (FQIS) and the high voltage

wire bundles of the ground power control

unit (GPCU), in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A320–92–1007, Revision 02,

dated August 4, 2000.

Note 2: Modifications accomplished prior

to the effective date of this AD in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1007,

dated January 12, 2000, or Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–92–1007, Revision 01, dated

June 29, 2000, are considered acceptable for

compliance with the applicable actions

specified in this amendment.

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 them 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 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 2000–407–

150(B), dated September 20, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–12177 Filed 5–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–47–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model 717 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 McDonnell Douglas Model 717

series airplanes. This proposal would

require repetitive inspections of the rod

ends of the spoiler hold-down actuators

for breakage along the intersection of the

thread runout and the outer spherical

surface of the lug; and replacement of

any broken rod end of the spoiler holddown actuators with a new rod end.

This proposal also would require

replacement of the rod ends of the

spoiler hold-down actuators with new

rod ends, and reidentification of the

spoiler hold-down actuators, which

would constitute terminating action for

the repetitive inspections. This action is

necessary to prevent failure of the rod

ends of the spoiler hold-down actuators

due to fatigue, which could result in

loss of the back-up protection of the

spoiler float hold-down and

unavailability of monitoring for an

uncommanded spoiler movement. This

action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 29, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

47–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. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–47–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.