This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

4789

Vol. 70, No. 19

Monday, January 31, 2005

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–20166; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–175–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A319, A320, and A321 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Airbus Model A319, A320, and 

A321 series airplanes. This proposed 

AD would require replacing the cargo 

ventilation extraction duct at frame 65 

with a new duct, and relocating the 

temperature sensor in the aft cargo 

compartment. This proposed AD is 

prompted by a report indicating that, 

during a test of the fire extinguishing 

system, air leakage around the 

temperature sensor for the aft cargo 

compartment reduced the concentration 

of fire extinguishing agent to below the 

level required to suppress a fire. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent air leakage 

around the temperature sensor for the 

aft cargo compartment, which, in the 

event of a fire in the aft cargo 

compartment, could result in an 

insufficient concentration of fire 

extinguishing agent, and consequent 

inability of the fire extinguishing system 

to suppress the fire.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 2, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:/

/dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions 

for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• By fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus, 1 

Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 

Blagnac Cedex, France. 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of 

the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. 

This docket number is FAA–2005–

20166; the directorate identifier for this 

docket is 2004–NM–175–AD.

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 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2005–20166; Directorate Identifier 

2004–NM–175–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments submitted by the 

closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of our docket 

Web site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You can 

review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you can visit http://

dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You can examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

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 a test 

of the fire containment capability of the 

aft cargo compartment was performed 

on a Model A319 series airplane. The 

test revealed that the concentration of 

the halon fire extinguishing agent 

decreased below the level required to 

suppress a fire. Investigation revealed 

that the drop in the concentration of 

halon was due to too high a rate of air 

renewal in the compartment. Further 

investigation revealed that air leakage 

around the water drain valves in the 

forward and aft cargo doors and around 

the aft cargo compartment temperature 

sensor contributed to the reduced 

concentration of halon. The air leakage 

allowed the halon to leak out of the 

compartment, and the remaining 

concentration of halon was insufficient 

to suppress a fire. The DGAC states that 

a separate French airworthiness 

directive will address air leakage around 

the water drain valves. In the event of 

a fire in the aft cargo compartment, an 

insufficient concentration of fire 

extinguishing agent could result in the 

inability of the fire extinguishing system 

to suppress the fire. 

The aft cargo compartment 

temperature sensor installation on the 

Airbus A320 and A321 series airplanes 

4790 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

is similar to that of the Airbus A319 

series airplanes; therefore, those 

airplanes may also be subject to this 

unsafe condition. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A320–21–1141, dated April 7, 2004. The 

service bulletin describes procedures for 

relocating the temperature sensor in the 

aft cargo compartment. The procedures 

include replacing the duct at frame 65 

with a new duct that can accommodate 

the temperature sensor and installing a 

placard, rerouting the sensor line, and 

installing the temperature sensor and 

associated hardware in the new duct. 

Accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information is intended to 

adequately address the unsafe 

condition. The DGAC mandated the 

service information and issued French 

airworthiness directive F–2004–123, 

dated July 21, 2004, to ensure the 

continued airworthiness of these 

airplanes in France. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

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. According to this bilateral 

airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has 

kept the FAA informed of the situation 

described above. We have examined the 

DGAC’s findings, evaluated all pertinent 

information, and determined that we 

need to issue an AD for products of this 

type design that are certificated for 

operation in the United States. 

Therefore, we are proposing this AD, 

which would require accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information described previously, 

except as discussed under ‘‘Difference 

Between the Proposed AD and French 

Airworthiness Directive.’’

Difference Between the Proposed AD 

and French Airworthiness Directive 

The applicability of French 

airworthiness directive F–2004–123 

excludes airplanes that accomplished 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–21–1141 

in service. However, we have not 

excluded those airplanes in the 

applicability of this proposed AD; 

rather, this proposed AD includes a 

requirement to accomplish the actions 

specified in that service bulletin. This 

requirement would ensure that the 

actions specified in the service bulletin 

and required by this proposed AD are 

accomplished on all affected airplanes. 

Operators must continue to operate the 

airplane in the configuration required 

by this proposed AD unless an 

alternative method of compliance is 

approved. 

Costs of Compliance 

The following table provides the 

estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD.

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work

hours 

Average

labor rate

per hour 

Parts Cost per

airplane 

Number 

of

U.S.-registered

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Replacement of duct/relocation of 

temperature sensor in aft cargo 

compartment.

34 $65 Between $7,000 and 

$11,640.

Between $9,210 and 

$13,850.

643 Between 

$5,922,030 

and 

$8,905,550. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the 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. 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2005–20166; 

Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–175–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

must receive comments on this AD action by 

March 2, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 4791

1Standardization of Generator Interconnection 

Agreements and Procedures, Order No. 2003, 68 FR 

49845 (Aug. 19, 2003), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,146 (2003) (Order No. 

2003), order on reh’g, 69 FR 15932 (Mar. 24, 2004), 

FERC Stats & Regs., Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,160 

(2004) (Order No. 2003–A), order on reh’g, 70 FR 

265 (January 4, 2005), FERC Stats & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,171 (2004) (Order No. 

2003–B), reh’g pending; see also Notice Clarifying 

Compliance Procedures, 106 FERC ¶ 61,009 (2004).

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A319, 

A320, and A321 series airplanes, certificated 

in any category; as identified in Table 1 of 

this AD.

TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY

Airbus ModelHaving the 

following 

Airbus 

modification 

installed in 

productionOr the following 

Airbus service 

bulletin incorporated in 

serviceBut not having the following Airbus modification installed in 

productionA319 series airplanes ....................................................................................................................... 24486 A320–21–1140 32616 

A320 series airplanes ....................................................................................................................... 20084 A320–21–1048 32616 

A321 series airplanes ....................................................................................................................... 22596 Not applicable ... 32616 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by a report that, 

during a test of the fire extinguishing system, 

air leakage around the temperature sensor for 

the aft cargo compartment reduced the 

concentration of fire extinguishing agent to 

below the level required to suppress a fire. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent air leakage 

around the temperature sensor for the aft 

cargo compartment, which, in the event of a 

fire in the aft cargo compartment, could 

result in an insufficient concentration of fire 

extinguishing agent, and consequent inability 

of the fire extinguishing system to suppress 

the fire. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Relocation of Aft Cargo Compartment 

Temperature Sensor 

(f) Within 24 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Replace the ventilation 

extraction duct with a new duct and relocate 

the aft cargo compartment temperature 

sensor by accomplishing all of the actions 

specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–

21–1141, dated April 7, 2004. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested in accordance with 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(h) French airworthiness directive F–2004–

123, dated July 21, 2004, also addresses the 

subject of this AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

18, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 05–1725 Filed 1–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 35 

[Docket No. RM05–4–000] 

Interconnection for Wind Energy and 

Other Alternative Technologies 

January 24, 2005.

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 

proposing to amend its regulations to 

require public utilities to append to the 

standard large generator interconnection 

agreement in their open access 

transmission tariffs (OATTs) specific 

technical requirements for the 

interconnection of large wind 

generation.

DATES: Comments are due March 2, 

2005. Reply comments will be due 30 

days thereafter.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be filed 

electronically via the eFiling link on the 

Commission’s Web site at http://

www.ferc.gov. Commenters unable to 

file comments electronically must send 

an original and 14 copies of their 

comments to Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426. Refer to the Comment 

Procedures section of the preamble for 

additional information on how to file 

comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bruce A. Poole (Technical Information), 

Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. (202) 502–

8468. 

G. Patrick Rooney (Technical 

Information), Office of Markets, 

Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

(202) 502–6205. 

P. Kumar Agarwal (Technical 

Information), Office of Markets, 

Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

(202) 502–8923. 

Jeffery S. Dennis (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426. (202) 502–6027.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction 

1. In Order No. 2003,1 the 

Commission adopted standard 

procedures for the interconnection of 

large generation facilities and a standard 

large generator interconnection 

agreement. The Commission required 

public utilities that own, control, or 

operate facilities for transmitting 

electric energy in interstate commerce to 

file revised Open Access Transmission 

Tariffs (OATTs) containing these 

standard provisions, and use them to 

provide interconnection service to 

generating facilities having a capacity of 

more than 20 megawatts. In Order No. 

2003–A, on rehearing, the Commission 

determined that the standard 

procedures and agreement were 

designed around the needs of traditional 

synchronous generation facilities, and 

that generators relying on nonVerDate jul<14>2003 16:55 Jan 28, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM 31JAP1