Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules 1057

Reporting Requirements

(d) Submit a report of the results (both

positive and negative) of the tests required by

paragraph (a) and (b) of this AD to: Peter

Skaves, Aerospace Engineer, ANM–111,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; fax (425) 227–1320. The report

must be submitted within 60 days from the

time of the transponder test. It must include

the part number of the Mode ‘‘C’’

transponder(s) and whether corrective action

was required. Information collection

requirements contained in this regulation

have been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(e) 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, Airplanes

and Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

or Avionics Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Airplane and Flight Crew Interface Branch,

ANM–111.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Manager, Airplane and

Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111.

Special Flight Permits

(f) 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 29, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–341 Filed 1–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–371–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier

Model DHC–8–100, –200, and –300

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This document revises an

earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to certain Bombardier

Model DHC–8–100, –200, and –300

series airplanes, that continues to

require a one-time detailed visual

inspection to detect damage of the

ladder plates and access cover areas of

the upper surface of the wings, repair,

if necessary, and installation of new Oring seals. That proposal was prompted

by issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. This new

action revises the inspection

requirements of the proposed rule by

correcting a reference to a repair

manual. The actions specified by this

new proposed AD are intended to

prevent damage of the upper wing

ladder plates, which could result in

displacement of the adjacent channel

seals and consequent reduced lightning

strike protection of the fuel tanks.

DATES: Comments must be received by

January 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

371–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–371–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

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, 123 Garrett Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada.

This information may be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate,

Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

New York Aircraft Certification Office,

10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley

Stream, New York; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James E. Delisio, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, FAA, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7521; fax

(516) 568–2716.

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 99–NM–371–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–371–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to add an airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Bombardier Model DHC–8–100, –200,

and –300 series airplanes, was

1058 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules

published as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal

Register on February 10, 2000 (65 FR

6565). That NPRM would have required

a one-time detailed visual inspection to

detect damage of the ladder plates and

access cover areas of the upper surface

of the wings, repair, if necessary, and

installation of new O-ring seals. That

NPRM was prompted by issuance of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information by a foreign civil

airworthiness authority.

Comments

Due consideration has been given to

the comments received in response to

the original NPRM:

Requests to Correct a Reference to a

Bombardier Repair Manual

One commenter requests correcting a

reference to a repair manual in the

original NPRM. That commenter states

that the limits for correcting fretting

corrosion are included in the Generic

Structural Repair Schemes Manual PSM

1–8–3RS instead of in the Structural

Repair Manual, as cited in paragraphs

(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the original NPRM. A

second commenter agrees with the first

commenter’s statements.

The FAA concurs that Generic

Structural Repair Schemes Manual PSM

1–8–3RS is one of the correct references

for specifying the limits for correcting

fretting and corrosion. A second

appropriate reference is Generic

Structural Repair Schemes Manual PSM

1–82–3RS (Chapter 57 Contents and

Repair Index). We point out that

Bombardier Service Bulletin 8–57–41,

Revision ‘C’ dated August 4, 2000, cites

both of those references. In light of this,

we have added both references in

paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) of this

supplemental NPRM.

Requests To Change the Revision Level

of the Service Bulletin

Two commenters state that the

original NPRM should cite Bombardier

Service Bulletin 8–57–41, Revision ‘‘B’’,

dated December 22, 1999, instead of

Revision ‘‘A’’, dated July 28, 1999. One

of the commenters adds that Revision

‘‘B’’ includes procedures for inspecting

the long-range fuel tanks.

Although the FAA does not concur

that Revision ‘‘B’’ of the service bulletin

should be cited, we have cited a later

revision of the service bulletin, Revision

‘‘C’’, in this supplemental NPRM.

Revision ‘‘C’’ includes additional

changes and corrections to earlier

revisions of the service bulletin, adds

additional work for the operators, and

revises the inspection and installation

procedures for long-range fuel tanks. We

have changed the reference in paragraph

(a) of this supplemental NPRM to cite

Revision ‘‘C’’ of the service bulletin.

Requests To Extend the Compliance

Time

Two commenters request extending

the compliance time for the one-time

detailed visual inspection and the

corrective actions specified by the

original NPRM. Both commenters state

that the compliance time of 60 days is

too restrictive and will result in

airplanes being removed from service

for an extended downtime. They also

consider that a 60-day compliance time

would cause particular problems for

U.S. operators with large fleets of Model

DHC–8 series airplanes. One of the

commenter suggests extending the

compliance time to 12 months, and adds

that its 10-year service history shows

that no significant instances of corrosion

or fretting occurred on its airplanes with

the larger O-ring seals installed. That

same commenter adds that Canadian

airworthiness directive CF–99–20

specified a compliance time of 5 months

for a much smaller fleet. The second

commenter suggests that the action

specified by the original NPRM be

accomplished at the next maintenance

period when the fuel tanks are accessed.

The FAA partially concurs with the

commenters’ requests to extend the

compliance time. Analysis of the data

sent by both commenters, which

includes long-term service history,

shows that the use of larger O-ring seals

has not presented a serious problem in

the U.S. fleet. For these reasons, we

have extended the compliance time

from 60 days to 9 months after the

effective date of this AD, or at the next

maintenance period during which the

fuel tanks are accessed, whichever

occurs earlier.

We consider that such an extension

will avoid grounding airplanes

unnecessarily, while ensuring timely

replacement of the seals. We have

revised paragraph (a) of this proposed

AD accordingly.

Requests To Allow the Use of

Alternative Solvents

One commenter states that the

previously referenced service bulletin

specifies the use of solvents that

typically are not available [or are not

approved] for use in the United States.

The commenter suggests that the

original NPRM should allow operators

to use other appropriate solvents that do

not pose significant safety hazards for

maintenance personnel. This would

avoid requiring operators to request an

alternative method of compliance

(AMOC) for using other appropriate

solvents. A second commenter agrees

with the first commenter’s statements.

The FAA concurs with the

commenters’ suggestions to allow

operators to make repairs using

alternative solvents that are approved

per standard industry maintenance

practices without having to request an

AMOC. We have added Note 3 in this

proposed AD to notify operators of such

an alternative.

Explanation of Applicability

The Canadian airworthiness directive

specifies, for certain Model DHC–8

series airplanes, serial numbers 003

through 543. However, the service

bulletin specifies serial numbers 003

through 528 and 531, and clarifies that

the specified modification will be

incorporated before delivery on

applicable Model DHC–8 series

airplanes, having serial numbers 529,

530, and 532 through 543. For this

reason, the applicability of this

supplemental NPRM parallels the

effectivity of the service bulletin.

Conclusion

Since the scope of the originally

proposed rule has been expanded, the

FAA has determined that it is necessary

to reopen the comment period to

provide additional opportunity for

public comment.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 516 Model

DHC–8–100, –200, and –300 series

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

235 airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 6 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, 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

$84,600, or $360 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. 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.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules 1059

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:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland,

Inc.): Docket 99–NM–371–AD.

Applicability: Model DHC–8–100, –200,

and –300 series airplanes, having serial

numbers 003 through 528 inclusive and 531;

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 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 damage of the upper wing

ladder plates, which could result in

displacement of the adjacent channel seals

and consequent reduced lightning strike

protection of the fuel tanks, accomplish the

following:

Inspection and Repair

(a) Within 9 months or at the next

maintenance period during which the fuel

tanks are accessed after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs earlier: Perform a

one-time detailed visual inspection to detect

damage (i.e., fretting and/or corrosion) of the

ladder plates and access cover areas of the

upper surface of the wings per paragraph

III.A., III.B., or III.C., as applicable, of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier

Service Bulletin 8–57–41, Revision ‘C’, dated

August 4, 2000.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual 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 intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc. may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

(1) If no damage is detected, prior to

further flight, install new 0.103-inchdiameter O-ring seals per paragraph III.A.,

III.B., or III.C., as applicable, of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin.

(2) If any damage is detected that is within

the limits specified in Generic Structural

Repair Schemes Manual PSM 1–8–3RS or

PSM 1–82–3RS (Chapter 57 Contents and

Repair Index), before further flight, repair the

damage per Generic Structural Repair

Schemes Manual PSM 1–8–3RS or PSM 1–

82–3RS (Chapter 57 Contents and Repair

Index), and install new 0.103-inch-diameter

O-ring seals per paragraph III.A., III.B., or

III.C., as applicable, of the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin.

(3) If any damage is detected that is outside

the limits specified in Generic Structural

Repair Schemes Manual PSM 1–8–3RS or

PSM 1–82–3RS (Chapter 57 Contents and

Repair Index), before further flight, repair per

a method approved by the Manager, New

York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, and install new 0.103-inch-diameter Oring seals.

Note 3: Although the Bombardier service

bulletin includes references to solvents that

are not available for use in the United States,

operators may use appropriate substitute

solvents per standard industry maintenance

practices.

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, New York

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, New York ACO.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(c) 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.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Canadian airworthiness directive CF–99–

20, dated July 20, 1999.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 29, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–342 Filed 1–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416

[Regs. Nos. 4 and 16]

RIN 0960–AE97

Federal Old-Age, Survivors and

Disability Insurance and Supplemental

Security Income for the Aged, Blind,

and Disabled; Scheduling Video

Teleconference Hearings Before

Administrative Law Judges

AGENCY: Social Security Administration

(SSA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: We propose to revise our

rules to allow us to schedule video

teleconference (VTC) hearings before

administrative law judges (ALJs). We

also propose to revise our rules so that

if we schedule a VTC hearing for

someone who does not want one, we

will schedule a traditional, in-person

hearing; that is, a hearing where all

participants are at the same location. We

also will schedule an in-person hearing

if an individual objects to an expert

witness testifying by VTC. We are

proposing these revisions to provide us

with greater flexibility in scheduling

and holding hearings, to improve

hearing process efficiency and to extend