Notices. Notice of proposed rulemaking

22,040 words·~100 min read·/register/2008/01/14/08-92

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 73 9 Monday, January 14, 2008 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary 6 CFR Part 19 44 CFR Part 206 [Docket No. DHS-2006-0065] RIN 1601-AA40 Nondiscrimination in Matters Pertaining to Faith-Based Organizations AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This proposed rule would implement Executive Branch policy that, within the framework of constitutional church-state guidelines, faith-based organizations should be able to compete on an equal footing with other organizations for Federal funding and participate, on an equal footing with other organizations, in Federally-funded activities.

DATE: Written comments must be received on or before February 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by agency name and docket number DHS-2006-0065, by *one* of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Facsimile:* Federal eRulemaking portal at 866-466-5370. Include the docket number on the cover sheet. • *Mail:* Greg DiNapoli, Deputy Director, Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C St., SW., Washington, DC. 20472.

To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. DHS-2006-0065 on your correspondence. This mailing address may also be used for paper, disk, or CD—ROM submissions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg DiNapoli, Deputy Director, Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives,

(202)646-4317. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Public Participation Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the proposed rule. The Department of Homeland Security

(DHS)also invites comments that relate to the potential economic, environmental, or federalism effects of this proposed rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to DHS in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change. All comments received will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided. See ADDRESSES above for information on how to submit comments. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Submitted comments may also be inspected by appointment at the Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives, 500 C St., NW., Washington, DC 20472. Please contact

(202)646-4317 for an appointment. II. Background President Bush, through Executive Order 13279 (“Equal Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community Organizations”), has directed federal agencies to ensure that Federal policies and programs are fully open to faith-based and community organizations in a manner that is consistent with the United States Constitution. *See* 67 FR 77141 (Dec. 16, 2002) 1 . The President also directed DHS to create a Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives to, *inter alia,* lead the Departmental effort to remove barriers to the participation of faith-based and community organizations in the Department's programs and initiatives through reform of regulations, procurement, and other internal policies and practices. Executive Order 13397 “Responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security with Respect to Faith-Based and Community Initiatives,” 71 FR 12273 (Mar. 9, 2006). 1 On May 16, 2006, Executive Order 13279 was amended by Executive Order 13403 to include DHS. 71 FR 28543. DHS believes that faith-based organizations have a significant role to play in various programs administered by DHS and in homeland security generally. For example, faith-based organizations have long been on the front lines in matters of disaster preparedness and relief, providing food, supplies and shelter to others in need. The primary reason for past exclusion of faith-based organizations from receipt of Federal funds generally has been a concern with the separation of “church and state.” The First Amendment provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof * * *” *U.S. Const.,* Amdt. I (1791). The Administration believes, however, that the First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion is neither offended nor implicated when a faith-based organization receives Federal funds or participates in a Federally-funded program in order to perform a vital mission that is not inherently religious in nature. Further, DHS believes that the First Amendment does not preclude the provision of assistance to a faith-based organization where such assistance is available on equal terms to similarly situated non-faith-based organizations. To that end, in the case of private, nonprofit faith-based organizations seeking public assistance to repair, restore or replace otherwise eligible facilities damaged in a disaster, DHS has determined that such organizations should be eligible for public assistance on the same terms as similarly situated non-faith-based, private nonprofit organizations, which is consistent with current DHS practice and policy. III. Proposed Rule A. Purpose of the Proposed Rule. Consistent with the President's initiative, this proposed rule would amend DHS' regulations to make clear that faith-based organizations are eligible to participate in any social or community service programs established, administered or funded by DHS (including any component of DHS) (collectively, “DHS service programs”), and are eligible to seek and receive Federal financial assistance from DHS service programs where such assistance is available to other organizations. The objective of this proposed rule is to ensure that DHS service programs are open to all qualified organizations, regardless of their religious character. This rule also aims to set forth the conditions for seeking or receiving DHS support related to DHS service programs and the permissible uses to which such support may be put. In addition, this proposed rule is designed to ensure that DHS service programs are implemented in a manner consistent with the requirements of the Constitution. Separately, the proposed rule recognizes the eligibility of faith-based organizations for repair, restoration or replacement of certain nonprofit facilities under Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5172). B. Proposed Amendments to DHS Regulations DHS proposes to amend its regulations by adding a new Part 19—Nondiscrimination in Matters Pertaining to Faith-Based Organizations—and to further amend its regulations at 44 CFR 206.226, to address the areas identified below. 1. Participation by Faith-Based Organizations in DHS Service Programs The proposed rule clarifies in section 19.3 that eligible organizations may not be excluded from the competition for DHS financial support for, or participation in, social service programs simply because such organizations are faith-based. Specifically, faith-based organizations are eligible to compete for DHS financial support, and to participate in DHS service programs, on the same basis, and under the same eligibility requirements, as all other non-governmental organizations. DHS, DHS social service intermediary providers, and State and local governments administering DHS support are prohibited from discriminating for or against organizations on the basis of the organizations' religious character or affiliation. 2. Inherently Religious Activities DHS recognizes that Federal funds disbursed through DHS service programs cannot be used to advance any religious agenda. To that end, the proposed rule describes in section 19.4 the requirements related to inherently religious activities in DHS service programs administered or supported by the department. By way of example, a faith-based organization could receive funding to obtain food or clothing to distribute as part of a disaster relief program. It could not, however, proselytize while distributing those items, or otherwise utilize DHS support for activities such as worship or religious instruction. While the organization is, of course, free to engage in such activities, the activities must be offered separately, in time or location, from the social service programs receiving direct DHS support. Moreover, participation in inherently religious activities must be voluntary for the beneficiaries of such programs. Organizations may inform program beneficiaries of their religious activities, but, should they do so, they must also advise them that receipt of any benefits is not contingent on participation in religious activity. 3. Nondiscrimination Requirements The proposed rule clarifies that an organization that receives direct DHS financial assistance pursuant to any DHS Service program shall not favor or discriminate against a program beneficiary or prospective program beneficiary on the basis of religion, professed belief or religious practice. 4. Independence of Faith-Based Organizations Proposed section 19.6 would clarify that a faith-based organization that participates in a DHS program or activity will retain its independence from Federal, State and local governments, and may continue to carry out its mission, including the definition, practice, and expression of its religious beliefs. Among other things, faith-based organizations may use space in their facilities to provide services under a DHS program, without removing religious items or symbols. In addition, a faith-based organization participating in a program funded by DHS retains its authority over its internal governance, and it may retain religious terms in its organization's name, select its board members, and otherwise govern itself on a religious basis and include religious references in its organization's mission statements and other governing documents. 5. Exemption From Title VII Employment Discrimination Requirements Section 19.7 of the proposed rule clarifies that a faith-based organization's exemption from the Federal prohibition on employment discrimination on the basis of religion, set forth in section 702(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-1), is not forfeited when the organization participates in a DHS program. Participation in some DHS programs, however, is subject to independent statutory or regulatory provisions that impose certain nondiscrimination requirements on all grantees. This proposed rule is not intended to alter or waive these requirements for faith-based or community organizations; accordingly, grantees should consult with the appropriate DHS program office to determine the scope of any applicable requirements. 6. Commingling of Federal and State and Local Funds The proposed rule clarifies that if a State or local government voluntarily contributes its own funds to supplement federally funded activities, the State or local government has the option to segregate the Federal funds or commingle them. However, if the funds are commingled, the requirements of proposed section 19.8 will apply to all of the commingled funds. If a State or local government is required to contribute matching funds to supplement a federally funded activity, the matching funds are considered commingled with the Federal assistance and therefore subject to the requirements of proposed section 19.8. As with Title VII issues, grantees should consult with the appropriate DHS program office to determine the scope of any applicable requirements. 7. Grants for Repair, Restoration or Replacement of Damaged Facilities The proposed rule would ensure that private nonprofit organizations that qualify for public assistance under disaster relief grant programs, but which are inherently religious in nature, are not subjected to discrimination because of their religious or faith-based status. DHS believes that private, nonprofit organizations of a religious nature which provide education, medical or custodial care, or other eligible services, should be eligible to receive public assistance for the repair, restoration or replacement of damaged facilities or for hazard mitigation on the same terms as similarly situated non-religious private, nonprofit organizations. C. Amendments to Emergency Management Regulations The proposed rule would also make specific changes to the regulations under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended. The amendments would specifically provide that if an organization is otherwise eligible to receive funding under this section, the organization's status as faith-based will not be considered in determining whether to authorize a grant or the amount of any such grant. IV. Regulatory Procedures A. Executive Order 12866 This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Secretary of Homeland Security, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), has reviewed this regulation and, by approving it, certifies that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as that term is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6). The proposed rule would not impose any new costs, or modify existing costs, applicable to recipients of DHS support. Rather, the purpose of the proposed rule is to clarify that DHS' social service programs are open to all qualified organizations, regardless of their religious character, and to establish clearly the permissible uses to which DHS support may be put. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and on the private sector. This proposed rule does not impose any Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector, within the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. D. Federalism Pursuant to Executive Order 13132, DHS has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have federalism implications. For the reasons set forth above, DHS proposes to amend 6 CFR by adding a new part 19 and 44 CFR part 206 as follows: PART 19—NONDISCRIMINATION IN MATTERS PERTAINING TO FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS 1. Part 19 to title 6 of the Code of Federal Regulations is added to read as follows: PART 19—NONDISCRIMINATION IN MATTERS PERTAINING TO FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS Sec. 19.1 Equal participation of faith-based organizations in Department of Homeland Security programs and activities. 19.2 Definitions. 19.3 Equal participation faith-based organizations in DHS programs and activities. 19.4 Inherently religious activities. 19.5 Nondiscrimination requirements. 19.6 Independence of faith-based organizations. 19.7 Exemption from Title VII employment discrimination requirements. 19.8 Commingling of Federal and State or local funds. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 111, 112; E.O. 13279, 67 FR 77141 and E.O. 13403, 71 FR 28543. § 19.1 Equal participation of faith-based organizations in Department of Homeland Security programs and activities. It is the policy of Department of Homeland Security

(DHS)to ensure the equal participation of faith-based organizations in social service programs administered or supported by DHS or its component agencies. The equal participation policies and requirements contained in this section are generally applicable to faith-based organizations participating or seeking to participate in any such programs. More specific policies and requirements regarding the participation of faith-based organizations in individual programs may be provided in the regulations governing those programs. § 19.2 Definitions.

(a)*Financial assistance* means assistance that non-Federal entities receive or administer in the form of grants, contracts, loans, loan guarantees, property, cooperative agreements, food, direct appropriations, or other assistance, including materiel for emergency response and incident management.

(b)*Social service program* means a program in the United States designed to provide relief or services to persons in need of such relief or services, or a program designed to assist communities in all-hazards preparedness, response and recovery activities. Social service programs include, but are not limited to: Disaster relief programs; preparedness programs; the preparation and delivery of meals and services related to soup kitchens or food banks; emergency medical services; health support services; or services related to the integration, processing or resettlement of immigrants and refugees coming into the United States. However, it shall not include any program providing funds for the repair, restoration or replacement of, or hazard mitigation for, damaged private, nonprofit facilities, as provided for in sections 404 and 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5172).

(c)*Inherently religious activities* mean sectarian activities such as worship, proselytization and religious instruction. An activity is not inherently religious merely because it is motivated by religious faith. § 19.3 Equal participation faith-based organizations in DHS programs and activities.

(a)Faith-based organizations are eligible, on the same basis as any other organization, to seek and receive financial assistance from the Department of Homeland Security for social service programs or to participate in social service programs administered or financed by DHS.

(b)Neither DHS, nor a State or local government, nor any other entity that administers any program or activity funded by DHS, shall discriminate for or against an organization on the basis of the organization's religious character or affiliation.

(c)Nothing in this part shall be construed to preclude DHS, or any of its components from accommodating religious organizations and persons to the fullest extent consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States. § 19.4 Inherently religious activities.

(a)Organizations that receive direct financial assistance from DHS to participate in or administer any social service program or activity may not engage in inherently religious activities as part of the programs or services funded or administered by DHS.

(b)Organizations receiving financial assistance from DHS pursuant to DHS social service programs are free to engage in inherently religious activities, but such activities must be

(1)Offered separately, in time or location, from the programs, activities, or services supported by direct DHS funds pursuant to DHS social service programs; and

(2)Voluntary for the beneficiaries of the programs, activities or services provided.

(c)It is not a violation of this section for a faith-based organization to inform persons of the organization's religious activities, provided that the organization makes it clear that receipt of any benefits or services supported by direct financial assistance from DHS pursuant to DHS social service programs, or provided in conjunction with any benefits or services supported by direct financial assistance from DHS pursuant to DHS social service programs, is in no way contingent on participation or attendance at such activities.

(d)The restrictions on inherently religious activities set forth in this section do not apply to programs where DHS funds are provided to chaplains to work with inmates in detention facilities or where DHS funds are provided to religious or other organizations for programs in detention facilities, in which such organizations assist chaplains in carrying out their duties. § 19.5 Nondiscrimination requirements. An organization that receives direct financial assistance from DHS pursuant to a social service program for any program or activity shall not favor or discriminate against a beneficiary or prospective beneficiary of said program or activity on the basis of religion, belief or religious practice. § 19.6 Independence of faith-based organizations.

(a)A faith-based organization that participates in a social services program administered by DHS or receives direct financial assistance from DHS for its own program or activity will retain its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, and may continue to carry out its mission, including the definition, practice, and expression of its beliefs.

(b)Faith-based organizations may use space in their facilities to provide social services utilizing financial assistance from DHS without removing or concealing religious articles, texts, art or symbols.

(c)A faith-based organization utilizing financial assistance from DHS for social services programs retains its authority over internal governance, and may also retain religious terms in its organization's name, select its board members on a religious basis, and include religious references in its organization's mission statements and other governing documents. § 19.7 Exemption from Title VII employment discrimination requirements.

(a)A faith-based organization's exemption from the Federal prohibition on employment discrimination on the basis of religion, set forth in section 702(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-1), is not forfeited when the organization seeks or receives funding from DHS for a social services program or otherwise participates in a DHS program.

(b)Where a DHS program contains independent statutory or regulatory provisions that impose nondiscrimination requirements on all grantees, the provisions are not waived or mitigated by this regulation. Accordingly, grantees should consult with the appropriate DHS program office to determine the scope of any applicable requirements. § 19.8 Commingling of Federal and State or local funds.

(a)If a State or local government voluntarily contributes its own funds to supplement federally funded activities, the State or local government has the option to segregate the Federal funds or commingle them.

(b)If the funds are commingled, the requirements of this section apply to all of the commingled funds.

(c)If a State or local government is required to contribute matching funds to supplement a federally funded activity, the matching funds are considered commingled with the Federal assistance and therefore subject to the requirements of this section. 44 CFR CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Subchapter A—General PART 206—[AMENDED] 2. The authority citation for 44 CFR part 206 is revised to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979, Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR 1979 Comp., p. 412; E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214; sections 206.226 and 206.434 are also issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 111, 112; E.O. 13279, 67 FR 77141 and E.O. 13403, 71 FR 28543. Subpart H—[Amended] 3. A new paragraph

(l)to § 206.226 is added to read as follows: § 206.226 Restoration of damaged facilities.

(l)*Facilities owned, operated or controlled by faith-based organizations* —If an organization is otherwise eligible to receive funding under this section, the organization's status as faith-based shall not be considered in determining whether to authorize a grant or the amount of any such grant. Subpart N—[Amended] 4. Section 206.434(a)(2) is revised to read as follows: § 206.434 Eligibility.

(a)* * *

(2)Private nonprofit organizations or institutions that own or operate a private nonprofit facility as defined in § 206.221. If an organization is otherwise eligible to receive funding under this section, the organization's status as faith-based shall not be considered in determining whether to authorize a grant or the amount of any such grant. Dated: December 31, 2007. Michael Chertoff, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-463 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0012; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-204-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER 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 Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. This proposed AD would require an inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable. This proposed AD would also require related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report that several passenger masks with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment. We are proposing this AD to prevent the in-line flow indicators of the passenger oxygen masks from fracturing and separating, which could inhibit oxygen flow to the masks and consequently result in exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Letcher, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)917-6474; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0012; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-204-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion We have received a report indicating that several passenger masks with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment on a Boeing Model 777-200 series airplane. Operators subsequently found several more broken in-line flow indicators after examining the oxygen mask assemblies on other Model 777 series airplanes and on Model 747-400 series airplanes. Investigation revealed that certain flow indicators are weaker and can fracture because of internal residual stresses caused by the flow indicator joint design and manufacturing processes. Fractures cause the in-line flow indicator to separate and consequently prevent oxygen flow to the mask during an emergency. This condition, if not corrected, could result in exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event. The oxygen masks on certain Model 777 airplanes and Model 747-400 series airplanes have the same flow indicators as those installed on certain Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. Therefore, the Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes may be subject to the identified unsafe condition. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-35-0054, dated July 6, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for a general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable. The service bulletin also describes procedures for doing related investigative and corrective actions. The related investigative action is a general visual inspection of the flow indicator to determine the color of the flow direction mark and the word “flow” on the flow indicator, if the identification

(ID)label shows that the manufacturer is B/E Aerospace and the manufacture date is between January 1, 2002, and March 1, 2006. The corrective action is the installation of a new oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator, if the existing oxygen mask is found to be one of the discrepant masks. Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-35-0054 refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and Revision 1, dated May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service information for getting a new oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 describes procedures for modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator, part number (P/N) 118023-02, with an improved flow indicator, P/N 118023-12. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 also specifies that, as an alternative to modifying the oxygen mask, operators may replace the oxygen mask with a new oxygen mask having the improved flow indicator. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Clarification Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin Although Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-35-0054 specifies to install a new oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator, the intent of the service bulletin is to replace it with either a new or modified oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator. Therefore, this proposed AD would require replacing the oxygen mask assembly with a new or modified oxygen mask assembly having an improved flow indicator. Costs of Compliance There are about 688 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 242 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 53 work hours per airplane, with an average of 360 oxygen masks per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,026,080, or $4,240 per airplane. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0012; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-204-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 28, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-35-0054, dated July 6, 2006. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report that several passenger masks with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment. We are issuing this AD to prevent the in-line flow indicators of the passenger oxygen masks from fracturing and separating, which could inhibit oxygen flow to the masks and consequently result in exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event. 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. Inspection and Related Investigative/Corrective Actions if Necessary

(f)Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do a general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable, and do the applicable related investigative and corrective actions, by accomplishing all of the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-35-0054, dated July 6, 2006; except where the service bulletin specifies installing a new oxygen mask, replace the oxygen mask with a new or modified oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator. The related investigative and corrective actions must be done before further flight. Note 1: The service bulletin refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and Revision 1, dated May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service information for modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator with an improved flow indicator. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(2)To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-378 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0017; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-268-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB-Fairchild SF340A (SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in flight * * * and on [the] ground, the FAA has published Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (SFAR-88) in June 2001 [which] required [conducting] a design review against explosion risks. The potential of ignition sources (in certain fuel pumps, fuel switches, refuel shutoff valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches), in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Fax:

(202)493-2251. • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-1112; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0017; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-268-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued Airworthiness Directive 2007-0248, dated September 7, 2007 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in flight * * * and on [the] ground, the FAA has published Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (SFAR-88) in June 2001 [which] required [conducting] a design review against explosion risks. In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296, dated March 4, 2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3, 2003 the JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the application of a similar regulation to the National Aviation Authorities (NAA). Under this regulation, all holders of type certificates for passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3402 kg) or more, which have received their certification since January 1, 1958, are required to conduct a design review against explosion risks. As a consequence of the design review mentioned above, this Airworthiness Directive

(AD)requires a modification to install extra protection of wiring installed in fuel tank conduits. The modification includes an inspection for any damage of the wiring to the fuel pumps, fuel level switches, the refuel shut off valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches, and if any damage is found, contacting SAAB for repair and repair. These fuel pumps, fuel switches, refuel shutoff valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches are potential ignition sources. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a regulation titled “Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements” (66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (“SFAR 88,” Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83). Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e., type certificate

(TC)and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews. In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address the failure types under evaluation: single failures, single failures in combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for further action. The Joint Aviation Authorities

(JAA)has issued a regulation that is similar to SFAR 88. (The JAA is an associated body of the European Civil Aviation Conference

(ECAC)representing the civil aviation regulatory authorities of a number of European States who have agreed to co-operate in developing and implementing common safety regulatory standards and procedures.) Under this regulation, the JAA stated that all members of the ECAC that hold type certificates for transport category airplanes are required to conduct a design review against explosion risks. We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. Relevant Service Information SAAB has issued Service Bulletin 340-28-026, dated July 5, 2007. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 218 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 80 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $1,395,200, or $6,400 per product. 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 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 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. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 AD: **Saab Aircraft AB:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0017; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-268-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)We must receive comments by February 13, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Saab Model SAAB-Fairchild SF340A (SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category. Subject

(d)Air Transport Association

(ATA)of America Code 28: Fuel. Reason

(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)states: Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in flight *** and on [the] ground, the FAA has published Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (SFAR-88) in June 2001 [which] required [conducting] a design review against explosion risks. In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296, dated March 4, 2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3, 2003 the JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the application of a similar regulation to the National Aviation Authorities (NAA). Under this regulation, all holders of type certificates for passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3402 kg) or more, which have received their certification since January 1, 1958, are required to conduct a design review against explosion risks. As a consequence of the design review mentioned above, this Airworthiness Directive

(AD)requires a modification to install extra protection of wiring installed in fuel tank conduits. The potential of ignition sources (in certain fuel pumps, fuel switches, refuel shutoff valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches), in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. The modification includes an inspection for any damage of the wiring to the fuel pumps, fuel level switches, the refuel shut off valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches, and if any damage is found, contacting SAAB for repair. Actions and Compliance

(f)Within 72 months after the effective date of this AD, unless already done, perform Modification No. 3164 (right-hand wing) and Modification No. 3165 (left-hand wing) in accordance with SAAB Service Bulletin 340-28-026, dated July 5, 2007. The modifications include the following actions.

(1)Removal of the fuel pumps 5QM and 6QM, the fuel switches 31EB, 32EB, 9QA, 10QA, 11QA, and 12QA, and the refuel shutoff valves 15QA and 16QA, and the optical sensors/mechanical switches 13QA and 14QA.

(2)Inspection of the wiring to the fuel pumps, fuel level switches, the refuel shutoff valves, and optical sensors/mechanical switches, and if any damage is found, contact SAAB for repair instructions and repair before further flight.

(3)Twisting of the fuel pump wiring, fuel level switches wiring, refuel shutoff valves wiring, and optical sensors/mechanical switches wiring.

(4)Installation of a shrinkable tube to the fuel pumps wiring, fuel level switches wiring, refuel shutoff valves wiring and optical sensors/mechanical switches wiring.

(5)Installation of fuel pumps, the fuel level switches, the refuel shutoff valves, and the optical sensors/mechanical switches.

(6)Operational and functional test of the fuel measuring/indicating system. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows:

(1)The MCAI does not specify corrective action for the inspection specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD. This AD requires contacting SAAB for repair instructions and repairing before further flight.

(2)The MCAI does not include actions for optical sensors/mechanical switches 13QA and 14QA; however, paragraph

(f)of this AD includes modification of those optical sensors/mechanical switches. Other FAA AD Provisions

(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-1112; fax

(425)227-1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information

(h)Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2007-0248, dated September 7, 2007, and SAAB Service Bulletin 340-28-026, dated July 5, 2007, for related information. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 3, 2008. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-375 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0011; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-203-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 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 Boeing Model 757 airplanes. This proposed AD would require an inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the lavatory and attendant box assemblies, and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report that several passenger masks with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment. We are proposing this AD to prevent the in-line flow indicators of the passenger oxygen masks from fracturing and separating, which could inhibit oxygen flow to the masks and consequently result in exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Letcher, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)917-6474; fax

(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0011; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-203-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion We have received a report indicating that several passenger masks with broken in-line flow indicators were found following a mask deployment on a Boeing Model 777-200 series airplane. Operators subsequently found several more broken in-line flow indicators after examining the oxygen mask assemblies on other Model 777 series airplanes and on Model 747-400 series airplanes. Investigation revealed that certain flow indicators are weaker and can fracture because of internal residual stresses caused by the flow indicator joint design and manufacturing processes. Fractures cause the in-line flow indicator to separate and consequently prevent oxygen flow to the mask during an emergency. This condition, if not corrected, could result in exposure of the passengers and cabin attendants to hypoxia following a depressurization event. The oxygen masks on certain Model 777 airplanes and Model 747-400 series airplanes have the same flow indicators as those installed on certain Model 757 airplanes. Therefore, the Model 757 airplanes may be subject to the identified unsafe condition. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028, dated April 9, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing a general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units

(PSUs)and the lavatory and attendant box assemblies. The service bulletin also describes procedures for doing the corrective action if necessary and other specified action. The corrective action is to repair any B/E Aerospace oxygen mask assembly with a manufacturing date after January 1, 2002, and before March 1, 2006. The service bulletin also specifies that as an alternative to doing the repair (rework), the oxygen mask assembly may be replaced with a new oxygen mask. Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028 refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and Revision 1, dated May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service information for repairing the oxygen mask assembly. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 describes procedures for modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator, part number (P/N) 118023-02, with an improved flow indicator, P/N 118023-12. B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 also specifies that, as an alternative to modifying the oxygen mask, operators may replace the oxygen mask with a new oxygen mask having the improved flow indicator. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Clarification Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin Although Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028 specifies to repair the oxygen mask assembly, the intent of the service bulletin is to replace it with either a new or modified oxygen mask assembly having an improved flow indicator. Therefore, this proposed AD would require replacing the oxygen mask assembly with a new or modified oxygen mask assembly having an improved flow indicator. Costs of Compliance There are about 1,035 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 640 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 20 work hours per airplane, for an average of 240 oxygen masks per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,024,000, or $1,600 per airplane. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0011; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-203-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 28, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 757-200, -200CB, -200PF, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028, dated April 9, 2007. Unsafe Condition

(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. Inspection and Corrective/Other Specified Actions if Necessary

(f)Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do a general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the lavatory and attendant box assemblies, and do the applicable corrective action, by accomplishing all of the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-35-0028, dated April 9, 2007; except where the service bulletin specifies repairing the oxygen mask assembly, replace it with a new or modified oxygen mask assembly having an improved flow indicator. The corrective action and other specified action must be done before further flight. Note 1: The service bulletin refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01, dated February 6, 2006; and Revision 1, dated May 1, 2006; as additional sources of service information for modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator with an improved flow indicator. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-376 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0018; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-145-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes and A300-600 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede two existing airworthiness directives (ADs). One existing AD applies to certain Airbus Model A310 series airplanes and requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the flap transmission shafts, and replacing the transmission shafts if necessary. That existing AD also provides an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. The other existing AD applies to all Airbus Model A310 and A300-600 series airplanes and requires a one-time inspection of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer actuator (THSA), corrective actions if necessary, and follow-on repetitive tasks. This proposed AD would require revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations and maintenance tasks for aging systems maintenance. This proposed AD results from the manufacturer's determination that life limitations and maintenance tasks are necessary in order to ensure continued operational safety of the affected airplanes. We are proposing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of these airplanes due to the failure of system components. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-1622; fax

(PCU)and the torque limiters of the flap transmission system. We issued that AD to detect and correct cracking of the flap transmission shaft, which could compromise shaft structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and reduced controllability of the airplane. On July 14, 2006, we issued AD 2006-15-10, amendment 39-14690 (71 FR 42021, July 25, 2006), for all Airbus Model A310 and A300-600 series airplanes and requires a one-time inspection of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer actuator (THSA), corrective actions if necessary, and follow-on repetitive tasks. That AD resulted from reports of THSAs that have reached their design operational life. We issued that AD to extend the operational life of the THSA to prevent a possible failure of high-time THSAs, which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. Actions Since Existing ADs Were Issued Since we issued ADs 2006-10-11 and 2006-15-10, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on all Airbus Model A310 and A300-600 series airplanes. The EASA advises that Airbus has issued aging system maintenance limitations and maintenance tasks to address airplane systems that operate beyond their original limits, which could result in increased potential for failure of these systems and consequent reduced structural integrity of these airplanes. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued A300-600 ALS—Airworthiness Limitations Section, and A310 ALS—Airworthiness Limitations Section, both dated May 31, 2006, which are a repository for stand-alone documents that are approved independently from each other. The Airbus ALSs comprises the following documents: • ALS Part 1—Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items • ALS Part 2—Damage-Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items • ALS Part 3—Certification Maintenance Requirements • ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance • ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations Airbus A310 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006, and A300-600 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006, describe aging system maintenance limitations and maintenance tasks. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The EASA mandated the service information and issued airworthiness directive 2007-0092, dated April 10, 2007, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplanes 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, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the EASA's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that AD action is necessary for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. This proposed AD would supersede ADs 2006-10-11 and 2006-15-10 and would retain the requirements of the existing ADs. This proposed AD would also require revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section

(ALS)of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations and maintenance tasks for aging systems maintenance. Doing an inspection in accordance with the ALS revision would terminate the requirements of the existing ADs. Explanation of Change to Applicability We have revised the applicability of the existing ADs to identify model designations as published in the most recent type certificate data sheet for the affected models. 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 Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Inspection (required by AD 2006-10-11) 1 $80 $80, per inspection cycle 59 $4,720, per inspection cycle. Inspection (required by AD 2006-15-10) 3 80 240 213 51,120. Repetitive follow-on tasks (required by AD 2006-15-10) 12 80 960, per inspection cycle 213 204,480, per inspection cycle. ALS Revision (new proposed action) 1 80 80 213 17,040. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-14595 (71 FR 28254, May 16, 2006) and amendment 39-14690 (71 FR 42021, July 25, 2006) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Airbus:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0018; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-145-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 13, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-10-11 and AD 2006-15-10. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to all Airbus Model A310 series airplanes and A300-600 series airplanes, certificated in any category. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph

(r)of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane. The FAA has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular

(AC)25-1529-1. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from the manufacturer's determination that life limitations and maintenance tasks are necessary in order to ensure continued operational safety of the affected airplanes. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of these airplanes due to the failure of system components. 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. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2006-10-11 Inspection and Corrective Action

(f)For Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, except for airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12247 has been embodied in production: At the earlier of the compliance times specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, perform a detailed inspection for stress corrosion cracking of the flight transmission shafts located between the power control unit

(PCU)and the torque limiters in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005. Thereafter, repeat the inspections as required by paragraph

(g)of this AD. Before further flight, replace any cracked transmission shaft discovered during any inspection required by this AD with a new or reconditioned shaft, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 2000. Doing an inspection in accordance with paragraph

(o)or

(p)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(1)Within 2,000 flight hours after the last flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with Airbus A310 Maintenance Planning Document

(MPD)Task 275600-01-1.

(2)Within 8,000 flight cycles after the last flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with Airbus A310 MPD Task 275600-02-1 or 800 flight cycles after June 20, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-10-11), whichever comes later. Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005, refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A-27-624, Revision 1, dated August 18, 2000, as an additional source of service information for accomplishing the inspections. Note 3: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 2000, as a source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. Note 4: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095 refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A-27-M551-05, dated January 12, 2000, as an additional source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. Repetitive Inspections

(g)Repeat the inspection required by paragraph

(f)of this AD at the applicable times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD. Doing an inspection in accordance with paragraph

(o)or

(p)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(1)Before further flight after any occurrence of jamming of the flap transmission system.

(2)At intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours after each flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with Airbus A310 MPD Task 275600-01-1.

(3)At intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight cycles after each flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with Airbus A310 MPD Task 275600-02-1. Optional Terminating Action

(h)Replacing any flap transmission shaft with a new or reconditioned transmission shaft in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 2000, ends the inspections required by paragraphs

(f)and

(g)of this AD for that transmission shaft only. Actions Performed Using Previously Issued Service Information

(i)Actions performed in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, dated April 9, 1999; or Revision 01, dated December 11, 2001; are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of paragraphs

(f)and

(g)of this AD. No Reporting

(j)Although Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005, specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2006-15-10 Service Bulletin References

(k)Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the term “service bulletin,” as used in paragraphs (l), (m), and

(n)of this AD, means the applicable required service bulletin identified in Table 1 of this AD. The service bulletins refer to Goodrich Actuation Systems Service Bulletin 47142-27-11, Revision 3, dated April 25, 2005, as an additional source of service information for the required actions. Table 1.—Service Bulletins Required Airbus Service Bulletin Approved Airbus Service Bulletin version for actions done before the effective date of this AD Airbus airplane model A300-27-6044, Revision 04, dated September 10, 2001 A300-27-6044, Revision 02, dated August 26, 2000; or Revision 03, dated June 28, 2001 A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622. A300 B4-605R and B4-622R. A300 F4-605R and F4-622R. A300 C4-605R Variant F. A310-27-2089, Revision 02, dated June 28, 2001 A310-27-2089, Revision 01, dated August 25, 2000 A310-203, -204, -221, and -222. A310-304, -322, -324, and -325. Inspection

(l)At the applicable time specified in paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this AD, do a detailed inspection of specified components of the THSA in accordance with paragraph 1.E.(2)(a) and the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. Repair any discrepancy before further flight in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)(or its delegated agent). TRW Aeronautical Systems/Lucas Aerospace Component Maintenance Manual 27-44-13, dated September 14, 2001, is one acceptable method for the repair. Doing an inspection in accordance with paragraph

(o)or

(p)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(1)If the flight hours accumulated on the THSA can be positively determined: Inspect at the earlier of:

(i)Before the accumulation of 47,000 total flight hours on the THSA, or within 600 flight hours after August 29, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-15-10), whichever occurs later.

(ii)Within 25 years since the THSA was new or within 600 flight hours after August 29, 2006, whichever occurs later.

(2)If the flight hours accumulated on the THSA cannot be positively determined: Inspect before the accumulation of 47,000 total flight hours on the airplane, or within 600 flight hours after August 29, 2006, whichever occurs later. Note 5: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: “An intensive examination of a specific item, 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. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.” Follow-on Repetitive Tasks

(m)After the inspection required by paragraph

(l)of this AD: Do the repetitive tasks in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions and at the times specified in paragraph 1.E.(2)(b) of the service bulletin, as applicable, except as provided by paragraph

(n)of this AD. The repetitive tasks are valid only until the THSA operational life exceeds 65,000 flight hours, 40,000 flight cycles, or 25 years, whichever occurs first. Before the THSA is operated beyond these extended life goals, it must be replaced with a new THSA, except as required by paragraph

(n)of this AD. Doing an inspection in accordance with paragraph

(o)or

(p)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph. THSA Replacement

(n)For any THSA, whether discrepant or not, that is replaced with a new THSA: Within 47,000 flight hours or 25 years, whichever occurs first, after the THSA is replaced, do the applicable tasks specified in paragraph 1.E.(2)(a) and the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. Thereafter repeat the tasks within the repetitive intervals specified in paragraph 1.E.(2)(b) of the applicable service bulletin. Doing the corresponding tasks in accordance with paragraph

(o)or

(p)of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph. New Requirements of This AD Revise Airworthiness Limitations Section

(ALS)to Incorporate Limitations and Maintenance Tasks for Aging Systems Maintenance

(o)Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the Airworthiness Limitations Section

(ALS)of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A310 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006; and A300-600 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006; as applicable. For all tasks identified in Airbus A310 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01; and A300-600 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01; the initial compliance times start from the effective date of this AD, except as provided by paragraph

(p)of this AD. The repetitive inspections must be accomplished thereafter at the interval specified in Airbus A310 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01; and A300-600 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01.

(p)For airplanes on which any life limitation/maintenance task has been complied with in accordance with the requirements of AD 2006-10-11 or AD 2006-15-10, the last accomplishment of each limitation/task must be retained as a starting point for the accomplishment of each corresponding limitation/task interval now introduced in Airbus A310 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006; and A300-600 ALS Part 4—Aging Systems Maintenance, Revision 01, dated December 21, 2006; as applicable.

(q)Except as provided by paragraph

(r)of this AD: After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs

(o)and

(p)of this AD, no alternative inspection, inspection intervals, or limitations may be used. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (r)(1) 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.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(3)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-10-11 are not approved as AMOCs with this AD.

(4)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-15-10 are not approved as AMOCs with this AD. Related Information

(s)EASA airworthiness directive 2007-0092, dated April 10, 2007, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 3, 2008. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-380 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-249-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive

(AD)that applies to certain Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive inspections for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of both main landing gear (MLG), and repair if necessary. The existing AD also provides optional terminating actions for certain airplanes, as well as other optional methods for complying with the inspection requirements of the existing AD. This proposed AD would continue to require repetitive inspections for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left and right MLG at new repetitive intervals in accordance with new service information, and repair or replacement of any cracked MLG fitting if necessary. This proposed AD would also require modification of the rib bushings of the left and right MLG, which would end the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from cracks found in the forward lug of the MLG support rib 5 fitting. We are proposing this AD to prevent cracking in the forward lug of the MLG, which could result in failure of the lug and consequent collapse of the MLG during takeoff or landing. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 13, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone

(425)227-2141; fax

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-249-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion On May 15, 2006, we issued AD 2006-11-04, amendment 39-14608 (71 FR 29578, May 23, 2006), for certain Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes. AD 2006-11-04 requires repetitive detailed inspections for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of both main landing gear (MLG), and repair if necessary. AD 2006-11-04 also provides optional terminating actions for certain airplanes, as well as other optional methods for complying with the inspection requirements of the existing AD. That AD resulted from a new crack that was found in the forward lug of the MLG support rib 5 fitting. We issued that AD to detect and correct cracking in the forward lug of the MLG, which could result in failure of the lug and consequent collapse of the MLG during takeoff or landing. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 2006-11-04, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the technical agent for the Member States of the European Union, notified us that the repetitive inspection intervals must be adjusted and that the optional terminating action, which would end the repetitive inspections, must be mandated for all airplanes. In the preamble to AD 2006-11-04, we indicated that the actions required by that AD were considered “interim action,” and that we were considering further rulemaking to require the modification of the lugs of the support rib 5 fitting of both MLG, which would terminate the repetitive inspections required by AD 2006-11-04. We have now determined that further rulemaking action is indeed necessary, and this proposed AD follows from that determination. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-57-1138, Revision 01, dated October 27, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for

(1)doing repetitive visual inspections or repetitive ultrasonic inspections for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left and right MLG,

(2)doing repetitive visual inspections for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting if any cracking is found during an ultrasonic inspection, and

(3)contacting the manufacturer for instructions if any cracking is found during a visual inspection. The service bulletin also specifies that accomplishing Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118 eliminates the need for the repetitive inspections. Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 03, dated April 23, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for modifying the rib bushings of the left and right MLG. The modification includes removing the existing bushings, doing a visual inspection for corrosion and damage to the bores and spotfaces, repairing any corrosion or damage found during the detailed inspection, and installing new improved bushings and applying a certain protective sealant to the bores and spotfaces of the lugs for the pintle-pin bushings of gear rib 5. Accomplishing the modification eliminates the need for the repetitive inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The EASA mandated the service information and issued airworthiness directive 2007-0213, dated August 7, 2007, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplanes 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. As described in FAA Order 8100.14A, “Interim Procedures for Working with the European Community on Airworthiness Certification and Continued Airworthiness,” dated August 12, 2005, the EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the EASA's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that AD action is necessary for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. This proposed AD would supersede AD 2006-11-04 and would retain the requirements of the existing AD, until the new inspections have been initiated. This proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.” Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin Although EASA airworthiness directive 2007-0213 specifies repeating the inspections at the intervals defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138, the intent is to require the repetitive inspections at those intervals, or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is first. We have coordinated this difference with the EASA. EASA airworthiness directive 2007-0213 and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138 permit further flight if cracking is found during the ultrasonic inspection but is not detected by a visual inspection. This proposed AD, however, would require repair or replacement of any cracked MLG fitting before further flight. We have determined that because of the safety implications and consequences associated with cracking in the subject area, the MLG fitting must be repaired or replaced before further flight regardless of how the crack is detected. We note that cracking found during the ultrasonic inspection may be repaired with oversized bushings, whereas cracking detected during the visual inspection would require extensive repair or replacement of the MLG fitting. Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138 specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions using a method approved by the FAA or the EASA (or its delegated agent). In light of the type of repair that would be required to address the unsafe condition, and consistent with existing bilateral airworthiness agreements, we have determined that, for this proposed AD, a repair approved by the FAA or the EASA would be acceptable for compliance with this proposed AD. Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 466 airplanes of U.S. registry. The actions that are required by AD 2006-11-04 and retained in this proposed AD take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently required actions is $160 per airplane, per inspection cycle. The new proposed inspections would take between 3 and 4 work hours per airplane, depending on the type of inspection accomplished, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the new inspections specified in this proposed AD for U.S. operators is between $111,840 and $149,120, or between $240 and $320 per airplane, per inspection cycle. The new proposed modification would take about 73 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts would cost $3,850 per airplane. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the new modification specified in this proposed AD for U.S. operators is $4,515,540, or $9,690 per airplane. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39-14608 (71 FR 29578, May 23, 2006) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Airbus:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0014; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-249-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 13, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)This AD supersedes AD 2006-11-04. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes, certificated in any category, except airplanes on which Airbus Modification 32025 has been accomplished in production. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from cracks found in the forward lug of the main landing gear

(MLG)support rib 5 fitting. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking in the forward lug of the MLG, which could result in failure of the lug and consequent collapse of the MLG during takeoff or landing. 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. Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD 2006-11-04 Repetitive Detailed Inspections

(f)Within 8 days after June 7, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-11-04), or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is first: Perform a detailed inspection for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left- and right-hand MLG, and, if any crack is found, replace the MLG fitting with a new fitting before further flight, in accordance with a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)(or its delegated agent). Accomplishing the actions specified in the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Nondestructive Testing Manual, Chapter 51-90-00, revision dated February 1, 2003, is one approved method for performing the detailed inspection. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 8 days, or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is first. As of the effective date of this AD, the repetitive inspections required by paragraph

(i)of this AD must be accomplished in lieu of the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: “An intensive examination of a specific item, 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. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.” Optional Inspection Method

(g)Performing an ultrasonic inspection for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left- and right-hand MLG in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116; or the EASA (or its delegated agent); is an acceptable alternative method of compliance for the initial and repetitive inspections required by paragraph

(f)of this AD. Doing the actions specified in the A318/A319/A320/A321 Nondestructive Testing Manual, Chapter 57-29-03, revision dated February 1, 2005 (for Model A318, A319, and A320 airplanes), or Chapter 57-29-04, revision dated May 1, 2005 (for Model A321 airplanes), as applicable, is one approved method for performing the ultrasonic inspection. Optional Terminating Action

(h)For Model A319, A320, and A321 airplanes: Repair of the forward lugs of the support rib 5 fitting of the left- and right-hand MLG in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116; or the EASA (or its delegated agent); constitutes terminating action for the requirements of this AD. Doing the repair in accordance with Airbus A319 Structural Repair Manual (SRM), Chapter 5.C., 57-26-13, revision dated November 1, 2004; Airbus A320 SRM, Chapter 5.D., 57-26-13, revision dated November 1, 2004; or Airbus A321 SRM, Chapter 5.D., 57-26-13, revision dated February 1, 2005; as applicable; is one approved method. New Requirements of This AD New Repetitive Inspections

(i)At the applicable time specified in Table 1 of this AD, or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is first: Do a visual inspection or ultrasonic inspection for cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left and right MLG, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138, Revision 01, dated October 27, 2006. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable interval specified in Table 1 of this AD or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is first, until the modification required by paragraph

(k)of this AD has been accomplished. Accomplishing the initial inspection terminates the requirements of paragraph

(f)of this AD. Table 1.—Compliance Times Airplanes Initial inspection Repetitive interval Model A318, A319, and A320 airplanes If the most recent inspection is a detailed inspection done in accordance with paragraph

(f)of this AD, inspect within 150 flight cycles after the most recent detailed inspection Within 150 flight cycles after a visual inspection. If the most recent inspection is an ultrasonic inspection done in accordance with paragraph

(g)of this AD, inspect within 940 flight cycles after the most recent ultrasonic inspection Within 940 flight cycles after an ultrasonic inspection. Model A321 airplanes If the most recent inspection is a detailed inspection done in accordance with paragraph

(f)of this AD, inspect within 100 flight cycles after the most recent detailed inspection Within 100 flight cycles after a visual inspection. If the most recent inspection is an ultrasonic inspection done in accordance with paragraph

(g)of this AD, inspect within 630 flight cycles after the most recent ultrasonic inspection Within 630 flight cycles after an ultrasonic inspection. Corrective Action

(j)If any cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph

(i)of this AD: Before further flight, repair or replace the cracked MLG fitting using a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, or the EASA (or its delegated agent). Terminating Action

(k)Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the rib bushings of the left and right MLG, by accomplishing all of the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 03, dated April 23, 2007. Accomplishing the modification terminates the requirements of this AD. Credit for Actions Done According to Previous Issue of Service Bulletin

(l)For Model A319, A320, and A321 airplanes, modifying the lugs of the support rib 5 fitting of the left and right MLG is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph

(k)of this AD if done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with one of the following service bulletins: Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, dated September 5, 2002; Revision 01, dated August 28, 2003; or Revision 02, dated August 2, 2006. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (m)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(3)AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-11-04 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD. Related Information

(n)EASA airworthiness directive 2007-0213, dated August 7, 2007, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-383 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0013; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-230-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727-200 Series Airplanes Equipped With an Auxiliary Fuel Tank System Installed in Accordance With Supplemental Type Certificate SA1350NM 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 Boeing Model 727-200 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require deactivation of auxiliary fuel tank systems installed in accordance with Supplemental Type Certificate

(STC)SA1350NM. This proposed AD results from fuel tank system reviews conducted by the manufacturer that identified potential unsafe conditions for which the manufacturer has not provided corrective actions. We are proposing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Janusz, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone

(316)946-4148; fax

(316)946-4107. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0013; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-230-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a regulation titled “Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements” (67 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (“SFAR 88,” Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83). Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e., type certificate

(TC)and supplemental type certificate

(STC)design approval) holders to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to design approval holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews. In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address the failure types under evaluation: Single failures, single failures in combination with another latent condition(s), and in-service failure experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for further action. We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. Supplemental Type Certificate

(STC)SA1350NM for DTAA, Inc., Auxiliary Fuel Tank System The auxiliary fuel tank system STC consists of two fuel tank systems, a forward tank system consisting of 5 cells and an aft tank system consisting of 3 cells. Each cell or individual tank is of a double wall cylindrical design. All auxiliary fuel tank system tanks are emptied and vented into the airplane center wing tank using bleed air pressure supplied from the No. 1 (left hand) engine. All auxiliary fuel tank system tanks use some type of electrical fuel quantity indication system (FQIS), flight deck control and annunciation panels, bleed air pressure regulators, vents, bleed air, and transfer valves, pressure switches, float level switches, and associated electrical wiring connections and electrical bonding methods. FAA's Findings During the SFAR 88 safety assessment, it was determined that the auxiliary fuel tank system FQIS requires wire separation or other means to preclude any adjacent high power wires from shorting or inducing high electrical energy levels into the auxiliary fuel tank system or airplane fuel tank system. Additionally, the auxiliary fuel tank system fuel transfer valves were not previously tested or shown to be intrinsically safe from producing electrical arcing or explosion hazards while in the presence of fuel vapors; therefore, re-certification or relocation of these valves are mandated. Finally, STC SA1350NM has been categorized by the FAA as being a high flammability exposure installation, based on the internal fuselage location of the auxiliary fuel tank system. A means to insure low flammability exposure or to mitigate the effects of high flammability exposure time is mandated. DTAA, Inc., has not provided the service information required under SFAR 88 that would correct these conditions; therefore, we must mandate the deactivation of all DTAA, Inc., auxiliary fuel tank systems installed in accordance with STC SA1350NM. If operators do not wish to deactivate their auxiliary fuel tanks, we will consider requests for alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs). Once an operator has deactivated the tank as required by this AD, the operator might wish to remove the tank. This would require a separate design approval, if an approved tank removal procedure does not exist. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require deactivation to prevent usage of the auxiliary fuel tank system installed in accordance with STC SA1350NM. Explanation of Compliance Time In most ADs, we adopt a compliance time allowing a specified amount of time after the AD's effective date. In this case, however, the FAA has already issued regulations that require operators to revise their maintenance/inspection programs to address fuel tank safety issues. The compliance date for these regulations is December 16, 2008. To provide for coordinated implementation of these regulations and this proposed AD, we are using this same compliance date in this proposed AD. Costs of Compliance The following table provides the estimated costs for the 25 U.S.-registered airplanes to comply with this proposed AD. Based on these figures, the estimated costs for U.S. operators could be as high as $162,000 to prepare and report the deactivation procedures, and $90,000 to deactivate the tank. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Parts Individual cost Report 1 $80 None $80 Preparation of tank deactivation procedure 80 80 None 6,400 Physical tank deactivation 30 80 1,200 3,600 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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **DTAA, Inc.:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0013; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-230-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 28, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 727-200 series airplanes, certificated in any category and equipped with an auxiliary fuel tank system installed in accordance with Supplemental Type Certificate SA1350NM. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from fuel tank system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. 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. Report

(f)Within 45 days after the effective date of this AD, submit a report to the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. The report must include the information listed in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements contained in this AD, and assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

(1)The airplane registration and serial number.

(2)The usage frequency in terms of total number of flights per year and total number of flights per year for which the auxiliary fuel tank system is used. Prevent Usage of Auxiliary Fuel Tank

(g)On or before December 16, 2008, deactivate the auxiliary fuel tank system, in accordance with a deactivation procedure approved by the Manager of the Wichita ACO. Any auxiliary fuel tank system component that remains on the airplane must be secured and must have no effect on the continued operational safety and airworthiness of the airplane. Deactivation may not result in the need for additional Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA). Note 1: Appendix A of this AD provides criteria that must be included in the deactivation procedure. The proposed deactivation procedures should be submitted to the Wichita ACO as soon as possible to ensure timely review and approval, prior to implementation. Note 2: For technical information, contact Steve Forness, DTAA, Inc., 101 Deer Meadow Court, St. Charles, Missouri 63304,

(636)928-9606, fax

(314)749-7513. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, Wichita ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Appendix A—Deactivation Criteria The auxiliary fuel tank system deactivation procedure required by paragraph

(g)of this AD should address the following actions.

(1)Permanently drain the auxiliary fuel tank system tanks, and clear them of fuel vapors to eliminate the possibility of out-gassing of fuel vapors from the emptied auxiliary tank.

(2)Disconnect all auxiliary fuel tank system electrical connections from the fuel quantity indication system (FQIS), float, pressure and transfer valves and switches, and all other electrical connections required for auxiliary fuel tank system operation, and stow them at the auxiliary fuel tank interface.

(3)Disconnect all auxiliary fuel tank system bleed-air connections, cap them at the bleed air source, and secure them.

(4)Disconnect all auxiliary fuel tank system fuel supply and fuel vent plumbing interfaces with airplane original equipment manufacturer

(OEM)fuel tanks, cap them at the airplane tank side, and secure them. All disconnected auxiliary fuel tank system vent systems must not alter the OEM fuel tank vent system configuration or performance. All empty auxiliary fuel tank system tanks must be vented to eliminate the possibility of structural deformation during cabin decompression. The configuration must not permit the introduction of fuel vapor into any compartments of the airplane.

(5)Pull and collar all circuit breakers used to operate the auxiliary fuel tank system.

(6)Revise the weight and balance document, if required, and obtain FAA approval.

(7)Amend the applicable sections of the applicable Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM)to indicate that the auxiliary fuel tank system is deactivated. Remove auxiliary fuel tank system operating procedures to ensure that only the OEM fuel system operational procedures are contained in the AFM. Amend the Limitations Section of the AFM to indicate that the AFM Supplement for the STC is not in effect. Place a placard in the flight deck indicating that the auxiliary fuel tank system is deactivated. The AFM revisions specified in this paragraph may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.

(8)Amend the applicable sections of the applicable airplane maintenance manual to remove auxiliary fuel tank system maintenance procedures.

(9)After the auxiliary fuel tank system is deactivated, accomplish procedures such as leak checks, pressure checks, and functional checks deemed necessary before returning the airplane to service. These procedures must include verification that the basic airplane OEM FQIS, fuel distribution, and fuel venting systems function properly and have not been adversely affected by deactivation of the auxiliary fuel tank system.

(10)Include with the proposed deactivation procedures any relevant information or additional steps that are deemed necessary by the operator to comply with the deactivation of the auxiliary fuel tank system and return of the airplane to service. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-384 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0015; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-328-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, and MD-10-10F Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, and MD-10-10F airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for the presence of stray nickel or chrome plating deposits on the air filler valve bore of certain main landing gear

(MLG)shock strut cylinders, and if necessary, related investigative and corrective actions. Doing the corrective action would terminate the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from a report of a left MLG collapse during landing rollout. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct stray nickel and chrome plating deposits, corrosion, and cracking of the air filler valve bore on the MLG cylinder, which could result in landing gear failure, significant damage to the airplane, and injury to personnel. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:* 202-493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Moreland, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone

(562)627-5238; fax

(562)627-5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0015; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-328-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion We received a report that one McDonnell Douglas Model MD-10-10 airplane experienced a left main landing gear

(MLG)collapse during landing rollout, which was caused by combined fatigue and stress corrosion cracking failure of the MLG shock strut cylinder assembly. Metallurgical analysis has determined that the origin of the fracture was located in the bore of the air filler valve port located on the aft side of the MLG cylinder. The primary crack initiation point was in an area of stray nickel plating deposits on the bore. A secondary origination of the crack was initiated from a shallow corrosion pit located at the opposite side of the bore to the primary initiation point. Stray nickel or chrome plating deposits, corrosion, or cracking in the air filler valve bore of the MLG cylinder, if not corrected, could result in landing gear failure, significant damage to the airplane, and injury to personnel. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-32A259, dated October 30, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for repetitive video probe inspections to detect the presence of stray nickel or chrome plating deposits on the air filler valve bore of certain main landing gear

(MLG)shock strut cylinders, and if necessary, related investigative and corrective actions. The related investigative actions include a video probe inspection for corrosion of the air filler valve bore in the MLG shock strut cylinder and an eddy current inspection for cracking of the air filler valve bore. The corrective actions include repair of the air filler valve bore of the MLG shock strut cylinder, removal of corrosion, and replacement of the MLG cylinder. The service bulletin specifies that doing the repair or replacement ends the repetitive inspections for that MLG shock strut cylinder only. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 75 airplanes of U.S. registry. 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 Cost per product Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Inspection 4 $80 $320, per inspection cycle 75 $24,000, per inspection cycle. 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 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 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. 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. You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of compliance in the AD Docket. 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 AD: **McDonnell Douglas:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0015; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-328-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)We must receive comments by February 28, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, and MD-10-10F airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-32A259, dated October 30, 2007. Unsafe Condition

(d)This AD results from a report of a left main landing gear

(MLG)collapse during landing rollout. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct stray nickel and chrome plating deposits, corrosion, and cracking of the air filler valve bore on the MLG cylinder, which could result in landing gear failure, significant damage to the airplane, and injury to personnel. Compliance

(e)Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. Inspections and Corrective Actions

(f)At the applicable time specified in paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of this AD, do a video probe inspection for the presence of stray nickel or chrome plating deposits on the air filler valve bore of the MLG shock strut cylinders, and before further flight, do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-32A259, dated October 30, 2007. Repeat the video probe inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,400 flight cycles or 20 months, whichever occurs first. Accomplishment of the repair specified in Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin or the replacement specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin terminates the repetitive inspections for that MLG shock strut cylinder.

(1)For passenger airplanes: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD.

(2)For freighter airplanes with MLG cylinders that have accumulated fewer than 7,200 flight cycles in a freighter configuration as of the effective date of this AD: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD.

(3)For freighter airplanes with MLG cylinders that have accumulated 7,200 flight cycles or more in a freighter configuration as of the effective date of this AD: Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD. Parts Installation

(g)As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a MLG shock strut cylinder assembly, part number ARG7002-1, -501, -503, or -505, on any airplane, unless the air filler valve bore hole has been oversized and closing action has been accomplished in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-32A259, dated October 30, 2007, and the MLG shock strut cylinder assembly has been permanently identified with part number SB10320259-3 adjacent to the existing ARG7002 part number. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Maureen Moreland, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone

(562)627-5238; fax

(562)627-5210; has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-385 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD 36 CFR Parts 1190 and 1191 RIN 3014-AA22 Emergency Transportable Housing Advisory Committee AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) has established an advisory committee to make recommendations for possible revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA)and Architectural Barriers Act

(ABA)Accessibility Guidelines to include provisions for emergency transportable housing. This notice announces the dates, time, and location of the next committee meeting. DATES: The meeting is scheduled for January 24 and 25, 2008 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on January 24 and from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on January 25. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Access Board's offices, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marsha Mazz, Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Telephone number

(202)272-0020 (Voice);

(202)272-0082 (TTY). These are not toll-free numbers. E-mail address: *mazz@access-board.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 23, 2007, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) established an advisory committee to make recommendations for possible revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA)and Architectural Barriers Act

(ABA)Accessibility Guidelines to include provisions for emergency transportable housing. (72 FR 48251; August 23, 2007). The next meeting of the committee will take place on January 24 and 25, 2008. The preliminary meeting agenda, along with information about the committee, is available at the Access Board's Web site ( *http://www.access-board.gov/eth/index.htm* ). Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons can attend the meetings and communicate their views. Members of the public will have opportunities to address the committee on issues of interest to them during public comment periods scheduled on each day of the meeting. Additionally, all interested persons will have the opportunity to comment when proposed rules regarding emergency transportable housing accessibility are issued in the **Federal Register** by the Access Board. The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Individuals who require sign language interpreters, real-time captioning, or materials in alternate formats should contact Marsha Mazz by January 17. Also, persons wishing to provide handouts or other written information to the committee are requested to provide electronic format to Marsha Mazz preferably via e-mail so that alternate formats such as large print can be distributed to committee members. Persons attending the meeting are requested to refrain from using perfume, cologne, and other fragrances for the comfort of other participants. Lawrence W. Roffee, Executive Director. [FR Doc. 08-92 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 16

Traces to 16 documents