Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64839

inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington; or at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html.

Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in French airworthiness directives F–2003–

425 and F–2003–426, both dated December 

10, 2003.

Effective Date 

(i) This amendment becomes effective on 

December 14, 2004.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

26, 2004. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24625 Filed 11–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–409–AD; Amendment 

39–13853; AD 2004–22–25] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –300F Series 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a 

new airworthiness directive (AD), 

applicable to certain Boeing Model 767–

200, –300, and –300F series airplanes, 

that requires a one-time inspection for 

discrepancies of all wire bundles, 

including certain power feeder cables, 

of the electrical system in the forward 

cargo compartment ceiling at certain 

stations; and corrective actions if 

necessary. This action is necessary to 

prevent damage to wire bundles, 

particularly those of the fuel quantity 

indication system (FQIS), which are 

located in the subject area. Damage of 

FQIS wires could cause arcing between 

those wires and power wires in the 

damaged wire bundle, and may lead to 

transmission of electrical energy into 

the fuel tank, which would result in a 

potential source of ignition in the fuel 

tank. This action is intended to address 

the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective December 14, 2004. 

The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in the 

regulations is approved by the Director 

of the Federal Register as of December 

14, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The service information 

referenced in this AD may be obtained 

from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, PO 

Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. This information may be 

examined at the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington; or at the National Archives 

and Records Administration (NARA). 

For information on the availability of 

this material at NARA, call (202) 741–

6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/

federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98055–4056; telephone 

(425) 917–6478; fax (425) 917–6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A 

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 

include an airworthiness directive (AD) 

that is applicable to certain Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –300F series 

airplanes was published as a 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 

Register on January 28, 2003 (68 FR 

4116). That action proposed to require 

a one-time detailed inspection to detect 

discrepancies of all wire bundles routed 

along the ceiling of the forward cargo 

compartment at certain stations; and 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Explanation of New Service 

Information 

Since the issuance of the 

supplemental NPRM, Boeing issued and 

we reviewed Revision 3 of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–24A0128, dated 

June 24, 2004. (The supplemental 

NPRM referred to Revision 2 of the 

service bulletin as the appropriate 

source of service information for 

accomplishing the proposed actions.) 

Revision 3 adds a new Figure 2 to 

clarify the instructions for inspecting 

the power feeder cables and installing 

sleeving, and clarifies the instructions 

for installing sleeving and lacing tape in 

Figure 1. Revision 3 also corrects a 

typographical error that resulted in the 

reference to an incorrect station; the 

supplemental NPRM specified the 

correct station. No more work is 

necessary on airplanes changed in 

accordance with Revision 2 or earlier 

releases of the service bulletin, provided 

that the required inspection and 

applicable corrective actions are done 

on all wire bundles, including power 

feeder cables W208 and W236, of the 

electrical system in the forward cargo 

compartment from stations 368 through 

742 and from right buttock lines (RBL) 

40 through 70, routed along the ceiling. 

In light of the changes to the service 

bulletin described above, we have 

revised paragraphs (a) and (a)(2) and the 

preamble of this AD accordingly, to 

clarify the inspection area and clearance 

measurements. In addition, we have 

revised the final rule to refer to Revision 

3 of the service bulletin as the 

appropriate source of service 

information for accomplishing the 

required actions and added a new 

paragraph (b) to give operators credit for 

accomplishing the required actions 

before the effective date of the AD, in 

accordance with Revision 2 or earlier 

releases of the service bulletin with the 

provision described previously. 

Comments 

Interested persons have been afforded 

an opportunity to participate in the 

making of this amendment. Due 

consideration has been given to the 

comments received. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

One commenter requests that the 

compliance time for the proposed 

inspection specified in paragraph (a) of 

the supplemental NPRM be extended 

from 18 to 24 months to coincide with 

regularly scheduled ‘‘C’’ checks. The 

commenter states that the proposed 

compliance time of 18 months will 

require approximately one-fourth of its 

fleet to be scheduled at special times for 

the accomplishment of the inspection at 

additional expense. The commenter also 

states that a detailed inspection was 

done on two of its oldest airplanes and 

no chafing was found, and that the 

proposed inspection area is already 

included in an existing maintenance 

inspection program. For these reasons, 

the commenter concludes that a 24-

month compliance time will provide an 

equivalent level of safety. 

The FAA partially agrees. We do not 

agree with the commenter’s rationale for 

extending the compliance time. The 

inspection that the commenter refers to 

in the existing maintenance program is 

not a detailed inspection of the wire 

bundles; it is a general visual inspection 

of the area that includes the wire 

bundles. In addition, although the 

commenter found no chafing damage on 

its oldest airplanes, age is not the only 

contributing factor to wire degradation 

and consequent damaged wire bundles. 

The wiring on any airplane, regardless 

64840 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

of age, is also susceptible to contributing 

factors such as improper installation or 

maintenance, contamination, fluid 

leakages, inadvertent spillage of liquids, 

or harmful debris that may be generated 

during production or maintenance. 

In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for the required 

inspection, we considered the safety 

implications, the commenters’ request 

in the original NPRM to extend the 

compliance time from 15 to 18 months, 

and normal maintenance schedules for 

timely accomplishment of the 

inspection. In consideration of these 

items, we have determined that 18 

months represents an appropriate 

interval of time allowable wherein the 

inspection can be accomplished during 

scheduled maintenance intervals for the 

majority of affected operators, and an 

acceptable level of safety can be 

maintained. However, we recognize that 

some operators’ ‘‘C’’ check intervals are 

longer than 18 months because of a low 

utilization rate. Therefore, we have 

revised the compliance time specified in 

paragraph (a) of this AD to ‘‘Within 18 

months or 6,000 flight hours after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later.’’

Request To Exclude the Generator 

Power Feeder Cables From the 

Required Actions 

One commenter requests that 

paragraph (a) of the supplemental 

NPRM be revised to state, ‘‘* * * to 

detect discrepancies of the stranded 

wire bundles routed in the notched floor 

beam area along the ceiling of the 

forward cargo compartment, from 

station 368 through 742. * * *’’ The 

commenter states that Revision 2 of the 

referenced service bulletin describes an 

inspection area beyond where wiring 

actually exists, and that it does not 

differentiate between the stranded wire 

bundles and the feeder cables. The 

commenter also states that the feeder 

cables are well supported within an 

inch of the stand-offs, are relatively stiff 

as compared to the stranded wire 

bundles, and are not part of the issues 

that prompted the proposed actions on 

the cables in this area. The commenter 

further states that there is no benefit 

gained from attaching plastic sleeving or 

adding spacers where the cable is routed 

greater than .125 inch from any standoff. 

We do not agree with the suggestion 

as worded by the commenter, but do 

agree that the inspection area specified 

in paragraph (a) and clearance 

measurements specified in paragraph 

(a)(2) of this AD need to be clarified. In 

conjunction with Boeing, we conducted 

an inspection of the subject area on 

certain affected Boeing Model 767 series 

airplanes at Boeing’s production area. 

The inspection results revealed that 

power feeder cables W208 and W236 are 

more rigidly supported in their position 

than other electrical wire bundles in the 

forward cargo compartment from 

stations 368 through 742 and RBLs 40 

through 70, routed along the cargo 

compartment ceiling. As discussed 

previously, we have reviewed Revision 

3 of Boeing Service Bulletin 767–

24A0128, dated June 24, 2004, which 

clarifies the inspection area and 

clearance measurement, and have 

revised the final rule accordingly. 

Request To Allow Installation of a Tie 

Cord 

One commenter requests that 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of the supplemental 

NPRM be revised to allow installation of 

a tie cord instead of a tie strap. The 

commenter notes that Figure 1, Step 5 

of Revision 2 of the referenced service 

bulletin specifies the use of a strap 

having part number (P/N) BACS38K2 to 

secure the harness to the cable mount. 

The commenter states that the retainer 

end of the strap can interfere with 

adjacent harness runs and may cause 

future damage. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request and observations. We have 

determined that a tie cord having P/N 

BMS 13–54 or equivalent may be used 

as an alternative to a strap having P/N 

BACS38K2. We have revised paragraph 

(a)(2) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Fix Service Bulletin Errors 

One commenter notes that the 

inspection area specified in the 

‘‘NOTES’’ column in the table of Figure 

1 of Revision 2 of the service bulletin 

should be from station ‘‘368,’’ not 

‘‘638.’’ From this comment, we infer 

that the commenter is requesting us to 

inform Boeing of the error. We agree. As 

discussed previously, Boeing has issued 

and we have reviewed Revision 3 of the 

service bulletin, which corrects the 

typographical error. However, no 

change to the final rule is necessary in 

this regard, because this AD specifies 

the correct station. 

In the ‘‘NOTES’’ column in the table 

of Figure 1 of Revision 2 of the service 

bulletin, the same commenter also notes 

that it refers to Boeing Standard Wiring 

Practices Manual (BWSPM) sections 20–

10–11 and 20–10–12. The commenter 

states that these sections specify 

installation criteria, not an inspection 

procedure, and that BWSPM section 20–

60–03, page 201, sub-task 222–003 is a 

more appropriate reference as it is an 

inspection criteria directed toward 

damage identification. 

We agree with the commenter that 

BWSPM sections 20–10–11 and 20–10–

12 do not provide inspection 

procedures. In fact, none of the BSWPM 

sections describe procedures for 

inspections. The intent of those sections 

is to provide instructions how to 

examine the wires and mounting 

components to determine installation 

and damage conditions and to make 

necessary repairs. Revisions 2 and 

Revision 3 of the service bulletin are 

referring to those sections for that 

purpose only. We also note that BSWPM 

section 20–60–03, as suggested by the 

commenter, provides procedures for 

special protection of electrical 

connectors. No change to the final rule 

is necessary in this regard. 

Request for Credit for Accomplishment 

of Earlier Service Bulletin 

One commenter requests that the 

supplemental NPRM be revised to give 

operators credit for prior 

accomplishment of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–24A0128, dated May 11, 

2000; and Revision 1, dated December 6, 

2001; as acceptable means of 

compliance with the requirements of the 

supplemental NPRM. 

A second commenter requests credit 

for Revision 1 only. The commenter 

states that Revision 1 of the service 

bulletin is more restrictive than 

Revision 2 with regard to the 

installation of the subject Teflon 

protection, clamps, and straps, and 

therefore, offers an equivalent level of 

protection to the wire bundles. The 

commenter also states that the addition 

of buttock line information to Revision 

2, while useful data, does not affect the 

ability to accomplish the intent of the 

supplemental NPRM. The commenter 

believes that all of the subject wire 

bundles in the inspection area are 

closely located to each other and clearly 

visible to maintenance personnel when 

the inspection area is accessed. Further, 

the commenter notes that there are no 

differences between the illustrations in 

Revisions 1 and 2 showing wire bundle 

locations subject to the inspection, and 

therefore, concludes that the areas to be 

accessed are the same. 

We partially agree with the 

commenters’ request. As discussed in 

the preamble of the supplemental 

NPRM, Revision 2 of the referenced 

service bulletin expands the inspection 

to include areas that were inadvertently 

omitted from the original service 

bulletin and Revision 1. Figure 1 of the 

original issue and Revision 1 incorrectly 

identifies the inspection area as RBL 70 

only; the correct inspection area is 

between RBL 40 and RBL 70. Therefore, 

we do not agree with the commenters 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64841

that accomplishing the required 

inspection and applicable corrective 

actions at RBL 70 only, as specified in 

the original issue and Revision 1 of the 

referenced service bulletin, is an 

acceptable means of compliance with 

the requirements of this AD. However, 

as discussed previously, we have added 

a new paragraph (b) to the final rule to 

give operators credit for accomplishing 

the required actions before the effective 

date of the AD in accordance with those 

previous releases of the referenced 

service bulletin, provided that those 

actions were done on the subject wire 

bundles from stations 368 through 742 

and from RBL 40 through 70. 

Conclusion 

After careful review of the available 

data, including the comments noted 

above, we have determined that air 

safety and the public interest require the 

adoption of the rule with the changes 

previously described. These changes 

will neither increase the economic 

burden on any operator nor increase the 

scope of the AD. 

Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on the 

AD 

On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a 

new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 

47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the 

FAA’s airworthiness directives system. 

The regulation now includes material 

that relates to altered products, special 

flight permits, and alternative methods 

of compliance. However, for clarity and 

consistency in this final rule, we have 

retained the language of the 

supplemental NPRM regarding that 

material. 

Changes to Labor Rate 

We have reviewed the figures we have 

used over the past several years to 

calculate AD costs to operators. To 

account for various inflationary costs in 

the airline industry, we find it necessary 

to increase the labor rate used in these 

calculations from $60 per work hour to 

$65 per work hour. The cost impact 

information, below, reflects this 

increase in the specified hourly labor 

rate. 

Cost Impact 

There are about 774 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

We estimate that 303 airplanes of U.S. 

registry will be affected by this AD, that 

it will take approximately 2 work hours 

per airplane to accomplish the required 

inspection, and that the average labor 

rate is $65 per work hour. Based on 

these figures, the cost impact of this AD 

on U.S. operators is estimated to be 

$39,390, or $130 per airplane. 

The cost impact figure discussed 

above is based on assumptions that no 

operator has yet accomplished any of 

the requirements of this AD action, and 

that no operator would accomplish 

those actions in the future if this AD 

were not adopted. The cost impact 

figures discussed in AD rulemaking 

actions represent only the time 

necessary to perform the specific actions 

actually required by the AD. These 

figures typically do not include 

incidental costs, such as the time 

required to gain access and close up, 

planning time, or time necessitated by 

other administrative actions. 

Regulatory Impact 

The regulations adopted herein will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, it is 

determined that this final rule does not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this action (1) is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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. A final evaluation has 

been prepared for this action and it is 

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy 

of it may be obtained from the Rules 

Docket at the location provided under 

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

■ 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive:

2004–22–25 Boeing: Amendment 39–13853. 

Docket 2000–NM–409–AD.

Applicability: Model 767–200, –300, and 

–300F series airplanes; certificated in any 

category; as listed in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–24A0128, Revision 3, dated 

June 24, 2004.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane 

identified in the preceding applicability 

provision, regardless of whether it has been 

modified, altered, or repaired in the area 

subject to the requirements of this AD. For 

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 

repaired so that the performance of the 

requirements of this AD is affected, the 

owner/operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance in 

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. 

The request should include an assessment of 

the effect of the modification, alteration, or 

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by 

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not 

been eliminated, the request should include 

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent damage of wire bundles in the 

forward cargo compartment, particularly 

wires of the fuel quantity indication system 

(FQIS) installed in that area, which could 

cause arcing between the FQIS wires and 

power wires in the damaged wire bundle, 

lead to transmission of electrical energy into 

the fuel tank, and result in a potential source 

of ignition in the fuel tank, accomplish the 

following: 

Inspection and Corrective Actions 

(a) Within 18 months or 6,000 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later, do a one-time detailed 

inspection for discrepancies of all wire 

bundles, including power feeder cables W208 

and W236, of the electrical system in the 

forward cargo compartment from stations 368 

through 742 and from right buttock lines 

(RBL) 40 through 70, routed along the ceiling, 

according to the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–24A0128, Revision 3, dated June 24, 

2004. Discrepancies include chafing or 

damage of wire bundles near stand-offs that 

attach the cargo ceiling liner to the floor 

beams.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is defined as: ‘‘An 

intensive visual examination of a specific 

structural area, system, installation, or 

assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by 

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, 

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate access procedures 

may be required.’’

(1) Before further flight, repair any 

discrepancy, according to the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

(2) Before further flight, examine the 

clearance between all wire bundles, 

including the power feeder cables, in the 

forward cargo compartment and the cargo 

liner standoffs, and do the applicable 

64842 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

corrective actions specified in paragraphs 

(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this AD, according to 

the service bulletin. A tie cord having P/N 

BMS 13–54 or equivalent may be used as an 

alternative to a tie strap having part number 

BACS38K2.

TABLE 1.—CLEARANCE BETWEEN WIRE BUNDLES AND CARGO LINER STANDOFFS

If the clearance between the— Is— Then—

(i) Wire bundles and cargo liner standoffs ......................... 0.25 inch or more .................................... No further action is required by this AD. 

Between 0.13 and 0.25 inch .................... Install sleeving and lacing tape 

Less than 0.13 inch ................................. Install sleeving, lacing tape, cable spacers, and straps. 

(ii) Power feeder cables and cargo liner standoffs ............ 0.13 inch or more .................................... No further action is required by this AD 

Less than 0.13 inch ................................. Install sleeving, lacing tape, cable spacers, and straps. 

Credit for Actions Done Previously 

(b) Accomplishment of the inspection and 

applicable corrective actions before the 

effective date of this AD in accordance with 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–24A0128, 

dated May 11, 2000; Revision 1, dated 

December 6, 2001; or Revision 2, dated May 

23, 2002; is acceptable for compliance with 

the corresponding actions required by this 

AD, provided that those actions were done 

on all wire bundles, including power feeder 

cables W208 and W236, of the electrical 

system in the forward cargo compartment 

from stations 368 through 742 and from RBLs 

40 through 70, routed along the ceiling. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(c) An alternative method of compliance or 

adjustment of the compliance time that 

provides an acceptable level of safety may be 

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. 

Operators shall submit their requests through 

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance 

Inspector, who may add comments and then 

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the 

existence of approved alternative methods of 

compliance with this AD, if any, may be 

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits 

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in 

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to 

a location where the requirements of this AD 

can be accomplished. 

Incorporation by Reference 

(e) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, 

the actions shall be done in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–24A0128, 

Revision 3, dated June 24, 2004. This 

incorporation by reference was approved by 

the Director of the Federal Register in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, PO Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. Copies may be 

inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington; or at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html.

Effective Date 

(f) This amendment becomes effective on 

December 14, 2004.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

26, 2004. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24624 Filed 11–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2003–CE–51–AD; Amendment 

39–13857; AD 2004–23–02] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon 

Aircraft Company 65, 90, 99, 100, 200, 

and 1900 Series Airplanes, and Models 

70 and 300 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The FAA supersedes 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 87–22–01 

R1, which applies to certain Raytheon 

Aircraft Company (Raytheon) 65, 90, 99, 

100, 200, and 1900 series airplanes, and 

Models 70 and 300 airplanes. AD 87–

22–01 R1 currently requires you to 

repetitively inspect the nose landing 

gear (NLG) fork for cracks. If cracks are 

found that exceed certain limits, AD 87–

22–01 R1 requires you to replace the 

NLG fork with a serviceable part or an 

improved NLG fork (Kit No. 101–8030–

1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S, as 

applicable). Incorporating an improved 

NLG fork kit terminates the repetitive 

inspection requirements. This AD is the 

result of FAA’s policy (since 1996) to 

disallow airplane operation when 

known cracks exist in primary structure. 

This AD retains the inspection 

requirements of AD 87–22–01 R1, 

requires you to incorporate an improved 

NLG fork kit anytime a crack is found, 

and adds additional airplanes to the 

applicability section of this AD. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

cracks in the NLG fork, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity 

and inability of the NLG fork to carry 

design limit and ultimate loads. The 

reduced residual strength may cause 

separation failure of the NLG fork, 

which could result in loss of control of 

the airplane during take off, landing, 

and taxi operations.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on 

December 23, 2004. 

As of December 23, 2004, the Director 

of the Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in the regulation.

ADDRESSES: You may get the service 

information identified in this AD from 

Raytheon Aircraft Company, 9709 E. 

Central, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085; 

telephone: (800) 429–5372 or (316) 676–

3140. 

You may view the AD docket at FAA, 

Central Region, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

2003–CE–51–AD, 901 Locust, Room 

506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office 

hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven E. Potter, Aerospace Engineer, 

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA, 1801 Airport Road, 

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 

946–4124; facsimile: (316) 946–4407.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

Has FAA taken any action to this 

point? Reports of cracks in the nose 

landing gear (NLG) fork on several 

Raytheon airplanes caused us to issue 

AD 87–22–01, Amendment 39–5748, 

and AD 87–22–01 R1, Amendment 39–

6312, against certain Raytheon 65, 90, 

99, 100, 200, and 1900 series airplanes, 

and Models 70 and 300 airplanes. 

AD 87–22–01 required you to 

repetitively inspect the nose landing 

gear (NLG) fork for cracks. If cracks were