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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64843

found during any inspection that 

exceeded certain limits, you were 

required to replace the NLG fork with a 

serviceable part. 

AD 87–22–01 R1 retained the 

repetitive inspection and replacement 

requirements from AD 87–22–01. AD 

87–22–01 R1 also introduced 

incorporating an improved NLG fork 

(Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–

8015–1 S, as applicable) as a 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspection requirements of this AD. 

What has happened since AD 87–22–

01 R1 to initiate this action? As 

currently written, AD 87–22–01 R1 

allows continued flight if cracks are 

found in the NLG fork that do not 

exceed certain limits. In 1996, FAA 

developed policy to not allow airplane 

operation when known cracks exist in 

primary structure, unless the ability to 

sustain limit and ultimate load with 

these cracks is proven. The NLG fork is 

considered primary structure, and the 

FAA has not received any analysis to 

prove that limit and ultimate loads can 

be sustained with cracks in this area. 

This AD brings the actions of AD 87–

22–01 R1 in compliance with FAA 

policy. Therefore, FAA has determined 

the crack limits contained in AD 87–22–

01 R1 should be eliminated and that AD 

action should be taken to require 

immediate incorporation of Kit No. 101–

8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S, as 

applicable, anytime a crack is found. 

This policy did not exist when we 

issued AD 87–22–01 and AD 87–22–01 

R1. 

What is the potential impact if FAA 

took no action? This condition, if not 

detected and corrected, could cause 

failure of the NLG fork to carry design 

limit and ultimate loads. Failure of the 

NLG fork could result in loss of control 

of the airplane during take off, landing, 

and taxi operations. 

Has FAA taken any action to this 

point? We issued a proposal to amend 

part 39 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include 

an AD that would apply to certain 

Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon) 

65, 90, 99, 100, 200, and 1900 series 

airplanes, and Models 70 and 300 

airplanes. This proposal was published 

in the Federal Register as a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on March 

18, 2004 (12807). The NPRM proposed 

to require you to repetitively inspect the 

nose landing gear (NLG) fork for cracks 

replacing the NLG fork assembly 

anytime cracks are found.

Comments 

Was the public invited to comment?

We provided the public the opportunity 

to participate in developing this AD. 

The following presents the comments 

received on the proposal and FAA’s 

response to each comment: 

Comment Issue No. 1: Clarify the 

Applicability 

What is the commenter’s concern?

The commenter states the compliance 

statement in paragraph (e)(1) of the 

proposed AD is confusing. The 

compliance statement requires an initial 

inspection of the nose landing gear 

(NLG) fork assembly for any signs of 

cracks on airplanes not previously 

affected by AD 87–22–01 R1. This 

inspection is required within the next 

200 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the 

effective date of this AD. However, it is 

also stated later in the proposed AD that 

incorporation of Kit No. 101–8030–1 S 

or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable) 

is a terminating action to the 

requirements of the AD and no further 

action is required. The commenter states 

that it does not make sense to comply 

with the initial inspection if you have 

already done the terminating action. 

The commenter states the reason that 

AD 87–22–01 R1 did not affect most 

airplanes is because they incorporate Kit 

No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–

1 S (as applicable). 

We infer the commenter wants more 

clarification to exempt airplanes that 

incorporate Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit 

No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable) from 

the applicability of the AD. 

What is FAA’s response to the 

concern? We agree that additional 

clarification may help remove confusion 

about the need to comply with the 

initial inspection required in the 

proposed AD. The proposed AD was 

written to account for the different set 

of serial numbers affected by AD 87–22–

01 R1 and the proposed AD. 

We will add a statement to paragraph 

(c) and (e)(1) to clarify that airplanes 

that already incorporate Kit No. 101–

8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S (as 

applicable) are exempt from this AD. 

We will change the final rule AD 

based on this comment. 

Comment Issue No. 2: Replacement 

Parts Not Available 

What is the commenter’s concern?

The commenter states that in April 

2004, Raytheon Aircraft Company 

(Raytheon) did not have a supply of 

replacements kits available. The 

commenter is concerned that a shortage 

of replacement kits could ground the 

affected airplanes. 

We infer the commenter wants us to 

confirm the availability and supply of 

replacements kits before issuing the 

final rule AD. 

What is FAA’s response to the 

concern? We concur with the 

commenter that a low supply of 

replacement kits would be a problem. 

However, on the effective date of this 

AD, Raytheon has assured us that 

replacement kits will be available. 

We are not changing the final rule AD 

based on this comment. 

Comment Issue No. 3: Revise the 

Proposed AD 

What is the commenter’s concern?

The commenter states that AD 87–22–01 

R1 sufficiently addresses inspecting and 

monitoring cracks in the nose landing 

gear (NLG) fork. The commenter states 

that no failures occurred after using the 

procedures and crack limitations set in 

AD 87–22–01 R1. The commenter adds 

that he has several hundred thousands 

of hours of experience with numerous 

affected airplanes with only three or 

four cracks found in the past 20 years. 

The commenter also disagrees with 

the FAA’s policy (since 1996) to 

disallow airplane operation when 

known cracks exist in a primary 

structure. The commenter states the 

policy is not justified by quantifiable 

resulting safety improvements and 

needs to be revised. 

The commenter states the proposed 

AD imposes an unnecessary economic 

burden upon the owners/operators of 

the affected airplanes. 

The commenter wants AD 87–22–01 

R1 to remain in place since it allows a 

reasonable period of time after 

discovering a crack to obtain and install 

a replacement kit. 

What is FAA’s response to the 

concern? We do not concur with the 

commenter. In 1996, FAA developed 

policy to not allow airplane operation 

when known cracks exist in primary 

structure, unless the ability to sustain 

limit and ultimate load with these 

cracks is proven. The NLG fork is 

considered primary structure, and the 

FAA has not received any analysis to 

prove that limit and ultimate loads can 

be sustained with cracks in this area. 

For this reason, the FAA has determined 

the crack limits contained in AD 87–22–

01 R1 should be eliminated and that AD 

action should be taken to require 

immediate incorporation of Kit No. 101–

8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S (as 

applicable) anytime a crack is found. 

We are not changing the final rule AD 

based on this comment. 

Conclusion 

What is FAA’s final determination on 

this issue? We have carefully reviewed 

the available data and determined that 

air safety and the public interest require 

adopting the AD as proposed except for 

64844 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

the changes discussed above and minor 

editorial corrections. We have 

determined that these changes and 

minor corrections:

—Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

—Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM.

Changes to 14 CFR Part 39—Effect on 

the AD 

How does the revision to 14 CFR part 

39 affect this AD? On July 10, 2002, the 

FAA published a new version of 14 CFR 

part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), 

which governs the FAA’s AD system. 

This regulation now includes material 

that relates to altered products, special 

flight permits, and alternative methods 

of compliance. This material previously 

was included in each individual AD. 

Since this material is included in 14 

CFR part 39, we will not include it in 

future AD actions. 

Costs of Compliance 

How many airplanes does this AD 

impact? We estimate that this AD affects 

5,296 airplanes in the U.S. registry. 

What is the cost impact of this AD on 

owners/operators of the affected 

airplanes? We estimate the following 

costs to accomplish the inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost

per airplane Total cost on U.S. operators 

2 workhours × $65 per hour = $130 ..................... Not applicable ............... $130 $130 × 5,296 = $688,480. 

We estimate the following costs to 

accomplish any necessary replacements 

that will be required based on the 

results of this inspection. We have no 

way of determining the number of 

airplanes that may need this repair/

replacement:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per kit 

4 workhours × $65 per hour = $260 .................. Kit No. 101–8030–1 S = $4,152 ...................... Kit No. 101–8030–1 S: $260 + $4,152 = 

$4,412. 

Kit No. 114–8015–1 S = $4,210 ...................... Kit No. 114–8015–1 S: $260 + $4,210 = 

$4,470. 

Regulatory Findings 

Will this AD impact various entities?

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. 

Will this AD involve a significant rule 

or regulatory action? For the reasons 

discussed above, I certify that this AD: 

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 summary of the costs 

to comply with this AD and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary by sending a request to us 

at the address listed under ADDRESSES.

Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 2003–CE–51–

AD’’ in your request.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

■ Accordingly, under 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

87–22–01 R1, Amendment 39–6312, and 

by adding a new AD to read as follows:

2004–23–02 Raytheon Aircraft Company:

Amendment 39–13857; Docket No. 

2003–CE–51–AD.

When Does This AD Become Effective? 

(a) This AD becomes effective on December 

23, 2004. 

What Other ADs Are Affected by This 

Action? 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 87–22–01 R1, 

Amendment 39–6312. 

What Airplanes Are Affected by This AD? 

(c) This AD affects the following airplane 

models and serial numbers that: 

(1) Do not incorporate Kit No. 1001–8030–

1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable); 

and 

(2) Are certificated in any category:

Model Serial numbers 

(i) A65 and A65–8200 .............................................................................. LC–240 through LC–335. 

(ii) 70 ......................................................................................................... LB–1 through LB–35. 

(iii) 65–A80, 65–A80–8800, and 65–B80 ................................................. LD–151 through LD–511. 

(iv) 65–88 .................................................................................................. LP–1 through LP–26, LP–28, and LP–30 through LP–47. 

(v) 65–90, 65–A90, B90, C90, and C90A ................................................ LJ–1 through LJ–1190. 

(vi) 65–A90–1 (U–21A, JU–21A, U–21G, RU–21A, RU–21D, and RU–

21H).

LM–1 through LM–141. 

(vii) 65–A90–2 (RU–21B) ......................................................................... LS–1 through LS–3. 

(viii) 65–A90–3 (RU–21C) ........................................................................ LT–1 and LT–2. 

(ix) 65–A90–4 (RU–21E and RU–21H) .................................................... LU–1 through LU–15. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64845

Model Serial numbers 

(x) E90 ...................................................................................................... LW–1 through LW–347. 

(xi) F90 ..................................................................................................... LA–2 through LA–236. 

(xii) H90 (T–44A) ...................................................................................... LL–1 through LL–61. 

(xiii) 99, 99A, A99, A99A, B99, and C99 ................................................. U–1 through U–239. 

(xiv) 100 and A100 ................................................................................... B–2 through B–93, and B–100 through B–247. 

(xv) A100 (U–21F) .................................................................................... B–95 through B–99. 

(xvi) A100–1 (U–21J) ............................................................................... BB–3 through BB–5. 

(xvii) B100 ................................................................................................. BE–1 through BE–137. 

(xviii) 200 and B200 ................................................................................. BB–2, and BB–6 through BB–1314. 

(xix) 200C and B200C .............................................................................. BL–1 through BL–72, and BL–124 through BL–131. 

(xx) 200CT and B200CT .......................................................................... BN–1 through BN–4. 

(xxi) 200T and B200T ............................................................................... BT–1 through BT–33. 

(xxii) A200 (C–12A and C–12C) .............................................................. BC–1 through BC–75 and BD–1 through BD–30. 

(xxiii) A200C (UC–12B) ............................................................................ BJ–1 through BJ–66. 

(xxiv) A200CT (C–12D, FWC–12D, and C–12F) ..................................... BP–1, BP–7 through BP–11, BP–19, and BP–24 through BP–63. 

(xxv) A200CT (RC–12D and RC–12H) .................................................... GR–1 through GR–19. 

(xxvi) A200CT (RC–12G) ......................................................................... FC–1 through FC–3. 

(xxvii) A200CT (RC–12K) ......................................................................... FE–1 through FE–9. 

(xxviii) B200C (C–12F) ............................................................................. BL–73 through BL–112, BL–118 through BL–123, and BP–64 through 

BP–71. 

(xxix) B200C (UC–12F) ............................................................................ BU–1 through BU–10. 

(xxx) B200C (UC–12M) ............................................................................ BV–1 through BV–10. 

(xxxi) 300 .................................................................................................. FA–1 through FA–168, and FF–1 through FF–19. 

(xxxii) 1900 ............................................................................................... UA–1 through UA–3. 

(xxxiii) 1900C ............................................................................................ UB–1 through UB–74, and UC–1 through UC–78. 

(xxxiv) 1900C (C–12J) .............................................................................. UD–1 through UD–6. 

What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in 

This AD? 

(d) The actions specified in this AD are 

intended to detect and correct cracks in the 

nose landing gear (NLG) fork, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity and 

failure of the NLG fork to carry design 

ultimate load. This failure could result in 

loss of control of the airplane during take off, 

landing, and taxi operations. 

What Must I Do To Address This Problem? 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following:

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(1) Inspect, using fluorescent liquid penetrant or 

magnetic particle method, the nose landing 

gear (NLG) fork assembly for any signs of 

cracks unless Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit 

No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable) is incorporated, then no further action is required. 

For airplanes previously affected by AD 87–

22–01 R1: Initially inspect within 200 hours 

time-in-service (TIS) after the last inspection required by AD 87–22–01 R1. For airplanes not previously affected by AD 87–

22–01 R1: Initially inspect within the next 

200 hours TIS after December 23, 2004 

(the effective date of this AD), unless already done. 

Follow the instructions in Part II of Raytheon 

Aircraft Company Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 32–2102, Revision 7, Revised: 

July, 2003. 

(2) If cracks are found during the inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, incorporate Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–

8015–1 S (as applicable). 

Before further flight after December 23, 2004 

(the effective date of this AD). 

Follow the instructions in Part III of Raytheon 

Aircraft Company Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 32–2102, Revision 7, Revised: 

July, 2003. 

(3) If no cracks are found during the inspection 

required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, repetitively inspect until Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or 

Kit No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable) is incorporated. When Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or 

Kit No. 114–8015–1 S is incorporated, no further action is required. 

Repetitively inspect at intervals not to exceed 

200 hours TIS after the initial inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. Incorporate Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit No. 

114–8015–1 S (as applicable) prior to further flight after any inspection in which 

cracks are found. 

Follow the instructions in Part III of Raytheon 

Aircraft Company Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 32–2102, Revision 7, Revised: 

July, 2003. 

(4) Incorporating Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit 

No. 114–8015–1 S (as applicable) is the terminating action for the repetitive inspection 

requirements specified in paragraph (e)(3) of 

this AD. 

Kit No. 101–8030–1 S or Kit No. 114–8015–1 

S (as applicable) can be incorporated at 

any time. When incorporated, no further action is required. 

Follow Raytheon Aircraft Company Mandatory 

Service Bulletin SB 32–2102, Revision 7, 

Revised: July, 2003. 

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, 

send your request to your principal 

inspector. The principal inspector may add 

comments and will send your request to the 

Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA. For information on any already 

approved alternative methods of compliance, 

contact Steven E. Potter, Aerospace Engineer, 

Wichita ACO, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, 

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946–

4124; facsimile: (316) 946–4407. 

64846 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Does This AD Incorporate Any Material by 

Reference? 

(g) You must do the actions required by 

this AD following the instructions in 

Raytheon Aircraft Company Mandatory 

Service Bulletin SB 32–2102, Revision 7, 

Revised: July, 2003. The Director of the 

Federal Register approved the incorporation 

by reference of this service bulletin in 

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

part 51. You may get a copy from Raytheon 

Aircraft Company, 9709 E. Central, Wichita, 

Kansas 67201–0085; telephone: (800) 429–

5372 or (316) 676–3140. You may review 

copies at FAA, Central Region, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 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.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 1, 2004. 

James E. Jackson, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24718 Filed 11–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–18572; Directorate 

Identifier 2003–NM–72–AD; Amendment 39–

13848; AD 2004–22–20] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–11F 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and 

MD–11F airplanes. This AD requires 

replacement of low base terminal 

boards, related investigative action, and 

corrective actions if necessary. This AD 

is prompted by arcing between a power 

feeder cable and terminal board support 

bracket. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent arcing damage to the power 

feeder cables, terminal boards, and 

adjacent structure, which could result in 

smoke and/or fire in the cabin.

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

December 14, 2004. 

The incorporation by reference of a 

certain publication listed in the AD is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of December 14, 2004.

ADDRESSES: 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). You can examine this 

information 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.

Docket: The AD docket contains the 

proposed AD, comments, and any final 

disposition. You can examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

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

Management Facility office between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

Docket Management Facility office 

(telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building at 

the DOT street address stated in the 

ADDRESSES section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Technical information: Brett Portwood, 

Aerospace Engineer, Systems and 

Equipment Branch, ANM–130L, FAA, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

telephone (562) 627–5350; fax (562) 

627–5210. Plain language information:

Marcia Walters, marcia.walters@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with 

an AD for certain McDonnell Douglas 

Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. 

That action, published in the Federal 

Register on July 13, 2004 (69 FR 41992), 

proposed to require replacement of low 

base terminal boards, related 

investigative action, and corrective 

actions if necessary. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. No comments 

have been submitted on the proposed 

AD or on the determination of the cost 

to the public. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data and determined that air 

safety and the public interest require 

adopting the AD as proposed. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 152 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This AD will affect about 52 airplanes 

of U.S. registry. The following table 

provides the estimated costs for U.S. 

operators to comply with this AD.

ESTIMATED COSTS

Airplanes identified in the service 

bulletin as— Work hours Average labor rateper hour Parts cost 

Cost per airplane

(depending on

the airplane

configuration) 

Group 1 ............................................ 3 $65 $45–$384 $240–$579

Groups 2 and 5 ................................ 1 65 45–384 110–449

Groups 3, 4, and 6 .......................... 2 65 45–384 175–514

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD. See the ADDRESSES section for