75282 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2004–19891; 

Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–136–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this AD 

action by January 31, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737–

300, –400, and –500 series airplanes 

modified in accordance with Supplemental 

Type Certificate (STC) ST00127BO, 

certificated in any category. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by the results 

of fuel system reviews conducted by the STC 

holder. We are proposing this AD to prevent 

unsafe levels of current or energy from 

entering the fuel tank, due to hot short faults 

or threat conditions associated with the safe 

side harness assembly, which could result in 

a fire or explosion of the fuel tank. 

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. 

Modification 

(f) Within 12 months after the effective 

date of this AD, modify the safe side harness 

connectors at the tank penetrations and the 

digital transient suppression devices, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Goodrich Service Bulletin 

737–300766–28–2, Revision 2, dated July 28, 

2004. 

Parts Installation 

(g) As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install a safe side harness, Part 

Number 50357–01XX, on any airplane, 

unless that safe side harness has been 

modified in accordance with Goodrich 

Service Bulletin 737–300766–28–2, Revision 

2, dated July 28, 2004. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 3, 2004. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–27519 Filed 12–15–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–129–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed 

Model L–1011–385 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This document revises an 

earlier proposed airworthiness directive 

(AD), applicable to all Lockheed Model 

L–1011–385 series airplanes, that would 

have required repetitive inspections to 

detect corrosion or fatigue cracking of 

certain structural elements of the 

airplane; corrective actions if necessary; 

and incorporation of certain structural 

modifications. This new action revises 

the proposed rule by referencing a new 

service bulletin that, among other 

changes, corrects the effectivity and 

revises the modification threshold of 

various secondary service bulletins. The 

actions specified by this new proposed 

AD are intended to prevent corrosion or 

fatigue cracking of certain structural 

elements, which could result in reduced 

structural integrity of the airplane. This 

action is intended to address the 

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by 

January 10, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

triplicate to the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Transport 

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

129–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Comments may be inspected at this 

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. Comments may be submitted 

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments 

may also be sent via the Internet using 

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent 

via fax or the Internet must contain 

‘‘Docket No. 99–NM–129–AD’’ in the 

subject line and need not be submitted 

in triplicate. Comments sent via the 

Internet as attached electronic files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 

Windows or ASCII text. 

The service information referenced in 

the proposed rule may be obtained from 

Lockheed Martin Aircraft & Logistics 

Centers, 120 Orion Street, Greenville, 

South Carolina 29605. This information 

may be examined at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at 

the FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification 

Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix 

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Herderich, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ACE–117A, FAA, 

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 

One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix 

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 

30349; telephone (770) 703–6082; fax 

(770) 703–6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in the making of the 

proposed rule by submitting such 

written data, views, or arguments as 

they may desire. Communications shall 

identify the Rules Docket number and 

be submitted in triplicate to the address 

specified above. All communications 

received on or before the closing date 

for comments, specified above, will be 

considered before taking action on the 

proposed rule. The proposals contained 

in this action may be changed in light 

of the comments received. 

Submit comments using the following 

format: 

• Organize comments issue-by-issue. 

For example, discuss a request to 

change the compliance time and a 

request to change the service bulletin 

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific 

change to the proposed AD is being 

requested. 

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or 

data) for each request. 

Comments are specifically invited on 

the overall regulatory, economic, 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 75283

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed rule. All comments 

submitted will be available, both before 

and after the closing date for comments, 

in the Rules Docket for examination by 

interested persons. A report 

summarizing each FAA-public contact 

concerned with the substance of this 

proposal will be filed in the Rules 

Docket. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

submitted in response to this action 

must submit a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket Number 99–NM–129–AD.’’ The 

postcard will be date stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

Availability of NPRMs 

Any person may obtain a copy of this 

NPRM by submitting a request to the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

99–NM–129–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, 

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Discussion 

A proposal to amend part 39 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 39) to add an airworthiness 

directive (AD), applicable to all 

Lockheed Model L–1011–385 series 

airplanes, was published as a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘the original NPRM’’) in 

the Federal Register on December 9, 

1999 (64 FR 68960). The original NPRM 

would have required repetitive 

inspections to detect corrosion or 

fatigue cracking of certain structural 

elements of the airplane; corrective 

actions if necessary; and incorporation 

of certain structural modifications. The 

original NPRM was prompted by new 

recommendations related to incidents of 

fatigue cracking and corrosion in 

transport category airplanes that are 

approaching or have exceeded their 

economic design goal. Such corrosion or 

fatigue cracking in certain structural 

elements, if not corrected, could result 

in reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

Comments 

Due consideration has been given to 

the comments received in response to 

the original NPRM. 

Request To Reference Latest Revision of 

Service Bulletin 

One commenter, the airplane 

manufacturer, provides clarification 

about the compliance times specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (c)(1), and (c)(2) 

of the original NPRM as they pertain to 

certain service bulletins identified in 

Lockheed Tristar L–1011 Service 

Bulletin (SB) 093–51–041, dated April 

27, 1998 (which is referenced in the 

original NPRM as the appropriate source 

of service information for accomplishing 

the proposed actions; hereafter called 

the ‘‘Collector Service Bulletin’’). The 

commenter states that it will initiate 

Revision 1 of the Collector Service 

Bulletin to reflect that continuing 

inspections are called for by SB 093–57–

208; to list the latest revision CN4, dated 

May 8, 1998, of SB 093–53–260; to 

reference AD 99–09–14, amendment 39–

11147 (64 FR 20144, April 28, 1999); 

and to revise the threshold of certain 

modifications. 

From this comment, the FAA infers 

that the commenter is requesting that 

the original NPRM reference Revision 1 

of the Collector Service Bulletin. We 

agree. The original issue of the Collector 

Service Bulletin was referenced in the 

original NPRM as the appropriate source 

of service information. The original 

issue describes procedures for certain 

repetitive inspections to detect 

corrosion or fatigue cracking of certain 

structural elements of the airplane; 

corrective actions, if necessary; and 

incorporation of certain structural 

modifications. Since the issuance of the 

original NPRM, we have reviewed and 

approved Revision 1 of Lockheed SB 

093–51–41, dated March 3, 2000. 

Revision 1 of the service bulletin 

corrects the effectivity and revises the 

‘‘Modification Termination Threshold’’

of various secondary SBs; revises SB 

093–53–260, CN3 to CN4; and contains 

certain editorial changes. We have 

revised the supplemental NPRM to 

include reference to Revision 1 of SB 

093–51–041 as the appropriate source of 

service information. 

Requests To Clarify Certain Compliance 

Times 

One commenter, the airplane 

manufacturer, provides further 

clarification about the compliance times 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) 

of the original NPRM for the inspections 

specified in SB 093–57–058, R5–CN1, 

dated August 22, 1995, which is listed 

in the Collector Service Bulletin. The 

commenter states the SB 093–57–208, 

Revision 1, dated October 28, 1997, 

which is also listed in the Collector 

Service Bulletin, forces inspection of the 

center box wing spar web at different 

frequencies. Since both of these SBs will 

be mandated, the commenter assumes 

the earlier schedule will take 

precedence. 

From this comment, we infer that the 

commenter is requesting that the 

compliance times specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the 

supplemental NPRM be clarified. We 

agree. We find that paragraph (c)(1) of 

the supplemental NPRM also needs to 

be clarified. Those paragraphs refer to 

the threshold and repetitive intervals 

specified in the individual service 

bulletin as listed in Tables 1 and II of 

the Collector Service Bulletin, as 

applicable. In the ‘‘Inspection 

Threshold’’ and ‘‘Reinspection 

Intervals’’ columns of Tables 1 and II, 

the Collector Service Bulletin references 

a total of eight notes (i.e., three notes in 

Table 1 and five notes in Table II) 

located at the bottom of those tables. 

Our intent was that the information 

specified in those notes be required as 

part of the applicable compliance time. 

As indicated in NOTE (1) of Tables I 

and II the Collector Service Bulletin, 

‘‘Inspection thresholds and repeat 

inspection intervals are shown for 

convenience, in the event of conflicts 

the individual service bulletin shall take 

precedence. Some service bulletins 

contain inspection options that are not 

shown here.’’ Therefore, for the subject 

inspections, the inspection times listed 

in SB 093–57–058, R5–CN1, take 

precedence. 

In light of this request and other 

similar requests below, we find that 

operators may misinterpret the 

compliance times specified in the 

original NPRM. Therefore, for 

clarification purposes, we have revised 

the supplemental NPRM by listing the 

compliance times for each individual 

service bulletin in a table (i.e., Table 1) 

and revised paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and 

(c)(1) to refer to the individual service 

bulletin listed in Table 1. 

One commenter requests that the 

compliance times specified in 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the 

original NPRM for the initial fatiguerelated inspection (i.e., reference SB 

093–53–276, Basic, dated June 17, 1996) 

be clarified as to whether that 

inspection is to be done at two or four 

years or is dependent upon corrosion 

inhibiting compound (CIC) application. 

The commenter notes that Table 1 of the 

‘‘Collector Service Bulletin states that 

the repetitive interval for Service 

Bulletin 093–53–276 is ‘‘CPCP (5).’’ The 

commenter states that SB 093–53–276 

refers to two Corrosion Prevention and 

Control Program (CPCP) tasks, which 

are accomplished repetitively at either 

two or four years (if 2 part CIC is used). 

We do not agree. SB 093–53–276 

recommends the use of the initial and 

repetitive intervals specified in 

corrosion tasks C–53–120–04 and C–53–

160–01, as described in the Lockheed 

Corrosion Prevention and Control 

Program (CPCP). In this case, the later 

of the times is the 15-year threshold and 

75284 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

10-year repetitive interval specified in 

C–53–160–01. No change to the 

supplemental NPRM is necessary in this 

regard. 

One commenter requests that SB 093–

53–266, which is referenced in the 

Collector Service Bulletin as an 

additional source of service information, 

be revised as described in items 1 

through 4 below. 

1. The initial threshold should be 

‘‘prior to the threshold listed in SB 093–

53–266, or within one ‘C’ interval after 

the effective AD date of the AD, 

whichever occurs later.’’ From this 

comment, we infer that the commenter 

is requesting a grace period for the 

initial threshold specified in the service 

bulletin, because the compliance time 

specified in the subject SB is ‘‘within 1 

year after receipt of this service 

bulletin.’’

We do not agree. As indicated in 

‘‘NOTE 2’’ of the Collector Service 

Bulletin, ‘‘* * * perform these 

inspections as specified except 

substitute ‘Effective Date of 

Airworthiness Directive’ for ‘After 

Receipt of Service Bulletin.’ ’’ Therefore, 

the initial threshold specified in this 

supplemental NPRM is within 1 year 

after the effective date of this AD for 

that SB. However, for clarification 

purposes, we have revised the 

supplemental NPRM by listing the 

compliance times for each individual 

service bulletin in Table 1 and revised 

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c)(1) to 

refer to the individual service bulletin 

listed in that table (discussed 

previously). 

2. For airplanes not previously 

repaired per SB 093–53–264: Within 1 

year, do the inspection per paragraph B 

of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

SB 093–53–266, and repetitively inspect 

frames found to be cracked at intervals 

not to exceed 90 days until modified by 

the referenced ‘‘LCC’’ drawing. 

We do not agree. The 1-year 

inspection threshold is already 

identified in paragraph (1)(C)(1) of SB 

093–53–266. In addition, it is our policy 

to require repair of known cracks before 

further flight (we may make exceptions 

to this policy in certain cases of unusual 

need, as discussed below). This policy 

is based on the fact that such damaged 

airplanes do not conform to the FAAcertificated type design and, therefore, 

are not airworthy until a properly 

approved repair is incorporated. While 

recognizing that repair deferrals may be 

necessary at times, our policy is 

intended to minimize adverse human 

factors relating to the lack of reliability 

of long-term repetitive inspections, 

which may reduce the safety of the type 

certificated design if such repair 

deferrals are practiced routinely. 

Additionally, our policy applies to 

airplanes certificated to damage 

tolerance evaluation regulations, as well 

as those not so certificated.

As noted above, we may make an 

exception to this policy in certain cases, 

if there is an unusual need for a 

temporary deferral. Unusual needs 

include such circumstances as 

legitimate difficulty in acquiring parts to 

accomplish repairs. Under such 

conditions, we may allow a temporary 

deferral of the repair, subject to a 

stringent inspection program acceptable 

to us. We acknowledge that the 

manufacturer has specified inspection 

intervals that are intended to allow 

continued operation with known cracks, 

and to prevent the need for extensive 

repairs. However, since we are not 

aware of any unusual need for repair 

deferral in regard to this supplemental 

NPRM, we have not evaluated these 

inspection intervals. 

We consider the compliance times in 

this supplemental NPRM to be adequate 

to allow operators time to acquire parts 

to have on hand in the event that a crack 

is detected during inspection. Therefore, 

we have determined that, due to the 

safety implications and consequences 

associated with such cracking, any 

subject frame that is found to be cracked 

must be repaired or modified prior to 

further flight. No change to the 

supplemental NPRM is necessary in this 

regard. 

3. For airplanes previously repaired 

per LCC drawings LCC–7622–337 or 

–325: Within 15,000 flight after repair 

installation, and thereafter at intervals 

not to exceed 15,000 cycles, inspect per 

paragraph C of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of SB 093–53–266. 

We do not agree. The compliance 

times identified by the commenter are 

already identified in paragraph (1)(C)(2) 

of SB 093–53–266. No change to the 

supplemental NPRM is necessary in this 

regard. 

4. For airplanes repaired or modified 

per SB 093–53–264 or –266: Every 

heavy maintenance visit (HMV), do a 

visual inspection per paragraph C of SB 

093–53–266. 

We do not agree. The compliance time 

identified by the commenter is already 

identified in paragraph (1)(C)(3) of SB 

093–53–266. No change to the 

supplemental NPRM is necessary in this 

regard. 

One commenter, the airplane 

manufacturer, notes that Table II of the 

Collector Service Bulletin does not 

specify a threshold or repetitive interval 

for SB 093–53–054, Revision 1, dated 

August 12, 1975. However, the notes of 

the Collector Service Bulletin say to 

modify at next HMV. The commenter 

notes that this SB is a modification only. 

From this comment, we infer that the 

commenter is requesting that the 

compliance times specified in paragraph 

(c)(1) of the supplemental NPRM be 

clarified. We agree. For clarification 

purposes, we have revised the 

supplemental NPRM by listing the 

compliance times for each individual 

service bulletin in Table 1 and revised 

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c)(1) to 

refer to the individual service bulletin 

listed in that table (discussed 

previously). 

Request for Credit for Previously 

Approved Alternative Methods of 

Compliance (AMOC) for Other ADs 

One commenter requests that 

previously approved AMOCs for other 

ADs (i.e., AD 91–21–51, and AD 99–09–

14) that refer to several of the SBs listed 

in the Collector Service Bulletin be 

approved for the original NPRM. 

We do not agree. We find that any 

previously approved AMOC must be 

assessed for its impact on the actions 

specified by this supplemental NPRM. 

Paragraph (d) of this supplemental 

NPRM provides affected operators the 

opportunity to apply for an AMOC. No 

change to the supplemental NPRM is 

necessary in this regard. 

Conclusion 

Since certain of these changes expand 

the scope of the originally proposed 

rule, we have determined that it is 

necessary to reopen the comment period 

to provide additional opportunity for 

public comment.

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 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. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 75285

Cost Impact 

There are approximately 235 

airplanes of the affected design in the 

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 

117 airplanes of U.S. registry would be 

affected by this proposed AD. 

It would take approximately 32 work 

hours per airplane (for actions specified 

in Table I of the Collector Service 

Bulletin) and 97 work hours per 

airplane (for actions specified in Table 

II of the Collector Service Bulletin) to 

accomplish the proposed inspections, at 

an average labor rate of $65 per work 

hour. Based on these figures, the cost 

impact of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators is estimated to be $243,360, or 

$2,080 per airplane, per inspection 

cycle (for Table I), and $737,685, or 

$6,305 per airplane, per inspection 

cycle (for Table II). 

It would take approximately 614 work 

hours per airplane to accomplish the 

proposed modifications, at an average 

labor rate is $65 per work hour. 

Required parts would cost 

approximately $142,275 per airplane. 

Based on these figures, the cost impact 

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is 

estimated to be $21,315,645, or 

$182,185 per airplane. 

The cost impact figures discussed 

above are based on assumptions that no 

operator has yet accomplished any of 

the proposed requirements of this AD 

action, and that no operator would 

accomplish those actions in the future if 

this AD were not adopted. The cost 

impact figures discussed in AD 

rulemaking actions represent only the 

time necessary to perform the specific 

actions actually required by the AD. 

These figures typically do not include 

incidental costs, such as the time 

required to gain access and close up, 

planning time, or time necessitated by 

other administrative actions. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

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. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 

44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under 

that section, the FAA is charged with 

promoting safety 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 

AD. 

Regulatory Impact 

The regulations proposed herein 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. Therefore, 

it is determined that this proposal 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this proposed regulation (1) 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 

regulatory evaluation prepared for this 

action is contained in the Rules Docket. 

A copy of it may be obtained by 

contacting the Rules Docket at the 

location provided under the caption 

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the Federal Aviation 

Administration proposes to amend part 

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding the following new airworthiness 

directive:

Lockheed: Docket 99–NM–129–AD.

Applicability: All Model L–1011–385 

series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane 

identified in the preceding applicability 

provision, regardless of whether it has been 

modified, altered, or repaired in the area 

subject to the requirements of this AD. For 

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 

repaired so that the performance of the 

requirements of this AD is affected, the 

owner/operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance in 

accordance with paragraph (d) 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 corrosion or fatigue cracking of 

certain structural elements, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane, accomplish the following: 

Inspections 

(a) At the time specified in the ‘‘Initial 

Compliance Time’’ column of Table 1 of this 

AD, perform structural inspections to detect 

corrosion or fatigue cracking of certain 

structural elements of the airplane, in 

accordance with the applicable service 

bulletins listed under ‘‘Service Bulletin 

Number, Revision, and Date’’ in Tables I and 

II of Lockheed Tristar L–1011 Service 

Bulletin 093–51–041, Revision 1, dated 

March 3, 2000. Thereafter, repeat the 

inspections at intervals specified in the 

‘‘Repetitive Intervals’’ column of Table 1 of 

this AD.

TABLE 1.—COMPLIANCE TIMES

Lockheed service bulletin 

Initial compliance time (whichever occurs later between the times in ‘‘Inspection Threshold’’

and ‘‘Grace Period’’) Repetitive intervals 

Inspection threshold Grace period 

(1) 093–53–269, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1997.Before the accumulation 8,000 total flight cycles or 15,000 total flight hours, whichever 

occurs first.

Within 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first.

At intervals not to exceed 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years, 

whichever occurs 

first. 

(2) 093–53–274, dated 

May 28, 1997.

Within 14 months after the effective date of 

this AD.

(None) ............................................................. At intervals not to exceed 14 months. 

75286 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—COMPLIANCE TIMES—Continued

Lockheed service bulletin 

Initial compliance time (whichever occurs later between the times in ‘‘Inspection Threshold’’

and ‘‘Grace Period’’) Repetitive intervals 

Inspection threshold Grace period 

(3) 093–53–275, dated 

December 10, 1996.

Within 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first.

(None) ............................................................. (None). 

(4) 093–53–276, dated 

June 17, 1996.

At the next Corrosion Prevention and Control 

Program (CPCP) inspection after the effective date of this AD.

(None) ............................................................. At intervals not to exceed the next CPCP 

inspection. 

(5) 093–57–085, Revision 1, dated December 1, 1997.Before the accumulation of 26,000 total flight 

cycles or 48,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Within 1,800 flight cycles or 3,300 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

At intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles or 3,300 flight 

hours, whichever 

first occurs first. 

(6) 093–57–208, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1997.Before the accumulation of 18,000 total flight 

cycles.

Within 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first.

At intervals not to exceed 6,450 flight cycles or 5 first years, 

whichever occurs 

first. 

(7) 093–52–210, dated 

July 19, 1991.

Within 5,000 flight hours or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(None) ............................................................. (None). 

(8) 093–53–054, dated 

August 12, 1975.

Within 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first.

(None) ............................................................. (None). 

(9) 093–53–070, Revision 3, dated September 19, 1989.Before the accumulation of 6,000 total flight 

hours.

Within 1,500 flight hours after the effective 

date of this AD.

At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight 

hours. 

(10) 093–53–085, Revision 3, dated December 15, 1989.Part I: Before the accumulation of 20,000 

flight cycles or 37,000 total flight hours, 

whichever occurs first.

Part I: Within 1,600 flight cycles or 3,000 

flight hours after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs first.

Part I: At intervals not 

to exceed 1,600 

flight cycles or 3,000 

flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

Part II: Before the accumulation of 30,000 

flight cycles or 55,000 total flight hours, 

whichever occurs first.

Part II: Within 5,000 flight cycles or 9,200 

flight hours after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs first.

Part II: At intervals not 

to exceed 5,000 

flight cycles or 9,200 

flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

(11) 093–53–086, Revision 5, dated April 

12, 1990.

Before the accumulation of 9,000 flight cycles 

or 10,000 flight hours, whichever occurs 

first.

Within 1,600 flight cycles or 3,000 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

At intervals not to exceed 1,600 flight cycles or 3,000 flight 

hours, whichever 

occurs first. 

(12) 093–53–110, Revision 1, dated May 7, 

1993.

Before the accumulation of 22,000 total flight 

cycles or 40,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Within 2,200 flight cycles or 4,000 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

At intervals not to exceed 2,200 flight cycles or 4,000 flight 

hours, whichever 

occurs first. 

(13) Change Notification 093–53–260, 

CN4, dated May 8, 

1998.

Before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight 

cycles or 20,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Within 800 flight cycles or 1,500 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

At intervals not to exceed 800 flight cycles or 1,500 flight 

hours, whichever 

occurs first. 

(14) Change Notification 093–53–266, 

CN1, dated July 10, 

1992.

Within 12 months after the effective date of 

this AD.

(None) ............................................................. At intervals not to exceed 90 days. 

(15) Change Notification 093–57–058, 

R5–CN1, dated May 

3, 1993.

Before the accumulation of 20,000 total flight 

cycles or 37,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Within 1,600 flight cycles or 3,000 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

At intervals not to exceed 1,600 flight cycles or 3,000 flight 

hours, whichever 

occurs first. 

(16) Change Notification 093–57–195, 

R3–CN1, dated August 22, 1995.

For airplanes having serial numbers (S/N) 

1002 through 1109 inclusive: Before the 

accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles. 

For airplanes having S/Ns 1110 through 1250 

inclusive: Before the accumulation of 

30,000 total flight cycles..

Within 2,200 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD.

At intervals not to exceed 2,200 flight cycles. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Proposed Rules 75287

TABLE 1.—COMPLIANCE TIMES—Continued

Lockheed service bulletin 

Initial compliance time (whichever occurs later between the times in ‘‘Inspection Threshold’’

and ‘‘Grace Period’’) Repetitive intervals 

Inspection threshold Grace period 

(17) Change Notification 093–57–213, 

CN1, dated February 

20, 1996.

For Model L–1011–385–1, L–1011–385–1–

14, L–1011–385–1–15: Before the accumulation of 15,00 total flight cycles. 

For Model L–1011–385–3: Before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles..

Within 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first.

At intervals not to exceed 6,450 flight cycles or 5 years, 

whichever occurs 

first. 

Corrective Action 

(b) If any cracking or corrosion is detected 

during any inspection required by paragraph 

(a) of this AD, prior to further flight, 

accomplish the actions specified in 

paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(4) of this 

AD.

(1) Repair in accordance with the 

applicable service bulletin referenced in 

Table I or II of Lockheed Tristar L–1011 

Service Bulletin 093–51–041, Revision 1, 

dated March 3, 2000. 

(2) Repair in accordance with the 

applicable section of the Lockheed L–1011 

Structural Repair Manual. 

(3) Accomplish the terminating 

modification in accordance with the 

applicable service bulletin referenced in 

Table I or II of Lockheed Tristar L–1011 

Service Bulletin 093–51–041, Revision 1, 

dated March 3, 2000. 

(4) Repair in accordance with a method 

approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Small 

Airplane Directorate. 

Terminating Action 

(c) Within 5 years or 5,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first, install the terminating 

modification referenced in the applicable 

service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD, 

per the applicable service bulletin. Such 

installation constitutes terminating action for 

the applicable structural inspection required 

by paragraph (a) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(d) 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, Atlanta 

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, Atlanta ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the 

existence of approved alternative methods of 

compliance with this AD, if any, may be 

obtained from the Atlanta ACO.

Special Flight Permits 

(e) 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 7, 2004. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–27520 Filed 12–15–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army 

32 CFR Part 637 

RIN 0702–AA44 

Military Police Investigations

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army 

proposes to add its regulation 

concerning military police 

investigations. The regulation prescribes 

policies and procedures on types and 

categories of offenses investigated by 

Military Police and DA Civilian 

detectives/investigators.

DATES: Comments submitted to the 

address below on or before February 14, 

2005 will be considered.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by ‘‘32 CFR Part 637 and RIN 

0702–AA44’’ in the subject line, by any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: james.crumley@hqdaaoc.army.pentagon.mil. Include 32 CFR 

part 637 and RIN 0702–AA44 in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Mail: Headquarters, Department of 

the Army, Office of the Provost Marshal 

General, ATTN: DAPM–MPD–LE, 2800 

Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20310–2800.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Crumley (703) 692–6721.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

This rule has not previously been 

published. The Administrative 

Procedure Act, as amended by the 

Freedom of Information Act requires 

that certain policies and procedures and 

other information concerning the 

Department of the Army be published in 

the Federal Register. The policies and 

procedures covered by this regulation 

fall into that category. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Army has 

determined that the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act does not apply because 

the proposed rule does not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Department of the Army has 

determined that the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act does not apply 

because the proposed rule does not 

include a mandate that may result in 

estimated costs to State, local or tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or the 

private sector, of $100 million or more. 

D. National Environmental Policy Act

The Department of the Army has 

determined that the National 

Environmental Policy Act does not 

apply because the proposed rule does 

not have an adverse impact on the 

environment. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Department of the Army has 

determined that the Paperwork 

Reduction Act does not apply because 

the proposed rule does not involve 

collection of information from the 

public. 

F. Executive Order 12630 (Government 

Actions and Interference With 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights) 

The Department of the Army has 

determined that Executive Order 12630 

does not apply because the proposed 

rule does not impair private property 

rights.