26738 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

(f) Where can I get information about any

already-approved alternative methods of

compliance? Contact Cindy Lorenzen,

Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center, 1895

Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, GA

30349; telephone: (770) 703–6078; facsimile,

(770) 703–6097.

(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to

another location to comply with this AD?

FAA can issue a special flight permit under

sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and

21.199) to operate your airplane to a location

where you can accomplish the requirements

of this AD .

(h) Are any service bulletins incorporated

into this AD by reference? You must

accomplish the actions required by this AD

in accordance with Maule Mandatory Service

Bulletin No. 20, dated December 27, 1999.

The Director of the Federal Register approved

this incorporation by reference under 5

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You can get

copies from Maule Aerospace Technology,

Inc., 2099 Georgia Hwy. 133 South, Moultrie,

GA 31768. You can look at copies at FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Regional

Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,

MO, or at the Office of the Federal Register,

800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(i) When does this amendment become

effective? This amendment becomes effective

on May 30, 2000.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April

27, 2000.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–11176 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–244–AD; Amendment

39–11704; AD 2000–08–18]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9 Series Airplanes,

and Model MD–88 and MD–90–30

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9 series airplanes,

and Model MD–88 and MD–90–30

airplanes, that requires replacement of

the lanyard assembly pins of the

evacuation slides with solid corrosionresistant pins. This amendment is

prompted by a report that, due to stress

corrosion on the lanyard pins, the arms

of the lanyard assembly of the

evacuation slide were found to be

frozen. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to prevent the improper

deployment of the evacuation slide due

to stress corrosion, which could delay or

impede evacuation of passengers during

an emergency.

DATES: Effective June 13, 2000. The

incorporation by reference of certain

publications listed in the regulations is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of June 13, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Aircraft

Group, Long Beach Division, 3855

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, CA

90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Dept. C1–L51 (2–60).

This information may be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate,

Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, WA; or at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA;

or at the Office of the Federal Register,

800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Sinclair, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137;

telephone (562) 627–5338; fax (562)

627–5210.

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 McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9 series airplanes,

and Model MD–88 and MD–90–30

airplanes was published as a

supplemental notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal

Register on November 26, 1999 (64 FR

66417). That action proposed to require

replacement of the lanyard assembly

pins of the evacuation slides with solid

corrosion-resistant pins.

Comments Received

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for Proposed AD

One commenter supports the

proposed AD. Another commenter states

that the proposed AD does not affect its

fleet.

Requests To Revise Applicability

Statement of Proposed AD

Two commenters request that the

applicability statement of the proposed

AD be revised to exclude freighter

airplanes on which emergency

evacuation slides have not been

installed. The commenters state that

such a revision would eliminate

alternative method of compliance

(AMOC) requests. The commenters did

not provide any data to substantiate

their request.

The FAA does not concur. The FAA

is unable to verify that all freighter

airplanes are not equipped with

evacuation slides. Therefore, all affected

freighter airplanes must be included in

the applicability statement of the final

rule. However, under the provisions of

paragraph (c) of the final rule, the FAA

may consider requests for approval of an

AMOC if sufficient data are submitted to

substantiate that replacement of the

lanyard pins with solid corrosionresistant pin are not necessary.

One commenter questions whether

Boeing latch assembly, part number (P/

N) 69–70843–1, should be included in

the applicability statement of the

proposed AD. The commenter states

that the roll pin, P/N MS39086–140,

which resulted in the corrosion

problem, is present in the Boeing latch

assembly, as well as the Douglas latch

assembly, P/N’s 3961899–1 and

3956939–501.

The FAA has determined that the

subject Boeing latch assemblies are not

susceptible to stress corrosion, and

therefore, are not subject to the

identified unsafe condition of this AD.

Therefore, no change to the final rule is

necessary.

Requests for Alternative Method of

Compliance (AMOC)

One commenter requests that the FAA

approve lanyard assembly pin, P/N

MS16555–627, as an AMOC for the pin

required by the AD (reference

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin DC9–25A357, dated February

11, 1997). The commenter states that

this pin is shorter and would not require

any machining. If the FAA does not

approve the pin having P/N MS16555–

627, the commenter requests that the

FAA approve the installation of an

unmodified pin, P/N MS16555–628,

which would protrude from the latch

assembly. The commenter states that

both of these alternatives would not

interfere with the operation of the

lanyard or deployment of the slide and

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 26739

would provide the same level of safety

as the pin required by the AD.

The FAA does not concur. The FAA

finds that the shorter pin would not

provide an equivalent level of safety to

that of the pin required by the AD,

because the taper on the end of the

shorter pin would not provide the same

level of pin retention. The shorter pin

could become loose and fall out of the

latch, thus causing the latch to fail. The

FAA also finds that a pin that extends

past the surface of the latch could cause

the latch to hang up and fail. Therefore,

no change to the final rule is necessary.

One commenter requests that the

proposed AD be revised to include an

AMOC, which was approved by the

airplane manufacturer, to eliminate the

need of each airline making a request to

the FAA on an individual basis. The

commenter states that the AMOC

involves a program to accomplish,

among other things, an initial check of

the lanyard and then to periodically

check, clean, and refurbish the subject

lanyards with new roll pins of the same

P/N.

The FAA does not concur. Because

Airplane Maintenance Programs vary

from operator to operator, there are no

assurances that each operator’s Airplane

Maintenance Program contains the

identical actions required by this AD.

However, under the provisions of

paragraph (c) of the final rule, the FAA

may consider requests for approval of an

AMOC if sufficient data are submitted to

substantiate that such an AMOC would

provide an acceptable level of safety.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule as proposed.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 2,167

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9 series

airplanes, and Model MD–88 and MD–

90–30 airplanes of the affected design in

the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates

that 1,200 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

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$144,000, or $120 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.

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:

2000–08–18 McDonnell Douglas:

Amendment 39–11704. Docket 97-NM–

244–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9 series airplanes,

and Model MD–88 airplanes, as listed in

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin

DC9–25A357, Revision 02, dated May 28,

1998; and Model MD–90–30 airplanes, as

listed in McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin MD90–25A019, dated February 11,

1997; 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 (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 the improper deployment of the

evacuation slide, which could delay or

impede evacuation of passengers during an

emergency, accomplish the following:

Replacement

(a) Within 180 days after the effective date

of this AD, replace the lanyard assembly pins

of the evacuation slides with solid corrosionresistant pins, in accordance with McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80–

25A357, dated February 11, 1997, Revision

01, dated March 16, 1998, or Revision 02,

dated May 28, 1998 (for Model DC–9 series

airplanes and Model MD–88 airplanes); or

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin

MD90–25A019, dated February 11, 1997 (for

Model MD–90–30 airplanes); as applicable.

Spares

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

lanyard assembly, part number (P/N)

3961899–1 or P/N 3956939–501, shall be

installed on any airplane unless that

assembly has been modified in accordance

with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this

AD.

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, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles 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) The replacement shall be done in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin MD80–25A357, dated

February 11, 1997; McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin DC9–25A357, Revision 01,

dated March 16, 1998; McDonnell Douglas

Alert Service Bulletin DC9–25A357, Revision

26740 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

02, dated May 28, 1998; or McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD90–

25A019, dated February 11, 1997; as

applicable. 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 Aircraft Group,

Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846,

Attention: Technical Publications Business

Administration, Dept. C1–L51 (2–60). Copies

may be inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

June 13, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 19,

2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–10288 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 95

[Docket No. 30029; Amdt. No. 422]

IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous

Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts

miscellaneous amendments to the

required IFR (instrument flight rules)

altitudes and changeover points for

certain Federal airways, jet routes, or

direct routes for which a minimum or

maximum en route authorized IFR

altitude is prescribed. This regulatory

action is needed because of changes

occurring in the National Airspace

System. These changes are designed to

provide for the safe and efficient use of

the navigable airspace under instrument

conditions in the affected areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, June 10,

2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure

Standards Branch (AMCAFS–420),

Flight Technologies and Programs

Division, Flight Standards Service,

Federal Aviation Administration, Mike

Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500

South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma City,

OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box

25082 Oklahoma City, OK. 73125)

telephone: (405) 954–4164.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

amendment to part 95 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95)

amends, suspends, or revokes IFR

altitudes governing the operation of all

aircraft in flight over a specified route

or any portion of that route, as well as

the changeover points (COPs) for

Federal airways, jet routes, or direct

routes as prescribed in part 95.

The Rule

The specified IFR altitudes, when

used in conjunction with the prescribed

changeover points for those routes,

ensure navigation aid coverage that is

adequate for safe flight operations and

free of frequency interference. The

reasons and circumstances that create

the need for this amendment involve

matters of flight safety and operational

efficiency in the National Airspace

System, are related to published

aeronautical charts that are essential to

the user, and provide for the safe and

efficient use of the navigable airspace.

In addition, those various reasons or

circumstances require making this

amendment effective before the next

scheduled charting and publication date

of the flight information to assure its

timely availability to the user. The

effective date of this amendment reflects

those considerations. In view of the

close and immediate relationship

between these regulatory changes and

safety in air commerce, I find that notice

and public procedure before adopting

this amendment are impracticable and

contrary to the public interest and that

good cause exists for making the

amendment effective in less than 30

days.

Conclusion

The FAA has determined that this

regulation only involves an established

body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are

necessary to keep them operationally

current. It, therefore—(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)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. For the same

reason, the FAA certifies that this

amendment will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 95

Airspace Navigation (air).

Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 3,

2000.

L. Nicholas Lacey,

Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, part 95 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) is

amended as follows effective at 0901

UTC.

PART 95—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 95

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106,

40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44719,

44721.

2. Part 95 is amended to read as

follows:

REVISIONS TO IFR ALTITUDES AND CHANGEOVER POINTS

[Amendment 422 Effective Date: June 15, 2000]

From To MEA

Color Routes

§ 95.10 Amber Federal Airway 7 Is Added To Read

Campbell Lake, AK NDB .............................................................. Mineral Creek AK NDB ................................................................ 12,100

Color Routes

§ 95.60 Blue Federal Airway 2 Is Added to Read

Point Lay, AK NDB ....................................................................... Cape Lisburne, AK NDB/DME ..................................................... 4,000

Cape Lisbune, AK NDB/DME ....................................................... Hotham, AK NDB ......................................................................... *8,000