34938 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Modification

(d) If a fuel nozzle NOT having one of the

General Electric part numbers listed in Table

1 of this AD is installed on any airplane in

a specific operator’s fleet: Within 30 days

after the effective date of this AD, accomplish

the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2)

of this AD on each airplane in the operator’s

fleet, in accordance with either Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–11A2052, Revision 1,

dated August 5, 1999 (for Model 747 series

airplanes); or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

767–11A0031, Revision 1, dated August 12,

1999 (for Model 767 series airplanes); as

applicable.

(1) Remove the existing placard on the

door of the fueling control panel and replace

it with a new placard that restricts the use

of JP–4 and Jet B fuels (wide cut fuels), in

accordance with the applicable alert service

bulletin. Or

(2) Remove any fuel nozzle having a part

number NOT listed in Table 1 of this AD, and

replace it with a fuel nozzle having a part

number listed in Table 1 of this AD, in

accordance with the applicable alert service

bulletin. When an operator’s entire fleet has

only fuel nozzles having a part number listed

in Table 1 of this AD installed, the AFM

revision required by paragraph (c) of this AD

may be removed from the AFM, and the

placard required by paragraph (d)(1) of this

AD may be removed from each airplane.

(e) Except as provided by paragraphs (b)

and (f) of this AD, if all fuel nozzles installed

on any airplane in a specific operator’s fleet

have one of the General Electric part numbers

listed in Table 1 of this AD, no further action

is required by this AD.

Spares

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

person shall install any fuel nozzle NOT

having one of the General Electric part

numbers listed in Table 1 of this AD on any

airplane unless the requirements specified by

paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (d)(1) of this AD

have been accomplished for the operator’s

entire fleet.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g)(1) 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,

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, Seattle ACO.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance,

approved previously in accordance with AD

98–08–23, amendment 39–10472, are

approved as alternative methods of

compliance with this AD.

Note 2: 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

(h) 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

(i) Except as provided by paragraph (c) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–11A2052, dated September 11,

1997, or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

11A2052, Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999

(for Model 747 series airplanes); or Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 767–11A0031, dated

September 11, 1997, or Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 767–11A0031, Revision 1, dated

August 12, 1999 (for Model 767 series

airplanes); as applicable.

(1) The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–11A2052,

Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; and Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 767–11A0031,

Revision 1, dated August 12, 1999; is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–11A2052,

dated September 11, 1997; and Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 767–11A0031, dated

September 11, 1997; was approved

previously by the Director of the Federal

Register as of May 1, 1998 (63 FR 18817,

April 16, 1998).

(3) Copies may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. 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 Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Effective Date

(j) This amendment becomes effective on

July 6, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 23,

2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–13447 Filed 5–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–343–AD; Amendment

39–11757; AD 2000–11–09]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A319, A320, and A321 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Airbus Model

A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes,

that requires repetitive inspections of

the sliding tube subassembly on the

main landing gear (MLG) to detect

cracks, and replacement of a cracked

subassembly with a new subassembly.

This amendment also eventually

requires a more extensive, one-time

inspection of the same area and

corrective actions, if necessary; which

terminates the repetitive inspections.

This amendment is prompted by

issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. The

actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent cracking of the MLG

sliding tube subassembly, which could

result in collapse of the MLG.

DATES: Effective July 6, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of July 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 227–1149.

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 Airbus

Model A319, A320, and A321 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on February 15, 2000 (65 FR

7465). That action proposed to require

repetitive inspections of the sliding tube

subassembly on the main landing gear

(MLG) to detect cracks, and replacement

of a cracked subassembly with a new

subassembly. That action also proposed

to eventually require a more extensive,

one-time inspection of the same area

and corrective actions, if necessary;

which would terminate the repetitive

inspections.

Comments Received

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 34939

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Previous Inspections of MLG Sliding

Tubes

Two commenters request that the

applicability of the proposed AD be

revised to exclude airplanes on which

certain conditions regarding the MLG

sliding tubes are met. Specifically, the

commenters request that airplanes be

excluded if it can be determined that (1)

the MLG sliding tubes have never been

removed; (2) a magnetic particle nondestructive test (NDT2) inspection has

never been accomplished on the

installed MLG sliding tubes; or, (3) an

NDT2 inspection has been

accomplished on the installed MLG

sliding tubes only after removal of

attaching hardware and bushings. One

commenter states that, contrary to the

assertion in the proposed AD that these

conditions cannot be easily determined,

each operator is required to track such

information for its airplanes. The

commenter notes that, since an MLG

sliding tube is a safe life-limited item,

operators are required to maintain

complete records of maintenance and

overhaul. And, since the NDT2

inspection can be performed only in a

shop environment, there should be no

concern that such an inspection could

have occurred ‘‘on-wing,’’ without

generation of proper maintenance

records.

The FAA acknowledges that operators

are required to maintain status records

for each safe life-limited part with

regard to the life limits of that part, i.e.,

hours or cycles of operation. However,

not all operators maintain complete

maintenance records for the life of the

part, and such records would be

necessary in order to make a definitive

determination of the conditions defined

above. The FAA has no objection to

revising the applicability of the AD to

exclude those airplanes on which one of

these conditions can be definitively

shown. The FAA has revised the

applicability accordingly, and has

added a ‘‘NOTE’’ to the final rule to

specify that complete maintenance

records are considered necessary in

order to determine whether one of the

above conditions has been met.

Exemption from Requirements of AD

One commenter, an operator, states

that its airplanes have never been

subjected to an NDT2 inspection (as

referenced in Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–32–1189, dated December 23,

1998), and hence are exempt from the

repetitive inspections required by the

proposed AD.

The FAA considers that reiteration of

the requirements of the specified

applicability of the proposed AD is

necessary. The commenter is referring to

a determination that an NDT2

inspection has never been accomplished

[as described in condition (2) above] on

its airplanes. All operators should be

aware that the applicability of this AD

(or any other AD) takes precedence over

the effectivity listed in the referenced

service bulletin. The exemption

declared by the commenter, based on

the information in the service bulletin,

was NOT included in the applicability

of the proposed AD, for reasons

described in the ‘‘Differences’’ section of

the preamble of the proposed AD.

Therefore, the commenter was indeed

subject to the requirements of the AD

with the applicability as proposed.

However, since the applicability of the

final rule has been revised, as discussed

above, the commenter may now

reevaluate its determination of affected

airplanes based on the applicability

specified in the final rule.

Revision to Applicability of AD

One commenter states that the

applicability of the proposed AD is

confusing, and suggests that it be

revised to include airplanes ‘‘only if the

initial issue of Messier-Dowty SB 200–

32–250 has been accomplished.’’ (The

original Messier-Dowty service bulletin

called for an NDT2 inspection without

specifying removal of the jacking dome

bushings. If the jacking dome bushings

were not removed, high temperature

damage could have occurred to the MLG

bore and bushings.) The commenter

states that Airbus Service Bulletin

A320–32–1189, dated December 23,

1998, was issued to alert operators of

potential cracking that can occur if the

NDT2 inspection procedures in the

original Messier-Dowty service bulletin

were used.

The FAA does not concur with

limiting the applicability as suggested,

due to potential difficulties in

determining the complete inspection

history of installed MLG sliding tubes,

as described previously. However, the

FAA has determined that an inadvertent

error in the proposed applicability may

have created confusion. The

applicability of the proposed AD

includes airplanes ‘‘. . . except those on

which Airbus Service Bulletin A320–

32–1189, dated December 23, 1998, has

not been accomplished.’’ Since the

actions described in Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–32–1189 are actually

required by this AD, the FAA’s intent in

the proposed applicability was to

exclude airplanes on which all actions

described in Service Bulletin A320–32–

1189 have been accomplished.

Therefore, the FAA has determined that

the applicability should have read ‘‘. . .

except those on which Airbus Service

Bulletin A320–32–1189, dated

December 23, 1998, has been

accomplished.’’ The final rule has been

revised accordingly.

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 with the change

described previously. The FAA has

determined that this change will neither

increase the economic burden on any

operator nor increase the scope of the

AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 179 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD.

It will take approximately 1 work

hour per airplane to accomplish the

required ‘‘Part A’’ (repetitive)

inspection, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the ‘‘Part A’’

(repetitive) inspection on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $10,740, or $60 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

It will take approximately 6 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

required ‘‘Part B’’ (one-time) inspection,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the ‘‘Part B’’ (one-time)

inspection on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $64,440, or $360 per

airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are 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)

34940 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

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:

2000–11–09 Airbus: Amendment 39–11757.

Docket 99–NM–343–AD.

Applicability: Model A319, A320, and

A321 series airplanes; manufacturer serial

numbers through 0875 inclusive; certificated

in any category; except those on which

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1189,

dated December 23, 1998, has been

accomplished; and except those on which it

can be shown that one of the following

conditions has been met (also see NOTE 1):

(1) The main landing gear (MLG) sliding

tubes have never been removed from the

airplane;

(2) A magnetic particle non-destructive test

(NDT2) inspection has never been

accomplished on any of the MLG sliding

tubes installed on the airplane; or

(3) If an NDT2 inspection has been

accomplished on any of the MLG sliding

tubes installed on the airplane, it was

accomplished only after removal of the

attaching hardware and bushings.

Note 1: Operators should note that

complete maintenance records for the life of

each MLG sliding tube are necessary in order

to make a definitive determination of

whether any condition specified in the

Applicability of the AD has been met.

Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 cracking of the sliding tube

subassembly of the main landing gear (MLG),

which could result in collapse of the MLG,

accomplish the following:

Inspections

(a) Within 500 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, perform a detailed

visual inspection to detect cracking of the

left-hand and right-hand MLG sliding tube

subassemblies, in accordance with paragraph

2.B.(1) of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1189,

dated December 23, 1998.

(1) If no crack is found, repeat the

inspection at intervals not to exceed 500

flight hours, until the requirements of

paragraph (b) of this AD have been

accomplished.

(2) If any crack is found, prior to further

flight, replace the sliding tube subassembly

with a new subassembly, in accordance with

the service bulletin. Thereafter, repeat the

inspection at intervals not to exceed 500

flight hours, until the requirements of

paragraph (b) of this AD have been

accomplished.

Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘an

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

(b) Within 15 months after the effective

date of this AD: Remove the jacking dome,

the stop washer, the jacking dome bushing,

and the harness supports; and perform

detailed visual inspections to detect

discrepancies (including cracking of the left

and right MLG sliding tube subassemblies,

and overheat damage of the jacking dome

bushing), in accordance with paragraph

2.B.(2) of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1189,

dated December 23, 1998. Accomplishment

of the requirements of this paragraph

constitutes terminating action for the

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(1) If no discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, install a new stop washer and

jacking dome bushing, in accordance with

the service bulletin. No further action is

required by this AD.

(2) If any discrepancy is found, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate; or the

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile

(DGAC) (or its delegated agent). For a repair

method to be approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, as required

by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval

letter must specifically reference 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,

International Branch, ANM–116. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

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) Except as required by paragraph (b)(2),

the actions shall be done in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1189,

dated December 23, 1998. 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 Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac

Cedex, France. Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 1999–358–

137(B) R1, dated October 20, 1999.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

July 6, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 23,

2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–13446 Filed 5–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U