62994 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

business, will no longer be handling

olives after it markets its old crop

inventory, and that it no longer desired

to serve on the Committee. The

Committee unanimously recommended

modifying the rules and regulations to

reallocate handler membership equally

between two handlers with each

handler represented by four members

and four alternates. This rule enables

the Committee to operate at full

strength; i.e., with the eight handler and

eight producer positions filled.

One alternative to this rule discussed

at the meeting was to leave the language

in § 932.159 unchanged; however, the

current language is no longer

appropriate. The current language

specifies that the two handlers who

handled the largest and second largest

volume of olives during the crop year in

which nominations are made and in the

preceding crop year shall be represented

by three members and alternate

members each, and that the remaining

handler shall be represented by two

members and two alternate members.

Since one of the remaining handlers no

longer desires to serve on the

Committee, the language concerning the

two seats allocated to the third handler

is no longer appropriate. Therefore, the

Committee recommended that handler

membership be reallocated equally

between two handlers and that each

handler be represented by four members

and four alternate members.

This final rule will not impose any

additional reporting or recordkeeping

requirements on either of the two olive

handlers. As with all Federal marketing

order programs, reports and forms are

periodically reviewed to reduce

information requirements and

duplication by industry and public

sector agencies. In addition, the

Department has not identified any

relevant Federal rules that duplicate,

overlap, or conflict with this rule.

Further, the Committee’s meeting was

widely publicized throughout the olive

industry and all interested persons were

invited to attend the meeting and

participate in Committee deliberations

on all issues. Like all Committee

meetings, the meeting at which the

recommendation was made was a public

meeting and all entities, both large and

small, were able to express their views

on this issue. All of the industry

handlers currently represented on the

Committee participated in the

deliberations. Finally, interested

persons were invited to submit

information on the regulatory and

informational impacts of this action on

small businesses.

A proposed rule concerning this

action was published in the Federal

Register on September 11, 2000 (65 FR

54818). Copies of the rule were mailed

or sent via facsimile to all Committee

members and olive handlers. Finally,

the rule was made available through the

Internet by the Office of the Federal

Register. A 30-day comment period

ending October 11, 2000, was provided

to allow interested persons to respond

to this proposal. No comments were

received.

A small business guide on complying

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop

marketing agreements and orders may

be viewed at the following website:

http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/

moab.html. Any questions about the

compliance guide should be sent to Jay

Guerber at the previously mentioned

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant

matter presented, including the

information and recommendation

submitted by the Committee and other

available information, it is hereby found

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,

will tend to effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

It is further found that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this rule until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register (5

U.S.C.) because the two vacant handler

member seats on the Committee should

be filled as soon as possible, so that the

Committee can operate at full strength.

Further, handlers are aware of this rule,

which was recommended at a public

meeting. Also, a 30-day comment period

was provided for in the proposed rule

and no comments were received.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932

Marketing agreements, Olives,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is amended as

follows:

PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN

CALIFORNIA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 932 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 932.159 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 932.159 Reallocation of handler

membership.

Pursuant to § 932.25, handler

representation on the Committee is

reallocated to provide that the two

handlers who handled the largest and

second largest total volume of olives

during the crop year in which

nominations are made and in the

preceding crop year shall each be

represented by four members and four

alternate members.

Dated: October 17, 2000.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–27082 Filed 10–17–00; 5:09 pm]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–35–AD; Amendment

39–11933; AD 2000–21–01]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed

Model L–1011–385 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Lockheed Model L–

1011–385 series airplanes, that requires

repetitive inspections to detect

corrosion or fatigue cracking of certain

structural elements of the airplane;

corrective action, if necessary; and

incorporation of certain structural

modifications. This amendment is

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.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent corrosion or fatigue

cracking of certain structural elements,

which could result in reduced structural

integrity of the airplane.

DATES: Effective November 24, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of November

24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Lockheed Martin Aircraft &

Logistics Center, 120 Orion Street,

Greenville, South Carolina 29605. 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 FAA,

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,

One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia;

or at the Office of the Federal Register,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62995

800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Peters, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center,

1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone (770)

703–6063; fax (770) 703–6097.

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 all Lockheed Model

L–1011–385 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

June 25, 1999 (64 FR 34170). That action

proposed to require repetitive

inspections to detect corrosion or

fatigue cracking of certain structural

elements of the airplane; corrective

action, if necessary; and incorporation

of certain structural modifications.

Explanation of New Service

Information

Since the issuance of the notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM), the FAA

has reviewed and approved Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision

2, dated October 21, 1999. The actions

described in Revision 2 of the service

bulletin are essentially similar to those

described in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–51–040, Revision 1, dated October

1, 1997 (which was referenced as the

applicable source of service information

for accomplishment of the actions

specified in the NPRM). Revision 2 of

the service bulletin corrects and updates

certain references, and adds and revises

certain ‘‘notes’’ to improve clarity.

Therefore, the FAA finds that either

Revision 1 or Revision 2 of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–51–040

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the Collector

Service Bulletin’’) is an acceptable

source of service information for the

actions required by this AD.

However, certain new revisions of the

individual service bulletins listed in

Tables I and II of Revision 2 of the

Collector Service Bulletin have reduced

the compliance times for certain actions

below what was specified in the

individual service bulletins listed in

Revision 1 of the Collector Service

Bulletin. The FAA finds that to reduce

the compliance times in this way would

necessitate issuance of a supplemental

NPRM and reopening of the comment

period to allow adequate time for public

comment. The FAA finds that it is

inappropriate to further delay issuance

of the final rule in this way. Therefore,

while this AD allows accomplishment

of the actions in this AD in accordance

with either Revision 1 or Revision 2 of

the Collector Service Bulletin, the

applicable compliance thresholds and

repetitive intervals are those listed in

the individual service bulletins listed in

Tables I and II of Revision 1. Paragraphs

(a)(1) and (a)(2), which specify the

compliance times for paragraph (a) of

this AD, reference only Revision 1 of the

Collector Service Bulletin, and a new

note, ‘‘Note 2,’’ has been added to this

final rule to clarify this issue.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Proposed Rule

One commenter supports the

proposed rule.

Provide Grace Period for Certain

Inspections in Paragraph (a)

One commenter notes that, though

paragraph (a)(2) of the proposed rule

provides a grace period of ‘‘one

repetitive interval after the effective date

of this AD’’ for the inspections specified

in paragraph (a) of the proposed rule,

certain inspections are one-time

inspections and, therefore, do not have

a repetitive interval.

The commenter makes no specific

request for a change to the proposed

rule. However, the FAA infers that the

commenter is requesting that the FAA

clarify the grace period for

accomplishment of the subject one-time

inspections. The FAA concurs that some

clarification is needed, and notes that

the inspections without repetitive

intervals in Table I reference ‘‘Footnote

3,’’ which provides a grace period of the

‘‘next ’C’ check not to exceed 14 months

for aircraft exceeding threshold.’’ The

FAA finds that a grace period of 14

months is adequate to ensure that the

unsafe condition is addressed in a

timely manner, without adversely

affecting the safety of the airplane fleet.

Therefore, paragraph (a)(2) of this AD

has been revised to specify a grace

period of 14 months after the effective

date of this AD for the service bulletins

listed in Tables I and II of the Collector

Service Bulletin that do not specify a

repetitive interval.

Eliminate Duplicate Requirements

One commenter questions whether

the repetitive inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–258,

Revision 1, dated April 4, 1996, as listed

in Table II of the Collector Service

Bulletin, should be included in the

proposed rule. The commenter notes

that these inspections are already

required by AD 95–17–03, amendment

39–9332 (60 FR 40753, August 10,

1995).

The commenter makes no specific

request for a change to the proposed

rule; however, the FAA infers that it is

requesting that this AD eliminate the

inspections in Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–258, Revision 1, from

the requirements of this AD. The FAA

concurs. While the AD referenced by the

commenter requires inspections with

the original issue of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–258, dated February

20, 1990, the FAA finds that the

inspections in accordance with that

bulletin, as required by AD 95–17–03,

are acceptable for compliance with this

AD. Therefore, the FAA has revised

paragraph (b) of this AD to state that the

structural inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–258,

Revision 1, are not required by this AD,

and that equivalent inspections are

already required by AD 95–17–03. The

modifications of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–258, Revision 1, that

terminate the inspections currently

required by AD 95–17–03 are required

by this AD.

The same commenter questions why

the inspections in Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–57–203, Revision 5, dated

April 22, 1996, are included in the

requirements of paragraph (a) of the

proposed AD. The commenter points

out that paragraph (e) of the proposed

rule would require installation of the

terminating modification in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–215, dated

April 11, 1996, which eliminates the

need for the inspections in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–203, Revision

5.

The FAA concurs with the

commenter’s intent, though not for the

reason stated by the commenter.

Accomplishment of the inspections

described in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–57–203 is necessary to ensure

continued safety of the airplane fleet

until accomplishment of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–215. However,

the FAA notes that inspections similar

to those specified in Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–57–203, Revision 5, are

currently required by AD 98–10–14,

amendment 39–10526 (63 FR 26966,

May 15, 1998). (AD 98–10–14 requires

inspections in accordance with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–57–203,

Revision 4, dated March 27, 1995, or

Revision 6, dated August 18, 1997.)

Thus, including these inspections in

this AD would unnecessarily duplicate

compliance requirements. Therefore,

paragraph (b) of this AD has been

revised to state that the structural

62996 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

inspections specified in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–203, Revision

5, are not required by this AD, and that

equivalent inspections are already

required by AD 98–10–14. The

terminating modifications of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–215 are

required by this AD.

Request To Acknowledge Superseding

Requirement

One commenter notes that the

inspections specified in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–249 are

currently required as part of the

requirements of AD 94–05–01,

amendment 39–8839 (59 FR 10275,

March 4, 1994). (AD 94–05–01 requires

accomplishment of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–035, dated June 28,

1990—an older ‘‘Collector’’ service

bulletin.) However, the proposed AD

would reduce the repetitive inspection

interval for the inspections in that

bulletin from 5,000 to 4,500 flight

cycles. The commenter requests that

language be added to the proposed rule

to acknowledge that accomplishment of

the repetitive inspections in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–249, Revision

3, dated February 28, 1994, at 4,500

flight cycle intervals, in accordance

with this AD, eliminates the need to

record accomplishment of the

inspections in that service bulletin as

required by AD 94–05–01. The

commenter notes that this will eliminate

confusion and dual compliance tracking

for operators.

The FAA partially concurs with the

commenter’s request. Because AD 94–

05–01 requires accomplishment of

another ‘‘Collector’’ service bulletin,

which lists numerous service bulletins,

the FAA is unable to revise the

requirement to accomplish the actions

in only one of those service bulletins

without superseding that entire AD.

Such an action cannot be undertaken in

the context of this rulemaking action.

Therefore, all of the requirements of AD

94–05–01 are still applicable. As noted

by the commenter, this results in two

parallel inspection requirements;

operators will be responsible for

tracking compliance for both

requirements. However, the FAA notes

that the inspection in accordance with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–249,

Revision 3, need only be accomplished

at the 4,500-flight-cycle interval

required by this AD. To clarify this, a

new note ‘‘Note 3’’ has been added

following paragraph (a)(2) of this AD, to

state, ‘‘The inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–249,

Revision 3, dated February 28, 1994, are

included in the requirements of both AD

94–05–01, amendment 39–8839, and

paragraph (a) of this AD. Inspections in

accordance with Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–249, Revision 3, at the

interval specified in Table I of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision

1, as required by this AD, are acceptable

for compliance with the inspections in

accordance with Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–249, Revision 3,

required by AD 94–05–01.’’

Require Overhaul of Main Landing

Gear Actuator

One commenter states that one of the

purposes of Revision 1 of the Collector

Service Bulletin was to require overhaul

of the main landing gear (MLG) actuator

within 10 years after previous

modification or overhaul. The proper

procedures for the MLG overhaul are

described in Change Notice (CN) 1,

dated September 21, 1998, for Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–32–238, Revision

3. However, Revision 1 of the Collector

Service Bulletin references Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–32–238, Revision

3, with no mention of CN 1. The

commenter asserts that the proposed AD

would not mandate the MLG overhaul

as intended.

The commenter makes no specific

request for a change to the proposed AD.

However, the FAA infers that the

commenter is requesting that the

proposed rule be revised to reference

CN 1 of the subject service bulletin. The

FAA partially concurs. The FAA

acknowledges that the current version of

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–32–238

is Revision 3, as revised by CN 1. The

FAA also notes that Revision 2 of the

Collector Service Bulletin incorporates

the correct reference. However, to revise

the proposed AD to specify overhaul of

the MLG actuator in accordance with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–32–238,

Revision 3, as revised by CN 1, would

necessitate reopening the comment

period to allow adequate time for public

comment. Because of the criticality of

the unsafe condition addressed in this

AD, the FAA finds that to delay

issuance of the final rule in this way

would be inappropriate. However, the

FAA is considering further rulemaking

to ensure that overhaul of the MLG

actuator is accomplished in a timely

manner in accordance with Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–32–238, Revision

3, as revised by CN 1. A new paragraph,

paragraph (e), has been added to this

final rule (and subsequent paragraphs

have been reordered accordingly) to

specify that overhaul of the main

landing gear actuator in accordance

with Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–32–

238, Revision 3, dated April 11, 1996, as

listed in Table II of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 1, dated

October 1, 1997, is not required by

paragraph (d) of this AD.

Extend Compliance Times

One commenter expresses concern

regarding the inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–270,

Revision 1, dated August 23, 1996, and

the modification specified in Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–271, dated

October 18, 1995. The commenter

operates several airplanes modified in

accordance with a certain supplemental

type certificate. The configuration of

those airplanes will necessitate request

for approval of alternative methods of

compliance (AMOC) for the actions

specified in these service bulletins. The

commenter is concerned that it will not

be able to accomplish the AMOC’s

within the compliance time proposed in

this AD for those actions.

The commenter makes no specific

request for a change to this AD.

However, the FAA infers that it is

requesting extension of the compliance

time for the subject requirements. The

FAA does not concur that such an

extension is appropriate. The inspection

threshold of 13,000 or 9,000 flight

cycles (depending on airplane

configuration) and repetitive inspection

interval of 2,500 flight cycles for the

actions in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–53–270, Revision 1, and the

threshold of 20,000 flight cycles for the

actions in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–53–271, were established based on

consideration of structural damage risk,

damage probability, and damage growth

rate. As noted by the commenter, if the

commenter’s unique circumstances

make it impossible to comply with the

requirements of this AD as written, it

will need to submit a request for

approval of an AMOC, in accordance

with paragraph (g) of this AD. The FAA

finds that the compliance time is

adequate for the commenter to submit

its request for approval of an AMOC and

for the FAA to review the request. No

change to the final rule is necessary in

this regard.

Clarify Terminating Action

One commenter requests that the

proposed rule be revised to clearly

indicate which revisions of the service

bulletins associated with the rear spar

modification are acceptable for

terminating the rear spar inspections

described in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–57–203 (which, as described

previously, are currently required by AD

98–10–14). The commenter notes that

Revision 1 of the Collector Service

Bulletin lists Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–57–184, Revisions 2 through 7, and

Service Bulletin 093–57–196, Revisions

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62997

1 through 6, as acceptable sources for

instructions for the rear spar

modifications. However, AD 98–10–14

lists only Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–57–184, Revision 6, dated October

28, 1991, and Revision 7, dated

December 6, 1994, and Service Bulletin

093–57–196, Revision 5, dated October

28, 1991, and Revision 6, dated

December 6, 1994, as sources of service

information for the modifications of the

rear spar to terminate the repetitive

inspections required by AD 98–10–14.

The FAA does not concur and has

determined that no change to the final

rule is necessary relevant to the

commenter’s request. This

determination is based on the following:

• As explained previously, structural

inspections equivalent to those

specified in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–57–203, Revision 5, are required by

AD 98–10–14. [Paragraph (b) of this

final rule has been revised to clarify this

information.]

• AD 98–10–14 correctly states

terminating action for the requirements

of that AD. Therefore, use of any other

revision to accomplish the

modifications would necessitate request

for approval of an AMOC in accordance

with paragraph (c) of AD 98–10–14.

• Current revisions of the referenced

modification bulletins, as well as

Revision 2 of the Collector Service

Bulletin (described previously),

correctly indicate which revisions are

acceptable for terminating the

inspections in Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–57–203.

• Section 2.B. of Revisions 1 and 2 of

the Collector Service Bulletin (page 9)

states, ‘‘Aircraft effectivity, inspection

thresholds, and repeat inspection

intervals are shown for convenience,

and in the event of conflicts, the

individual service bulletin shall take

precedence.’’

Increase Compliance Threshold

One commenter requests an increase

in the compliance threshold for the

modification of the rear spar on Model

L–1011–385–3 series airplanes specified

in Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–57–

215, dated April 11, 1996, as listed in

Table II of the Collector Service

Bulletin. The commenter states that the

proposed compliance threshold would

preclude accomplishment of the rear

spar modification during a regularly

scheduled maintenance visit, thus

increasing the cost of the modification

for operators. The commenter requests

that the compliance time be increased to

coincide with the compliance threshold

for a similar modification on Model L–

1011–385–1 series airplanes. The

commenter points out that current

proposed thresholds for inspection and

modification of the rear spar on the

Model L–1011–385–3 series airplanes

are lower, in terms of accumulated flight

cycles, and earlier, in terms of designlife goal, than currently required actions

on the Model L–1011–385–1 series

airplanes. The commenter separately

notes that while the L–1011–385–1

series airplanes are approaching 83

percent of the 36,000 flight-cycle

design-life goal, the L–1011–385–1–14,

L–1011–385–1–15, and L–1011–385–3

series airplanes are at less than 50

percent of this goal. The commenter

justifies its request on the basis that

Model L–1011–385–3 series airplanes

are younger and accumulate flight

cycles at a lower rate than L–1011–385–

1 series airplanes.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to increase the

compliance threshold. The proposed

compliance time for the modification of

the rear spar on Model L–1011–385–3

series airplanes is based on established

service history and predicted fatigue

cracking. The FAA has determined that

the unique characteristics of Model L–

1011–385–3 series airplanes

(principally, higher fuel loading than on

Model L–1011–385–1 series airplanes)

make it necessary to require

modification of the rear spar at a lower

threshold relative to the Model L–1011–

385–1 series. Because of these unique

characteristics, inspection thresholds

and repetitive intervals are consistently

lower for actions affecting the wing rear

spar on Model L–1011–385–3 series

airplanes than for actions affecting the

same area on Model L–1011–385–1

series airplanes. No change to the final

rule is necessary in this regard.

Remove Inspection Requirement for

Certain Airplanes

One commenter requests that any

airplane on which a rear spar

modification has been installed

previously be excluded from the

requirement to accomplish Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–57–194, Revision

3, dated April 11, 1994, as listed in

Table II of the Collector Service

Bulletin. The commenter states that it

sees little benefit in listing this

requirement for any airplanes subject to

AD 94–05–01, and the requirement

should only apply to airplanes on which

the rear spar has not been modified.

The FAA does not concur that any

change to this AD is necessary. For the

service bulletin referenced by the

commenter, Table II of the Collector

Service Bulletin clearly states, ‘‘Rear

spar web replacement per Service

Bulletin 093–57–184, 093–57–196, or

093–57–215 terminates these

requirements.’’ The FAA finds that no

clarification and no change to the final

rule is necessary in this regard.

Remove Terminating Modification

Requirement

One commenter requests that

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–256,

Revision 1, dated October 7, 1991, be

removed from the listing of structural

modifications in Table II of the Collector

Service Bulletin. The commenter points

out that there are certain inspection

findings addressed by repetitive

inspections and not by the immediate

installation of a terminating

modification.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request. The intent of this

AD is that the inspections specified in

Table II of the Collector Service Bulletin

be accomplished according to the

schedule cited in that bulletin, and that

the specified terminating or corrective

action be accomplished, unless

otherwise noted in this AD. For the

specific service bulletin referenced by

the commenter, Table II states,

‘‘Terminate repeat inspections of Part I

by performing Part II inspection and

disposition of inspection findings per

Service Bulletin 093–53–256 R1.’’ The

FAA finds that these instructions are

clear, and no change to the final rule is

necessary in this regard.

Acknowledge Incorrect Reference to

Service Bulletin in Table II

One commenter points out that

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–271,

dated October 18, 1995, listed in Table

II of the Collector Service Bulletin, is

not an inspection bulletin. The

commenter notes that inspections are

contained in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–53–A271, as required by AD 95–

10–17, amendment 39–9234 (60 FR

26683, May 18, 1995).

The commenter makes no specific

request for a change to the proposal. The

FAA infers that the commenter is

requesting that the FAA acknowledge

that there are no inspections in

accordance with Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–271. The FAA does not

concur with the commenter’s request.

The listing in Table II of the Collector

Service Bulletin for Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–271 refers to Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–A271, dated

April 25, 1995, as the correct source of

information for accomplishment of the

inspections. The commenter is correct

that AD 95–10–17 does require

inspections in accordance with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–

A271, dated April 25, 1995. However,

Revision 2 of the Collector Service

Bulletin correctly notes that the

62998 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

inspections required by that AD are onetime only. The FAA now finds that it is

necessary for the inspections in that

bulletin to be accomplished repetitively.

For the inspections associated with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–271

(meaning the inspections of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–A271, dated

April 25, 1995), Revision 1 of the

Collector Service Bulletin specifies

repetitive intervals varying from 3,500

to 6,500 flight cycles, depending on the

method of inspection. The FAA has

determined that the inspections and

repetitive intervals specified in Revision

1 of the Collector Service Bulletin are

adequate to ensure the safety of the

airplane fleet. No change to the final

rule is necessary in this regard.

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 changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 214 Model

L–1011–385 series airplanes of the

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The FAA estimates that 107 airplanes of

U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.

It will take approximately 315 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

required inspections, at an average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

inspections required by this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $2,022,300,

or $18,900 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

It will take approximately 3,385 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

required modifications, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$242,000 per airplane. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

modifications required by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$47,625,700, or $445,100 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. The cost impact

figures discussed in AD rulemaking

actions represent only the time

necessary to perform the specific actions

actually required by the AD. These

figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have a substantial direct effect on

the States, on the relationship between

the national Government and the States,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, it is

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

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

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

2000–21–01 Lockheed: Amendment 39–

11933. Docket 98–NM–35–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 (g) 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) Except as provided by paragraph (b) 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 Service Bulletin 093–51–040,

Revision 1, dated October 1, 1997, or

Revision 2, dated October 21, 1999. Perform

the initial inspections at the later of the times

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

this AD. Thereafter, repeat each inspection at

an interval not to exceed that specified in the

applicable service bulletin listed in Revision

1 of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–040.

(1) Prior to the threshold specified in the

individual service bulletin listed in Table I

or II of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–

040, Revision 1, as applicable.

(2) Within one repetitive interval after the

effective date of this AD, as specified in the

individual service bulletin listed in Table I

or II of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–

040, Revision 1, as applicable; or within 14

months after the effective date of this AD for

the service bulletins in Tables I and II that

do not specify a repetitive interval; as

applicable.

Note 2: Operators should note that

paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD

reference only Revision 1 of Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–51–040. Certain new

revisions of the individual service bulletins

listed in Tables I and II of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 2, have

reduced the compliance times below those

specified in the service bulletin revision

levels listed in Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–51–040, Revision 1. While this AD

allows accomplishment of the actions in this

AD in accordance with either Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 1, or

Revision 2, the applicable compliance

thresholds and repetitive intervals are those

listed in the individual service bulletins

listed in Table I or II of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 1.

Note 3: The inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–249,

Revision 3, dated February 28, 1994, are

included in the requirements of both AD 94–

05–01, amendment 39–8839, and paragraph

(a) of this AD. Inspections in accordance with

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–249,

Revision 3, at the interval specified in Table

I of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–040,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 204 / Friday, October 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62999

Revision 1, as required by this AD, are

acceptable for compliance with the

inspections in accordance with Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–53–249, Revision 3,

required by AD 94–05–01.

(b) The following service bulletins listed in

Table II of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–

51–040, Revision 1, dated October 1, 1997,

and Revision 2, dated October 21, 1999, are

excluded from the requirements of paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(1) The structural inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletins 093–53–268,

Revision 1, dated July 2, 1996, and 093–53–

272, Revision 1, dated March 17, 1997, are

not required by this AD. The inspections

specified in these service bulletins are

required by AD 99–08–20, amendment 39–

11128.

(2) The structural inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–258,

Revision 1, dated April 4, 1996, are not

required by this AD. Inspections equivalent

to those specified in that bulletin are

required by AD 95–17–03, amendment 39–

9332.

(3) The structural inspections specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–57–203,

Revision 5, dated April 22, 1996, are not

required by this AD. Inspections equivalent

to those specified in that bulletin are

required by AD 98–10–14, amendment 39–

10526.

Corrective Action

(c) If any cracking is detected during any

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, accomplish the

actions specified in paragraph (c)(1), (c)(2),

(c)(3), or (c)(4) of this AD.

(1) Repair in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin referenced in

Table I or II of Lockheed Service Bulletin

093–51–040, Revision 1, dated October 1,

1997, or Revision 2, dated October 21, 1999.

(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 Service Bulletin

093–51–040, Revision 1, dated October 1,

1997, or Revision 2, dated October 21, 1999.

(4) Repair in accordance with a method

approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Terminating Action

(d) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of

this AD, install the terminating modification

referenced in each service bulletin listed in

Table II of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–

51–040, Revision 1, dated October 1, 1997, or

Revision 2, dated October 21, 1999; in

accordance with the applicable service

bulletin listed under ‘‘Service Bulletin

Number, Revision, and Date’’ in Table II of

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–040,

Revision 1 or Revision 2. Except as provided

by paragraph (f) of this AD, install each

modification at the later of the times

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of

this AD. Such installation constitutes

terminating action for the applicable

structural inspection required by paragraph

(a) of this AD.

(1) Prior to the threshold specified in the

applicable service bulletin listed in Table II

of Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–040,

Revision 1 or Revision 2.

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

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs first.

Note 4: Installation of the terminating

modifications specified in Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–53–268, Revision 1, dated July

2, 1996, and Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–

53–272, dated November 12, 1996, does not

constitute terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of AD 99–

08–20, amendment 39–11128.

(e) Overhaul of the main landing gear

actuator in accordance with Lockheed

Service Bulletin 093–32–238, Revision 3,

dated April 11, 1996, as listed in Table II of

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–51–040,

Revision 1, dated October 1, 1997, is not

required by paragraph (d) of this AD.

(f) At the later of the times specified in

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD: Install

the terminating modification listed in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–57–215, as

referenced in Table II of Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 1, dated

October 1, 1997, or Revision 2, dated October

21, 1999. Such installation constitutes

terminating action for the inspections

required by AD 98–10–14, amendment 39–

10526.

(1) Prior to the threshold specified in

Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–57–203,

Revision 5, dated April 22, 1996.

(2) Within 2 years or 2,000 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs first.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g) 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

ACO. 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 5: 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

(h) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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 paragraphs (c)(2)

and (c)(4) of this AD, the actions shall be

done in accordance with Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 1, dated

October 1, 1997; or Lockheed Service

Bulletin 093–51–040, Revision 2, dated

October 21, 1999. 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 Lockheed Martin Aircraft &

Logistics Center, 120 Orion Street,

Greenville, South Carolina 29605. Copies

may be inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington; at the FAA,

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, One

Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite

450, Atlanta, Georgia; 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

November 24, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October

11, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–26590 Filed 10–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–123–AD; Amendment

39–11937; AD 2000–21–05]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace BAe Model ATP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all British Aerospace BAe

Model ATP airplanes. This action

requires repetitive inspections to detect

damage of the torque link apex joint of

the left-and right-hand main landing

gear (MLG); and replacement of nuts,

pins, and bolts with new parts, if

necessary. This action is necessary to

prevent separation of the top and

bottom torque links, and consequent

loss of directional control of the MLG.

This action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective November 6, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of November

6, 2000.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

November 20, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

123–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,