Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 15, 2000 / Proposed Rules 68955

(5) Create a component history card or

equivalent record for each crosstube

assembly and enter the P/N, S/N, and the

accumulated number of landings derived in

accordance with paragraph (1).

(6) Begin tracking the number of landings

for each crosstube assembly on the

component history card or equivalent record.

(b) For a crosstube assembly, P/N 412–050–

010–101 or 412–050–011–107 FM, on or

before accumulating 10,000 landings or

within 25 hours TIS after the effective date

of this AD, whichever occurs later, replace

the crosstube assembly with an airworthy

crosstube assembly.

(c) For a crosstube assembly, P/N 412–050–

045–107, on or before accumulating 20,000

landings or within 25 hours TIS after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, replace the crosstube assembly with an

airworthy crosstube assembly.

(d) This AD revises the Airworthiness

Limitations section of the Maintenance

Manual by establishing a life limit of 10,000

landings for the crosstube assembly, P/N

412–050–010–101 and 412–050–011–107

FM, and 20,000 landings for the crosstube

assembly, P/N 412–050–045–107.

(e) 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, Rotorcraft

Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate,

FAA. Operators shall submit their requests

through an FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may concur or comment and

then send it to the Manager, Rotorcraft

Certification Office.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Rotorcraft Certification

Office.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199

to operate the helicopter to a location where

the requirements of this AD can be

accomplished.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November

8, 2000.

Henry A. Armstrong,

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–29211 Filed 11–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–285–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 777 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 777 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

replacement of nuts on the clevis

assemblies that support the auxiliary

tracks of the inboard leading edge slats.

This action is necessary to prevent loose

or missing nuts on the clevis assemblies,

68956 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 15, 2000 / Proposed Rules

which could cause the inboard leading

edge slats to be loose or in an incorrect

position and result in partial or total

failure or loss of the slats. This action

is intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

January 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

285–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. 2000–NM–285–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

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan

Wood, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2772;

fax (425) 227–1181.

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,

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 2000–NM–285–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.

2000–NM–285–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received a report

indicating that the airplane

manufacturer found discrepancies in

two production lots of nuts used on the

clevis assemblies that support the

auxiliary tracks of the inboard leading

edge slats on Boeing Model 777 series

airplanes. The nuts had inadequate selflocking capability. In service, this

condition could result in loose or

missing nuts, which could cause the

inboard leading edge slats to be loose or

in an incorrect position. This condition,

if not corrected, could result in partial

or total failure or loss of the slats.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Special Attention Service

Bulletin 777–57–0038, dated February

24, 2000, which describes procedures

for replacement of nuts on the clevis

assemblies that support the auxiliary

tracks of the inboard leading edge slats

with new nuts. Accomplishment of the

actions specified in the service bulletin

is intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Bulletin

The compliance time for the proposed

actions in paragraph (a) of this AD is 18

months after the effective date of this

AD. For these actions, the service

bulletin recommends a compliance time

of 1,500 days after delivery of the

airplane or 18 months after receipt of

the service bulletin, whichever occurs

later. The FAA finds that, by the time

the proposed rule becomes effective,

more than 1,500 days after the date of

delivery will have passed for all

airplanes subject to the proposed rule.

Therefore, for simplicity and clarity,

this proposed rule only includes the 18-

month compliance time.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 121

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

34 airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 2 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

replacement, and that the average labor

rate is $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $4,080, or $120 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is 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 proposed 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 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,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 15, 2000 / Proposed Rules 68957

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:

Boeing: Docket 2000–NM–285–AD.

Applicability: Model 777 series airplanes,

line numbers 1 through 155 inclusive,

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 loose or

missing nuts on the clevis assemblies that

support the auxiliary tracks of the inboard

leading edge slats, which could cause the

slats to be loose or in an incorrect position

and result in partial or total failure or loss of

the slats, accomplish the following:

Replacement

(a) Within 18 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace nuts having part

number NAS1805–5L on the clevis

assemblies that support the auxiliary tracks

(outboard, center, and inboard) of the inboard

leading edge slats with new nuts purchased

from the airplane manufacturer after October

31, 1999, in accordance with Boeing Special

Attention Service Bulletin 777–57–0038,

dated February 24, 2000.

Spares

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

person shall install any nut having part

number NAS1805–5L on any airplane unless

it was purchased from the airplane

manufacturer after October 31, 1999.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 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

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 8, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–29214 Filed 11–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 199

Civilian Health and Medical Program of

the Uniformed Service (CHAMPUS):

Enuretic Devices, Breast

Reconstructive Surgery, PFPWD Valid

Authorization Period, Early

Intervention Services

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule amends

CHAMPUS to remove the exclusion of

enuresis alarms, to correct contradictory

language as it relates to breast

reconstructive surgery, to change the

valid period of an authorization for

services and items under the Program

for Persons with Disabilities (PFPWD),

to establish the CHAMPUS payment

relationship for IDEA Part C services

and items, and to provide for early

intervention services.

DATES: Written comments will be

accepted until January 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Forward comments to the

Office of CHAMPUS Management

Activity, 16401 East Centretech

Parkway, Aurora, CO. 80011–9043.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Margaret Brown and Michael Kottyan,

Office of Medical Benefits and

Reimbursement Systems, telephone

(303) 676–3581 and (303) 676–3520

respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Civilian Health and Medical Program of

the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS)

supplements the availability of health

care in military hospitals and clinics.

This proposed rule removes the

exclusion of enuresis alarms, corrects

contradictory language as it relates to

breast reconstructive surgery, changes

the valid period of an authorization for

services and items under the Program

for Persons with Disabilities (PFPWD),

and establishes the CHAMPUS payment

relationship for IDEA Part C services

and items, and revises a statement to the

paragraph at 32 CFR 199.4(g)(15)(i)(D).

Enuretic Device

The CHAMPUS Management Activity

received a request from the medical

community that we re-evaluate our

policy regarding enuretic devices,

which currently are excluded from cost

sharing under the CHAMPUS Basic

Program. Recent literature review

indicates that the medical community

considers enuresis alarms the most

effective method for treating enuresis.

Having found no contradictory

evidence, we agree that enuretic devices

should be removed from the exclusions

in the regulation. The removal of this

exclusion will allow physicians to select

rational treatment options and insure

that CHAMPUS pays only for the most

appropriate and highest quality medical

care possible.

Enuretic conditioning programs are

also specifically excluded from

CHAMPUS cost sharing. Enuretic

conditioning programs will continue to

be excluded. The basis for excluding

enuretic conditioning programs is to

restrict the payment for professional

guidance on the use of these devices to

an attending physician.