55228 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

would apply. Thus, where the second 

tier CUSO is itself wholly owned by a 

wholly owned first tier CUSO, use of a 

consolidated opinion audit capturing 

both levels would be permissible. 

Regulatory Procedures 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The final rule relieves a CUSO that is 

wholly owned from having to secure a 

separate opinion audit of its books, if it 

is included in the annual consolidated 

opinion audit of the credit union that is 

its parent. The Board has determined 

and certifies that the rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small credit 

unions. Accordingly, the NCUA Board 

has determined that a Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis is not required. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

NCUA has determined that the 

proposed regulation does not increase 

paperwork requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 

regulations of the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132 encourages 

independent regulatory agencies to 

consider the impact of their actions on 

state and local interests. In adherence to 

fundamental federalism principles, 

NCUA, an independent regulatory 

agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5), 

voluntarily complies with the executive 

order. The final rule will apply only to 

federally-chartered credit unions. It will 

not have substantial direct effects 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. NCUA has 

determined that this proposal does not 

constitute a policy that has federalism 

implications for purposes of the 

executive order. 

The Treasury and General Government 

Appropriations Act, 1999—Assessment 

of Federal Regulations and Policies on 

Families 

The NCUA has determined that the 

final rule will not affect family wellbeing within the meaning of section 654 

of the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999, 

Public Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681 

(1998). 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. 

L. 104–121) provides generally for 

congressional review of agency rules. A 

reporting requirement is triggered in 

instances where NCUA issues a final 

rule as defined by Section 551 of the 

Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. 

551. The Office of Management and 

Budget has determined that this rule is 

not a major rule for purposes of the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996. 

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 712 

Administrative practices and 

procedure, Credit, Credit unions, 

Investments, Reporting and record 

keeping requirements. 

By the National Credit Union 

Administration Board on September 15, 

2005. 

Mary F. Rupp, 

Secretary of the Board. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

NCUA amends 12 CFR part 712 as 

follows: 

PART 712—CREDIT UNION SERVICE 

ORGANIZATIONS (CUSOs) 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 712 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1756, 1757(5)(D), and 

(7)(I), 1766, 1782, 1784, 1785 and 1786. 

■ 2. Amend § 712.3 by revising 

paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 712.3 What are the characteristics of and 

what requirements apply to CUSOs? 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Prepare quarterly financial 

statements and obtain an annual 

financial statement audit of its financial 

statements by a licensed certified public 

accountant in accordance with generally 

accepted auditing standards. A wholly 

owned CUSO is not required to obtain 

a separate annual financial statement 

audit if it is included in the annual 

consolidated financial statement audit 

of the credit union that is its parent; and 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–18749 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21189; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–055–AD; Amendment 

39–14279; AD 2005–19–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A318–100, A319–100, A320–200, A321–

100, and A321–200 Series Airplanes; 

and Model A320–111 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Airbus Model A318–100, A319–100, 

A320–200, A321–100, and A321–200 

series airplanes; and Model A320–111 

airplanes. This AD requires 

modification of the electrical bonding of 

all structures and systems installed 

inside the center fuel tank. This AD 

results from fuel system reviews 

conducted by the manufacturer. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent electrical 

arcing in the center fuel tank due to 

inadequate bonding, which could result 

in an explosion of the center fuel tank 

and consequent loss of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 26, 2005. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in the AD 

as of October 26, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street 

SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, 

Washington, DC. 

Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, 

for service information identified in this 

AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim 

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2141; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 55229 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the street 

address stated in the ADDRESSES section. 

Discussion 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to certain Airbus Model A318, 

A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. 

That NPRM was published in the 

Federal Register on May 12, 2005 (70 

FR 24997). That NPRM proposed to 

require modification of the electrical 

bonding of all structures and systems 

installed inside the center fuel tank. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

Support for the Proposed AD 

One commenter supports the 

proposed AD. 

Request To Consider Effect of Other 

Rulemaking 

One commenter requests that we 

revise the ‘‘Discussion’’ and ‘‘FAA’s 

Determination and Requirements of the 

Proposed AD’’ sections of the proposed 

AD to describe the relationship of the 

proposed AD to the NPRM on Reducing 

Fuel Tank Flammability (referred to 

after this as the ‘‘FTF rule’’), which was 

announced by the FAA Administrator in 

February 2004. The commenter notes 

that airplanes affected by the proposed 

AD are included in the applicability of 

the FTF NPRM. Further, the commenter 

expects that the unsafe condition 

addressed by the proposed AD would be 

mitigated by doing the requirements of 

the FTF rule, so the FTF rule would 

preclude the need for the proposed AD. 

The commenter concludes that the FAA 

did not consider all pertinent data when 

it issued the proposed AD and, 

consequently, the FAA’s determination 

and requirements of the proposed AD 

may be flawed. 

While the commenter asks for specific 

changes only to the preamble of the 

proposed AD, we infer that the 

commenter is requesting that we 

withdraw the proposed AD. We do not 

concur. Reducing flammability and 

minimizing potential ignition sources 

comprise the FAA’s two-pronged, 

balanced approach to fuel tank safety. 

Since the introduction of turbinepowered airplanes, the FAA’s primary 

means of protection from fuel tank 

explosions has been to eliminate 

ignition sources. The fuel tank rules are 

based on the assumption that fuel tanks 

will always contain flammable vapors. 

However, one of the important lessons 

learned as a result of the fuel tank safety 

reviews required by Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’

amendment 21–78, and subsequent 

amendments 21–82 and 21–83) is that 

unanticipated failures and maintenance 

errors will continue to generate 

unexpected ignition sources. Thus, we 

have concluded that we are unlikely 

ever to identify and eradicate all 

possible sources of ignition. 

Our balanced approach means that, 

while we pursue reducing flammability 

through efforts such as the Fuel Tank 

Flammability (FTF) rule, we will also 

continue to eliminate identified ignition 

sources, such as those identified as a 

result of the SFAR 88 fuel tank safety 

reviews. This AD is consistent with that 

effort. We have not changed the AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

One commenter requests that we 

extend the compliance time from 58 

months to 72 months after the effective 

date of the AD. The commenter states 

that many operators have increased 

their heavy maintenance interval from 5 

years to 6 years. Thus, the commenter 

states that increasing the compliance 

time to 72 months would allow for 

minimum disruption to its operating 

schedule. 

We do not concur. We have 

determined that the 58-month 

compliance time, as proposed, 

represents the maximum interval of 

time allowable for the affected airplanes 

to continue to operate safely before the 

modification is done. In developing an 

appropriate compliance time for this 

AD, we considered, among other factors, 

the manufacturer’s recommendation and 

the degree of urgency associated with 

the subject unsafe condition. We have 

not changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Increase Estimated Costs of 

Compliance 

Two commenters request that we 

revise the estimated costs of compliance 

stated in the proposed AD. One 

commenter states that the service 

bulletin to which the proposed AD 

refers estimates that the modification 

will take 132 to 141 work hours, but the 

commenter’s own experience indicates 

that the modification will take 200 to 

215 work hours. The other commenter 

states that the service bulletin estimates 

the total work hours as 129 to 146.5, but 

it estimates up to 443 work hours 

(including time required for fuel tank 

guard personnel) will be needed. 

We do not concur. The estimates of 

129 to 146.5 work hours specified in the 

service bulletin include time for gaining 

access and closing up. The cost analysis 

in AD rulemaking actions, however, 

typically does not include costs such as 

the time required to gain access and 

close up, time necessary for planning, or 

time necessitated by other 

administrative actions. Those incidental 

costs may vary significantly among 

operators and are almost impossible to 

calculate. We recognize that, in doing 

the actions required by an AD, operators 

may incur incidental costs in addition 

to the direct costs. However, the 

estimate of 49 to 64 work hours, as 

proposed and as specified in this AD, 

represents the time necessary to perform 

only the actions actually required by 

this AD. We have not changed the AD 

in this regard. 

Explanation of Change to Applicability 

The FAA has revised the applicability 

of this AD to identify model 

designations as published in the most 

recent type certificate data sheet for the 

affected models. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data, including the comments 

received, and determined that air safety 

and the public interest require adopting 

the AD with the change described 

previously. We have determined that 

this change will neither increase the 

economic burden on any operator nor 

increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

This AD affects about 506 airplanes of 

U.S. registry. The required actions take 

between 49 and 64 work hours per 

airplane depending on the airplane’s 

configuration. The average labor rate is 

$65 per work hour. Required parts cost 

between $10 and $370 per airplane, 

depending on the airplane’s 

configuration. Based on these figures, 

the estimated cost of this AD for U.S. 

operators is between $1,616,670 and 

$2,292,180, or between $3,195 and 

$4,530 per airplane. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

55230 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

See the ADDRESSES section for a location 

to examine the regulatory evaluation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Aircraft, Air transportation, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

2005–19–14 Airbus: Amendment 39–14279. 

Docket No. FAA–2005–21189; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–055–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective October 26, 

2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318–

111 and –112 airplanes; A319–111, –112, 

–113, –114, –115, –131, –132, and –133 

airplanes; A320–111, –211, –212, –214, –231, 

–232, and –233 airplanes; and A321–111, 

–112, –131, –211 and –231 airplanes; 

certificated in any category; except airplanes 

that have received Airbus Modification 

31892 in production. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by results of 

fuel system reviews conducted by the 

manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent electrical arcing in the center fuel 

tank due to inadequate bonding, which could 

result in an explosion of the center fuel tank 

and consequent loss of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Inspection and Related Investigative and 

Corrective Actions 

(f) Within 58 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Modify the electrical 

bonding of all structures and systems 

installed inside the center fuel tank by 

accomplishing all of the actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–

28–1104, Revision 01, dated December 8, 

2004. 

Actions Accomplished According to 

Previous Issue of Service Bulletin 

(g) Actions done before the effective date 

of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–28–1104, dated December 2, 

2003, are acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of paragraph (f) 

of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h) The Manager, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority 

to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

in accordance with the procedures found in 

14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(i) French airworthiness directive F–2005–

028, dated February 16, 2005, also addresses 

the subject of this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(j) You must use Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–28–1104, Revision 01, dated December 

8, 2004, to perform the actions that are 

required by this AD, unless the AD specifies 

otherwise. The Director of the Federal 

Register approved the incorporation by 

reference of this document in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for a 

copy of this service information. You may 

review copies at the Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Room PL–401, 

Nassif Building, Washington, DC; on the 

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov; or at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at the NARA, 

call (202) 741–6030, or go to http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 9, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–18518 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21087; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–019–AD; Amendment 

39–14280; AD 2005–19–15] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; BAE 

Systems (Operations) Limited 

(Jetstream) Model 4101 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD), 

which applies to all BAE Systems 

(Operations) Limited (Jetstream) Model 

4101 airplanes. That AD currently 

requires operators to determine the 

number of flight cycles accumulated on 

each component of the main landing 

gear (MLG) and the nose landing gear 

(NLG), and to replace each component 

that reaches its life limit with a 

serviceable component. The existing AD 

also requires operators to revise the 

Airworthiness Limitations section (ALS) 

of the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness in the aircraft 

maintenance manual to reflect the new 

life limits. This new AD requires 

revising the ALS to incorporate 

extended and more restrictive life limits 

for structurally significant items. This 

AD is prompted by engineering analysis 

of fleet operations which resulted in 

more restrictive life limits. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent failure of 

certain structurally significant items, 

including the MLG and the NLG, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 26, 2005.