Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 Series Airplanes, 37025-37028 [05-12635]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001–NM–296–AD; Amendment
39–14171; AD 2005–13–34]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 777–200 and –300 Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a
new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 777–
200 and –300 series airplanes, that
requires replacing existing ceiling and
sidewall light connectors in the
passenger cabin with new connectors,
and follow-on actions. This action is
necessary to prevent overheating of the
light connectors, which could result in
smoke and a possible fire in the
passenger cabin. This action is intended
to address the identified unsafe
condition.
DATES: Effective August 2, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director
of the Federal Register as of August 2,
2005.
ADDRESSES: The service information
referenced in this AD may be obtained
from Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124–2207. This information may be
examined at the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Binh V. Tran, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6485; fax (425) 917–6590.
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 Boeing
Model 777–200 and –300 series
airplanes was published in the Federal
Register on August 15, 2003 (68 FR
48833). That action proposed to require
replacing existing ceiling and sidewall
light connectors in the passenger cabin
with new connectors, and follow-on
actions.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:51 Jun 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
Explanation of New Relevant Service
Information
Since the issuance of the proposed
AD, the FAA has reviewed and
approved Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 777–33–0019, Revision
1, dated March 11, 2004. (The proposed
AD refers to Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 777–33–0019, dated
July 19, 2001, as the appropriate source
of service information for the proposed
actions.) Revision 1 limits the effectivity
listing to airplanes having line numbers
1 through 264 inclusive. (Connectors on
airplanes with line numbers 265 and
subsequent were modified and screened
prior to delivery of those airplanes to
ensure the connectors’ resistance to
moisture contamination.) We have
revised the applicability statement of
this AD accordingly.
The work instructions in Revision 1 of
the service bulletin are essentially the
same as those in the original issue.
Accordingly, we have revised paragraph
(a) of this AD to refer to Revision 1 of
the service bulletin and to give credit for
actions accomplished previously per the
original issue of the service bulletin. We
have also revised paragraph (b) of this
AD to remove the reference to the
applicable steps in Work Packages 1, 2,
and 3 of the service bulletin. Since all
steps in Work Packages 1, 2, and 3 of
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777–33–0019, Revision 1, must
be done, there is no need to include this
information in the AD.
Comments
Interested persons have been afforded
an opportunity to participate in the
making of this amendment. We have
duly considered the comments received.
Support for the Proposed AD
One commenter supports the
proposed AD.
Request To Withdraw the Proposed AD
One commenter, the airplane
manufacturer, requests that we
withdraw the proposed AD. The
commenter notes that it has performed
a comprehensive hazard assessment of
the subject connectors and has
concluded that a connector failure
would not adversely affect the airplane’s
capacity for continued safe flight and
landing. The commenter states that the
hazard assessment included a review of
the materials adjacent to the subject
connectors. This review shows that
these materials do not propagate a flame
and would not significantly affect the
magnitude or duration of a potential
connector failure. The commenter notes
that the type of material adjacent to the
connectors was also changed to an
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37025
improved material at a certain line
number during production. The
commenter further explains that the
reported connector failures were
detected during troubleshooting of
inoperative lighting or during airplane
maintenance and, in all cases, short
circuiting was limited by circuit breaker
protection. Based on this information,
the commenter concludes that the
proposed AD is not justified. The
commenter also expresses concern that
the extensive rework associated with the
proposed AD could be detrimental
because the rework would increase the
probability of latent system failures due
to the large number of connectors in the
airplane that must be reworked in an
environment not conducive to such
rework.
After the comment period closed, we
coordinated with the commenter on this
issue. The commenter agrees that an
unsafe condition exists, and that the
proposed AD is an appropriate means of
addressing it. Thus, we find that no
change to the AD is necessary in this
regard.
Requests To Extend Compliance Time
Several commenters request that we
extend the proposed compliance time
beyond the proposed 18 months. The
commenters’ proposals for the extended
compliance time range from 24 months
to 6 years. The commenters justify their
requests based on the scope of the
necessary work, especially related to the
amount of work associated with gaining
access to the connectors (e.g., removing
stowage bins and ceiling panels, which
are not normally removed during minor
maintenance visits). The commenters
state that extending the compliance time
would allow them to accomplish the
proposed requirements during a
scheduled heavy maintenance visit.
Two commenters question the urgency
of the unsafe condition (a factor that we
considered in determining the
compliance time, as explained in the
proposed AD). These commenters have
not experienced any connector failures
in their fleets and thus conclude that an
extension of the compliance time would
not adversely affect safety. Another
commenter suggests that we require the
replacement of Priority ‘‘A+’’ and ‘‘A’’
connectors (as defined in Revision 01 of
the referenced service bulletin) within
18 months, and the replacement of
Priority ‘‘B’’ and ‘‘C’’ connectors within
6 years. One commenter also expresses
concern about parts availability, in that
the number of airplanes affected by the
proposed AD and the relatively short
compliance time could overburden the
ceiling light supplier with a large
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
37026
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
number of lights sent to them for
modification.
We agree that the compliance time for
the requirements of this AD may be
extended somewhat. We have
reconsidered the urgency of the unsafe
condition and the amount of work
related to the required actions. We find
that extending the compliance time
from 18 months to 60 months will not
adversely affect safety, and, for the
majority of affected operators, will allow
the required actions to be performed
during regularly scheduled maintenance
at a base where special equipment and
trained maintenance personnel will be
available if necessary. A 60-month
compliance time will reduce the burden
on affected operators, while at the same
time addressing one of the
manufacturer’s concerns, stated
previously, that the rework associated
with the connector replacement could
increase the probability of latent system
failures. We have revised paragraph (b)
of this AD accordingly.
Request To Limit Required
Replacement of Connectors
One commenter, the airplane
manufacturer, requests that we limit the
requirement to replace connectors to
connectors that are prioritized ‘‘A+’’ and
‘‘A’’ (as defined in Revision 1 of the
referenced service bulletin). The
commenter notes that Revision 1 of the
referenced service bulletin designates
connectors with ‘‘A+’’ priority as those
that have failed in service, and
connectors with ‘‘A’’ priority as those
that are in the same physical area and
exposed to the same conditions as the
failed connectors. (Connectors with ‘‘B’’
priority are those that are in the same
physical areas as connectors with ‘‘A’’
priority, but that are not expected to be
subject to the same environmental
conditions (e.g., possible exposure to
moisture) as connectors with ‘‘A’’
priority. Connectors with priority ‘‘C’’
are all other connectors in which 115volt power is present.)
We acknowledge the manufacturer’s
position with regard to known service
problems. We also acknowledge our
common interest in replacing all of the
connectors. We have determined that all
connectors, regardless of their location,
have the potential to fail if they are
contaminated by moisture. Also, these
connectors are interchangeable, so it is
possible that connectors with priority
‘‘C’’ could be removed and reinstalled in
a location where they would merit
priority ‘‘A+’’ or ‘‘A’’ replacement. For
these reasons, we find that all
connectors are subject to the same
unsafe condition that is addressed by
this AD. We find that requiring
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:51 Jun 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
replacement of all connectors with
improved connectors that are more
resistant to moisture contamination will
eliminate the unsafe condition and
ensure the continued operating safety of
the affected airplane fleet. As stated
previously, we have agreed to extend
the compliance time for the replacement
of all connectors to 60 months, which
the manufacturer has agreed will not
impose an unnecessary burden on
operators. No further change is
necessary in this regard.
Requests To Increase Estimate of Cost
Impact
Several commenters request that we
revise the Cost Impact section of the
proposed AD to increase the estimated
number of work hours, as well as the
estimated number of affected Model
777–200 series airplanes.
Several commenters note that the
referenced service bulletin estimates
that 242 work hours per airplane will be
needed to modify each Model 777–200
series airplane. One of these
commenters explains that the time
required for gaining access and closing
up should be included as a specific cost
of the proposed AD because the
overhead bins and ceiling panels would
not normally be removed at a
maintenance visit corresponding to the
proposed compliance time of 18
months. Another commenter notes that
the estimate in the service bulletin of
242 work hours is low. Based on its past
experience, the commenter estimates
that 300 work hours per airplane will be
necessary.
We do not concur with the request to
increase the estimated number of work
hours. Section 1. G., ‘‘Manpower,’’ of
the service bulletin states that 242 work
hours per airplane will be needed to
accomplish the actions that apply to
Model 777–200 series airplanes. This
total figure of 242 work hours includes
79 work hours for opening access and
91 work hours for closing access. We do
not typically include the time for
gaining access and closing up in the
Cost Impact estimates in ADs. Thus, in
this AD we estimate that 72 work hours
will be needed to accomplish the
required actions on each Model 777–200
series airplane.
Regarding the commenter’s statement
that the time for gaining access and
closing up should be included because
the overhead bins and ceiling panels
would not normally be removed at a
maintenance visit corresponding to the
originally proposed compliance time of
18 months: As explained previously, we
have revised the compliance time for
this AD from 18 months to 60 months.
This extension should allow the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
majority of affected operators to
accomplish the required actions at a
scheduled heavy maintenance visit
(when stowage bins and ceiling panels
are removed). No additional change is
necessary in this regard.
Several commenters also note that the
estimate that the proposed AD would
affect 22 Model 777–200 series airplanes
of U.S. registry is incorrect, and that
there are actually 107 of these airplanes
that would be affected by the proposed
AD. We partially concur. We find that
74 Model 777–200 series airplanes will
be affected by this AD. We also find that
there are no affected Model 777–300
series airplanes currently on the U.S.
Register. (The proposed AD identifies 86
affected Model 777–300 series
airplanes.) We have revised the Cost
Impact section of this AD accordingly.
Other commenters request that we
add cost estimates for additional
actions. One commenter requests that
we revise the cost estimate to include
the work hours for modifying each light
connector. We do not concur. We find
that the light connectors may be
modified by the operator or by a vendor.
Thus, the time for modifying the light
connectors may not be borne by the
operator. No change is necessary in this
regard.
One commenter states that, to support
the modification program, it will need
to purchase an entire ship’s set of lights
to create a rotating pool of light
assemblies. This commenter requests
that we increase the cost estimate to
reflect this cost of $63,200. We do not
concur. The need to create a rotating
pool of light assemblies is a planning
decision made by the individual
operator. Not all operators will choose
such a course of action; thus, the cost of
additional light assemblies should not
be attributable to this AD. No change is
necessary in this regard.
Another commenter requests that we
revise the Cost Impact section of the
proposed AD to include the cost of an
oxygen leak detection test that it must
accomplish following removal/
installation of stowage bins on airplanes
equipped with gaseous oxygen systems.
We do not concur. Not all airplanes
subject to this AD are equipped with a
gaseous oxygen system in the passenger
cabin. Thus, not all airplanes will be
subject to the cost of a test of such a
system. Further, the estimated work
hours needed for testing, as specified in
Section 1.G., Manpower, of the service
bulletin, are already included in the
Cost Impact estimate specified in this
AD. No change is necessary in this
regard.
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Explanation of Additional Change to
This AD
We have revised the Note included in
the proposed AD to correct the reference
to Diehl Service Information Letter
3352–33–01/01, dated June 20, 2001,
and to designate the note as ‘‘Note 1.’’
Conclusion
After careful review of the available
data, including the comments noted
above, we have determined that air
safety and the public interest require the
adoption of the rule with the changes
previously described. We have
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 264
airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 74
Model 777–200 series airplanes of U.S.
registry will be affected by this AD.
For Model 777–200 series airplanes, it
will take approximately 72 work hours
per airplane to accomplish the required
actions, at an average labor rate of $65
per work hour. Required parts will cost
approximately $4,631 per airplane.
Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators
of Model 777–200 series airplanes to be
$689,014, or $9,311 per airplane.
There are currently no affected Model
777–300 series airplanes on the U.S.
Register. However, if an affected Model
777–300 series airplane is placed on the
U.S. Register in the future, it will take
approximately 82 work hours per
airplane to accomplish the required
actions, at an average labor rate of $65
per work hour. Required parts will cost
approximately $5,488 per airplane.
Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost impact of this AD to be $10,818 per
affected Model 777–300 series 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.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:51 Jun 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
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
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 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:
I
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
I
PO 00000
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 39.13
37027
[Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive:
I
2005–13–34 Boeing: Amendment 39–14171.
Docket 2001–NM–296–AD.
Applicability: Model 777–200 and –300
series airplanes, certificated in any category,
line numbers 001 through 264 inclusive.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless
accomplished previously.
To prevent overheating of ceiling and
sidewall light connectors, which could result
in smoke and a possible fire in the passenger
cabin, accomplish the following:
Service Bulletin References
(a) The following information pertains to
the service bulletin referenced in this AD:
(1) The term ‘‘service bulletin,’’ as used in
this AD, means the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 777–33–0019, Revision 1,
dated March 11, 2004.
(2) Although the service bulletin
referenced in this AD specifies to submit
information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include such a requirement.
(3) Actions accomplished before the
effective date of this AD per Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 777–33–0019,
dated July 19, 2001, are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions
required by this AD.
Replacement of Light Connectors
(b) Within 60 months after the effective
date of this AD: Replace, with improved
parts, the existing ceiling and sidewall light
connectors and wire bundle connectors in
the areas specified in the service bulletin; by
accomplishing all actions in Work Packages
1, 2, and 3, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin.
Note 1: Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777–33–0019 refers to Diehl Service
Information Letter 3352–33–01/01, dated
June 20, 2001, as an additional source of
service information for accomplishment of
the connector replacements.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(c) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the
Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, is authorized to approve alternative
methods of compliance for this AD.
Incorporation by Reference
(d) Unless otherwise specified in this AD,
the actions shall be done in accordance with
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
777–33–0019, Revision 1, dated March 11,
2004. 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. To get copies of this
service information, go to Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207. To inspect copies
of this service information, go to the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or to the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at the NARA,
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
37028
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
call (202) 741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Effective Date
(e) This amendment becomes effective on
August 2, 2005.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 21,
2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–12635 Filed 6–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
This AD requires both visual and dye
penetrant inspections of the elevator
torque tube assembly for cracks. If a
crack is found, this AD requires
replacement with a modified assembly
that incorporates a steel doubler. This
AD also requires replacement of the
modified elevator torque tube assembly
every 300 hours time-in-service or 18
months (whichever occurs first).
Need for the Correction
This correction is needed to ensure
that the affected airplane model is
correct and to eliminate
misunderstanding in the field.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Correction of Publication
Federal Aviation Administration
I
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–21357; Directorate
Identifier 2005–CE–29–AD; Amendment 39–
14136; AD 2005–12–20]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Lancair
Company Model LC41–550FG
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; correction
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document makes a
correction to Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 2005–12–20, which was published
in the Federal Register on June 20, 2005
(70 FR 35370), and applies to certain
The Lancair Company (Lancair) Model
LC41–550FG airplanes. We incorrectly
referenced the affected airplane model
as LC41–550F in the applicability
section. The correct airplane model is
LC41–550FG. This action corrects the
regulatory text.
DATES: The effective date of this AD
remains June 21, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Jeffrey Morfitt, Program Manager, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4065; telephone:
(425) 917–6405; facsimile: (425) 917–
6590.
Accordingly, the publication of June
20, 2005 (70 FR 35370), of Amendment
39–14136; AD 2005–12–20, which was
the subject of FR Doc. 05–11880, is
corrected as follows:
§ 39.13
[Corrected]
On page 35371, in section 39.13
[Amended], in paragraph (c), replace
Model LC41–550F with Model LC41–
550FG.
Action is taken herein to correct this
reference in AD 2005–12–20 and to add
this AD correction to section 39.13 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 39.13).
The effective date remains June 21,
2005.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June
20, 2005.
Kim Smith,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–12676 Filed 6–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Federal Aviation Administration
This amendment to 14 CFR part 71
establishes Class D airspace at Front
Range Airport, Denver CO. An Airport
Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is under
construction at Front Range Airport,
Denver, CO, which will meet criteria for
Class D airspace.
The FAA has determined that this
regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which
frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally
current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that will only affect air
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket FAA 2005–20248; Airspace Docket
05–AWP–1]
Establish Class D Airspace; Front
Range Airport, Denver, CO
On June 10, 2005, FAA issued AD
2005–12–20, Amendment 39–14136 (70
FR 35370, June 20, 2005), which applies
to certain The Lancair Company
(Lancair) Model LC41–550FG airplanes.
We incorrectly referenced the affected
airplane model as LC41–550F. The
correct airplane model is LC41–550FG.
This action corrects the regulatory text.
SUMMARY: This rule will establish Class
D airspace at Front Range Airport,
Denver, CO. An Airport Traffic Control
Tower (ATCT) is being constructed at
Front Range Airport, Denver, CO, which
will meet criteria for Class D airspace.
Class D airspace is required when the
ATCT is open, and to contain and
protect Standard Instrument Approach
15:51 Jun 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
On March 11, 2005, the FAA
proposed to amend Title 14 Code of
Federal Regulations part 71 (CFR part
71) to establish Class D airspace at Front
Range Airport, Denver, CO, (70 FR
12161). An Airport Traffic Control
Tower (ATCT) is under construction at
Front Range Airport, Denver CO, which
will meet criteria for Class D airspace.
The Class D airspace area will be
effective during periods that the ATCT
is open.
Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rule making
proceeding by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA.
No comments were received. Class D
airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9M
dated August 30, 2004, and effective
September 16, 2004, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
part 71.1. The Class D airspace
designation listed in this document will
be published subsequently in that
Order.
The Rule
Discussion
VerDate jul<14>2003
History
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Procedures (SIAPs) and other
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations
at the airport. This action would
establish Class D airspace extending
upward from the surface to 8,000 feet
Mean Sea Level (MSL) within a 5.1
nautical mile radius of the airport.
DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, August
4, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Larry Tonish, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Terminal
Operations, 15000 Aviation Boulevard,
Lawndale, CA 90261; telephone (310)
725–6539.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 28, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37025-37028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12635]
[[Page 37025]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NM-296-AD; Amendment 39-14171; AD 2005-13-34]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 Series
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes,
that requires replacing existing ceiling and sidewall light connectors
in the passenger cabin with new connectors, and follow-on actions. This
action is necessary to prevent overheating of the light connectors,
which could result in smoke and a possible fire in the passenger cabin.
This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Effective August 2, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of August 2, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules
Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Binh V. Tran, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-
4056; telephone (425) 917-6485; fax (425) 917-6590.
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 Boeing Model 777-200 and -
300 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on August
15, 2003 (68 FR 48833). That action proposed to require replacing
existing ceiling and sidewall light connectors in the passenger cabin
with new connectors, and follow-on actions.
Explanation of New Relevant Service Information
Since the issuance of the proposed AD, the FAA has reviewed and
approved Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-33-0019,
Revision 1, dated March 11, 2004. (The proposed AD refers to Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-33-0019, dated July 19, 2001, as
the appropriate source of service information for the proposed
actions.) Revision 1 limits the effectivity listing to airplanes having
line numbers 1 through 264 inclusive. (Connectors on airplanes with
line numbers 265 and subsequent were modified and screened prior to
delivery of those airplanes to ensure the connectors' resistance to
moisture contamination.) We have revised the applicability statement of
this AD accordingly.
The work instructions in Revision 1 of the service bulletin are
essentially the same as those in the original issue. Accordingly, we
have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to refer to Revision 1 of the
service bulletin and to give credit for actions accomplished previously
per the original issue of the service bulletin. We have also revised
paragraph (b) of this AD to remove the reference to the applicable
steps in Work Packages 1, 2, and 3 of the service bulletin. Since all
steps in Work Packages 1, 2, and 3 of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777-33-0019, Revision 1, must be done, there is no need to
include this information in the AD.
Comments
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. We have duly considered the comments
received.
Support for the Proposed AD
One commenter supports the proposed AD.
Request To Withdraw the Proposed AD
One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, requests that we withdraw
the proposed AD. The commenter notes that it has performed a
comprehensive hazard assessment of the subject connectors and has
concluded that a connector failure would not adversely affect the
airplane's capacity for continued safe flight and landing. The
commenter states that the hazard assessment included a review of the
materials adjacent to the subject connectors. This review shows that
these materials do not propagate a flame and would not significantly
affect the magnitude or duration of a potential connector failure. The
commenter notes that the type of material adjacent to the connectors
was also changed to an improved material at a certain line number
during production. The commenter further explains that the reported
connector failures were detected during troubleshooting of inoperative
lighting or during airplane maintenance and, in all cases, short
circuiting was limited by circuit breaker protection. Based on this
information, the commenter concludes that the proposed AD is not
justified. The commenter also expresses concern that the extensive
rework associated with the proposed AD could be detrimental because the
rework would increase the probability of latent system failures due to
the large number of connectors in the airplane that must be reworked in
an environment not conducive to such rework.
After the comment period closed, we coordinated with the commenter
on this issue. The commenter agrees that an unsafe condition exists,
and that the proposed AD is an appropriate means of addressing it.
Thus, we find that no change to the AD is necessary in this regard.
Requests To Extend Compliance Time
Several commenters request that we extend the proposed compliance
time beyond the proposed 18 months. The commenters' proposals for the
extended compliance time range from 24 months to 6 years. The
commenters justify their requests based on the scope of the necessary
work, especially related to the amount of work associated with gaining
access to the connectors (e.g., removing stowage bins and ceiling
panels, which are not normally removed during minor maintenance
visits). The commenters state that extending the compliance time would
allow them to accomplish the proposed requirements during a scheduled
heavy maintenance visit. Two commenters question the urgency of the
unsafe condition (a factor that we considered in determining the
compliance time, as explained in the proposed AD). These commenters
have not experienced any connector failures in their fleets and thus
conclude that an extension of the compliance time would not adversely
affect safety. Another commenter suggests that we require the
replacement of Priority ``A+'' and ``A'' connectors (as defined in
Revision 01 of the referenced service bulletin) within 18 months, and
the replacement of Priority ``B'' and ``C'' connectors within 6 years.
One commenter also expresses concern about parts availability, in that
the number of airplanes affected by the proposed AD and the relatively
short compliance time could overburden the ceiling light supplier with
a large
[[Page 37026]]
number of lights sent to them for modification.
We agree that the compliance time for the requirements of this AD
may be extended somewhat. We have reconsidered the urgency of the
unsafe condition and the amount of work related to the required
actions. We find that extending the compliance time from 18 months to
60 months will not adversely affect safety, and, for the majority of
affected operators, will allow the required actions to be performed
during regularly scheduled maintenance at a base where special
equipment and trained maintenance personnel will be available if
necessary. A 60-month compliance time will reduce the burden on
affected operators, while at the same time addressing one of the
manufacturer's concerns, stated previously, that the rework associated
with the connector replacement could increase the probability of latent
system failures. We have revised paragraph (b) of this AD accordingly.
Request To Limit Required Replacement of Connectors
One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, requests that we limit
the requirement to replace connectors to connectors that are
prioritized ``A+'' and ``A'' (as defined in Revision 1 of the
referenced service bulletin). The commenter notes that Revision 1 of
the referenced service bulletin designates connectors with ``A+''
priority as those that have failed in service, and connectors with
``A'' priority as those that are in the same physical area and exposed
to the same conditions as the failed connectors. (Connectors with ``B''
priority are those that are in the same physical areas as connectors
with ``A'' priority, but that are not expected to be subject to the
same environmental conditions (e.g., possible exposure to moisture) as
connectors with ``A'' priority. Connectors with priority ``C'' are all
other connectors in which 115-volt power is present.)
We acknowledge the manufacturer's position with regard to known
service problems. We also acknowledge our common interest in replacing
all of the connectors. We have determined that all connectors,
regardless of their location, have the potential to fail if they are
contaminated by moisture. Also, these connectors are interchangeable,
so it is possible that connectors with priority ``C'' could be removed
and reinstalled in a location where they would merit priority ``A+'' or
``A'' replacement. For these reasons, we find that all connectors are
subject to the same unsafe condition that is addressed by this AD. We
find that requiring replacement of all connectors with improved
connectors that are more resistant to moisture contamination will
eliminate the unsafe condition and ensure the continued operating
safety of the affected airplane fleet. As stated previously, we have
agreed to extend the compliance time for the replacement of all
connectors to 60 months, which the manufacturer has agreed will not
impose an unnecessary burden on operators. No further change is
necessary in this regard.
Requests To Increase Estimate of Cost Impact
Several commenters request that we revise the Cost Impact section
of the proposed AD to increase the estimated number of work hours, as
well as the estimated number of affected Model 777-200 series
airplanes.
Several commenters note that the referenced service bulletin
estimates that 242 work hours per airplane will be needed to modify
each Model 777-200 series airplane. One of these commenters explains
that the time required for gaining access and closing up should be
included as a specific cost of the proposed AD because the overhead
bins and ceiling panels would not normally be removed at a maintenance
visit corresponding to the proposed compliance time of 18 months.
Another commenter notes that the estimate in the service bulletin of
242 work hours is low. Based on its past experience, the commenter
estimates that 300 work hours per airplane will be necessary.
We do not concur with the request to increase the estimated number
of work hours. Section 1. G., ``Manpower,'' of the service bulletin
states that 242 work hours per airplane will be needed to accomplish
the actions that apply to Model 777-200 series airplanes. This total
figure of 242 work hours includes 79 work hours for opening access and
91 work hours for closing access. We do not typically include the time
for gaining access and closing up in the Cost Impact estimates in ADs.
Thus, in this AD we estimate that 72 work hours will be needed to
accomplish the required actions on each Model 777-200 series airplane.
Regarding the commenter's statement that the time for gaining
access and closing up should be included because the overhead bins and
ceiling panels would not normally be removed at a maintenance visit
corresponding to the originally proposed compliance time of 18 months:
As explained previously, we have revised the compliance time for this
AD from 18 months to 60 months. This extension should allow the
majority of affected operators to accomplish the required actions at a
scheduled heavy maintenance visit (when stowage bins and ceiling panels
are removed). No additional change is necessary in this regard.
Several commenters also note that the estimate that the proposed AD
would affect 22 Model 777-200 series airplanes of U.S. registry is
incorrect, and that there are actually 107 of these airplanes that
would be affected by the proposed AD. We partially concur. We find that
74 Model 777-200 series airplanes will be affected by this AD. We also
find that there are no affected Model 777-300 series airplanes
currently on the U.S. Register. (The proposed AD identifies 86 affected
Model 777-300 series airplanes.) We have revised the Cost Impact
section of this AD accordingly.
Other commenters request that we add cost estimates for additional
actions. One commenter requests that we revise the cost estimate to
include the work hours for modifying each light connector. We do not
concur. We find that the light connectors may be modified by the
operator or by a vendor. Thus, the time for modifying the light
connectors may not be borne by the operator. No change is necessary in
this regard.
One commenter states that, to support the modification program, it
will need to purchase an entire ship's set of lights to create a
rotating pool of light assemblies. This commenter requests that we
increase the cost estimate to reflect this cost of $63,200. We do not
concur. The need to create a rotating pool of light assemblies is a
planning decision made by the individual operator. Not all operators
will choose such a course of action; thus, the cost of additional light
assemblies should not be attributable to this AD. No change is
necessary in this regard.
Another commenter requests that we revise the Cost Impact section
of the proposed AD to include the cost of an oxygen leak detection test
that it must accomplish following removal/installation of stowage bins
on airplanes equipped with gaseous oxygen systems. We do not concur.
Not all airplanes subject to this AD are equipped with a gaseous oxygen
system in the passenger cabin. Thus, not all airplanes will be subject
to the cost of a test of such a system. Further, the estimated work
hours needed for testing, as specified in Section 1.G., Manpower, of
the service bulletin, are already included in the Cost Impact estimate
specified in this AD. No change is necessary in this regard.
[[Page 37027]]
Explanation of Additional Change to This AD
We have revised the Note included in the proposed AD to correct the
reference to Diehl Service Information Letter 3352-33-01/01, dated June
20, 2001, and to designate the note as ``Note 1.''
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest
require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously described.
We have 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 264 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 74 Model 777-200 series airplanes of
U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.
For Model 777-200 series airplanes, it will take approximately 72
work hours per airplane to accomplish the required actions, at an
average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts will cost
approximately $4,631 per airplane. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators of Model 777-200 series
airplanes to be $689,014, or $9,311 per airplane.
There are currently no affected Model 777-300 series airplanes on
the U.S. Register. However, if an affected Model 777-300 series
airplane is placed on the U.S. Register in the future, it will take
approximately 82 work hours per airplane to accomplish the required
actions, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts
will cost approximately $5,488 per airplane. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost impact of this AD to be $10,818 per affected Model
777-300 series 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.
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 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 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
0
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:
2005-13-34 Boeing: Amendment 39-14171. Docket 2001-NM-296-AD.
Applicability: Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes,
certificated in any category, line numbers 001 through 264
inclusive.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent overheating of ceiling and sidewall light connectors,
which could result in smoke and a possible fire in the passenger
cabin, accomplish the following:
Service Bulletin References
(a) The following information pertains to the service bulletin
referenced in this AD:
(1) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777-33-0019, Revision 1, dated March 11, 2004.
(2) Although the service bulletin referenced in this AD
specifies to submit information to the manufacturer, this AD does
not include such a requirement.
(3) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD
per Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-33-0019, dated
July 19, 2001, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
actions required by this AD.
Replacement of Light Connectors
(b) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD:
Replace, with improved parts, the existing ceiling and sidewall
light connectors and wire bundle connectors in the areas specified
in the service bulletin; by accomplishing all actions in Work
Packages 1, 2, and 3, of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
service bulletin.
Note 1: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-33-0019
refers to Diehl Service Information Letter 3352-33-01/01, dated June
20, 2001, as an additional source of service information for
accomplishment of the connector replacements.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(c) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, is authorized to approve
alternative methods of compliance for this AD.
Incorporation by Reference
(d) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be
done in accordance with Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
777-33-0019, Revision 1, dated March 11, 2004. 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. To get copies of
this service information, go to Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O.
Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. To inspect copies of this
service information, go to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or to the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at the NARA,
[[Page 37028]]
call (202) 741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_
register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
Effective Date
(e) This amendment becomes effective on August 2, 2005.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 21, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-12635 Filed 6-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
