Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Airplanes, 19104-19107 [06-3478]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19104
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Regulatory Analysis
A regulatory analysis has not been
prepared for this direct final rule
because this rule is considered a minor,
nonsubstantive amendment; it has no
economic impact on NRC licensees or
the public. The NRC has sole control of
10 CFR part 110 and NRC Form 7. There
is no alternative to amending the
regulations at 10 CFR part 110 to reflect
changing circumstances.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)),
the Commission certifies that this direct
final rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This minor,
non-substantive amendment merely
changes the method of filing certain
license applications. As such, it has no
economic impact on NRC licensees or
the public.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that a
backfit analysis is not required for this
direct final rule because these
amendments do not include any
provisions that would impose backfits
as defined in 10 CFR chapter I.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
Under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the
NRC has determined that this action is
not a major rule and has verified this
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 110
Administrative practice and
procedure, Classified information,
Criminal penalties, Export, Import,
Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear
materials, Nuclear power plants and
reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Scientific equipment.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553;
the NRC is adopting the following
amendments to 10 CFR part 110.
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
PART 110—EXPORT AND IMPORT OF
NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT AND
MATERIAL
1. The authority citation for part 110
is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 54, 57, 63, 64, 65,
81, 82, 103, 104, 109, 111, 126, 127, 128, 129,
134, 161, 170H., 181, 182, 187, 189, 68 Stat.
929, 930, 931, 932, 933, 936, 937, 948, 953,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:13 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
954, 955, 956, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071,
2073, 2074, 2077, 2092–2095, 2111, 2112,
2133, 2134, 2139, 2139a, 2141, 2154–2158,
2160d., 2201, 2210h., 2231–2233, 2237,
2239); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42
U.S.C. 5841; sec. 5, Pub. L. 101–575, 104 Stat.
2835 (42 U.S.C. 2243); sec. 1704, 112 Stat.
2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 110.1(b)(2) and 110.1(b)(3) also
issued under Pub. L. 96–92, 93 Stat. 710 (22
U.S.C. 2403). Section 110.11 also issued
under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152)
and secs. 54c and 57d, 88 Stat. 473, 475 (42
U.S.C. 2074). Section 110.27 also issued
under sec. 309(a), Pub. L. 99–440. Section
110.50(b)(3) also issued under sec. 123, 92
Stat. 142 (42 U.S.C. 2153). Section 110.51
also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 110.52
also issued under sec. 186, 68 Stat. 955 (42
U.S.C. 2236). Sections 110.80–110.113 also
issued under 5 U.S.C. 552, 554. Sections
110.30–110.135 also issued under 5 U.S.C.
553. Sections 110.2 and 110.42 (a)(9) also
issued under sec. 903, Pub. L. 102–496 (42
U.S.C. 2151 et seq.).
2. In § 110.7, paragraphs (b) and (c)(1)
are revised to read as follows:
I
§ 110.7 Information collection
requirements: OMB approval.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The approved information
collection requirements contained in
this part appear in §§ 110.7a, 110.23,
110.26, 110.27, 110.32, 110.50, 110.52,
and 110.53.
(c) * * *
(1) In §§ 110.19, 110.20, 110.21,
110.22, 110.23, 110.31, 110.32, and
110.51, NRC Form 7 is approved under
control number 3150–0027.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In § 110.31, paragraph (c) is revised
to read as follows:
§ 110.31
Application for a specific license.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Applications for an export, import,
combined export/import, amendment or
renewal licenses under 10 CFR Part 110
shall be filed on NRC Form 7.
*
*
*
*
*
I 4. In § 110.51, paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
§ 110.51 Amendment and renewal of
licenses.
(a) A licensee shall submit an
application to renew a license or to
amend a license on a completed NRC
Form 7.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day
of March, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Luis A. Reyes,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 06–3551 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2004–19680; Directorate
Identifier 2003–NM–215–AD; Amendment
39–14558; AD 2006–08–04]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 767 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 767 airplanes. This AD
requires performing a test of the
bonding resistance between the engine
fuel feed tube fitting and the front spar,
applying sealant on a hex nut inside the
dry bay, and performing any applicable
corrective actions. This AD results from
a report that the engine fuel feed tubes
were found not electrically bonded to
the front spar. We are issuing this AD
to prevent an ignition source from
entering the fuel tank during a lightning
strike event, which could cause a fuel
tank explosion.
DATES: This AD becomes effective May
18, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of May 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
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 Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for service
information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Vann, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion
Branch, ANM–140S, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6513;
fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness
directive (AD) docket on the Internet at
https://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 holidays.
The Docket Management Facility office
E:\FR\FM\13APR1.SGM
13APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(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 Boeing Model 767
series airplanes. That NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on
November 24, 2004 (69 FR 68272). That
NPRM proposed to require performing a
test of the bonding resistance between
the engine fuel feed tube fitting and the
front spar, applying sealant on a hex nut
inside the dry bay, and performing any
applicable corrective actions.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments received.
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Requests To Revise Surface Preparation
Procedures
Two commenters, Continental
Airlines and Britannia Airlines, note
that the preparation of the mating
surface on the dry bay side of the front
spar for bonding requires the use of a
stainless steel brush. The commenters
recommend that the preparation of the
mating surface be accomplished using
cleaning procedures 1, 2, or 3, described
in Section 20–20–00 of the Boeing
Standard Wiring Practices Manual
(SWPM), or other cleaning procedures;
ideally, by the use of fine abrasive
material (100 grit or finer). One of the
commenters states, ‘‘Since the objective
is to achieve a satisfactory bond, any
approved cleaning method, which
achieves that objective, should be
acceptable.’’ Continental Airlines notes
disadvantages to the other two cleaning
procedures, which involve using a
stainless steel brush, or using a rotary
abrasive disk. Specifically:
• There is a high possibility of
damaging the mating surface when
using the stainless steel rotary brush.
• Using a stainless steel rotary brush
would introduce unwelcome
contamination in the fuel tank area.
• Using a steel rotary brush when
attached to an electrical motor tool
would create a fire hazard in a fuel
vapor area.
• Current flap or shot peen
equipment cannot or is very difficult to
fit in the area due to access issues.
• Current flap or shot peen
equipment is also equipped with an
electrical motor which creates a fire
hazard in a fuel vapor area.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:13 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
We agree with the use of fine abrasive
material as the primary method for
preparing the mating surface for
bonding. Since we issued the NPRM, we
have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletins
767–28A0071 and 767–28A0072, both
Revision 2, both dated December 8,
2005. These service bulletins specify
appropriate procedures for preparing
the mating surface for bonding. We have
determined that the use of a rotary
abrasive disk as described in cleaning
procedure 3, in Section 20–20–00 of the
Boeing SWPM, should not be allowed as
a cleaning method for this AD, for the
same reasons/justifications the
commenters used against the use of a
stainless steel rotary brush. This
determination is consistent with
Revision 2 of the service bulletin
instructions. We recognize that both the
stainless steel brush and abrasive disk
require the use of an electrical motor
tool. However, using the stainless steel
brush is not considered to pose such a
significant fire hazard to the degree/
point that we would not allow it to be
used as an alternate procedure to the
fine abrasive material, as noted in
Revision 2 of the service bulletins. We
have revised paragraph (f) of this AD to
reference Revision 2 of the service
bulletins as the appropriate source of
service information. We have also
revised paragraph (c) of this AD to
reference Revision 2 of the service
bulletins, and added paragraph (h) to
give credit for actions previously
accomplished in accordance with
Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 767–
28A0071 and 767–28A0072, both
Revision 1, both dated January 22, 2004.
Request To Extend the Compliance
Time
The Air Transport Association (ATA),
on behalf of U.S. Airways, requests that
the compliance time be extended from
48 months to 60 months after the
effective date of this AD. The ATA notes
that we issued AD 2004–10–06,
amendment 39–13636 (69 FR 28046,
May 18, 2004), which addresses a
similar unsafe condition in Boeing
Model 737 and 747 airplanes. In AD
2004–10–06, we determined that a 60month compliance time maintained an
acceptable level of safety. Further, the
AD requires fuel tank entry, which
involves unique scheduling of facilities
and resources. Since other initiatives to
eliminate potential ignition sources will
result from the SFAR 88 effort, and
since some will also require fuel tank
entry, flexibility in planning those
entries should be preserved to the
greatest extent that provides an
acceptable level of safety to avoid
unnecessary fuel tank entries.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19105
We agree to extend the compliance
time to 60 months. We have determined
that a 60-month compliance time is
consistent with the requirements of
existing ADs 2004–10–06 and 2005–04–
01, amendment 39–13973 (70 FR 7841,
February 16, 2005) (also an SFAR 88
AD). This new compliance time is
consistent with Boeing’s new
recommendation specified in Revision 2
of the service bulletins (described
previously). We have also determined
that extending the compliance time will
not adversely affect safety. We have
revised paragraph (g) of this AD to
require the new compliance time.
Request To Revise Order of Tasks
ATA, on behalf of United Airlines,
requests that we allow accomplishment
of the sealant application in paragraph
3.B.7. of Revision 1 of the service
bulletins to be performed after the leak
checks in paragraph 3.B.8. of Revision 1
of the service bulletins. The commenter
explains that sealing of the coupling
could mask leaks during the leak checks
of the fuel feed line, and an undetected
leak could manifest into subsequent
related problems. The commenter states
that Boeing concurred with this resequencing.
We agree. Boeing has revised the
service bulletins to re-sequence the
steps in Revision 2 of the service
bulletins. As explained previously, we
have revised paragraph (g) to require
accomplishment of actions in
accordance with Revision 2 of the
service bulletins.
Request To Allow Use of an Alternative
Material
United Airlines requests that we
allow the use of CRES lock-wire, part
number (P/N) MS20995C32, as an
option to the Monel lock-wire, P/N
MS20995NC32, that is defined in the
service bulletin. The commenter states
that the CRES lock-wire is listed as an
acceptable standard parts substitution
for the Monel lock-wire in Boeing
Drawing 012W6100—Materials, Parts
and Process Substitution and
Equivalents. The commenter also states
that Boeing did not state any technical
objection to this substitution.
We do not agree to allow the use of
the CRES stainless-steel lock-wire.
Pieces of the CRES lock-wire could be
in the fuel tank due to breakage or be
left in the tank during the lock-wire
installation process. These pieces of
lock-wire could then be ingested into
the fuel pump inlets, and contact
stainless-steel components in the fuel
pump. Such contact in the fuel pump
between stainless-steel materials could
produce sparks or excessive heat.
E:\FR\FM\13APR1.SGM
13APR1
19106
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Neither the commenter nor the
manufacturer has provided any data that
would indicate whether pieces of CRES
lock-wires could create sparks when
ingested by the fuel pump. While
Boeing did not state any objection to
United’s substitution, it did not include
the CRES wire as an option in Revision
2 of the service bulletins either. In light
of the properties of stainless-steel, and
the absence of any sparking
characteristics data that can be used to
show that the level of safety with
stainless-steel wire is acceptable, we
currently cannot determine that the
potential impact to the level of safety is
acceptable. The commenter is welcome
to submit a request for an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) with
sparking characteristics data to support
the request. We have not changed the
AD in this regard.
Request To Revise Cost Estimate
American Airlines states that it is
accomplishing the actions proposed in
the NPRM, and estimates that the
bonding test of the engine fuel feed tube
will require approximately 21 work
hours. We infer that the commenter
wants the cost estimate to be revised.
We disagree with the commenter’s
request. Our estimate of the work hours
required is based on information
provided by the manufacturer, without
any follow-on/conditional corrective
actions, or access/close-up actions
included. We have not changed the cost
estimate of this AD.
Clarification of AMOC Paragraph
We have revised this action to clarify
the appropriate procedure for notifying
the principal inspector before using any
approved AMOC on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies.
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 changes described
previously. We have determined that
these changes will neither increase the
economic burden on any operator nor
increase the scope of the AD.
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 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
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Costs of Compliance
Adoption of the Amendment
There are about 867 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
This AD will affect about 400 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The actions will take
about 3 work hours per airplane, at an
average labor rate of $65 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the estimated
cost of the AD for U.S. operators is
$78,000, or $195 per airplane.
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:13 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
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:
I
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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):
I
2006–08–04 Boeing: Amendment 39–14558.
Docket No. FAA–2004–19680;
Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–215–AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective May 18,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767–
200, –300, and –300F series airplanes, as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767–
28A0071, Revision 2, dated December 8,
2005; and Model 767–400ER series airplanes,
as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767–
28A0072, Revision 2, dated December 8,
2005; certificated in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by a report that
the engine fuel feed tubes were found not
electrically bonded to the front spar. We are
issuing this AD to prevent an ignition source
from entering the fuel tank during a lightning
strike event, which could cause a fuel tank
explosion.
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.
Service Bulletin Definition
(f) The term ‘‘service bulletin,’’ as used in
this AD, means the Work Instructions of the
following service bulletins, as applicable:
(1) For Model 767–200, –300, and –300F
series airplanes: Boeing Service Bulletin 767–
28A0071, Revision 2, dated December 8,
2005; and
(2) For Model 767–400ER series airplanes:
Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0072,
Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005.
Investigative and Corrective Actions
(g) Within 60 months after the effective
date of this AD: Do a test of the bonding
resistance between the engine fuel feed tube
fitting and the front spar, apply sealant on a
hex nut inside the dry bay, and do all
applicable corrective actions, by
accomplishing all of the actions in the
applicable service bulletin. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.
Previous Actions
(h) Actions done before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767–28A0071, Revision 1,
dated January 22, 2004; or Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767–28A0072, Revision 1,
dated January 22, 2004, are acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of
paragraph (g) of this AD.
E:\FR\FM\13APR1.SGM
13APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in
accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies, notify the
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA
Flight Standards Certificate Holding District
Office.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin
767–28A0071, Revision 2, dated December 8,
2005; or Boeing Service Bulletin 767–
28A0072, Revision 2, dated December 8,
2005; as applicable; 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 these documents in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, 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 https://
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 https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 4,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–3478 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–22109; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NE–32–AD; Amendment 39–
14557; AD 2006–08–03]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Sicma Aero
Seat (Formerly Farner); Cabin
Attendant Seats Series 150 Type FN
and Series 151 Type WN
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for Sicma
Aero Seat (formerly Farner) cabin
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:13 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
attendant seats series 150 type FN and
series 151 type WN. This AD requires
installing two protection fairings over
the upper seat structure to cover the gap
between the upper and lower seats and
prevent any contact with the bottom
seat folding mechanisms. This AD
results from a child catching its fingers
in the folding mechanism of the bottom
of the attendant seat. We are issuing this
AD to prevent injury resulting from
contact with the bottom folding
mechanism.
This AD becomes effective May
18, 2006. The Director of the Federal
Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed
in the regulations as of May 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You can get the service
information identified in this AD from
Sicma Aero Seat, 7 Rue Lucien Coupet,
36100 Issoudun, France; telephone 33
(0) 2 54 03 39 39, fax 33 (0) 2 54 03 15
16.
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov or in
Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Boston
Aircraft Certification Office, Engine and
Propeller Directorate, FAA, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; telephone (781) 238–7161; fax
(781) 238–7170.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA
proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with
a proposed airworthiness directive (AD).
The proposed AD applies to Sicma Aero
Seat (formerly Farner) cabin attendant
seats series 150 type FN and series 151
type WN. We published the proposed
AD in the Federal Register on October
4, 2005 (70 FR 57804). That action
proposed to require installing two
protection fairings over the upper seat
structure to cover the gap between the
upper and lower seats and prevent any
contact with the bottom seat folding
mechanisms.
DATES:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the docket that
contains the AD, any comments
received, and any final disposition in
person at the Docket Management
Facility Docket Office between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is
located on the plaza level of the
Department of Transportation Nassif
Building at the street address stated in
ADDRESSES. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after the DMS
receives them.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19107
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We received no
comments on the proposal or on the
determination of the cost to the public.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data and determined that air
safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD as proposed.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 5,584 Sicma Aero
Seat (formerly Farner) cabin attendant
seats, series 150 type FN and 151 type
WN of the affected design installed on
698 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate that it will take about 3 work
hours per airplane to perform the
actions, and that the average labor rate
is $65 per work hour. Sicma has advised
us that they will supply the
modification kits at no cost. Based on
the labor rate to install the kits, the total
cost of the AD to U.S. operators will be
$136,110.
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 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;
E:\FR\FM\13APR1.SGM
13APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19104-19107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3478]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2004-19680; Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-215-AD;
Amendment 39-14558; AD 2006-08-04]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 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 Boeing Model 767 airplanes. This AD requires performing a test
of the bonding resistance between the engine fuel feed tube fitting and
the front spar, applying sealant on a hex nut inside the dry bay, and
performing any applicable corrective actions. This AD results from a
report that the engine fuel feed tubes were found not electrically
bonded to the front spar. We are issuing this AD to prevent an ignition
source from entering the fuel tank during a lightning strike event,
which could cause a fuel tank explosion.
DATES: This AD becomes effective May 18, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of May 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
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 Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Vann, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone
(425) 917-6513; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness directive (AD) docket on the
Internet at https://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 holidays. The Docket Management Facility office
[[Page 19105]]
(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 Boeing Model
767 series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register
on November 24, 2004 (69 FR 68272). That NPRM proposed to require
performing a test of the bonding resistance between the engine fuel
feed tube fitting and the front spar, applying sealant on a hex nut
inside the dry bay, and performing any applicable corrective actions.
Comments
We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.
Requests To Revise Surface Preparation Procedures
Two commenters, Continental Airlines and Britannia Airlines, note
that the preparation of the mating surface on the dry bay side of the
front spar for bonding requires the use of a stainless steel brush. The
commenters recommend that the preparation of the mating surface be
accomplished using cleaning procedures 1, 2, or 3, described in Section
20-20-00 of the Boeing Standard Wiring Practices Manual (SWPM), or
other cleaning procedures; ideally, by the use of fine abrasive
material (100 grit or finer). One of the commenters states, ``Since the
objective is to achieve a satisfactory bond, any approved cleaning
method, which achieves that objective, should be acceptable.''
Continental Airlines notes disadvantages to the other two cleaning
procedures, which involve using a stainless steel brush, or using a
rotary abrasive disk. Specifically:
There is a high possibility of damaging the mating surface
when using the stainless steel rotary brush.
Using a stainless steel rotary brush would introduce
unwelcome contamination in the fuel tank area.
Using a steel rotary brush when attached to an electrical
motor tool would create a fire hazard in a fuel vapor area.
Current flap or shot peen equipment cannot or is very
difficult to fit in the area due to access issues.
Current flap or shot peen equipment is also equipped with
an electrical motor which creates a fire hazard in a fuel vapor area.
We agree with the use of fine abrasive material as the primary
method for preparing the mating surface for bonding. Since we issued
the NPRM, we have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletins 767-28A0071 and
767-28A0072, both Revision 2, both dated December 8, 2005. These
service bulletins specify appropriate procedures for preparing the
mating surface for bonding. We have determined that the use of a rotary
abrasive disk as described in cleaning procedure 3, in Section 20-20-00
of the Boeing SWPM, should not be allowed as a cleaning method for this
AD, for the same reasons/justifications the commenters used against the
use of a stainless steel rotary brush. This determination is consistent
with Revision 2 of the service bulletin instructions. We recognize that
both the stainless steel brush and abrasive disk require the use of an
electrical motor tool. However, using the stainless steel brush is not
considered to pose such a significant fire hazard to the degree/point
that we would not allow it to be used as an alternate procedure to the
fine abrasive material, as noted in Revision 2 of the service
bulletins. We have revised paragraph (f) of this AD to reference
Revision 2 of the service bulletins as the appropriate source of
service information. We have also revised paragraph (c) of this AD to
reference Revision 2 of the service bulletins, and added paragraph (h)
to give credit for actions previously accomplished in accordance with
Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 767-28A0071 and 767-28A0072, both
Revision 1, both dated January 22, 2004.
Request To Extend the Compliance Time
The Air Transport Association (ATA), on behalf of U.S. Airways,
requests that the compliance time be extended from 48 months to 60
months after the effective date of this AD. The ATA notes that we
issued AD 2004-10-06, amendment 39-13636 (69 FR 28046, May 18, 2004),
which addresses a similar unsafe condition in Boeing Model 737 and 747
airplanes. In AD 2004-10-06, we determined that a 60-month compliance
time maintained an acceptable level of safety. Further, the AD requires
fuel tank entry, which involves unique scheduling of facilities and
resources. Since other initiatives to eliminate potential ignition
sources will result from the SFAR 88 effort, and since some will also
require fuel tank entry, flexibility in planning those entries should
be preserved to the greatest extent that provides an acceptable level
of safety to avoid unnecessary fuel tank entries.
We agree to extend the compliance time to 60 months. We have
determined that a 60-month compliance time is consistent with the
requirements of existing ADs 2004-10-06 and 2005-04-01, amendment 39-
13973 (70 FR 7841, February 16, 2005) (also an SFAR 88 AD). This new
compliance time is consistent with Boeing's new recommendation
specified in Revision 2 of the service bulletins (described
previously). We have also determined that extending the compliance time
will not adversely affect safety. We have revised paragraph (g) of this
AD to require the new compliance time.
Request To Revise Order of Tasks
ATA, on behalf of United Airlines, requests that we allow
accomplishment of the sealant application in paragraph 3.B.7. of
Revision 1 of the service bulletins to be performed after the leak
checks in paragraph 3.B.8. of Revision 1 of the service bulletins. The
commenter explains that sealing of the coupling could mask leaks during
the leak checks of the fuel feed line, and an undetected leak could
manifest into subsequent related problems. The commenter states that
Boeing concurred with this re-sequencing.
We agree. Boeing has revised the service bulletins to re-sequence
the steps in Revision 2 of the service bulletins. As explained
previously, we have revised paragraph (g) to require accomplishment of
actions in accordance with Revision 2 of the service bulletins.
Request To Allow Use of an Alternative Material
United Airlines requests that we allow the use of CRES lock-wire,
part number (P/N) MS20995C32, as an option to the Monel lock-wire, P/N
MS20995NC32, that is defined in the service bulletin. The commenter
states that the CRES lock-wire is listed as an acceptable standard
parts substitution for the Monel lock-wire in Boeing Drawing 012W6100--
Materials, Parts and Process Substitution and Equivalents. The
commenter also states that Boeing did not state any technical objection
to this substitution.
We do not agree to allow the use of the CRES stainless-steel lock-
wire. Pieces of the CRES lock-wire could be in the fuel tank due to
breakage or be left in the tank during the lock-wire installation
process. These pieces of lock-wire could then be ingested into the fuel
pump inlets, and contact stainless-steel components in the fuel pump.
Such contact in the fuel pump between stainless-steel materials could
produce sparks or excessive heat.
[[Page 19106]]
Neither the commenter nor the manufacturer has provided any data that
would indicate whether pieces of CRES lock-wires could create sparks
when ingested by the fuel pump. While Boeing did not state any
objection to United's substitution, it did not include the CRES wire as
an option in Revision 2 of the service bulletins either. In light of
the properties of stainless-steel, and the absence of any sparking
characteristics data that can be used to show that the level of safety
with stainless-steel wire is acceptable, we currently cannot determine
that the potential impact to the level of safety is acceptable. The
commenter is welcome to submit a request for an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) with sparking characteristics data to support the
request. We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Revise Cost Estimate
American Airlines states that it is accomplishing the actions
proposed in the NPRM, and estimates that the bonding test of the engine
fuel feed tube will require approximately 21 work hours. We infer that
the commenter wants the cost estimate to be revised.
We disagree with the commenter's request. Our estimate of the work
hours required is based on information provided by the manufacturer,
without any follow-on/conditional corrective actions, or access/close-
up actions included. We have not changed the cost estimate of this AD.
Clarification of AMOC Paragraph
We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure
for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on
any airplane to which the AMOC applies.
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 changes described previously.
We have determined that these changes will neither increase the
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 867 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This AD will affect about 400 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The actions will take about 3 work hours per airplane, at an
average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of the AD for U.S. operators is $78,000, or $195 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 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
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
2006-08-04 Boeing: Amendment 39-14558. Docket No. FAA-2004-19680;
Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-215-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective May 18, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F
series airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
28A0071, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005; and Model 767-400ER
series airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
28A0072, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005; certificated in any
category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by a report that the engine fuel feed
tubes were found not electrically bonded to the front spar. We are
issuing this AD to prevent an ignition source from entering the fuel
tank during a lightning strike event, which could cause a fuel tank
explosion.
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.
Service Bulletin Definition
(f) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the
Work Instructions of the following service bulletins, as applicable:
(1) For Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes: Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-28A0071, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005;
and
(2) For Model 767-400ER series airplanes: Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-28A0072, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005.
Investigative and Corrective Actions
(g) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a
test of the bonding resistance between the engine fuel feed tube
fitting and the front spar, apply sealant on a hex nut inside the
dry bay, and do all applicable corrective actions, by accomplishing
all of the actions in the applicable service bulletin. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further flight.
Previous Actions
(h) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-28A0071, Revision
1, dated January 22, 2004; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
28A0072, Revision 1, dated January 22, 2004, are acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.
[[Page 19107]]
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards
Certificate Holding District Office.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0071, Revision
2, dated December 8, 2005; or Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0072,
Revision 2, dated December 8, 2005; as applicable; 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 these documents in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, 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 https://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 https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 4, 2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 06-3478 Filed 4-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
