This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

18664 

Vol. 76, No. 65 

Tuesday, April 5, 2011 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–1221; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–097–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model 767 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for the products listed above. That 

NPRM proposed to require installing 

new panel assemblies in the main 

equipment center or on the forward 

cargo compartment sidewall and 

removing certain relays from some 

panels in the main equipment center. 

That NPRM also proposed to require 

revising the maintenance program to 

incorporate Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) No. 28–AWL–27 and No. 28– 

AWL–28. That NPRM was prompted by 

fuel system reviews conducted by the 

manufacturer. For certain airplanes, this 

action revises that NPRM by proposing 

to require prior or concurrent 

installation of a second fuel crossfeed 

valve. This action also revises that 

NPRM by proposing an alternative 

location for the installation of the new 

panel assemblies for airplanes that have 

the optional water system drain 

plumbing and changing the 

interconnecting wiring between the 

P141 panel and the P36 and P37 panels. 

For airplanes with a deactivated center 

fuel tank, this action revises that NPRM 

by proposing an alternative functional 

test for the left and right override/ 

jettison pumps. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to prevent possible 

sources of ignition in a fuel tank caused 

by electrical fault or uncommanded dry 

operation of the main tank boost pumps 

and center auxiliary tank override and 

jettison pumps. An ignition source in 

the fuel tank could result in a fire or an 

explosion and consequent loss of the 

airplane. Since these actions impose an 

additional burden over that proposed in 

the NPRM, we are reopening the 

comment period to allow the public the 

chance to comment on these proposed 

changes. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by May 2, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124– 

2207; telephone 206–544–5000, 

extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail 

me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 

130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6478; fax (425) 917–6590; 

e-mail elias.natsiopoulos@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–1221; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–097–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an airworthiness 

directive (AD) that would apply to The 

Boeing Company Model 767–200, –300, 

–300F, and –400ER series airplanes. 

That NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on December 29, 2009 (74 FR 

68743). That NPRM proposed to require 

installing new panel assemblies in the 

main equipment center or on the 

forward cargo compartment sidewall 

and removing certain relays from some 

panels in the main equipment center. 

That NPRM also proposed to require 

revising the maintenance program to 

incorporate Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) No. 28–AWL–27 and No. 28– 

AWL–28. 

Actions Since Original NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the original NPRM, 

the manufacturer has notified us that 

certain airplanes affected by the original 

NPRM have the optional water system 

drain plumbing. This optional system 

was not addressed in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0085, dated 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18665 

January 10, 2008; or Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 1, 

dated June 25, 2009; which we referred 

to as appropriate sources of service 

information for accomplishing the 

proposed actions. Several operators 

attempted to accomplish the actions and 

encountered equipment installation 

interference. Specifically, the 

installation of the new P141 panel at the 

location specified in either revision of 

the service bulletin interferes with the 

optional water system drain plumbing. 

We have revised the supplemental 

NPRM to refer to Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 2, 

dated August 19, 2010. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 

2010, specifies the following changes: 

• For airplanes equipped with the 

optional water system drain plumbing: 

An alternate location is specified for the 

installation of the P141 panel. The 

interconnecting wiring between the 

P141 panel and the P36 and P37 panels 

is also changed due to the relocation of 

the P141 panel. 

• For airplanes with a deactivated 

center fuel tank (alternately referred to 

as the center auxiliary fuel tank): An 

alternative functional test is added for 

the left and right override/jettison 

pumps. 

• For airplanes having line positions 

1 through 430: Installation of a second 

fuel crossfeed valve is added as a prior 

or concurrent action. This installation is 

specified to be done in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28–0034, 

Revision 3, dated March 14, 1996. 

• Additional error corrections and 

clarifications, including clarifications of 

wiring configurations and routing, and 

increased work-hours for airplanes with 

the optional water system drain 

plumbing. 

Explanations of Additional Changes to 

the Original NPRM 

We have added a new paragraph (d) 

to this supplemental NPRM to provide 

the Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America subject code 28, Fuel. This 

code is added to make this 

supplemental NPRM parallel with other 

new AD actions. We have reidentified 

subsequent paragraphs accordingly. 

We have included the cost of the 

prior/concurrent installation of the 

second crossfeed valve. 

We have also removed Table 1 and 

fully cited the service information that 

was specified in the table. We 

reidentified the subsequent table. 

As noted above, we have added 

certain paragraphs to the supplemental 

NPRM and, since we issued the original 

NPRM, the format has been revised, and 

certain other paragraphs have been 

rearranged. As a result, the 

corresponding paragraph identifiers 

have changed from the original NPRM 

in this supplemental NPRM, as listed in 

the table titled ‘‘Revised Paragraph 

Identifiers.’’ In the disposition of 

comments we will refer to the relevant 

paragraph of the original NPRM or the 

supplemental NPRM, depending on 

context. 

REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS

Paragraph in the 

original NPRM 

Corresponding or new 

paragraph in the supplemental NPRM 

none ................. paragraph (d)—new ATA 

code. 

paragraph (d) .... paragraph (e). 

paragraph (e) .... paragraph (f). 

paragraph (f) ..... paragraph (g). 

none ................. paragraph (h)—exception. 

paragraph (g) .... paragraph (i). 

none ................. paragraph (j)—new concurrent requirement. 

paragraph (h) .... paragraph (k). 

paragraph (i) ..... paragraph (l). 

paragraph (j) ..... paragraph (m). 

none ................. paragraph (n)—new paragraph for credit for actions accomplished in 

accordance with previous service information. 

paragraph (k) .... paragraph (o). 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the original NPRM. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Add Service Information to 

Table 1 of the Original NPRM 

Japan Airlines (JAL) requested that we 

revise Table 1 in paragraph (g) of the 

original NPRM to include the original 

versions of two service bulletins as 

sources of service information. JAL 

pointed out that these two service 

bulletins are referred to in AD 2009–16– 

06, amendment 39–15989, which is the 

subject of paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM. 

We agree with JAL’s request. We have 

included a new Table 2 in this 

supplemental NPRM to include Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0083, 

dated May 3, 2006; and Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0084, dated 

May 3, 2006. Both of these service 

bulletins are acceptable for compliance 

with the requirements of AD 2009–16– 

06. Although Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0083, dated May 3, 2006, is 

identified in Paragraph 1.B., 

‘‘Concurrent Requirements,’’ of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 

2, dated August 19, 2010, Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0084, dated 

May 3, 2006, is not listed in Paragraph 

1.B. of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 

2010. We have coordinated this 

difference with Boeing. 

Requests To Refer to R1 of AD 2008–11– 

01 

JAL, Continental Airlines (CAL), 

United Airlines (UAL), and UPS pointed 

out that although paragraph (i) of the 

original NPRM proposed the option of 

incorporating paragraph (g)(2) of AD 

2008–11–01, amendment 39–15523 (73 

FR 29414, May 21, 2008), that AD has 

since been revised to AD 2008–11–01 

R1, amendment 39–16145 (74 FR 68515, 

December 28, 2009). 

We agree with the requests to refer to 

AD 2008–11–01 R1, amendment 39– 

16145. We issued the revision to AD 

2008–11–01 to clarify the AD’s intended 

effect on spares and on-airplane fuel 

tank system components, regarding the 

use of maintenance manuals and 

instructions for continued 

airworthiness. The actions required by 

AD 2008–11–01 R1 are consistent with 

paragraph (j) of the original NPRM, 

which states that ‘‘after accomplishing 

the actions specified in paragraph (i) of 

this AD, no alternative inspections or 

inspection intervals may be used.’’ We 

have changed paragraph (l) of this 

supplemental NPRM to refer to AD 

2008–11–01, amendment 39–15523, and 

AD 2008–11–01 R1, amendment 39– 

16145. 

Requests for Clarification of Date of 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document 

Several commenters requested 

clarification of the intent of the 

‘‘Revision March 2009’’ date of Boeing 

767 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document, Section 9, D622T001–9, 

Revision March 2009, referred to in the 

original NPRM. 

• JAL stated that the revision should 

be Revision April 2009 or Revision 

August 2009 because it does not appear 

that Revision March 2009 was issued. 

• CAL believed that the date should 

be Revision May 2009. 

• UAL asked if the intent of the 

proposed rule is to override the 

requirements of AD 2008–11–01 R1 in 

that only Revision May 2009 may be 

used for compliance. UAL stated that it 

believed that operators should be 

allowed to use either Revision April 

2008 or Revision May 2009, and that 

paragraph (h) of the original NPRM 

should be revised accordingly. 

• UPS pointed out that as an optional 

action in AD 2008–11–01 R1, AWLs No. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

18666 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

28–AWL–27 and No. 28–AWL–28 may 

be incorporated into the maintenance 

program as identified in Revision April 

2008 or Revision May 2009 of the MPD. 

UPS was unclear as to whether the 

original NPRM would supersede the 

previous option by requiring that only 

Revision March 2009 be used. UPS 

further stated that AD 2008–11–01 R1 

notes that the changes in Revision May 

2009 are for clarification only and that 

either Revision April 2008 or Revision 

May 2009 are acceptable for use. 

We agree that the date of the MPD 

document needs to be clarified. AWLs 

No. 28–AWL–27 and No. 28–AWL–28 

were added to Boeing 767 Maintenance 

Planning Data (MPD) Document, Section 

9, D622T001–9, in Revision October 

2007. None of the revisions of this MPD 

document since that time have changed 

the text of AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 and 

No. 28–AWL–28. Therefore, either of 

the revisions mentioned in AD 2008– 

11–01 R1, Revision April 2008 or 

Revision May 2009, may be used to 

update the maintenance program to 

incorporate AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 and 

No. 28–AWL–28. We have revised 

paragraph (k) of this supplemental 

NPRM to specify that Revision April 

2008, Revision March 2009, or Revision 

May 2009, may be used. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

CAL had no technical objection to the 

original NPRM, but pointed out that 

although the compliance time for 

accomplishing the actions proposed in 

the original NPRM is 60 months, the 

concurrent requirements from AD 2009– 

16–06, which is specified as terminating 

action for paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM, have a compliance time of 36 

months. CAL stated that doing the 

actions in AD 2009–16–06 requires 

extensive airplane modifications and 

material allocations that can only be 

accomplished during a heavy check or 

special maintenance hold. Therefore, 

CAL requested that we consider a minor 

extension to the compliance time in AD 

2009–16–06. 

We disagree with approving an 

extension to the compliance time for AD 

2009–16–06 through this supplemental 

NPRM. However, we will consider 

requests for an adjustment to the 

compliance time under the provisions of 

paragraph (o) of AD 2009–16–06 if data 

are submitted to substantiate that such 

an adjustment would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. We have not 

changed the supplemental NPRM in this 

regard. 

Request To Remove Paragraph (g) of the 

Original NPRM 

Boeing requested that we consider 

removing paragraph (g) from the original 

NPRM. Paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM is the concurrent installation of 

an automatic shutoff system for the 

auxiliary fuel tank pump. Boeing 

explained that the safety conditions and 

fixes associated with references to 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0083, 

Revision 2, dated February 12, 2009; or 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0084, 

Revision 1, dated April 26, 2007; are 

already mandated by AD 2009–16–06, 

and by the instructions in paragraph (f) 

of the original NPRM with 

implementation of Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 2, 

dated August 19, 2010. Boeing stated 

that future changes to paragraph (g) of 

the original NPRM would require 

alternative methods of compliance 

(AMOCs) and create added paperwork 

for Boeing, the airlines, and the FAA. 

We disagree with the request to 

remove paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM. Accomplishing the actions 

proposed in the original NPRM for the 

center fuel tank pump system depend 

on the configuration of the center fuel 

tank pump system of the affected 

airplanes as modified by the 

accomplishment of the actions specified 

in the service information identified in 

paragraph (g) of the original NPRM. 

Therefore, airplanes in the effectivity of 

the service bulletins identified in Table 

1 of this supplemental NPRM must have 

the actions done prior to or concurrently 

with the actions proposed in paragraph 

(g) of this supplemental NPRM. If we 

remove paragraph (i) of this 

supplemental NPRM, there is no 

assurance that the center fuel tank 

pump system for the affected airplanes 

would be in the correct configuration 

during the accomplishment of the 

actions proposed in paragraph (g) of this 

supplemental NPRM. 

Should the service information 

specified in paragraph (i) of this 

supplemental NPRM change in a way 

that affects the ground fault interrupt 

(GFI) relays and uncommanded-on 

protective feature, under the provisions 

of paragraph (o) of this supplemental 

NPRM, we will consider requests for 

approval of an AMOC if sufficient data 

are submitted to substantiate that the 

design change would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. We have not 

changed this supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

Request To Remove Paragraphs (h), (i), 

and (j) of the Original NPRM 

All Nippon Airways (ANA) requested 

that we remove the proposed 

requirements of paragraphs (h), (i), and 

(j) of the original NPRM, which specify 

incorporating AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 

and No. 28–AWL–28 into the 

maintenance program. ANA stated that 

these AWLs have already been 

introduced in the airline maintenance 

program as required by AD 2008–11–01 

R1. 

We disagree with the request to 

remove paragraphs (k), (l), and (m) of 

the supplemental NPRM (paragraphs 

(h), (i), and (j) of the original NPRM). 

Incorporating AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 

and No. 28–AWL–28 into the 

maintenance program in accordance 

with AD 2008–11–01 R1 is an option, 

not a requirement. Operators may or 

may not decide to exercise this option. 

The actions proposed in paragraph (k) of 

this supplemental NPRM remain 

applicable. However, paragraph (l) of 

this supplemental NPRM gives credit to 

operators of the affected airplanes that 

chose the optional action; doing the 

optional action terminates the actions 

proposed in paragraph (k) of this 

supplemental NPRM. We have not 

changed this supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

Request To Define Unsafe Condition 

and Corrective Actions Clearly 

TDG Aerospace (TDG) requested that 

we revise the text of the original NPRM 

to reflect the construction of a typical 

NPRM. TDG stated that in that 

construction, the FAA typically 

discusses the unsafe condition, 

describes the desired corrective action, 

and then refers to the manufacturer’s 

service information for approved 

instructions for doing the corrective 

action. TDG pointed out that the intent 

of the original NPRM is effectively 

masked by focusing on the ‘‘Installation 

of Panel Assemblies and Removal of 

Relays.’’ TDG said this suggests that the 

FAA intends to mandate ‘‘Installation of 

Panel Assemblies and Removal of 

Relays’’ as a desired corrective action for 

the unsafe condition identified in 

paragraph (d) of the original NPRM. 

TDG argued that the corrective action is 

the installation of an uncommanded-on 

protection system and installation of 

GFI relays. TDG stated that installing 

new panels and removing relays is 

simply one method of achieving the 

corrective action. TDG further stated 

that the language of the rule is 

important with respect to the 

application for AMOCs and said it 

would be more straightforward for 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18667 

AMOC applicants to show an equivalent 

level of safety to installing 

uncommanded-on protection and GFI 

relays as opposed to showing an 

equivalent level of safety to installation 

of panel assemblies and removal of 

relays. 

We partially agree with TDG’s request 

for clarification. We disagree that the 

order of the supplemental NPRM should 

be revised. The unsafe condition and 

the intent of the proposed rule are 

described in the Summary and 

Discussion sections and paragraph (d) of 

the original NPRM. The heading 

‘‘Installation of Panel Assemblies and 

Removal of Relays’’ is a descriptive title 

only and not the enforceable language of 

paragraph (f) of the original NPRM. 

However, we agree that some 

clarification of the P140 and P141 

assemblies is necessary. These panel 

assemblies are preassembled modules 

that contain the GFI relays and the 

center fuel tank override/jettison pumps 

un-commanded ON protective features. 

We have included in the Summary and 

Discussion sections of the supplemental 

NPRM the words ‘‘* * * main 

equipment center or on the forward 

cargo compartment sidewall and 

removing certain relays from some 

panels in the main equipment center.’’ 

We have also revised the wording in 

paragraph (g) of this supplemental 

NPRM to reflect a similar wording. 

Request for Clarification of Prior or 

Concurrent Actions for Airplanes With 

Deactivated Center Fuel Tank 

TDG pointed out that paragraph (j) of 

AD 2009–16–06 provides for optional 

terminating action for paragraphs (f), 

(h), and (i) of that AD via deactivation 

of the center fuel tank. TDG expressed 

concern that operators that deactivate 

the center tank will not be able to do the 

modifications proposed in the original 

NPRM without prior or concurrent 

installation of the automatic shutoff 

system in accordance with the actions 

in proposed paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM. TDG stated that requiring 

operators to install an automatic shutoff 

system on an airplane with a 

deactivated center tank effectively 

eliminates the center tank deactivation 

as an optional terminating action for AD 

2009–16–06. 

We infer from TDG’s comments that it 

sees a conflict between the original 

NPRM and AD 2009–16–06, amendment 

39–15989, that would invalidate certain 

provisions of that AD. We disagree. We 

note that paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM proposed to require changes to 

all affected airplanes, whether the 

airplanes have an active center fuel tank 

(with changes made per paragraphs (f), 

(h), and (i) of AD 2009–16–06), or a 

deactivated center fuel tank (as allowed 

by paragraph (j) of AD 2009–16–06). 

Changes made per Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 2, 

dated August 19, 2010, can be made on 

airplanes in either configuration, and 

this service bulletin includes 

instructions for testing of an airplane 

with a deactivated center fuel tank 

(reference Step 3.B.29.e. of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of this 

service bulletin). If a deactivated center 

fuel tank is later reactivated, the 

requirements in paragraph (i) of AD 

2009–16–06 must be done. We have not 

changed the supplemental NPRM in this 

regard. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all the 

relevant information and determined 

the unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

in other products of the same type 

design. Certain changes described above 

expand the scope of the original NPRM. 

As a result, we have determined that it 

is necessary to reopen the comment 

period to provide additional 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on this supplemental NPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of the 

Supplemental NPRM 

This supplemental NPRM would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 416 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on 

U.S. operators 

Installation of GFI equipment and 

wiring.

Between 216 and 279 work-hours 

× $85 per hour = between 

$18,360 and $23,715.

Between $52,285 and 

$53,123.

Between $70,645 and 

$76,838.

Up to $31,964,608. 

Installation of second crossfeed 

valve (prior/concurrent action).

Between 274 and 302 work-hours 

× $85 per hour = between 

$23,290 and $25,670.

Between $30,838 and 

$66,903.

Between $54,128 and 

$92,573.

Between $22,517,248 

and $38,510,368. 

Installing automatic shutoff system (prior/concurrent action; required by AD 2009–16–06).Between 3 and 29 work-hours × 

$85 per hour = between $255 

and $2,465.

Between $421 and 

$9,374.

Between $676 and 

$11,835.

Between $281,216 

and $4,925,024. 

Revising the maintenance program.1 ................................................... None .......................... $85 ............................. $35,360. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

individuals. We do not control warranty 

coverage for affected individuals. As a 

result, we have included all costs in our 

cost estimate. 

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. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

18668 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) 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. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2009–1221; Directorate Identifier 2008– 

NM–097–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by May 2, 

2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to The Boeing 

Company Model 767–200, –300, –300F, and 

–400ER series airplanes, certificated in any 

category; as identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 2, dated 

August 19, 2010. 

Note 1: This AD requires revisions to 

certain operator maintenance documents to 

include new inspections. Compliance with 

these inspections is required by 14 CFR 

91.403(c). For airplanes that have been 

previously modified, altered, or repaired in 

the areas addressed by these inspections, the 

operator may not be able to accomplish the 

inspections described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), 

the operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance (AMOC) 

according to paragraph (o) of this AD. The 

request should include a description of 

changes to the required inspections that will 

ensure the continued operational safety of 

the airplane. 

Subject 

(d) Joint Aircraft System Component 

(JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28, Fuel. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent possible 

sources of ignition in a fuel tank caused by 

electrical fault or uncommanded dry 

operation of the main tank boost pumps and 

center auxiliary tank override and jettison 

pumps. An ignition source in the fuel tank 

could result in a fire or an explosion, and 

consequent loss of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(f) Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

Installation of Panel Assemblies and 

Removal of Relays 

(g) Within 60 months after the effective 

date of this AD, install ground fault interrupt 

relays (P140 and P141 panel assemblies) and 

all applicable parts and components in the 

main equipment center or in the forward 

cargo compartment sidewall, as applicable, 

and remove the fuel boost pump control 

relays from the P33, P36, and P37 panels, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, 

except as required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD. 

Exception to Service Bulletin 

(h) Although paragraph 3.B.29.e. of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0085, Revision 2, 

dated August 19, 2010, specifies an 

alternative functional test of the left and right 

center override pumps as an option, this AD 

requires that test for airplanes on which the 

center tank is deactivated. 

Prior/Concurrent Installations 

(i) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

1.A.1. of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0083, Revision 2, dated February 12, 

2009; or Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0084, Revision 1, dated April 26, 2007: 

Prior or concurrently with accomplishing the 

action required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 

install an automatic shutoff system for the 

auxiliary fuel tank pump, in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0083, Revision 2, 

dated February 12, 2009; or Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0084, Revision 1, dated 

April 26, 2007; as applicable. Accomplishing 

the requirements of AD 2009–16–06, 

amendment 39–15989, terminates the 

requirements of this paragraph. 

(j) For airplanes having line positions 1 

through 430: Prior or concurrently with 

accomplishing the action required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, install a second fuel 

crossfeed valve, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28–0034, Revision 3, 

dated March 14, 1996. 

Maintenance Program Revision 

(k) Concurrently with accomplishing the 

actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 

or within 30 days after the effective date of 

this AD, whichever occurs later: Revise the 

maintenance program by incorporating 

Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) No. 28– 

AWL–27 and No. 28–AWL–28 of Section 9 

(‘‘AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS (AWLs) 

AND CERTIFICATION MAINTENANCE 

REQUIREMENTS (CMRs)’’) of the Boeing 767 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document, D622T001–9, Revision April 

2008; Revision March 2009; or Revision May 

2009. The initial compliance time for the 

actions specified in AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 

and No. 28–AWL–28 is within 1 year after 

accomplishing the installation required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 1 year 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

Terminating Action for AWLs Revision 

(l) Incorporating AWLs No. 28–AWL–27 

and No. 28–AWL–28 into the maintenance 

program in accordance with paragraph (g)(2) 

of AD 2008–11–01, amendment 39–15523, or 

paragraph (g)(2) of 2008–11–01 R1, 

amendment 39–16145, terminates the action 

required by paragraph (k) of this AD. 

No Alternative Inspections or Inspection 

Intervals 

(m) After accomplishing the actions 

specified in paragraph (k) of this AD, no 

alterative inspections or inspection intervals 

may be used unless the inspections or 

intervals are approved as an alternative 

method of compliance (AMOC) in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (o) of this AD. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

(n) Actions done before the effective date 

of this AD in accordance with the service 

information identified in Table 1 of this AD 

are acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of this AD. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18669 

TABLE 1—CREDIT SERVICE INFORMATION

Boeing Service Bulletin Revision Date 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0085 ........................................................................................... Original .................. January 10, 2008. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0085 ................................................................................................... 1 ............................. June 25, 2009. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0083 ........................................................................................... Original .................. May 3, 2006. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0083 ................................................................................................... 1 ............................. April 26, 2007. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0084 ........................................................................................... Original .................. May 3, 2006. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28–0034 .................................................................................................... 2 ............................. May 4, 1995. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(o)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be e-mailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

Related Information 

(p) For more information about this AD, 

contact Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, 

ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6478; fax (425) 917–6590; e-mail 

elias.natsiopoulos@faa.gov. 

(q) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766– 

5680; e-mail me.boecom@boeing.com; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 

24, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8066 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0184] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone, Newport River; Morehead 

City, NC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes the 

establishment a safety zone on the 

waters of the Newport River under the 

main span US 70/Morehead City— 

Newport River high rise bridge in 

Carteret County, NC. This safety zone is 

necessary to provide for safety of life on 

navigable waters during the 

establishment of staging for bridge 

maintenance. This rule will enhance the 

safety of the contractors performing 

maintenance as well as the safety 

vessels that plan to transit this area. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before May 5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2011–0184 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail BOSN3 Joseph M. 

Edge, Coast Guard Sector North 

Carolina, Coast Guard; telephone 252– 

247–4525, e-mail 

Joseph.M.Edge@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2011–0184), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (via http:// 

www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a telephone number in the 

body of your document so that we can 

contact you if we have questions 

regarding your submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS