41934 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

WA. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 6, 

2012. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17391 Filed 7–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0619; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–356–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 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 all The Boeing Company Model 747– 

100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747– 

200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 747–300, 

747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. That 

NPRM proposed to require performing 

repetitive operational tests of the engine 

fuel suction feed of the fuel system, and 

other related testing if necessary. That 

NPRM was prompted by reports of two 

in-service occurrences on Model 737– 

400 airplanes of total loss of boost pump 

pressure of the fuel feed system, 

followed by loss of fuel system suction 

feed capability on one engine, and inflight shutdown of the engine. This 

action revises that NPRM by proposing 

to require repetitive operational tests, 

and corrective actions if necessary. We 

are proposing this supplemental NPRM 

to detect and correct loss of the engine 

fuel suction feed capability of the fuel 

system, which in the event of total loss 

of the fuel boost pumps could result in 

dual engine flameout, inability to restart 

the engines, and consequent forced 

landing of the airplane. Since these 

actions impose an additional burden 

over that proposed in the previous 

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 August 31, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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 identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; 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: Sue 

Lucier, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140S, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6438; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: suzanne.lucier@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–2008–0619; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–356–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 AD that would 

apply to all The Boeing Company Model 

747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 

747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 747– 

300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. 

That NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on June 6, 2008 (73 FR 32245). 

That NPRM proposed to require 

performing repetitive operational tests 

of the engine fuel suction feed of the 

fuel system, and other related testing if 

necessary. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008) Was Issued 

Since we issued the previous NPRM 

(73 FR 32245, June 6, 2008), we have 

received comments from operators 

indicating a high level of difficulty 

performing the actions in the previous 

NPRM during maintenance operations. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–28A2331, dated April 2, 

2012. This service information describes 

procedures for repetitive operational 

tests of the engine fuel suction feed of 

the fuel system, and corrective actions 

if necessary. The corrective actions 

include isolating the cause of any 

leakage and repairing the leak. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

previous NPRM and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Requests To Clarify the Reason for the 

Unsafe Condition/Define Risk 

Assessment 

Boeing and Northwest Airlines 

(NWA) asked that we clarify the reason 

for the unsafe condition identified in 

the previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 

6, 2008) by including all relevant 

information. 

Boeing stated that the description of 

a report of in-service occurrences of loss 

of fuel system suction feed capability 

results from reports of two in-service 

engine flameout events while operating 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 41935 

on suction feed with undetected air leak 

failures on Model 737–400 airplanes. 

Boeing added that there are no known 

reports of any engine flameout-related 

events in the Model 747 fleet. Boeing 

noted that undetected air leaks could 

exist and the subject maintenance 

procedure is a proactive measure to 

ensure engine flameout will not occur 

due to air leaks while on suction feed 

operation. 

NWA asked for an explanation of 

what caused the failure that resulted in 

issuance of the previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008), and stated that 

failure analysis could indicate different 

action than the one proposed. NWA 

added that the events occurred on twinengine airplanes, and requested that we 

provide the basis for the conclusion that 

Model 747–400 airplanes have the same 

or greater risk for this unsafe condition 

to occur as twin-engine airplanes. 

We agree that the reason for the 

unsafe condition should be clarified for 

the reasons provided. We have changed 

the language in the reason for the unsafe 

condition identified in the Summary 

section and paragraph (e) of this 

supplemental NPRM to specify that the 

previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 6, 

2008) was prompted by reports of two 

in-service occurrences on Model 737– 

400 airplanes of total loss of boost pump 

pressure of the fuel feed system, 

followed by loss of fuel system suction 

feed capability on one engine, and inflight shutdown of the engine. 

The cause of the failure is identified 

in a failure analysis done by Boeing, and 

incorporates a four-engine airplane in 

place of a twin-engine airplane. The 

differences between the four-engine 

airplane and the twin-engine airplane 

are reflected in a longer compliance 

time for the four-engine airplane. 

Although the Model 747 fuel system 

differs with respect to the engine fuel 

feed design, service data of transport 

category airplanes indicate that multiengine flameouts have generally 

resulted from a common cause such as 

fuel mismanagement, crew action that 

inadvertently shuts off the fuel supply 

to the engines, exposure to common 

environmental conditions, or engine 

deterioration occurring on all engines of 

the same type. Successful in-flight 

restart of these engines depends on 

adequate fuel being supplied to the 

engines solely through engine fuel 

suction feed. Deterioration of the fuel 

plumbing system ‘‘lead-to-line’’ 

(vacuum) reduces engine fuel suction 

feed capability; therefore, directed 

maintenance is necessary to ensure that 

this system is available to perform its 

function in order to maintain continued 

safe flight. 

In light of the above, we have 

determined that Model 747–400, –400D, 

and –400F series airplanes are also 

affected by the identified unsafe 

condition, and are considering 

additional rulemaking for those 

airplanes. 

Request To Issue Certification 

Maintenance Requirement (CMR) Task 

Instead of Previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008) 

Japan Airlines (JAL) requested that we 

withdraw the previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008). JAL asked that 

instead of issuing an NPRM, we issue a 

CMR task. JAL stated that the 

requirements in the previous NPRM 

should not be addressed as an AD. JAL 

did not provide a reason for this request. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request. CMRs are developed by the 

Certification Maintenance Coordination 

Committee (CMCC) during the type 

certification process. The CMCC is made 

up of manufacturer representatives 

(typically maintenance, design, and 

safety engineering personnel); operator 

representatives designated by the 

Industry Steering Committee 

chairperson; aircraft certification office 

specialists, and the maintenance review 

board (MRB) chairperson. CMRs 

developed during this process become a 

part of the certification basis of the 

airplane upon issuance of the type 

certificate. We do not have a process for 

convening the CMCC outside of the type 

certification process; based on this, the 

CMR is not an option for replacing this 

AD. Regardless, the airworthiness 

limitations (ALI) were not in the 

maintenance program at the time the 

previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 6, 

2008) was issued; therefore, an AD is 

required to accomplish the ALI task. 

Request To Remove or Clarify Certain 

Language in Paragraph (f) of the 

Previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 6, 

2008) 

NWA asked that the last sentence in 

paragraph (f) of the previous NPRM (73 

FR 32245, June 6, 2008) be removed or 

clarified. NWA stated that the intent of 

that sentence is unclear, and is 

reiterated as follows: ‘‘Thereafter, except 

as provided in paragraph (h) of this AD, 

no alternative procedure or repetitive 

test intervals will be allowed.’’ NWA 

added that it is standard practice that 

once an AD is issued, deviation 

procedures and intervals are not 

allowed unless approved by requesting 

an alternative method of compliance. 

We agree with the commenter that 

including the subject sentence is 

redundant; however, that sentence is 

included in paragraph (g) of the 

supplemental NPRM (paragraph (f) of 

the previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 

6, 2008)) merely as a reminder for 

operators of standard practices. We have 

made no change to the supplemental 

NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance 

Section 

NWA stated that the cost estimate 

specified in the previous NPRM (73 FR 

32245, June 6, 2008) is too low, and 

asked that it be changed. NWA stated 

that the cost of fuel is not included in 

the cost estimate and should be 

included due to the high cost of fuel. 

We acknowledge the commenter’s 

request. Although fuel is used during 

the operational test, we have not 

received data on the amount of fuel 

used during the test. In addition, fuel 

costs vary among operators. Therefore, 

we do not have definitive data that 

would enable us to provide a cost 

estimate for the fuel costs. In any case, 

we have determined that direct and 

incidental costs are still outweighed by 

the safety benefits of the AD. We have 

made no change to 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 

(73 FR 32245, June 6, 2008). 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 revises the 

previous NPRM (73 FR 32245, June 6, 

2008) by proposing repetitive 

operational tests of the engine fuel 

suction feed of the fuel system, and 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 1,080 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We estimate the following costs 

to comply with this proposed AD: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

41936 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Cost per 

product Cost on U.S. operators 

Operational Test ...................................... 3 work hours × $85 per hour = $255 per 

engine, per test.

$255 $275,400 per engine, per test. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide a cost 

estimate for the on-condition actions or 

the optional terminating action 

specified in this 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 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– 

2008–0619; Directorate Identifier 2007– 

NM–356–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by August 31, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747– 

100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 

747–300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 2800, Aircraft Fuel System. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of two 

in-service occurrences on Model 737–400 

airplanes of total loss of boost pump pressure 

of the fuel feed system, followed by loss of 

fuel system suction feed capability on one 

engine, and in-flight shutdown of the engine. 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

loss of the engine fuel suction feed capability 

of the fuel system, which in the event of total 

loss of the fuel boost pumps could result in 

dual engine flameout, inability to restart the 

engines, and consequent forced landing of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Operational Test and Corrective Actions 

Within 30,000 flight hours after the 

effective date of this AD: Perform an 

operational test of the engine fuel suction 

feed of the fuel system, and all applicable 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–28A2331, dated April 2, 

2012. Do all applicable corrective actions 

before further flight. Repeat the operational 

test thereafter at intervals not to exceed 

30,000 flight hours. Thereafter, except as 

provided in paragraph (h) of this AD, no 

alternative procedure or repetitive test 

intervals will be allowed. 

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(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 emailed to: 9–ANM– 

Seattle-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. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Sue Lucier, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6438; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: suzanne.lucier@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 

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 July 5, 

2012. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17393 Filed 7–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS