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

14934 

Vol. 78, No. 46 

Friday, March 8, 2013 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1160; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–148–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

to supersede an existing AD for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 767 

airplanes. The existing AD currently 

requires repetitive inspections to detect 

discrepancies of the wiring and 

surrounding Teflon sleeves of the fuel 

tank boost pumps and override/jettison 

pumps; replacement of the sleeves with 

new sleeves, for certain airplanes; and 

repair or replacement of the wiring and 

sleeves with new parts, as necessary. 

The first SNPRM proposed to reduce the 

initial compliance time and repetitive 

inspection interval in the existing AD. 

The first SNPRM also proposed to 

mandate a terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections, to eliminate wire 

damage. In addition, the first SNPRM 

proposed to remove certain airplanes 

from the applicability of the existing 

AD. The first SNPRM was prompted by 

fleet information indicating that the 

repetitive inspection interval in the 

existing AD is too long, because 

excessive chafing of the sleeving 

continues to occur much earlier than 

expected between scheduled 

inspections. This action revises the first 

SNPRM by also proposing to require 

revising the maintenance program to 

incorporate changes to the airworthiness 

limitations section. We are proposing 

this second SNPRM to detect and 

correct chafing of the fuel pump wire 

insulation and consequent exposure of 

the electrical conductor, which could 

result in electrical arcing between the 

wires and conduit and consequent fire 

or explosion of the fuel tank. Since 

these actions impose an additional 

burden over that proposed in the first 

SNPRM, 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 proposed AD by April 22, 2013. 

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: Deliver to Mail 

address above 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, Washington 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: 

Rebel Nichols, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: 425– 

917–6509; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

rebel.nichols@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–2010–1160; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–148–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 a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to 

amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede 

airworthiness directive (AD) 2000–11– 

06, Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 

34928, June 1, 2000; corrected August 1, 

2000 (65 FR 46862)). That first SNPRM 

would apply to certain Model 767–200, 

–300, –300F, and –400ER series 

airplanes. The first SNPRM published in 

the Federal Register on July 2, 2012 (77 

FR 39188). The first SNPRM proposed 

to continue to require repetitive 

inspections to detect discrepancies of 

the wiring and surrounding Teflon 

sleeves of the fuel tank boost pumps and 

override/jettison pumps; replacement of 

the sleeves with new sleeves, for certain 

airplanes; and repair or replacement of 

the wiring and sleeves with new parts, 

as necessary. The first SNPRM also 

proposed to reduce the initial 

compliance time and repetitive 

inspection interval in the existing AD, 

and remove certain airplanes from the 

applicability of the existing AD. In 

addition, the first SNPRM proposed to 

include a terminating action for the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 14935 

repetitive inspections, to eliminate wire 

damage. 

Actions Since First SNPRM Was Issued 

Since we issued the first SNPRM (77 

FR 39188, July 2, 2012), we have 

reviewed the information specified in 

Airworthiness Limitation Instruction, 

Critical Design Configuration Control 

Limitations (CDCCL) Task 28–AWL–29, 

‘‘In-Tank AC Fuel Pump Wire Bundles 

with Protective Liner;’’ and CDCCL Task 

28–AWL–30, ‘‘Fuel Boost Pump Wires 

in Conduit Installation—In Fuel Tank;’’ 

of Section 9 of Boeing 767 

Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs), D622T001–9, Revision October 

2012. We have determined it is 

necessary to revise the maintenance 

program to include these tasks in order 

to address the identified unsafe 

condition. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal (77 FR 39188, 

July 2, 2012), and the FAA’s response to 

each comment. 

Request To Change Terminating Action 

Requirement 

Air Canada (ACN) asked that the 

terminating action mandated by the first 

SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 2012) be 

deemed optional. American Airlines 

(AAL) stated that after complying with 

the inspections in the first SNPRM, very 

little damage was found. AAL added 

that damage is confined to the outer 

sleeve beyond 44,400 flight hours, and 

the wiring damage does not occur until 

17 years later when undisturbed. AAL 

concluded that, given its service 

experience, Boeing’s service data and 

analysis and the proposed 15,000 flighthour inspection interval, the 

terminating action should not be 

mandated. ACN provided no 

justification for its request. 

We do not agree with the commenters. 

Mandating the terminating action is 

based on our determination that, in this 

case, long term continued operational 

safety would be better ensured by a 

modification to remove the source of the 

problem, rather than by repetitive 

inspections. As a matter of policy, we 

have determined that long-term 

inspections might not provide the 

degree of safety necessary for the 

transport airplane fleet. This 

determination has led us to consider 

placing less emphasis on inspections 

and more emphasis on design 

improvements. The modification is 

consistent with these conditions. 

Therefore, we have not changed the 

second SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Justify Existing Repetitive 

Inspection Interval 

ACN stated that it would like the FAA 

to confirm that the new repetitive 

inspection interval proposed by Boeing 

is based on sufficient evidence and 

supported by proper risk analysis. ACN 

noted that the information should be 

specific to the Model 767 fleet and 

should justify such a drastic increase in 

the frequency of the repetitive 

inspection interval. 

We agree to provide justification. 

Operators have reported finding chafing 

of the fuel pump wire bundle before the 

accumulation of 30,000 flight cycles or 

60,000 flight hours. Wire bundle chafing 

could wear away the sleeving, jacket, 

and wire installation, in addition to 

exposing metal conductors and causing 

electrical arcing. Based on these reports, 

the design approval holder (DAH) 

recommended that the wiring 

inspection required by this proposed 

AD be done within 15,000 flight hours 

after doing the most recent inspection. 

The DAH also recommended not 

including flight cycles in the inspection 

interval. We analyzed their 

recommendations and agreed. The 

repetitive interval for the wiring 

inspection is within 15,000 flight hours 

after the most recent inspection until 

the terminating action has been done. 

We have not changed the second 

SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Correct Certain Paragraph 

Identifiers 

United Airlines (UAL), Japan Airlines 

(JAL), and UPS asked that the paragraph 

identifiers referenced within certain 

paragraphs in the first SNPRM (77 FR 

39188, July 2, 2012) be corrected. UAL, 

JAL, and UPS stated that those 

paragraph identifiers are incorrect and 

suggested changes. The suggested 

changes to the first SNPRM are as 

follows: 

• The reference within paragraph 

(i)(2)(i)(C) that identifies paragraph 

(h)(2)(i)(D) should identify paragraph 

(i)(2)(i)(D). 

• The reference within paragraph 

(i)(2)(i)(D) that identifies paragraph 

(h)(2) should identify paragraph (i)(2). 

• The reference within paragraph (k) 

that identifies paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) 

should identify paragraph (k)(1) or 

(k)(2). 

We agree with the commenters’ 

requests for the reasons provided. We 

have changed those paragraphs 

identified above accordingly. 

Request To Clarify Terminating Action 

JAL asked that paragraph (g) be added 

to paragraph (l) of the first SNPRM (77 

FR 39188, July 2, 2012), so that 

accomplishing the terminating action 

specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0104, Revision 1, 

dated March 2, 2012, applies to 

paragraphs (g) and (k) of the first 

SNPRM. JAL also asked that Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0104, 

Revision 1, dated March 2, 2012, be 

added to paragraph (m) of the first 

SNPRM. 

We agree to clarify the terminating 

action. We have changed the last 

sentence of paragraph (l) of this second 

SNPRM to read: ‘‘Accomplishing the 

replacement specified in this paragraph 

ends the repetitive inspection 

requirements in paragraphs (g) and (k) 

of this AD.’’ However, we have not 

changed paragraph (m) of this second 

SNPRM in this regard, because that 

paragraph gives credit for 

accomplishing the terminating action 

required by paragraph (l) of this second 

SNPRM, if the terminating action was 

done before the effective date of the AD 

using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–28A0104, dated January 25, 2011. 

Request To Reference Certain AD 

Paragraph 

UAL stated that it reviewed Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 

3, dated November 11, 2011, which 

contains a note that refers to paragraph 

(c)(2)(ii) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, 

June 1, 2000; corrected August 1, 2000 

(65 FR 46862)). UAL suggested that the 

first SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 2012), 

provide information regarding the 

applicable equivalent paragraph in the 

superseding AD. 

We acknowledge that Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011, refers to 

paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, 

June 1, 2000; corrected August 1, 2000 

(65 FR 46862)). Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of 

AD 2000–11–06 corresponds to 

paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this second 

SNPRM. However, we do not agree with 

requiring a service information update, 

because the note which refers to 

paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of that service 

information will not adversely affect 

accomplishment of the required actions. 

We have not changed the second 

SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Certain Language in 

the ‘‘Comments’’ Section of the First 

SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 2012) 

Boeing asked that the language in the 

‘‘Comments’’ section of the preamble of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
14936 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

the first SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 

2012), which refers to Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0104, Revision 

1, dated March 2, 2012, including 

procedures for a wiring change, be 

clarified. Boeing stated that the language 

should emphasize that the procedures 

include the addition of a conduit liner 

and new wire bundle. 

We acknowledge and agree with the 

commenter’s request for clarification; 

however, the content of that section of 

the preamble of the first SNPRM (77 FR 

39188, July 2, 2012) does not reappear 

in this second SNPRM. However, we 

have added the words ‘‘with a conduit 

liner’’ to paragraph (l) of this second 

SNPRM for clarification. 

Request To Clarify Service Information 

UAL requested that we reference new 

service information to address minor 

corrections for Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0104, Revision 1, 

dated March 2, 2012. UAL noted that 

certain figure callouts should be revised. 

We do not agree. Boeing has not yet 

issued a revised service bulletin. 

Accomplishing Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0104, Revision 1, 

dated March 2, 2012, addresses the 

identified unsafe condition. If a new 

service bulletin is issued later, operators 

may request an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC) in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph 

(p) of this AD. We have not changed the 

second SNPRM in this regard. 

Request to Increase Work-Hours 

UAL asked that the work-hours 

specified in the ‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ 

section of the first SNPRM (77 FR 

39188, July 2, 2012) be increased. UAL 

stated that the new proposed action in 

the first SNPRM specifies that it will 

take 33 work-hours per airplane; 

however, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–28A0104, Revision 1, dated March 

2, 2012, specifies 41.5 work-hours per 

airplane. UAL suggested increasing the 

work-hours to be consistent with the 

service information. 

We agree with the commenter. The 

cost data that was included in the first 

SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 2012) has 

been updated. We have changed the 

total number of work-hours for the ‘‘new 

proposed action’’ in the ‘‘Costs of 

Compliance’’ section of this second 

SNPRM accordingly. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this second 

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 first 

SNPRM (77 FR 39188, July 2, 2012). 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 second 

SNPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of the Second 

SNPRM 

This second SNPRM would require 

repetitive inspections to detect 

discrepancies of the wiring and 

surrounding Teflon sleeves of the fuel 

tank boost pumps and override/jettison 

pumps; replacement of the sleeves with 

new sleeves, for certain airplanes; and 

repair or replacement of the wiring and 

sleeves with new parts, as necessary; a 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections, to eliminate wire damage. 

This second SNPRM also would require 

revising the maintenance program to 

incorporate changes to the airworthiness 

limitations section. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 414 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 

Actions for airplanes with jettison pumps, required by AD 2000–11–06, Amendment 39– 

11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 2000; corrected 

August 1, 2000 (65 FR 46862)).

7 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $595 per inspection cycle.

None ........... $595 per inspection 

cycle.

Up to $246,330 per inspection cycle. 

Actions for airplanes without jettison pumps, required by AD 2000–11–06 Amendment 39– 

11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 2000; corrected 

August 1, 2000 (65 FR 46862)).

5 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $425 per inspection cycle.

None ........... $425 per inspection 

cycle.

Up to $175,950 per inspection cycle. 

New proposed action: Replace existing wire bundles with new wire bundles.42 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $3,570.

$6,061 ......... $9,631 ........................... $3,987,234. 

New proposed revision to maintenance program 1 work-hour × $85 per 

hour = $85.

None ........... $85 ................................ $35,190. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary repairs that would be 

required based on the results of the 

inspections. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these repairs: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Replace wire bundle sleeves if damage found during 

inspections.

1 work hour × $85 per hour = $85 ............................... $1,452 $1,537. 

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, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 14937 

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 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2000–11–06, Amendment 39–11754 (65 

FR 34928, June 1, 2000; corrected 

August 1, 2000 (65 FR 46862)), and 

adding the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2010–1160; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM– 

148–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by April 22, 2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)). 

(c) Applicability 

(1) 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 767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated 

November 11, 2011. 

(2) This AD requires revisions to certain 

operator maintenance documents to include 

new actions (e.g., inspections) and/or Critical 

Design Configuration Control Limitations 

(CDCCLs). Compliance with these actions 

and/or CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 

91.403(c). For airplanes that have been 

previously modified, altered, or repaired in 

the areas addressed by this AD, the operator 

may not be able to accomplish the actions 

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 according 

to paragraph (p) of this AD. The request 

should include a description of changes to 

the required actions that will ensure the 

continued operational safety of the airplane. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28: Fuel. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by fleet 

information indicating that the repetitive 

inspection interval in the existing AD is too 

long because excessive chafing of the 

sleeving continues to occur much earlier than 

expected between scheduled inspections. We 

are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

chafing of the fuel pump wire insulation and 

consequent exposure of the electrical 

conductor, which could result in electrical 

arcing between the wires and conduit and 

consequent fire or explosion of the fuel tank. 

(f) Compliance 

You are responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed within the 

compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

(g) Retained Repetitive Inspections 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (a) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), with revised service information. 

Perform a detailed visual inspection to detect 

discrepancies—including the presence of 

cuts, splits, holes, worn areas, and lacing ties 

installed on the outside of the sleeves (except 

at the sleeve ends)—of the Teflon sleeves 

surrounding the wiring of the fuel tank boost 

pumps and override/jettison pumps, at the 

earlier of the times specified in paragraphs 

(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, in accordance 

with Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 60,000 flight hours or 30,000 flight 

cycles, whichever occurs first. As of the 

effective date of this AD, only Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated 

November 11, 2011, may be used to do the 

actions required by this paragraph. 

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 50,000 

total flight hours, or within 90 days after July 

6, 2000 (the effective date of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), whichever occurs later. 

(2) Within 18 months after July 6, 2000 (the 

effective date of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)). 

(h) Retained Corrective Actions 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (b) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), with revised service information. If 

any discrepancy is detected during any 

inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD: Prior to further flight, remove the Teflon 

sleeves and perform a detailed visual 

inspection to detect damage of the wiring, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0053, Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. As of the effective 

date of this AD, only Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011, may be used to do the actions 

required by this paragraph. 

(1) If no damage to the wiring is detected, 

prior to further flight, install new Teflon 

sleeves, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. As of the effective date of this AD, 

only Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011, may be 

used to do the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(2) If any damage to the wiring is detected, 

prior to further flight, accomplish the 

requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD. 

(i) Retained Corrective Actions 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (c) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), with revised service information. If 

any damage to the wiring is detected during 

any inspection required by paragraph (h) of 

this AD: Prior to further flight, perform a 

detailed visual inspection to determine if the 

wiring damage was caused by arcing, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
14938 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

28A0053, Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. As of the effective 

date of this AD, only Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011, may be used to do the actions 

required by this paragraph. 

(1) If the wire damage was not caused by 

arcing: Prior to further flight, repair any 

damaged wires or replace the wires with new 

or serviceable wires, as applicable, and 

install new Teflon sleeves, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. As of the effective 

date of this AD, only Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011, may be used to do the actions 

required by this paragraph. 

(2) If any damage caused by arcing is 

found: Prior to further flight, perform an 

inspection for signs of fuel inside the conduit 

or on the wires, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. As of the effective date of this AD, 

only Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011, may be 

used to do the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(i) If no sign of fuel is found, accomplish 

the actions specified in paragraphs 

(i)(2)(i)(A), (i)(2)(i)(B), (i)(2)(i)(C), and 

(i)(2)(i)(D) of this AD. 

(A) Prior to further flight, repair the wires 

or replace the wires with new or serviceable 

wires, as applicable, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. As of the effective date of this AD, 

only Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011, may be 

used to do the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(B) Prior to further flight, install new 

Teflon sleeves, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. As of the effective date of this AD, 

only Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011, may be 

used to do the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(C) Repeat the inspection for signs of fuel 

inside the conduit thereafter at intervals not 

to exceed 500 flight hours, until the 

requirements of paragraph (i)(2)(i)(D) of this 

AD have been accomplished. If any fuel is 

found inside the conduit during any 

inspection required by this paragraph, prior 

to further flight, replace the conduit with a 

new or serviceable conduit in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. Thereafter, repeat 

the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of 

this AD at intervals not to exceed 60,000 

flight hours or 30,000 flight cycles, 

whichever occurs first. As of the effective 

date of this AD, only Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011, may be used to do the actions 

required by this paragraph. 

(D) Within 6,000 flight hours or 18 months 

after the initial fuel inspection specified by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, whichever occurs 

first, replace the conduit with a new or 

serviceable conduit, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. Such conduit replacement 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive fuel inspections required by 

paragraph (i)(2)(i)(C) of this AD. As of the 

effective date of this AD, only Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated 

November 11, 2011, may be used to do the 

actions required by this paragraph. 

(ii) If any fuel is found in the conduit or 

on any wire: Prior to further flight, replace 

the conduit with a new or serviceable 

conduit, replace damaged wires with new or 

serviceable wires, and install new Teflon 

sleeves; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, 

dated August 5, 1999; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 2, dated 

June 24, 2010; or Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011. Thereafter, repeat the inspection 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD at 

intervals not to exceed 60,000 flight hours or 

30,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first. 

As of the effective date of this AD, only 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011, may be 

used to do the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(j) Retained Pump Retest 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (d) of AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), with revised service information. 

For any wire bundle removed and reinstalled 

during any inspection required by this AD: 

Prior to further flight after such 

reinstallation, retest the fuel pump in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0053, Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999; 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, 

Revision 2, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 3, 

dated November 11, 2011. As of the effective 

date of this AD, only Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 

11, 2011, may be used to do the actions 

required by this paragraph. 

(k) New Repetitive Inspections With 

Reduced Inspection Intervals 

Do the inspection required by paragraph (g) 

of this AD at the time specified in paragraph 

(k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD, as applicable, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 

28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 11, 

2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight hours. 

Accomplishing the first inspection in this 

paragraph ends the repetitive inspection 

requirements in paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(1) For airplanes on which the inspection 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD has been 

done as of the effective date of this AD: Do 

the inspection within 15,000 flight hours 

after the most recent inspection or within 

6,000 flight hours after the effective date of 

this AD, whichever occurs later, but not to 

exceed 60,000 flight hours after the most 

recent inspection required by paragraph (g) of 

this AD. 

(2) For airplanes on which the inspection 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD has not 

been done as of the effective date of this AD: 

Do the inspection before the accumulation of 

15,000 total flight hours or within 6,000 

flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later. 

(l) New Terminating Action 

Within 60 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Replace the fuel boost pump and 

override/jettison pump wire bundles inside 

the in-tank electrical conduit with a conduit 

liner and new wire bundles, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–28A0104, 

Revision 1, dated March 2, 2012. 

Accomplishing the replacement specified in 

this paragraph ends the repetitive inspection 

requirements in paragraphs (g) and (k) of this 

AD. 

(m) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–28A0104, dated January 

25, 2011. 

(n) New Maintenance Program Revision 

Within 180 days after the effective date of 

this AD: Revise the maintenance program to 

incorporate CDCCL Task 28–AWL–29, ‘‘InTank AC Fuel Pump Wire Bundles With 

Protective Liner;’’ and CDCCL Task 28– 

AWL–30, ‘‘Fuel Boost Pump Wires in 

Conduit Installation—In Fuel Tank;’’ of 

Section 9, of Boeing 767 Airworthiness 

Limitations (AWLs) and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), of the 

Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document, D622T001–9, Revision 

October 2012. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 14939 

(o) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or 

CDCCLs 

After accomplishing the revision required 

by paragraph (n) of this AD, no alternative 

actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, and/or 

CDCCLs may be used unless the actions, 

intervals, and/or CDCCLs are approved as an 

alternative method of compliance in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (p) of this AD. 

(p) 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-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. 

(3) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2000–11–06, 

Amendment 39–11754 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 

2000; corrected August 1, 2000 (65 FR 

46862)), are approved as AMOCs with the 

corresponding requirements of this AD. 

Compliance time extensions approved 

previously in accordance with AD 2000–11– 

06 are not approved as AMOCs for the 

compliance times required by paragraph (k) 

of this AD. 

(q) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Rebel Nichols, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6509; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: rebel.nichols@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, Washington 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, February 

26, 2013. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05295 Filed 3–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 301 

[REG–160873–04] 

RIN 1545–BF39 

American Jobs Creation Act 

Modifications to Section 6708, Failure 

To Maintain List of Advisees With 

Respect to Reportable Transactions 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

and notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

proposed regulations relating to the 

penalty under section 6708 of the 

Internal Revenue Code for failing to 

make available lists of advisees with 

respect to reportable transactions. 

Section 6708 imposes a penalty upon 

material advisors for the failure to make 

available to the Secretary, upon written 

request, lists required by section 6112 

within the time prescribed by section 

6708(a)(1). These proposed regulations 

reflect changes to section 6708 made by 

the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 

and provide guidance regarding the 

imposition of the section 6708 penalty 

on material advisors who are required to 

maintain lists of advisees pursuant to 

section 6112. This document also 

provides notice of a public hearing on 

these proposed regulations. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

must be received by June 6, 2013. 

Requests to speak and outlines of topics 

to be discussed at the public hearing 

scheduled for July 2, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. 

must be received by June 10, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: 

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–160873–04), room 

5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 

7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, 

DC 20044. Submissions may be hand 

delivered Monday through Friday 

between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

to: CC:PA:LDP:PR (REG–160873–04), 

Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue 

Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC, or sent electronically, 

via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–160873– 

04). The public hearing will be held in 

the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue 

Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the proposed regulations, 

Emily M. Lesniak at (202) 622–4910; 

concerning submission of comments, 

the hearing, or to be placed on the 

building access list to attend the 

hearing, Oluwafunmilayo (Funmi) 

Taylor at (202) 622–7180 (not toll-free 

numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The collection of information 

contained in this notice of proposed 

rulemaking has been submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget for 

review in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3507(d)). Comments on the 

collection of information should be sent 

to the Office of Management and 

Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Treasury, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Washington, DC 20503, with copies to 

the Internal Revenue Service, Attn: IRS 

Reports Clearance Officer, 

SE:CAR:MP:T:T:SP, Washington, DC 

20224. Comments on the collection of 

information should be received by May 

7, 2013. Comments are specifically 

requested concerning: 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the Internal Revenue 

Service, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

The accuracy of the estimated burden 

associated with the proposed collection 

of information or of the certification 

contained under the heading ‘‘Special 

Analyses’’; 

How the quality, utility, and clarity of 

the information to be collected may be 

enhanced; 

How the burden of complying with 

the proposed collection of information 

may be minimized; and 

Estimates of capital or start-up costs 

and costs of operation, maintenance, 

and purchases of service to provide 

information. 

The collection of information in this 

proposed regulation is in § 301.6708– 

1(c)(3)(ii). This information is required 

for the IRS to determine whether good 

cause exists to allow a person affected 

by these regulations an extension of the 

legislatively established 20-business-day 

period to furnish a lawfully requested 

list to the IRS. The collection of 

information is voluntary to obtain a 

benefit. The likely respondents are 

persons (individuals and entities) who 

qualify as material advisors, as defined 

in section 6111, who are unable to 

respond to a valid and statutorily 

authorized section 6112 list request 

within the statutory period of time 

provided by section 6708. 

Estimated total annual reporting 

burden: 200 hours. 

Estimated average annual burden 

hours per respondent: 8 hours. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS