Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 71351 

(a) Basic Airframe Structure. Includes 

design elements such as structural 

members, structural joint features, and 

fastener systems including airplane 

skins, ribs, spars, stringers, etc., and 

associated fasteners, joints, coatings, 

and sealant. Basic airframe structure 

may also include those structural 

elements that are expected to be 

removed for maintenance, such as 

exterior fuel tank access panels and 

fairing attachment features, provided 

maintenance errors that could 

compromise associated lightning 

protection features would be evident 

upon an exterior preflight inspection of 

the airplane and would be corrected 

prior to flight. 

(b) Permanent Systems Supporting 

Structure. Includes static, permanently 

attached structural parts (such as 

brackets) that are used to support 

system elements. It does not include any 

part intended to be removed, or any 

joint intended to be separated, to 

maintain or replace system elements or 

other parts, unless that part removal or 

joint separation is accepted by the FAA 

as being extremely remote. 

(c) Manufacturing Variability. 

Includes tolerances and variability 

allowed by the design and production 

specifications as well as anticipated 

errors or escapes from the 

manufacturing and inspection 

processes. 

(d) Extremely Remote. Conditions that 

are not anticipated to occur to each 

airplane during its total life, but which 

may occur a few times when 

considering the total operational life of 

all airplanes of one type. Extremely 

remote conditions are those having an 

average probability per flight hour on 

the order of 1 × 10¥7 or less, but greater 

than on the order of 1 × 10¥9. 

(e) Extremely Improbable. Conditions 

that are so unlikely that they are not 

anticipated to occur during the entire 

operational life of all airplanes of one 

type. Extremely improbable conditions 

are those having an average probability 

per flight hour of the order of 1 × 10¥9

or less. 

2. Alternative Fuel Tank Structural 

Lightning Protection Requirements 

For lightning protection features that 

are integral to fuel tank basic airframe 

structure or permanent systems 

supporting structure, as defined in 

Special Condition No. 1, Definitions, for 

which The Boeing Company shows and 

the FAA finds compliance with 

§ 25.981(a)(3) to be impractical, the 

following requirements may be applied 

in lieu of the requirements of 

§ 25.981(a)(3): 

(a) The Boeing Company must show 

that the airplane design meets the 

requirements of part 25, Appendix M, as 

amended by Amendment 25–125, for all 

fuel tanks installed on the airplane. 

(b) The Boeing Company must show 

that the design includes at least two 

independent, effective, and reliable 

lightning protection features (or sets of 

features) such that fault tolerance to 

prevent lightning-related ignition 

sources is provided for each area of the 

structural design proposed to be shown 

compliant with these special conditions 

in lieu of compliance with the 

requirements of § 25.981(a)(3). Fault 

tolerance is not required for any specific 

design feature if: 

(1) For that feature, providing fault 

tolerance is shown to be impractical, 

and 

(2) Fuel tank vapor ignition due to 

that feature and all other non-faulttolerant features, when their fuel tank 

vapor ignition event probabilities are 

summed, is shown to be extremely 

improbable. 

(c) The applicant must perform an 

analysis to show that the design, 

manufacturing processes, and 

airworthiness limitations section of the 

instructions for continued airworthiness 

include all practical measures to 

prevent, and detect and correct, failures 

of structural lightning protection 

features due to manufacturing 

variability, aging, wear, corrosion, and 

likely damage. Issued in Renton, 

Washington, on November 15, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29409 Filed 11–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0725; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NE–18–AD]; Amendment 39– 

16528; AD 2010–24–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & 

Whitney PW4000 Series Turbofan 

Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD requires 

a one-time visual inspection of the No. 

3 bearing oil pressure tube, part number 

(P/N) 51J041–01, P/N 50J604–01, or 

P/N 50J924–01. Tubes that are found 

cracked or repaired must be removed 

from service. This AD also prohibits 

repaired tubes from being installed. This 

AD results from one report of a repaired 

No. 3 bearing oil tube that caused an 

engine in-flight shutdown, seven reports 

of repaired No. 3 bearing oil pressure 

tubes found cracked that led to 

unscheduled engine removals, and one 

report of a test cell event from a repaired 

tube that cracked. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent cracking of No. 3 bearing 

oil pressure tubes, which could result in 

internal oil fire, failure of the highpressure turbine (HPT) disks, 

uncontained engine failure, and damage 

to the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

28, 2010. 

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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

telephone (781) 238–7742; fax (781) 

238–7199; e-mail: james.e.gray@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an airworthiness 

directive (AD) that would apply to the 

specified products. That NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31330). That NPRM 

proposed to require: 

• A one-time visual inspection of the 

No. 3 bearing oil pressure tube, P/N 

51J041–01, P/N 50J604–01, or P/N 

50J924–01; and 

• Removal from service if found 

cracked or repaired, or if suspected that 

the tube was repaired; and 

• A prohibition on installing repaired 

tubes. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

71352 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Clarify Paragraph (e) of the 

Proposed AD 

United Airlines asked us to revise 

paragraph (e) of the proposed AD to 

inspect the tube when the tube is in the 

piece-part condition. United Airlines 

felt that changing paragraph (e) of the 

proposed AD will make our intent clear. 

We agree. We revised paragraph (e) of 

the proposed AD to say ‘‘You are 

responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed the next 

time the No. 3 bearing oil pressure tube 

is in the piece-part condition after the 

effective date of this AD, unless the 

actions have already been done.’’ We 

also added a new heading ‘‘Definitions’’ 

and new paragraph (i) that defines 

piece-part condition for the oil pressure 

tube. 

Request To Provide Clarification of the 

Definition of a Repair 

Delta Airlines, Inc. and United 

Airlines asked us to clarify the types of 

repaired tubes that must be removed. 

Delta Airlines Inc. and United Airlines 

said the body of the NPRM states that 

weld repairs were the source of the 

failures. 

We don’t agree. All repairs are 

unacceptable, not just weld repairs. 

Further, the original equipment 

manufacturer also revised their 

applicable repair manual(s) to remove 

all repairs to these tubes. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM. 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD would affect 

973 PW4000 series turbofan engines 

installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 10 minutes per engine to perform 

the one-time visual inspection when the 

tube has been removed, and that the 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts would cost about $9,154 

per engine. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. 

operators to be $8,923,383. 

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 

This AD will not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This AD will not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 

(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, Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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): 

2010–24–09 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 

39–16528; FAA–2010–0725; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NE–18–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD is effective December 28, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to the following Pratt 

& Whitney turbofan engines, with No. 3 

bearing oil pressure tube, part number (P/N) 

51J041–01, P/N 50J604–01, or P/N 50J924– 

01, installed: 

PW4000–94’’ Engines 

(1) PW4000–94’’ engines affected are 

PW4050, PW4052, PW4056, PW4060, 

PW4060A, PW4060C, PW4062, PW4062A, 

PW4152, PW4156, PW4156A, PW4158, 

PW4160, PW4460, PW4462, and PW4650, 

including models with any dash number 

suffix. 

PW4000–100’’ Engines 

(2) PW4000–100’’ engines affected are 

PW4164, PW4168, PW4168A, PW4164C, 

PW4164C/B, PW4170, PW4168A–1D, 

PW4168–1D, PW4164–1D, PW4164C–1D, 

and PW4164C/B–1D, including models with 

any dash number suffix. 

PW4000–112’’ Engines 

(3) PW4000–112’’ engines affected are 

PW4074, PW4074D, PW4077, PW4077D, 

PW4084, PW4084D, PW4090, PW4090–3, 

PW4090D, and PW4098, including models 

with any dash number suffix. 

(4) These engines are installed on, but not 

limited to, Airbus A300, A310, and A330 

series, Boeing MD–11, 747, 767, and 777 

series, airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from one report of a 

repaired No. 3 bearing oil pressure tube that 

cracked and caused an engine in-flight 

shutdown, one report of a test cell event, and 

seven reports since 2007, of repaired No. 3 

bearing oil pressure tubes found cracked that 

led to unscheduled engine removals. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent cracking of No. 3 

bearing oil pressure tubes, which could result 

in internal oil fire, failure of the highpressure turbine disks, uncontained engine 

failure, and damage to the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed the 

next time the No. 3 bearing oil pressure tube 

is in the piece-part condition after the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 71353 

effective date of this AD, unless the actions 

have already been done. 

One-Time Visual Inspection of the No. 3 

Bearing Oil Pressure Tube 

(f) Perform a one-time visual inspection of 

the exterior of the No. 3 bearing oil pressure 

tube for cracks and evidence of being 

repaired. 

(1) Remove the tube from service if any 

cracks are found. 

(2) Remove the tube from service if found 

repaired, or if suspected that the tube was 

repaired. 

(g) After the effective date of this AD, do 

not install any repaired No. 3 bearing oil 

pressure tube into any engine. 

(h) Guidance on the No. 3 bearing oil 

pressure tube visual inspection can be found 

in: 

(1) Pratt & Whitney Clean, Inspect, Repair 

Manual PN 51A357, 72–41–20 for PW4000– 

94’’ and PW4000–100’’ series engines; or 

(2) Pratt & Whitney Clean, Inspect, Repair 

Manual PN 51A750, 72–41–20 for PW4000– 

112’’ series engines. 

Definitions 

(i) For the purpose of this AD, piece part 

condition means that the part is completely 

disassembled from the engine as specified in 

the disassembly instructions in the 

manufacturer’s engine manual. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(j) The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, FAA, may approve alternative 

methods of compliance for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(k) For more information about this AD, 

contact James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

telephone (781) 238–7742; fax (781) 238– 

7199; e-mail: james.e.gray@faa.gov. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) None. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

November 16, 2010. 

Robert G. Mann, 

Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29451 Filed 11–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–1076; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–019–AD; Amendment 

39–16296; AD 2010–10–17] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi 

Heavy Industries, Ltd. Various Models 

MU–2B Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an 

airworthiness directive (AD) that has 

published in the Federal Register. That 

AD applies to the products listed above. 

The reissue date of September 24, 1986, 

of the MU–2B–60 airplane flight manual 

(AFM) in table 3 of the Compliance 

section (e)(1)(i) is incorrect, in that it is 

‘‘September 24, 1985,’’ instead of 

‘‘September 24, 1986.’’ This document 

corrects this error. In all other respects, 

the original document remains the 

same. 

DATES: This final rule; correction is 

effective November 23, 2010. The 

effective date for AD 2010–10–17 

remains July 22, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: 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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Bryant, Propulsion Engineer, FAA, Fort 

Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort 

Worth, Texas 76137; telephone: (817) 

222–5146; fax: (817) 222–5960; e-mail: 

matthew.a.bryant@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Airworthiness Directive 2010–10–17, 

amendment 39–16296 (75 FR 34349), 

which supersedes Airworthiness 

Directive (AD) 2006–17–01, AD 2006– 

15–07, AD 2000–02–25, and AD 97–25– 

02, currently retains from AD 2006–17– 

01 the inspection of the engine torque 

indication system and possible 

recalibration of the torque pressure 

transducers and requires incorporating 

all revisions up to and including the 

latest revisions of the AFM for certain 

MHI various Models MU–2B airplanes. 

As published, table 3 specific to the 

MHI MU–2B–60 airplane stating that the 

MU–2B–60 AFM has a reissued date of 

September 24, 1986, in the Compliance 

section (e) is incorrect, in that it is 

‘‘September 24, 1985,’’ instead of 

‘‘September 24, 1986.’’ 

No other part of the preamble or 

regulatory information has been 

changed; therefore, only the changed 

portion of the final rule is being 

published in the Federal Register. 

The effective date of this AD remains 

July 22, 2010. 

Correction of Regulatory Text 

§ 39.13 [Corrected] 

■ In the Federal Register of June 17, 

2010, AD 2010–10–17; Amendment 

39–16296 is corrected as follows: 

On page 34352, in the Compliance 

section paragraph (e)(1)(i) in table 3, 

under the third column ‘‘Date and 

version of AFM,’’ change the AFM, 

Section 6, Reissued date ‘‘September 24, 

1986,’’ to ‘‘September 24, 1985.’’ 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 17, 2010. 

Patrick R. Mullen, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29463 Filed 11–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 26 

[Docket No. OJP 1464; AG Order No.] 

RIN 1121–AA76 

Office of the Attorney General; 

Certification Process for State Capital 

Counsel Systems; Removal of Final 

Rule 

AGENCY: Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the USA 

PATRIOT Improvement and 

Reauthorization Act of 2005, the 

Department of Justice promulgated a 

final rule to implement certification 

procedures for States seeking to qualify 

for the special federal habeas corpus 

review procedures in capital cases. A 

Federal district court issued an 

injunction requiring the Department to 

provide an additional public comment 

period and publish a response to any 

comments received during that period. 

The Department then solicited further 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES