Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Proposed Rules 41813 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

7, 2009. 

Stephen P. Boyd, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–19853 Filed 8–18–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0686; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–044–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–11F 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and 

MD–11F airplanes. This proposed AD 

would require a one-time inspection to 

determine if wires touch the upper 

surface of the center upper auxiliary 

fuel tank and marking the location, if 

necessary; a one-time inspection of all 

wire bundles above the center upper 

auxiliary fuel tank for splices and 

damage; a one-time inspection for 

damage to the fuel vapor barrier seal 

and upper surface of the center upper 

auxiliary fuel tank; and corrective 

actions, if necessary. This proposed AD 

would also require installation of 

nonmetallic barrier/shield sleeving, new 

clamps, new attaching hardware, and a 

new extruded channel. This proposed 

AD results from fuel system reviews 

conducted by the manufacturer. We are 

proposing this AD to reduce the 

potential of ignition sources inside fuel 

tanks, which, in combination with 

flammable fuel vapors, could result in 

fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 5, 2009. 

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 identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, 

Long Beach, California 90846–0001; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; 

fax 206–766–5683; e-mail 

dse.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 or 425–227–1152. 

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 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

telephone (562) 627–5262; fax (562) 

627–5210. 

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–2009–0686; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–044–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 

The FAA has examined the 

underlying safety issues involved in fuel 

tank explosions on several large 

transport airplanes, including the 

adequacy of existing regulations, the 

service history of airplanes subject to 

those regulations, and existing 

maintenance practices for fuel tank 

systems. As a result of those findings, 

we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport 

Airplane Fuel Tank System Design 

Review, Flammability Reduction and 

Maintenance and Inspection 

Requirements’’ (67 FR 23086, May 7, 

2001). In addition to new airworthiness 

standards for transport airplanes and 

new maintenance requirements, this 

rule included Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’ 

Amendment 21–78, and subsequent 

Amendments 21–82 and 21–83). 

Among other actions, SFAR 88 

requires certain type design (i.e., type 

certificate (TC) and supplemental type 

certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate 

that their fuel tank systems can prevent 

ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This 

requirement applies to type design 

holders for large turbine-powered 

transport airplanes and for subsequent 

modifications to those airplanes. It 

requires them to perform design reviews 

and to develop design changes and 

maintenance procedures if their designs 

do not meet the new fuel tank safety 

standards. As explained in the preamble 

to the rule, we intended to adopt 

airworthiness directives to mandate any 

changes found necessary to address 

unsafe conditions identified as a result 

of these reviews. 

In evaluating these design reviews, we 

have established four criteria intended 

to define the unsafe conditions 

associated with fuel tank systems that 

require corrective actions. The 

percentage of operating time during 

which fuel tanks are exposed to 

flammable conditions is one of these 

criteria. The other three criteria address 

the failure types under evaluation: 

single failures, single failures in 

combination with another latent 

condition(s), and in-service failure 

experience. For all four criteria, the 

evaluations included consideration of 

previous actions taken that may mitigate 

the need for further action. 

We have determined that the actions 

identified in this AD are necessary to 

reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination 


CPrice-Sewell on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
41814 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result 

in fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

We have received a report that wire 

bundles routed above the center upper 

auxiliary fuel tank are in close 

proximity to the upper surface of the 

tank on certain McDonnell Douglas 

Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. 

In addition, some wire harness mounts 

may have loosened, allowing the wires 

to contact the tank. This condition may 

cause wire damage or chafing that can 

lead to possible arcing, sparking, and 

burn-through on the fuel tank upper 

surface, which can result in a fuel tank 

explosion. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Service 

Bulletin MD11–28–126, Revision 1, 

dated June 18, 2009, which describes 

procedures for the following actions. 

• A general visual inspection to 

determine if wires touch the upper 

surface of the center upper auxiliary 

fuel tank; and marking the location(s) 

where the wire bundle(s) contacts the 

upper surface of the center upper 

auxiliary fuel tank. 

• A detailed inspection for splices 

and damage (such as chafing, arcing, 

and broken insulation) of all wire 

bundles above the center upper 

auxiliary fuel tank, and corrective 

actions if necessary. The corrective 

actions include repairing or replacing 

damaged wires, and relocating any 

splice. 

• A detailed inspection for damage 

(burn marks) on the upper surface of the 

center upper auxiliary fuel tank and fuel 

vapor barrier seal, and corrective actions 

if necessary. The corrective actions 

include repairing the vapor barrier seal 

and contacting Boeing for repair 

instructions and doing the repair. 

• Installing nonmetallic barrier/shield 

sleeving to the wire harnesses, new 

clamps, new attaching hardware, and a 

new extruded channel, to raise the wire 

harnesses off the upper surface of the 

center upper auxiliary fuel tank. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all relevant information and 

determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. This proposed AD would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously, except as 

discussed under ‘‘Differences Between 

Proposed AD and Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between Proposed AD and 

Service Information 

Boeing Service Bulletin MD11–28– 

126, Revision 1, dated June 18, 2009, 

specifies to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• Using a method that we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by a Structures 

Authorized Representative for the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Delegation Option Authorization 

Organization whom we have authorized 

to make those findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 111 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. The following table provides 

the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours Average labor 

rate per hour Parts Cost per product 

Number of 

U.S.-registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Inspection/Installation 1.136 to 154 ............. $80 $9,405 to $12,201 $20,285 to $24,521 111 $2,251,635 to 

$2,721,831. 

1 Depending on airplane configuration. 

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), and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

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 AD: 

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2009– 

0686; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM– 

044–AD. 


CPrice-Sewell on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Proposed Rules 41815 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by October 

5, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model MD–11 and 

MD–11F airplanes, certificated in any 

category, as identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin MD11–28–126, Revision 1, dated 

June 18, 2009. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28: Fuel. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. The 

Federal Aviation Administration is issuing 

this AD to reduce the potential of ignition 

sources inside fuel tanks, which, in 

combination with flammable fuel vapors, 

could result in fuel tank explosions and 

consequent loss of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Actions 

(g) Within 60 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Do the actions specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), (g)(4), and 

(g)(5) of this AD, and do all applicable 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin MD11–28–126, Revision 1, 

dated June 18, 2009, except as required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all applicable 

corrective actions before further flight. 

(1) Do a general visual inspection to 

determine if wires touch the upper surface of 

the center upper auxiliary fuel tank, and 

mark the location, as applicable. 

(2) Do a detailed inspection for splices and 

damage of all wire bundles above the center 

upper auxiliary fuel tank. 

(3) Do a detailed inspection for damage 

(burn marks) on the upper surface of the 

center upper auxiliary fuel tank. 

(4) Do a detailed inspection for damage 

(burn marks) on the fuel vapor barrier seal. 

(5) Install nonmetallic barrier/shield 

sleeving, new clamps, new attaching 

hardware, and a new extruded channel. 

(h) If damage (burn marks) is found on the 

upper surface of the center upper auxiliary 

fuel tank during any inspection required by 

paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, and Boeing 

Service Bulletin MD11–28–126, Revision 1, 

dated June 18, 2009, specifies to contact 

Boeing for repair instructions: Before further 

flight, repair the auxiliary fuel tank using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (j)(3) of 

this AD. 

Actions Accomplished According to 

Previous Issue of Service Bulletin 

(i) Actions accomplished before the 

effective date of this AD according to Boeing 

Service Bulletin MD11–28–126, dated March 

3, 2009, are considered acceptable for 

compliance with the corresponding actions 

specified in this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(j)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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. Send information to ATTN: 

Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los Angeles 

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712– 

4137; telephone (562) 627–5262; fax (562) 

627–5210. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair of 

the center upper auxiliary tank required by 

this AD, if it is approved by a Structures 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

4, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–19850 Filed 8–18–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

20 CFR Parts 652, 661, 662, 663, 664 

and 667 

RIN 1205–AB46 

Workforce Investment Act 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Employment and Training 

Administration (ETA), Labor. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor 

(DOL or Department) is announcing the 

withdrawal of the proposed rule that 

was published in the Federal Register 

on December 20, 2006 (71 FR 76558) 

relating to policy changes to the 

Workforce Investment Act and WagnerPeyser Act Regulations. The Department 

no longer considers this proposed rule 

viable for final action at this time. 

DATES: Effective August 19, 2009, the 

Department withdraws the proposed 

rule published on December 20, 2006, at 

71 FR 76558. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas M. Dowd, Administrator, Office 

of Policy Development and Research, 

Employment and Training 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Room N–5641, Washington, DC 20210, 

telephone: (202) 693–3700 (this is not a 

toll-free number). 

Individuals with hearing or speech 

impairments may access the telephone 

number above via TTY by calling the 

toll-free Federal Information Relay 

Service at 1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) 

enacted in August 1998, reformed 

Federal job training programs and 

created a new, comprehensive 

workforce investment system. The 

legislation replaced the Job Training 

Partnership Act and amended the 

Wagner-Peyser Act. WIA authorization 

for appropriations expired on 

September 30, 2003. Although WIA 

reauthorization bills passed the House 

and the Senate, the reauthorization 

legislation was not enacted, and 

Congress continued to annually 

authorize and fund these programs 

through annual appropriations. 

In the absence of reauthorizing 

legislation, the Department published a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

on December 20, 2006, to implement 

several policy changes to the Workforce 

Investment Act and Wagner-Peyser Act 

regulations. (71 FR 76558). 

Subsequently, in February 2007, 

Congress enacted language in the 

revised Continuing Resolution (Pub. L. 

110–5, sec. 20601(a)(4)), prohibiting the 

Department from finalizing or 

implementing any proposed regulations 

under the Workforce Investment Act 

until legislation reauthorizing the Act is 

enacted. The prohibition has been 

reenacted annually, most recently in the 

Department of Labor Appropriations 

Act, 2009 (Pub. L. 111–8, Div. G, sec. 

110). 

II. Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule 

The Department has decided to 

withdraw the proposed rule based upon 

the continuing Congressional 

prohibition against publishing a rule 

until the Workforce Investment Act is 

reauthorized. The Department notes, 


CPrice-Sewell on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS