Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules 54941 

spoiler jacks. A review of airplane 

maintenance records is an acceptable method 

of determining the P/N if the P/N can be 

conclusively determined from that review. 

(1) If no lift spoiler jack having P/N P308–

45–0002 or P308–45–0102 is installed: No 

further action is required by this paragraph. 

(2) For any lift spoiler jack having P/N 

P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102: Before 

further flight, inspect the lift spoiler jack to 

determine its serial number (S/N) and date of 

manufacture. A review of airplane 

maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of 

this inspection if the S/N and date of 

manufacture can be conclusively determined 

from that review. 

Inspection of Lift Spoiler Jack 

(h) For any lift spoiler jack having P/N 

P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102: At the 

applicable compliance time specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, perform 

a detailed inspection for discrepancies of the 

eye-end assembly of the lift spoiler jack, 

associated hardware, and the thread of the 

piston where the eye-end assembly attaches, 

in accordance with the service bulletin. 

Discrepancies include but are not limited to 

evidence of corrosion or damaged or fretted 

threads. 

(1) For lift spoiler jacks identified in 

paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD: 

Within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(i) Any lift spoiler jack having a S/N 

prefixed with ‘‘DAWX’’ or ‘‘CSW’’ (regardless 

of the date of manufacture). 

(ii) Any lift spoiler jack having P/N P308–

45–0002 or P308–45–0102, with a date of 

manufacture on or before December 31, 1999. 

(2) For lift spoiler jacks with a date of 

manufacture on or after January 1, 2000, 

except those with S/Ns prefixed with 

‘‘DAWX’’ or ‘‘CSW’’: Within 5 months after 

the effective date of this AD. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive 

examination of a specific item, installation, 

or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate procedures may be 

required.’’

Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Action 

(i) Repeat the inspection required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD and do corrective 

actions based on the inspection findings, in 

accordance with paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or 

(i)(3) of this AD, as applicable. 

(1) If no discrepancy of the eye-end 

assembly of the lift spoiler jack is found: 

Repeat the inspection required by paragraph 

(h) of this AD within 48 months, and, based 

on the findings during that repeat inspection, 

repeat the inspection and do corrective 

actions, as applicable, in accordance with 

paragraph (i) of this AD. 

(2) If light corrosion, as defined in the 

service bulletin, but no other discrepancy, is 

found: Repeat the inspection required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD within 24 months, 

and, based on the findings during that repeat 

inspection, repeat the inspection and do 

corrective actions, as applicable, in 

accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. 

(3) If severe corrosion, as defined in the 

service bulletin, or any damaged or fretted 

thread, is found: Before further flight, replace 

the eye-end assembly of the lift spoiler jack, 

associated hardware, and piston, as 

applicable, with new or serviceable parts, as 

applicable, in accordance with the service 

bulletin. Then, repeat the inspection required 

by paragraph (h) of this AD within 48 

months, and, based on the findings during 

that repeat inspection, repeat the inspection 

and do corrective actions, as applicable, in 

accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. 

Where the service bulletin specifies to return 

certain damaged parts to the parts 

manufacturer, this AD does not require that 

action. 

Parts Installation 

(j) As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install a lift spoiler jack having 

P/N P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102 unless 

it has been inspected as required by this AD 

and found to be free of severe corrosion or 

other discrepancy. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(k)(1) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested in accordance with 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) Before using any AMOC approved in 

accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify the 

appropriate principal inspector in the FAA 

Flight Standards Certificate Holding District 

Office. 

Related Information 

(l) The European Aviation Safety Agency’s 

airworthiness directive 2006–0139, dated 

May 23, 2006, also addresses the subject of 

this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 12, 2006. 

Kevin M. Mullin, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E6–15592 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–25850; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–128–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Model MD–11 and –11F 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and 

–11F airplanes. This proposed AD 

would require revising the maintenance 

inspection program that provides for 

inspection of principal structural 

elements (PSEs) and replacement of 

safe-life parts, to incorporate a new 

revision to the MD–11 Airworthiness 

Limitations Instructions. The revision 

would reduce inspection intervals for 

fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, and 

expand the inspection area for a certain 

other PSE. This proposed AD results 

from a revised damage tolerance 

analysis. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking of 

certain PSEs, which could adversely 

affect the structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 6, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Contact Boeing Commercial Aircraft 

Group, Long Beach Division, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, 

California 90846, Attention: Data and 

Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A 

(D800–0024), for the service information 

identified in this proposed AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maureen Moreland, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, 

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

telephone (562) 627–5238; fax (562) 

627–5210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
54942 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

comments to an address listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. Include the docket 

number ‘‘FAA–2006–25850; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–128–AD’’ at the 

beginning of your comments. We 

specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed AD. We will consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and may amend the proposed AD in 

light of those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of that Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the Docket 

Management System receives them. 

Discussion 

Boeing has completed a revised 

damage tolerance analysis of certain 

principal structural elements (PSEs) on 

Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. 

Boeing repeated the analysis to address 

additional crack growth scenarios as a 

result of in-service cracking and to 

correct the crack growth analysis 

spectrum which it found to 

underpredict operational loading. These 

new data indicate that the initial and 

repeat inspection intervals to detect 

fatigue cracking for certain PSEs must 

be revised. 

The actions specified by the proposed 

AD are intended to detect fatigue 

cracking of several wing PSEs and a tail 

pylon PSE. This fatigue cracking, if not 

detected and corrected, could adversely 

affect the structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing MD–11 

Airworthiness Limitations Instructions 

(ALI), Report Number MDC–K5225, 

Revision 11, dated March 2006. Among 

other things, Revision 11 of the ALI 

reduces certain initial and repeat 

intervals for inspections for fatigue 

cracking of certain PSEs, and expands 

the inspection area for a certain other 

PSE. Accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information is 

intended to adequately address the 

unsafe condition. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

We have evaluated all pertinent 

information and identified an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on other airplanes of this same 

type design. For this reason, we are 

proposing this AD, which would require 

operators to incorporate the Boeing MD–

11 ALI, Report Number MDC–K5225, 

Revision 11, dated March 2006, into the 

applicable maintenance and inspection 

program. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 102 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This proposed AD would affect about 93 

airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed 

maintenance and inspection program 

revision would take about 1 work hour 

per airplane, at an average labor rate of 

$80 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the 

proposed AD for U.S. operators is 

$7,440, or $80 per airplane, per 

inspection cycle. 

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 have 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 that the 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section 

for a location to examine the regulatory 

evaluation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, 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 Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2006–

25850; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–

128–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by November 6, 2006. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all McDonnell 

Douglas Model MD–11 and –11F airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

Note 1: This AD requires revisions to 

certain operator maintenance documents to 

incorporate new inspections for fatigue 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules 54943 

cracking of principal structural elements 

(PSEs). Compliance with these inspections is 

required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes 

that have been previously modified, altered, 

or repaired in the areas addressed by these 

inspections, the operator may not be able to 

incorporate the inspections described in the 

revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 

CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request 

approval for an alternative method of 

compliance according to paragraph (h) of this 

AD. The request should include a description 

of changes to the required inspections that 

will ensure the continued damage tolerance 

of the affected structure. The FAA has 

provided guidance for this determination in 

Advisory Circular (AC) 25–1529. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a revised damage 

tolerance analysis. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain 

principal structural elements (PSEs), which 

could adversely affect the structural integrity 

of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Revision of Airworthiness Limitations 

Section 

(f) Within 18 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Revise the Airworthiness 

Limitations section of the Instructions for 

Continued Airworthiness, Airworthiness 

Limitations Instructions (ALI), according to a 

method approved by the Manager, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA. Boeing MD–11 ALI, Report Number 

MDC–K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006, 

is one approved method. 

(g) Except as provided by paragraph (h) of 

this AD: After the actions specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD have been done, no 

alternative inspection intervals or 

replacement times may be approved for the 

PSEs and safe-life limited parts specified in 

Boeing Report Number MDC–K5225, 

Revision 11, dated March 2006. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, has 

the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, 

if requested in accordance with the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by accomplishing the actions in this 

AD, if it is approved by an 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. 

(3) Before using any AMOC approved in 

accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify the 

appropriate principal inspector in the FAA 

Flight Standards Certificate Holding District 

Office. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 12, 2006. 

Kevin M. Mullin, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–7945 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Parts 4, 5, and 7 

[Notice No. 64; Re: Notice No. 62] 

RIN 1513–AB08 

Major Food Allergen Labeling for 

Wines, Distilled Spirits and Malt 

Beverages 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: In response to industry 

member requests, the Alcohol and 

Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau extends 

the comment period for Notice No. 62, 

Major Food Allergen Labeling for 

Wines, Distilled Spirits and Malt 

Beverages, a notice of proposed 

rulemaking published in the Federal 

Register on July 26, 2006, for an 

additional 90 days. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 26, 

2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to 

any of the following addresses—

• Director, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 62, P.O. 

Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044–

4412. 

• 202–927–8525 (facsimile). 

• nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail). 

• http://www.ttb.gov/ 

regulations_laws/all_rulemaking.shtml. 

An online comment form is posted with 

this notice on our Web site. 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Federal 

e-rulemaking portal; follow instructions 

for submitting comments. 

You may view copies of this 

extension notice, Notice No. 62, the 

petitions, and any comments we receive 

by appointment at the TTB Information 

Resource Center, 1310 G Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20220. To make an 

appointment, call 202–927–2400. You 

may also access copies of this extension 

notice, Notice No. 62, and the related 

comments online at http://www.ttb.gov/ 

regulations_laws/all_rulemaking.shtml. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

M. Gesser, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 128, Morganza, 

MD 20660; telephone (301) 290–1460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

26, 2006, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) published 

Notice No. 62, Major Food Allergen 

Labeling for Wines, Distilled Spirits and 

Malt Beverages, in the Federal Register 

(71 FR 42329). In that notice of 

proposed rulemaking, TTB requested 

public comment on the proposed 

adoption of mandatory labeling 

standards for major food allergens used 

in the production of alcohol beverages 

subject to the labeling requirements of 

the Federal Alcohol Administration Act. 

The comment period for Notice No. 62, 

when published, was scheduled to close 

on September 25, 2006. 

After publication of Notice No. 62, 

TTB received requests from the Distilled 

Spirits Council of the United States, the 

National Association of Beverage 

Importers, Inc., and Wine Institute to 

extend the comment period for Notice 

No. 62 for a period ranging from 60 to 

120 days beyond the September 25, 

2006, closing date. In support of their 

extension requests, these organizations 

note that the comment period of this 

notice would coincide with habitual 

August vacations in Europe, where 

many industry member suppliers reside, 

and that it would also coincide with the 

approaching grape harvest in California. 

Consequently, the three organizations 

state, many industry members would be 

unable to focus on the complexities and 

ramifications of the proposed rule and 

would not have adequate time to 

formulate a response to the proposal. 

In response to these requests, TTB 

extends the comment period for Notice 

No. 62 for an additional 90 days. 

Therefore, comments on Notice No. 62 

are now due on or before December 26, 

2006. 

Drafting Information: Gabriel J. Hiza 

of the Regulations and Rulings Division 

drafted this notice. 

Signed: September 14, 2006. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 06–7963 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL