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

12506 

Vol. 77, No. 41 

Thursday, March 1, 2012 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0187; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–094–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 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 

The Boeing Company Model 757 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by fuel system reviews 

conducted by the manufacturer. This 

proposed AD would require modifying 

the fuel quantity indication system 

(FQIS) wiring or fuel tank systems to 

prevent development of an ignition 

source inside the center fuel tank. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent 

ignition sources inside the center fuel 

tank, 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 April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

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: Tak 

Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: 425– 

917–6499; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

takahisa.kobayashi@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2012–0187; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–094–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’’ (66 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, a combination of 

failures, and unacceptable 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 proposed AD are 

necessary to reduce the potential of 

ignition sources inside the center fuel 

tank, which has been identified to have 

a high flammability exposure. Ignition 

sources inside the center fuel tank, in 

combination with flammable fuel 

vapors, could result in fuel tank 

explosions and consequent loss of the 

airplane. 

The combination of a latent failure 

within the center fuel tank and a 

subsequent single failure of the fuel 

quantity indicating system (FQIS) 

wiring or components outside the fuel 

tank can cause development of an 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12507 

ignition source inside the center fuel 

tank. Latent in-tank failures, including 

corrosion/deposits at wire terminals, 

conductive debris on fuel system 

probes, wires or probes contacting the 

tank structure, and wire faults, could 

create a conductive path inside the 

center fuel tank. Out-tank single failures 

including hot shorts in airplane wiring 

and/or the FQIS processor could result 

in electrical energy being transmitted 

into the center fuel tank via the FQIS 

wiring. The electrical energy, if 

combined with a latent in-tank failure, 

could be sufficient to create an ignition 

source inside the center fuel tank, 

which, combined with flammable fuel 

vapors could result in a catastrophic 

fuel tank explosion. 

SFAR 88 and Fuel Tank Flammability 

Reduction Rule 

The National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB) determined that the 

combination of a latent failure inside 

the center fuel tank and a subsequent 

single failure of the FQIS wiring or 

components outside the fuel tank was 

the most likely ignition source inside 

the center fuel tank that resulted in the 

TWA Flight 800 explosion. After the 

TWA 800 accident, we issued AD 99– 

03–04, Amendment 39–11018 (64 FR 

4959, February 2, 1999), and AD 98–20– 

40, Amendment 39–10808 (63 FR 

52147, September 30, 1998), mandating 

separation of the FQIS wiring that 

penetrates the fuel tank from high 

power wires and circuits on the classic 

Boeing 737 and 747 airplanes. Those 

ADs resulted in installation of Transient 

Suppression Units (TSUs), Transient 

Suppression Devices (TSDs), or Isolated 

Fuel Quantity Transmitter (IFQT) as a 

method of compliance with the AD 

requirements. 

After we issued those ADs, the 

findings from the SFAR 88 review 

showed that most transport category 

airplanes with high flammability fuel 

tanks needed TSUs, TSDs, or IFQTs to 

prevent electrical energy from entering 

the fuel tanks via the FQIS wiring in the 

event of a latent failure in combination 

with a single failure. 

Installation of those FQIS protection 

devices, however, was determined 

unnecessary on those airplanes that are 

required to comply with the ‘‘Reduction 

of Fuel Tank Flammability in Transport 

Category Airplanes’’ rule (73 FR 42444, 

July 21, 2008), referred to as the Fuel 

Tank Flammability Reduction (FTFR) 

rule. The FTFR rule requires 

incorporation of a flammability 

reduction means (FRM) that converts 

high flammability fuel tanks into low 

flammability fuel tanks for certain 

airplane models. Therefore, the unsafe 

condition identified by SFAR 88 is 

mitigated by incorporation of an FRM, 

as discussed in the FTFR rule. 

This proposed AD is intended to 

address the unsafe condition associated 

with the FQIS wiring that penetrates the 

center fuel tank for all Boeing Model 

757 airplanes that are not subject to the 

requirements of the FTFR rule. This 

proposed AD would apply to airplanes 

operated in all-cargo service and 

airplanes operated under Title 14 Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 91, 

since those airplanes are not subject to 

the requirements of the FTFR rule. Also, 

this proposed AD would apply to 

airplanes for which the State of 

Manufacture issued the original 

certificate of airworthiness or export 

airworthiness approval prior to January 

1, 1992, since those airplanes are also 

not subject to the requirements of the 

FTFR rule. However, as explained in 

paragraph 2–5.a. of Advisory Circular 

120–98, ‘‘Operator Requirements for 

Incorporation of Fuel Tank 

Flammability Reduction Requirements,’’ 

dated May 7, 2009, to operate a pre-1992 

airplane in passenger service after 

December 26, 2017, operators must 

incorporate an FRM that meets the 

requirements of § 26.33(c) before that 

date. For such airplanes on which an 

FRM is incorporated, further 

compliance with this proposed AD is 

not required. 

The nitrogen generating system (NGS) 

being developed by Boeing to meet the 

FTFR rule addresses the unsafe 

condition of this AD, as well as 

providing other safety improvements. 

Paragraph (h) of this proposed AD 

provides that, for operators not required 

to comply with the FTFR rule, electing 

to comply with the FTFR rule would be 

an acceptable method of addressing the 

unsafe condition. 

As discussed in the FTFR rule, the 

FAA recognized that separate 

airworthiness actions would be initiated 

to address the remaining fuel system 

safety issues for airplanes for which an 

FRM is not required. We have notified 

design approval holders that service 

instructions to support introduction of 

FQIS protection are now necessary for 

fuel tanks that are not required to be 

modified with an FRM by the FTFR 

rule. To date we have not received any 

service information from Boeing 

addressing this specific threat; therefore, 

we are proceeding with this proposal, 

which would require modifications 

using methods approved by the Manager 

of the Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office. 

We plan similar actions for those 

Boeing and Airbus airplanes with 

similar FQIS vulnerabilities that are not 

affected by the FTFR rule. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD 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. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

modifying the FQIS wiring or fuel tank 

systems to prevent development of an 

ignition source inside the center fuel 

tank. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 352 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 

have been advised that some of those 

airplanes are subject to the requirements 

of the FTFR rule and therefore are 

excluded from the requirements of this 

AD. 

Because the manufacturer has not yet 

developed a modification 

commensurate with the actions 

specified by this proposed AD, we 

cannot provide specific information 

regarding the required number of work 

hours or the cost of parts to do the 

proposed modification. In addition, 

modification costs will likely vary 

depending on the operator and the 

airplane configuration. The proposed 

compliance time of 60 months should 

provide ample time for the 

development, approval, and installation 

of an appropriate modification. 

Based on similar modifications, 

however, we can provide some 

estimated costs for the proposed 

modification in this NPRM. The 

modifications mandated by AD 99–03– 

04, Amendment 39–11018 (64 FR 4959, 

February 2, 1999), and AD 98–20–40, 

Amendment 39–10808 (63 FR 52147, 

September 30, 1998), for the classic 

Boeing Model 737 and 747 airplanes 

(i.e., TSD, TSU, IFQT) are not available 

for Boeing Model 757 airplanes. But, 

based on the costs associated with those 

modifications, we estimate the cost of 

this new proposed modification to be no 

more than $100,000 per airplane. The 

Honeywell FQIS may need additional 

modifications, which may cost as much 

as $100,000 per airplane. The cost 

impact of the proposed AD therefore is 

estimated to be between $100,000 and 

$200,000 per airplane. 

As indicated earlier in this preamble, 

we specifically invite the submission of 

comments and other data regarding the 

costs of this proposed AD. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12508 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in subtitle VII, 

part A, subpart III, section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2012–0187; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–094–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 30, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 

series airplanes; certificated in any category; 

for which compliance with 14 CFR 

121.1117(d), 125.509(d), or 129.117(d) is not 

required; regardless of the date of issuance of 

the original certificate of airworthiness or 

export airworthiness approval. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 7397: Engine fuel system wiring. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent development 

of an ignition source inside the center fuel 

tank caused by a latent in-tank failure 

combined with electrical energy transmitted 

into the center fuel tank via the fuel quantity 

indicating system (FQIS) wiring due to a 

single out-tank failure. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Modification 

Within 60 months after the effective date 

of this AD, modify the FQIS wiring or fuel 

tank systems to prevent development of an 

ignition source inside the center fuel tank, in 

accordance with a method approved by the 

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA. 

Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: After 

accomplishment of the actions required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, maintenance and/ 

or preventive maintenance under 14 CFR part 

43 is permitted provided the maintenance 

does not result in changing the AD-mandated 

configuration (reference 14 CFR 39.7). 

(h) Optional Installation of Flammability 

Reduction Means 

As an alternative to the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD, operators may elect 

to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 

121.1117 or 14 CFR 125.509 or 14 CFR 

129.117 (not including the exclusion of cargo 

airplanes in Sections 121.1117(j), 129.117(j), 

and 125.509(j)). Following this election, 

failure to comply with Sections 121.1117, 

129.117, and 125.509 is a violation of this 

AD. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle 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. 

(j) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact Tak Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6499; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: takahisa.kobayashi@faa.gov. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

21, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4931 Filed 2–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

21 CFR Part 1308 

[Docket No. DEA–345] 

Schedules of Controlled Substances: 

Placement of Five Synthetic 

Cannabinoids Into Schedule I 

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA) proposes placing 

five synthetic cannabinoids 1-pentyl-3- 

(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH–018), 1-butyl3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH–073), 1-[2- 

(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1- 

naphthoyl)indole (JWH–200), 5-(1,1- 

dimethylheptyl)-2-(3- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-phenol (CP– 

47,497), and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2-(3- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-phenol 

(cannabicyclohexanol, CP–47,497 C8 

homologue) including their salts, 

isomers, and salts of isomers whenever 

the existence of such salts, isomers, and 

salts of isomers is possible, into 

Schedule I of the Controlled Substances 

Act (CSA). This proposed action is 

pursuant to the CSA which requires that 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS