Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27051

Mammal Negotiated Rulemaking

Advisory Committee:

Representing Facility Owners and

Managers

American Zoo and Aquarium

Association

Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks

International Association of Amusement

Parks and Attractions

Marine Mammal Coalition

United States Navy

Related Industry Groups

Coalition of Animal Welfare Institute,

Society for Animal Protective

Legislation, and numerous other

organizations

Center for Marine Conservation

Humane Society of the United States

Representing Those Who Work with

Captive Marine Mammals in Various

Capacities

American Association of Zoo

Veterinarians

International Association for Aquatic

Animal Medicine

International Marine Animal Trainers

Association

Society for Marine Mammology

Federal Government

Marine Mammal Commission

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service, USDA

Comments on this tentative list of

participants are invited, as are

suggestions for other potential

participants. Please keep in mind that it

is not necessary that every concerned

organization be represented, as long as

every significant interest is represented.

Negotiation sessions will be open to the

public. individuals and organizations

without designated representatives on

the Committee may attend sessions and

communicate informally with members

of the Committee.

Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of

March.

Wardell C. Townsend,

Assistant Secretary for Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–12434 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

Energy Efficiency Standards Test

Procedures, Labeling, and Certification

Reporting for Certain Commercial and

Industrial Electric Motors

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Department of

Energy.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE) will hold an informal public

meeting to discuss issues and gather

information related to energy efficiency

standards, test procedures, labeling, and

compliance certification for 1 through

200 horsepower electric motors that are

manufactured alone or as a component

of another piece of equipment. All

persons are hereby given notice of the

opportunity to attend this public

meeting and to submit written

statements.

DATES: The public meeting will be held

on Friday, June 2, 1995. Written

statements, in quadruplicate, must be

received by June 30, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written statements should

be labeled ‘‘Test Procedures and

Efficiency Certification for Electric

Motors,’’ and submitted to: Ms. Sandy

Cooper, Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE–431,

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20585. Telephone:

(202) 586–7574; Telefax: (202) 586–

4617.

The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m.,

and will be held at the U.S. Department

of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1E–

245, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Balducci, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy, Mail Station

EE–431, Forrestal Building, 1000

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–

8459

James Raba, U.S. Department of Energy,

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE–

431, Forrestal Building, 1000

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–

8654

Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department

of Energy, Office of General Counsel,

Mail Station GC–72, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue

SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202)

586–9507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Authority

Part 3 of Title IV of the National

Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978

(NECPA), Pub. L. 95–619, amends the

Energy Policy and Conservation Act of

1975 (EPCA) to add ‘‘Energy Efficiency

of Industrial Equipment,’’ which

includes electric motors. The most

recent amendment to EPCA, the Energy

Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct), Pub. L. 102–

486, promulgates definitions related to

electric motors in section 122(a), 106

Stat. 2807, test procedures for motor

efficiency in section 122(b), 106 Stat.

2809, labeling for electric motors in

section 122(c), 106 Stat. 2809, standards

for nominal full-load efficiency in

section 122(d), 106 Stat. 2814, and

certification of compliance by

manufacturers in section 122(e), 106

Stat. 2817.

Section 122(a)(3) of the EPAct (EPCA,

section 340(13)(A), 42 U.S.C. 6311

(13)(A)), defines ‘‘electric motor’’ as any

motor which is ‘‘general purpose Tframe, single-speed, foot-mounting,

polyphase squirrel-cage induction of the

National Electrical Manufacturers

Association (NEMA) Designs A and B,

continuous-rated, operating on 230/460

volts and constant 60 Hertz line power,

as defined in NEMA Standards

Publication MG1–1987.’’ Section 122(d)

of the EPAct (EPCA, section 342(b)(1),

42 U.S.C. section 6313(b)(1)), prescribes

standards for electric motors that are 1

through 200 horsepower, and

‘‘manufactured (alone or as a

component of another piece of

equipment),’’ except for ‘‘definite

purpose motors, special purpose motors,

and those motors exempted by the

Secretary.’’

Section 122(b)(1) of the EPAct (EPCA,

section 343(a)(5)(A), 42 U.S.C. 6314

(a)(5)(A)), requires that testing

procedures for motor efficiency shall be

the test procedures specified in NEMA

Standards Publication MG1–1987, and

the Institute of Electrical and

Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard

112 Test Method B for motor efficiency,

as in effect on October 24, 1992. Section

122(b)(1), EPCA section 343(a)(5)(B) and

(C), provide for amendment of the

testing procedures if the test procedures

in the NEMA and IEEE standards are

revised.

Section 122(c)(4) of the EPAct (EPCA,

section 344(d), 42 U.S.C. 6315(d))

directs the Secretary, after consultation

with the Federal Trade Commission, see

EPCA section 344(f), 42 U.S.C. 6315(f),

to prescribe rules requiring motor
27052 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

labeling to indicate energy efficiency on

the permanent nameplate, to display

that motor energy efficiency

prominently in catalogs and other

marketing materials, and to include

other markings to facilitate enforcement

of the energy efficiency standards.

Section 122(e)(2) of the EPAct (EPCA,

section 345(c), 42 U.S.C. 6316(c))

requires manufacturers to certify

compliance with energy efficiency

standards through an independent

testing or certification program

nationally recognized in the United

States.

2. Background

The Department of Energy is drafting

a proposed rule to implement the EPAct

requirements for motors. However, the

language of the EPAct raises several

issues regarding definitions, testing,

labeling, and certification.

The purpose of the public meeting is

to discuss these issues, gather

information, and seek early resolution.

3. Discussion

The Department is interested in

receiving information and statements to

help resolve the following issues:

a. Definitions.

(1) Metric equivalents. Section 122(d)

of the EPAct (EPCA, section 342(b)(1),

42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(1)) lists standards for

electric motor nominal full-load

efficiency ratings corresponding to

horsepower and number of poles.

Additionally, section 205b. of the Metric

Conversion Act of 1975, Pub. L. 94–168,

15 U.S.C. 205b., states ‘‘the declared

policy of the United States—(1) to

designate the metric system of

measurement as the preferred system of

weights and measures for United States

trade and commerce; (2) to require that

each Federal agency, by a date certain

and to the extent economically feasible

by the end of the fiscal year 1992, use

the metric system of measurement in its

procurements, grants, and other

business-related activities, except to the

extent that such use is impractical or is

likely to cause significant inefficiencies

or loss of markets to United States firms,

such as when foreign competitors are

producing competing products in nonmetric units.’’ This policy is

promulgated in Executive Order 12770

of July 25, 1991, ‘‘Metric Usage in

Federal Government Programs.’’ 56 FR

35801–03 (July 29, 1991). The

Department seeks advice on how to

implement these statutes with respect to

motors under the EPAct. Specifically,

should the energy efficiency rules

identify kilowatt ratings equivalent to

corresponding horsepower ratings, and

other electrical and mechanical

equivalents? If so how?

(2) Basic model. The Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR), in 10 CFR Part 430

§ 430.2, provides a definition for the

term ‘‘basic model’’ in regard to the

appliance program: ‘‘Basic model means

all units of a given type of covered

product (or class thereof) manufactured

by one manufacturer and—* * * (as to

dishwashers, for example) which have

electrical characteristics that are

essentially identical, and which do not

have any differing physical or

functional characteristics that affect

energy consumption.’’ Basic model is a

term used to describe a product or item

of equipment whose performance,

design, mechanical, and functional

characteristics are essentially the same.

Components of similar design may be

substituted in a basic model without

requiring additional testing if the

represented measures of energy

consumption continue to satisfy

applicable provisions for sampling and

testing. In the case of electric motors, a

manufacturer may produce one basic

model and thousands more of other

model numbers that are essentially the

same, all based on variations in design

features that do not affect energy

efficiency.

The Department is considering

defining the term ‘‘basic model’’ in its

coverage of electric motors to mean all

units of a given type of covered

equipment (or class thereof)

manufactured by a single manufacturer,

and, with respect to electric motors,

having the same rating, electrical design

characteristics that are essentially

identical, and no differing mechanical

or functional characteristics that affect

energy consumption or efficiency. The

Department solicits the views of

interested parties as to whether the

Department should adopt such a

definition.

(3) Definite purpose motor. Under

section 122(d) of the EPAct (EPCA

section 342(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(1)),

the energy efficiency standards for

electric motors do not apply to ‘‘definite

purpose motors.’’ Section 122(a)(3) of

the EPAct (EPCA § 340(13)(B), 42 U.S.C.

§ 6311(13)(B)) defines a ‘‘definite

purpose motor’’ as ‘‘any motor designed

in standard ratings with standard

operating characteristics or standard

mechanical construction for use under

service conditions other than usual, or

for use on a particular type of

application which cannot be used in

most general purpose applications.’’

However, the EPAct does not define the

term ‘‘service conditions other than

usual.’’ Therefore, the Department is

considering developing a definition for

this term that will take into

consideration adverse environmental

and operating conditions, such as

exposure to abrasive or combustible

dusts, chemical fumes, nuclear

radiation, salt-laden air, abnormal shock

or vibration, unbalanced supply voltage,

power system not grounded, frequent

starting, frequent short circuits, and so

forth. The Department seeks advice in

developing a definition for ‘‘service

conditions other than usual.’’

b. Testing.

(1) Canadian Standards Association

Standard C390. Section 122(b)(1) of the

EPAct (EPCA, section 343(a)(5)(A), 42

U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(A)) states that ‘‘the test

procedures shall be the test procedures

specified in NEMA Standards

Publication MG1–1987 and IEEE

Standard 112 Test Method B for motor

efficiency, as in effect on the date of the

enactment of the Energy Policy Act of

1992.’’ Subsequently, the NEMA

Standards Publication MG1–1987 was

revised and superseded by MG1–1993

on November 19, 1992, and published

in October 1993 as MG1–1993. A further

amendment, Revision 1 to MG1–1993,

was added on December 7, 1993.

The EPAct (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(B)

and (C)) provides for amending the

established test procedures if the test

procedures in NEMA Standards

Publication MG1–1987 and IEEE

Standard 112 Test Method B are

amended. MG1–1993 with Revision 1,

section MG1–12.58.1 states: ‘‘Efficiency

and losses shall be determined in

accordance with IEEE Std 112 or

Canadian Standards Association

Standard C390.’’ In considering whether

to amend the motor efficiency test

procedures specified in NEMA

Standards Publication MG1–1987 in

order to require the motor efficiency test

procedures specified in NEMA

Standards Publication MG1–1993 with

Revision 1, the Department hereby

solicits information on the affect of the

additional reference to Canadian

Standards Association Standard C390.

(2) Testing sampling plan. Section

122(d) of the EPAct (EPCA, section

342(b), 42 U.S.C. 6313(b)) requires each

electric motor to have a certain

‘‘nominal full load efficiency,’’ which is

defined in section 122(a)(3) of the EPAct

(EPCA section 340(13)(H), 42 U.S.C.

6311(13)(H)) as the average efficiency of

a population of motors of duplicate

design as determined in accordance

with NEMA Standards Publication

MG1–1987. NEMA Standards

Publications MG1–1987 and MG1–1993

with Revision 1 both provide for the

determination of nominal full load

efficiencies that are to represent the

average efficiency of a large population
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27053

of motors of duplicate design, and a

corresponding minimum efficiency that

any motor must equal or exceed to be

rated at the corresponding nominal

efficiency. The DOE contemplates

establishing a testing sampling plan to

reasonably ensure that the results from

testing a few motors will establish the

average efficiency of the large

population of motors of duplicate

design. This could be done by requiring

the testing of a sufficient number of

motors of a particular model, selected at

random, so that an estimate at the 95

percent statistical confidence level can

be made both that the motors of this

model offered for sale have both a mean

efficiency equal to or greater than the

nominal efficiency given in NEMA

Standards Publication MG1–1993

Revision 1 for this rating, and also that

at least 99 percent of these motors of

this same particular model have

efficiencies equal to or greater than the

minimum efficiency associated with the

nominal efficiency given for this motor

in the NEMA Standards Publication

MG1–1993 Revision 1. The Department

seeks advice on what type of sampling

plan should be adopted.

(3) Alternative method of efficiency

determination. In the case where a

manufacturer produces hundreds of

different basic models of electric

motors, it may be neither technically

feasible, nor economically justifiable to

test all basic models for compliance. For

such situations, the Department is

considering the use of predictive

mathematical calculations and

statistical methodologies developed

from scientific and engineering analyses

that are substantiated by actual test data

in order to calculate the efficiency, i.e.

total power losses, for some basic

models of electric motors. Such

‘‘alternative efficiency determination

methods,’’ engineering or statistical

analyses, would require support by

actual testing of some minimum number

of basic models and would incorporate

computer simulations, modeling, or

other mathematical evaluations of

performance data. The alternate

efficiency determination method to

verify compliance for motors is similar

to the method used in the appliance

program, 10 CFR part 430,

§ 430.24(m)(2)(ii), that permits

manufacturers of central air

conditioners to verify compliance by

use of an ‘‘alternative rating method.’’

The Department solicits views on

both the feasibility of testing all models

of motors, as well as appropriate

alternative methods for determining

efficiency in the event it is not feasible

to test all models.

c. Labeling. Section 122(c)(4) of the

EPAct (EPCA, section 344(d), 42 U.S.C.

6315(d)) requires the following: (1) ‘‘Not

later than 12 months after the Secretary

establishes test procedures for electric

motors * * * the Secretary shall

prescribe labeling rules * * * taking

into consideration NEMA Standards

Publication MG1–1987;’’ and (2) such

labeling rules shall ‘‘(1) indicate the

energy efficiency of the motor on the

permanent nameplate attached to such

motor; (2) prominently display the

energy efficiency of the motor in

equipment catalogs and other material

used to market the equipment; and (3)

include such other markings as the

Secretary determines necessary, solely

to facilitate enforcement of the

standards.’’

Based upon these EPAct

requirements, the Department is

considering the required use of a

distinct logo, such as lower case letters

‘‘ee’’ within a circle, to identify motors

that are manufactured as energyefficient and in compliance with the

EPAct. Such a logo would be

permanently marked on the motor

nameplate to facilitate enforcement, be

prominently displayed on packaging, in

shipping documents, in customs and

commercial documents, and other

materials. The Department is also

considering a requirement of permanent

markings on the motor nameplate of

both the nominal efficiency and the

minimum efficiency associated with

that nominal efficiency, and of

prominent displays of both the nominal

and minimum efficiency values in

catalogs to assist purchasers in making

purchasing decisions.

In addition, section 122(c)(4) of the

EPAct (EPCA, section 344(c), 42 U.S.C.

6315(c)) authorized additional required

displays of information about electric

motor energy efficiency that are likely to

assist purchasers in making purchasing

decisions, including instructions for

maintenance, use, or repair of the motor,

and information on energy use. Thus,

the Department is also considering use

of a label(s) or marking(s) that bear(s)

the following statement(s): (1) ‘‘This

motor complies with energy efficiency

requirements in the Energy Policy Act of

1992 at the time of original

manufacture, [DATE].’’ or ‘‘Efficiency

complies with EPACT at time of

manufacture, [DATE].’’; (2) ‘‘Consult the

manufacturer for maintenance, use, or

repair.’’ or ‘‘Repair only in factory

authorized shop.’’; and (3) ‘‘Estimated

kilowatts used after 2000 hours

continuous operation according to

manufacturer’s ratings: lllll’’, or

‘‘Est. annual kW used: lllll’’.

(Annual would be defined as ‘‘2000

hours continuous operation according to

manufacturer’s ratings.’’)

The Department seeks advice on

whether such label(s) or marking(s)

would assist purchasers, and on the

content, design, size, location, and

attachment of such label(s) or

marking(s).

d. Certification. Section 122(e)(2) of

the EPAct (EPCA section 345(c), 42

U.S.C. 6316(c)) requires ‘‘manufacturers

to certify, through an independent

testing or certification program

nationally recognized in the United

States, that such motor meets the

applicable (nominal full-load efficiency

standard).’’

(1) Compliance. The Department is

considering implementation of the

EPAct requirement for ‘‘manufacturers

to certify’’ by means of a compliance

statement and certification report that

each basic model of energy efficient

electric motor meets the requirements of

the EPAct. This is similar to 10 CFR

430.62(a), which sets forth the appliance

program procedures to be followed for

certification by requiring each

manufacturer to ‘‘certify by means of a

compliance statement and certification

report that each basic model meets the

requirements of that standard.’’ A

manufacturer’s compliance statement

and certification report for each basic

model of energy efficient electric motor

would be based, at least in part, upon

actual testing or an alternative efficiency

determination method. The Department

solicits the views of interested parties

on such a requirement.

(2) Independent testing and

certification. The Department is also

considering how to interpret and

implement the EPAct requirement for

‘‘manufacturers to certify, through an

independent testing or certification

program nationally recognized in the

United States, that such motor meets the

applicable (nominal full-load efficiency

standard).’’ Such testing or certification

programs could be operated by

commercial laboratories, government

laboratories, and trade associations. The

Department seeks information as to the

identity, nature, and capabilities of any

nationally recognized program(s) for the

testing and certification of motors. The

Department is aware that the

Association of Home Appliance

Manufacturers conducts a program to

verify manufacturers’ certifications of

the total refrigerated volume of

refrigerators and the energy efficiency

values of room air conditioners; that the

Gas Appliance Manufacturers

Association conducts a testing program

to verify manufacturers’ certifications of

the energy efficiency of water heaters,

furnaces, room heaters, and boilers; and
27054 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 1995 / Proposed Rules

that the Air Conditioning and

Refrigeration Institute conducts a testing

program to verify manufacturers’

certifications of the energy efficiency

and other performance criteria of

residential and commercial air

conditioning and heat pump systems.

The Department seeks information on

any similar existing programs that

certify or verify the performance

characteristics of motors. In addition,

the Department seeks information as to

whether foreign commercial

laboratories, foreign government

laboratories, or trade associations

operate such programs.

The Department also seeks advice

concerning two other possible issues

under 122(e) of the EPAct (EPCA section

345(c), 42 U.S.C. 6316(c)). First,

questions may arise as to what

constitutes ‘‘an independent testing or

certification program [that is] nationally

recognized.’’ The Department seeks

input as to the criteria by which an

organization should be considered

competent (1) to conduct the specific

tests or calibrations for motors

according to the required test

procedures, and (2) to operate a

certification program. One possibility is

that the Department could consider a

motor testing or certification program to

be ‘‘nationally recognized’’ if the

program were accredited by the

National Institute of Standards and

Technology/National Voluntary

Laboratory Accreditation Program

(NIST/NVLAP). The Department seeks

views on such an approach, including

the question of whether a foreign

program recognized by NIST/NVLAP

should be considered ‘‘nationally

recognized in the United States.’’

Second, the Department seeks views as

to whether manufacturers are permitted

to self-test or self-certify the energy

efficiency of their own motors, and, if

so, under what circumstances.

e. Identification of other issues. The

Department will seek to resolve the

above issues in developing a proposed

rule. In addition, there may be other

issues that the Department will need to

address. The purpose of the meeting is

to identify all of these various issues

and to begin dialogue with interested

parties to help resolve them.

4. Public Meeting Procedure

The meeting will be conducted in an

informal, conference style. A court

reporter will be present to record the

minutes of the meeting. There shall be

no discussion of proprietary

information, costs or prices, market

shares, or other commercial matters

regulated by antitrust law. After the

meeting and period for written

statements, the Department will

consider the views presented in

formulating a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking regarding energy efficient

motors.

Issued in Washington, DC, May 16, 1995.

Christine A. Ervin,

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy.

[FR Doc. 95–12492 Filed 5–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–13–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes Equipped

With BFGoodrich Off-Wing Ramp/Slide

Evacuation Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 767 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of the off-wing ramp/slide

evacuation systems. This proposal is

prompted by reports of punctured tubes

on certain BFGoodrich off-wing ramp/

slide evacuation systems installed on

these airplanes. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent such tube punctures, which

could delay or impede the evacuation of

passengers during an emergency.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No 95–NM–13–

AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207; and BFGoodrich Company,

Aircraft Evacuation Systems, Sustaining

Engineering, Dept. 7916, Phoenix,

Arizona 85040. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Gfrerer, Aerospace Engineer,

ANM–130L, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (310) 627–5338; fax (310)

627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–13–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–NM–13–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received reports of

punctured tubes on BFGoodrich offwing ramp/slide evacuation systems,

having part numbers (P/N) 101630,

101655, and 101656, installed on certain

Boeing Model 767 series airplanes.

There have been several incidents in