51788 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

the applicant to provide an interpreter. 

In such cases, the applicant would be in 

the same position they would have been 

without this action. 

DHS recognizes there are both 

quantitative and qualitative benefits that 

could be realized by providing an 

applicant for asylum the opportunity to 

bring their own interpreter when a 

contract interpreter is unavailable, such 

as the costs avoided that would be 

incurred through rescheduling if a 

contract interpreter is unavailable—both 

for the applicant and USCIS, and the 

overall positive effect on applicants of 

having their asylum application timely 

adjudicated. Once this rule is no longer 

in effect, asylum applicants unable to 

proceed with an interview before a 

USCIS asylum officer in English will 

again be required to provide their own 

interpreters under 8 CFR 208.9(g). 

F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This rule will not have substantial 

direct effects 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. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, it is determined that this 

rule does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a federalism summary impact 

statement. 

G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This rule meets the applicable 

standards set forth in section 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. 

H. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not propose new, or 

revisions to existing, ‘‘collection[s] of 

information’’ as that term is defined 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–13, 44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35, and its implementing 

regulations, 5 CFR part 1320. As this 

action would only span 180 days, 

USCIS does not anticipate a need to 

update the Form I–589, Application for 

Asylum and for Withholding of 

Removal, despite the existing language 

on the form instructions regarding 

interpreters, because it will be primarily 

rescheduling interviews that were 

cancelled due to COVID–19. USCIS will 

post updates on its I–589 website, 

https://www.uscis.gov/i-589, and other 

asylum and relevant web pages 

regarding the new interview 

requirements in this regulation, as well 

as provide personal notice to applicants 

via the interview notices issued to 

applicants prior to their interview. 

List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 208 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Aliens, Immigration, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

in the preamble, the Secretary of 

Homeland Security amends 8 CFR part 

208 as follows: 

PART 208—PROCEDURES FOR 

ASYLUM AND WITHHOLDING OF 

REMOVAL 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 208 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1158, 

1226, 1252, 1282; Title VII of Pub. L. 110– 

229; 8 CFR part 2; Pub. L. 115–218. 

■ 2. Effective from September 20, 2021, 

through March 16, 2022, amend § 208.9 

by revising paragraphs (h) introductory 

text and (h)(1)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 208.9 Procedure for interview before an 

asylum officer. 

* * * * * 

(h) Asylum applicant interpreters. For 

asylum interviews conducted between 

September 21, 2021, through March 16, 

2022: 

(1) * * * 

(i) If a USCIS interpreter is 

unavailable, USCIS will either 

reschedule the interview and attribute 

the interview delay to USCIS for the 

purposes of employment authorization 

pursuant to § 208.7, or USCIS may, in its 

discretion, allow the applicant to 

provide an interpreter. 

* * * * * 

Alejandro Mayorkas, 

Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20161 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–97–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2021–0263; Project 

Identifier AD–2020–01702–T; Amendment 

39–21710; AD 2021–18–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all The 

Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. 

This AD was prompted by a report that 

an operator found solid rivets with 

missing heads at the left buttock line 25 

on the sloping pressure deck web. This 

AD requires doing a detailed inspection 

of the left- and right-side sloping 

pressure deck at certain stations for any 

damaged solid rivets, and applicable oncondition actions. The FAA is issuing 

this AD to address the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective October 22, 

2021. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of October 22, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 

Attention: Contractual & Data Services 

(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 

110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; 

telephone 562–797–1717; internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may view this service information at the 

FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 

216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. 

It is also available at https://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2021– 

0263. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2021–0263; or in person at Docket 

Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

final rule, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for 

Docket Operations is U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 

Cortez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 

South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; 

phone and fax: (206) 231–3958; email: 

Luis.A.Cortez-Muniz@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to all The Boeing Company Model 

777 airplanes. The NPRM published in 

the Federal Register on April 9, 2021 

(86 FR 18479). The NPRM was 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 51789 

prompted by a report that an operator 

found solid rivets with missing heads at 

the left buttock line 25 on the sloping 

pressure deck web. In the NPRM, the 

FAA proposed to require doing a 

detailed inspection of the left- and rightside sloping pressure deck at certain 

stations for any damaged solid rivets, 

and applicable on-condition actions. 

The FAA is issuing this AD to address 

damaged or missing solid rivet heads on 

the sloping pressure deck web, which 

could result in loss of sloping pressure 

deck panels, causing decompression 

and pressure loss, and loss of the 

hydraulic systems in the area for wheel 

brakes (both normal and alternate) and 

steering, and potentially leading to 

runway departure and adversely 

affecting the structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

Discussion of Final Airworthiness 

Directive 

Comments 

The FAA received comments from 

four commenters, including Boeing, 

American Airlines (AA), FedEx, and 

United Airlines (UAL). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

NPRM and the FAA’s response to each 

comment. 

Request To Revise the On-Condition 

Actions Statement 

Boeing requested a revision to the oncondition actions statement in the third 

sentence of the ‘‘Related Service 

Information Under 1 CFR part 51’’ 

paragraph of the NPRM. Boeing stated 

that the repetitive detailed inspections 

cover ‘‘two rows of fasteners common to 

the affected stiffener,’’ instead of ‘‘two 

rows of blind fasteners and solid rivets 

common to the affected stiffener.’’ 

Boeing commented that the blind 

fastener repair option is allowed only 

under Condition 2 of Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020, which is 

limited to findings of a maximum of 

nine damaged rivets within the same 

stiffener. Boeing commented that the 

damage rivets must be within the same 

fastener row, and therefore, the 

compliance action does not allow for 

blind fasteners to be installed in both 

fastener rows of an affected stiffener. 

Boeing commented that the revised 

language improves clarity of the oncondition actions because it does not 

imply that blind fasteners can be 

installed in both fastener rows of an 

affected stiffener. 

The FAA agrees to revise the oncondition actions statement in the 

‘‘Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR part 51’’ paragraph of this final rule 

for the reasons provided above; the FAA 

has revised this final rule accordingly. 

Request To Revise Cost of Compliance 

Paragraph 

Boeing requested a revision to the oncondition work-hours for replacing a 

blind fastener. Boeing stated that the 

blind fastener replacement does not 

require internal access, and therefore, 

the 328 work-hours can be reduced to 

11 work-hours as noted in Boeing 

Information Notice 777–53A0093 IN 01, 

dated January 27, 2021. 

The FAA agrees to revise the oncondition work-hours for replacing a 

blind fastener for the reason provided 

above; this final rule has been revised 

accordingly. 

Request To Clarify the Applicability 

AA asked if the rivet problems 

specified in the NPRM affect any 

airplanes in the AA livery, particularly 

N-numbers (nose numbers) so it can 

keep better track on preflights. 

For clarification, this AD does affect 

AA airplanes because its fleet includes 

Model 777–200 and –300ER airplanes. 

This AD applies to all Model 777–200, 

–200LR, –300, –300ER, and 777F 

airplanes, as specified in paragraph (c) 

of this AD. Since all Model 777 

airplanes are affected, it is not necessary 

to identify airplanes by N-numbers. The 

FAA has not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise the Compliance 

Time 

FedEx Express (FedEx) agreed with 

the intent of the proposed AD, but 

found the 16-month compliance time for 

the initial inspection does not align 

with its heavy maintenance visits and 

requested an extension. FedEx stated 

that its current heavy maintenance visits 

would be the suitable time to 

accomplish the actions in the proposed 

AD, and that accomplishing the initial 

inspection in the proposed AD may 

require performing special maintenance 

visits. FedEx commented that it 

currently has 26 Model 777F airplanes 

that have accumulated more than 32,000 

flight hours, and therefore, will be 

required to accomplish the initial 

inspection within the 16-month initial 

compliance time. 

FedEx also commented that since 

Boeing found the missing rivet heads 

from a retired Model 777–200 airplane, 

the current in-service Model 777 

airplanes can operate with missing 

rivets without experiencing adverse 

structural complications since the issue 

was not discovered until after that 

airplane retired from service. 

The FAA disagrees with the 

commenter’s request to extend the 

initial compliance time. The FAA 

cannot assume that Model 777 airplanes 

can operate with missing rivet heads 

without experiencing adverse structural 

complications. The FAA determined 

that the compliance time, as proposed, 

represents the maximum interval of 

time allowable for the affected airplanes 

to continue to safely operate before the 

initial and repetitive inspections and 

on-condition actions are done. If the 

inspection interval were based on 

maintenance schedules, which vary 

among operators, there would be no 

assurance that the airplane would be 

inspected and repaired during that 

maximum interval. In addition, in 

developing an appropriate compliance 

time, the FAA coordinated with the 

manufacturer to provide a compliance 

time with an acceptable level of safety. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (i) of this AD, the FAA will 

consider requests for approval of an 

extension of the compliance time, if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the change would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

The FAA has not changed this AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Clarify Required Service 

Information 

FedEx requested that the FAA revise 

note 1 to paragraph (g) in the proposed 

AD to clarify that the proposed AD 

requires accomplishment of the actions 

only specified in Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020. FedEx 

stated that note 1 does not clearly 

distinguish the required actions from 

the guidance service information for 

accomplishing the actions in the 

proposed AD. 

The FAA disagrees with the 

commenter’s request to change the note. 

For clarification, paragraph (g) of this 

AD states the required actions for 

applicable airplanes, and only specifies 

to do all applicable actions identified in, 

and in accordance with, the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Alert Requirements Bulletin 777– 

53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020. 

The FAA clearly states that note 1 to 

paragraph (g) of this AD is guidance and 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777– 

53A0093, dated November 24, 2020, is 

only referred to in that note. The FAA 

has not changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Repair Instructions 

UAL indicated support for the NPRM, 

but requested clarification as to what to 

do if a Condition 4 is found in one 

stiffener and a Condition 3 is found in 

51790 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

another stiffener as referenced in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–53A0093, 

dated November 24, 2020. UAL stated 

that Condition 4 requires operators to 

contact Boeing and request repair 

instructions and to do the repair if any 

damaged rivet is found on both fastener 

rows within the same stiffener. 

In addition, UAL requested the 

following clarifications. 

• When contacting Boeing, should 

operators provide all details of affected 

stiffeners regardless of the condition 

identified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–53A0093, dated November 

24, 2020? UAL commented that Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–53A0093, 

dated November 24, 2020, appears to 

request details associated with a specific 

stiffener only. 

• Where a Condition 4 discrepancy is 

present, is it acceptable to continue with 

the repair of an adjacent Condition 3 

stiffener discrepancy or is further 

manufacturer approval required? 

UAL stated that it assumes that the 

conservative approach would be for the 

operator to provide all details of affected 

stiffeners to the manufacturer and then 

the manufacturer will provide approval 

to repair both Conditions 3 and 4, as 

referenced in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–53A0093, dated November 

24, 2020. UAL asserted that clarification 

will help operators determine which 

information is required by the 

manufacturer to make a repair 

assessment, and it will also provide 

clarification as to what to do in the 

event of a parallel process involving 

both Condition 3 and Condition 4 

repair. 

The FAA provides the following 

clarification for the commenter. This AD 

requires operators to use Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020, to 

perform the actions required in this AD. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777– 

53A0093, dated November 24, 2020, is 

for guidance only. Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020, does not 

specify any limitations on a Condition 

3 repair based on any conditions found 

on another stiffener. When a Condition 

3 is found, the FAA finds no issues with 

continuing with the Condition 3 repair 

of replacing all solid rivets even in the 

event a Condition 4 is found in an 

adjacent stiffener. Regarding the 

question on the details to provide to 

Boeing for a repair, as specified in Note 

4. of 5.A., ‘‘General Information,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 

777–53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 

2020, operators can refer to Boeing 

Service Letter 777–SL–51–013, Damage 

Reporting and Repair Plan/Design 

Guidelines, which describes what 

information must be provided to Boeing 

before a structural repair can be 

provided. The structural repair must be 

approved by the FAA or the Boeing 

Company Organization Designation 

Authorization (ODA) as specified in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. The FAA 

has not revised this AD in this regard. 

Conclusion 

The FAA reviewed the relevant data, 

considered any comments received, and 

determined that air safety requires 

adopting this AD as proposed. Except 

for minor editorial changes, and any 

other changes described previously, this 

AD is adopted as proposed in the 

NPRM. None of the changes will 

increase the economic burden on any 

operator. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020. This 

service information specifies procedures 

for doing a detailed inspection of the 

left- and right-side sloping pressure 

deck from station (STA) 1245 to STA 

1287 for any damaged (i.e., missing 

solid rivet heads, cracking or 

deformation of the solid rivet, or gaps 

between the solid rivet head and the 

sloping pressure deck surface) solid 

rivets, and applicable on-condition 

actions. On-condition actions include 

repeating the detailed inspection of the 

left-and right-side sloping pressure deck 

from STA 1245 to STA 1287 for any 

damaged solid rivet; repetitive detailed 

inspections of two rows of fasteners 

common to the affected stiffener for any 

damaged solid rivet or damaged blind 

fastener; replacing solid rivets or blind 

fasteners; and repair. This service 

information is reasonably available 

because the interested parties have 

access to it through their normal course 

of business or by the means identified 

in ADDRESSES. 

Costs of Compliance 

The FAA estimates that this AD 

affects 224 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The FAA estimates the following costs 

to comply with this AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Detailed inspections .......... Up to 384 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

Up to $32,640.

$0 Up to $32,640 ................... Up to $7,311,360. 

The FAA estimates the following 

costs to do any necessary replacements 

or inspections that would be required 

based on the results of the inspection. 

The agency has no way of determining 

the number of aircraft that might need 

these replacements or inspections: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Replacement (solid fastener) ......... 338 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$28,730.

Up to $3,200 ................................. Up to $31,930. 

Replacement (blind fastener) ......... 11 work-hour × $85 per hour = 

$935.

Up to $450 .................................... Up to $1,385. 

Repetitive inspections of fastener 

rows.

326 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$27,710 per inspection cycle.

$0 per inspection cycle ................. $27,710 per inspection cycle. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 51791 

The FAA has received no definitive 

data on which to base the cost estimates 

for the on-condition repairs specified in 

this AD. 

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. 

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 

44701: General requirements. Under 

that section, Congress charges the FAA 

with promoting safe flight of civil 

aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 

regulations for practices, methods, and 

procedures the Administrator finds 

necessary for safety in air commerce. 

This regulation is within the scope of 

that authority because it addresses an 

unsafe condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on products identified in this 

rulemaking action. 

Regulatory Findings 

This AD will not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This AD will not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, 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. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

2021–18–09 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–21710; Docket No. 

FAA–2021–0263; Project Identifier AD– 

2020–01702–T. 

(a) Effective Date 

This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective October 22, 2021. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 777–200, –200LR, –300, 

–300ER, and 777F airplanes, certificated in 

any category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report that an 

operator found solid rivets with missing 

heads at the left buttock line 25 on the 

sloping pressure deck web. The FAA is 

issuing this AD to address damaged or 

missing solid rivet heads on the sloping 

pressure deck web, which could result in loss 

of sloping pressure deck panels, causing 

decompression and pressure loss, and loss of 

the hydraulic systems in the area for wheel 

brakes (both normal and alternate) and 

steering, and potentially leading to runway 

departure and adversely affecting the 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Required Actions 

Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this 

AD: At the applicable times specified in the 

‘‘Compliance’’ paragraph of Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB, 

dated November 24, 2020, do all applicable 

actions identified in, and in accordance with, 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Alert Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 

RB, dated November 24, 2020. 

Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for 

accomplishing the actions required by this 

AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–53A0093, dated November 24, 

2020, which is referred to in Boeing Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB, 

dated November 24, 2020. 

(h) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Requirements 

Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB, dated November 

24, 2020, uses the phrase ‘‘the original issue 

date of 777–53A0093 RB’’ or ‘‘the original 

issue date of Requirements Bulletin 777– 

53A0093 RB,’’ this AD requires using ‘‘the 

effective date of this AD,’’ except where Alert 

Requirements Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB, 

dated November 24, 2020, uses the phrase 

‘‘the original issue date of Requirements 

Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB’’ in a note or flag 

note. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements 

Bulletin 777–53A0093 RB, dated November 

24, 2020, specifies contacting Boeing for 

repair instructions: This AD requires doing 

the repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, 

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 responsible Flight 

Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending 

information directly to the manager of the 

certification office, send it to the attention of 

the person identified in Related Information. 

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 responsible Flight Standards Office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair, 

modification, or alteration required by this 

AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company 

Organization Designation Authorization 

(ODA) that has been authorized by the 

Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, to make 

those findings. To be approved, the repair 

method, modification deviation, or alteration 

deviation must meet the certification basis of 

the airplane, and the approval must 

specifically refer to this AD. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Luis Cortez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 

2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 

98198; phone and fax: (206) 231–3958; email: 

Luis.A.Cortez-Muniz@faa.gov. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (k)(3) and (4) of this AD. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 

777–53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., 

MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; 

telephone 562–797–1717; internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th 

51792 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

206–231–3195. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, 

email fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: 

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. 

Issued on August 25, 2021. 

Gaetano A. Sciortino, 

Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, 

Compliance & Airworthiness Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20035 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2019–0919; Project 

Identifier 2019–NE–24–AD; Amendment 39– 

21714; AD 2021–18–13] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; General 

Electric Company Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

General Electric Company (GE) CF34–8 

model turbofan engines with a certain 

outer shell combustion liner 

(combustion outer liner shell) installed. 

This AD was prompted by two in-flight 

engine shutdowns (IFSDs) that occurred 

as a result of failures of the combustion 

outer liner shell. This AD requires a 

borescope inspection (BSI) or visual 

inspection of the combustion outer liner 

shell and, depending on the results of 

the inspection, possible replacement of 

the combustion outer liner shell. The 

FAA is issuing this AD to address the 

unsafe condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective October 22, 

2021. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of October 22, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

General Electric Company, GE Aviation, 

Room 285, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati, 

OH 45215; phone: (513) 552–3272; 

email: aviation.fleetsupport@ge.com. 

You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Airworthiness Products 

Section, Operational Safety Branch, 

1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 

01803. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call (781) 238–7759. It is also available 

at https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2019–0919. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2019–0919; or in person at Docket 

Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

final rule, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for 

Docket Operations is U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Stevenson, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 

District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: (781) 238–7132; fax: (781) 238– 

7199; email: Scott.M.Stevenson@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to all CF34–8C1, CF34–8C5, 

CF34–8C5A1, CF34–8C5B1, CF34– 

8C5A2, CF34–8C5A3, CF34–8E2, CF34– 

8E2A1, CF34–8E5, CF34–8E5A1, CF34– 

8E5A2, CF34–8E6, and CF34–8E6A1 

model turbofan engines with a certain 

combustion outer liner shell installed. 

The NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on January 10, 2020 (85 FR 

1292). The NPRM was prompted by 

reports of two IFSDs on GE CF34–8C 

and –8E model turbofan engines. These 

IFSDs were due to the cracking and 

collapsing of the combustion outer liner 

shell, which resulted in thermal distress 

of the high-pressure turbine and lowpressure turbine (LPT) including burnthrough of the LPT case. In the NPRM, 

the FAA proposed to require a BSI or 

visual inspection of the combustion 

outer liner shell and, depending on the 

results of the inspection, possible 

replacement of the combustion outer 

liner shell. The FAA is issuing this AD 

to address the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

Discussion of Final Airworthiness 

Directive 

Comments 

The FAA received comments from 

four commenters. The commenters were 

Horizon Air, Japan Airlines, Endeavor 

Air, and the Air Line Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

NPRM and the FAA’s response to each 

comment. 

Request To Change the Initial 

Compliance Time 

Horizon Air requested the FAA revise 

the initial inspection threshold in 

proposed paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM 

to ‘‘17,499 flight hours (FHs) time since 

new (TSN) or time since repair (TSR), or 

12,000 flight cycles (FCs) TSN or TSR, 

whichever occurs later.’’ Horizon Air 

reasoned that the initial inspection 

threshold in paragraph (g)(2) of the 

proposed AD would unfairly penalize 

operators, like Horizon Air, with high 

FH to FC ratios. Horizon Air further 

stated that using the higher FH to FC 

ratios, the proposed 17,499 FHs TSN or 

TSR inspection threshold would equate 

to approximately 11,000 engine FCs. 

This FC value is substantially below the 

GE targeted initial engine shop visit 

threshold of 12,000 to 14,000 FCs and 

would potentially result in a significant 

increase in the number of engine shop 

visits over the 6- to 12-year operating 

lifespan of each engine. 

The FAA partially agrees. While the 

failure mode is partially related to FCs, 

the compliance is published in FHs to 

align with existing maintenance 

intervals. Incorporating both measures 

as intervals into this AD is impractical; 

however, operators may request an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of 

this AD to use alternate intervals. The 

FAA did not change this AD as a result 

of this comment. 

Request To Change the Installation 

Prohibition 

Horizon Air requested the FAA revise 

paragraph (h), Installation Prohibition, 

as proposed in the NPRM, so it does not 

conflict with the proposed required 

actions specified in paragraph (g)(1) of 

the NPRM. Horizon Air stated that 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD 

prohibits installation of a combustion 

outer liner shell with greater than 

17,500 FHs TSN or TSR, without first 

inspecting it in accordance with 

paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD. 

However, paragraph (g)(1) of the 

proposed AD requires inspection of the 

combustion outer liner shell within 500 

engine FHs TSN or TSR for those 

combustion outer liner shells that have 

accumulated 17,500 FHs TSN or TSR. 

Horizon Air concluded that the 18,000 

FHs TSN or TSR limitation specified in 

paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD 

conflicts with the 17,500 FHs TSN or