Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67935 

approved port for the importation of 

cattle from Mexico that have been 

infested with fever ticks or exposed to 

fever ticks or tick-borne diseases, 30,000 

to 50,000 head of such cattle could 

potentially enter the United States 

through San Luis; these animals would 

most likely be animals that otherwise 

would enter through the existing 

approved ports in Texas and New 

Mexico. Any positive impacts of the 

proposed rule for small entities in the 

San Luis, AZ, area, such as an increased 

volume of business for firms that 

transport cattle, would be matched by 

business declines for firms operating 

from the Texas and New Mexico ports. 

There may also be positive effects at the 

Texas and New Mexico ports to the 

extent that the diversion of cattle to San 

Luis, AZ, would reduce operational 

delays when the demand for imports is 

beyond the capacity of the facilities; 

however, APHIS has no information on 

whether such periods of insufficient 

capacity have occurred, and if so, how 

frequently. 

There are no significant alternatives to 

the proposed rule. The Mexican 

Government has requested that a port be 

established on the Mexico-Arizona 

border for the entry into the United 

States of cattle from Mexico that have 

been infested with fever ticks or 

exposed to fever ticks or tick-borne 

diseases. APHIS has determined that 

with the construction of new facilities at 

the port of San Luis, AZ, this request 

can be satisfied. 

Under these circumstances, the 

Administrator of the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service has 

determined that this action would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Executive Order 12988 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is 

adopted: (1) All State and local laws and 

regulations that are in conflict with this 

rule will be preempted; (2) no 

retroactive effect will be given to this 

rule; and (3) administrative proceedings 

will not be required before parties may 

file suit in court challenging this rule. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule contains no 

information collection or recordkeeping 

requirements under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93 

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, 

Poultry and poultry products, 

Quarantine, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 

CFR part 93 as follows: 

PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN 

ANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY, 

AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND 

POULTRY PRODUCTS; 

REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF 

CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING 

CONTAINERS 

1. The authority citation for part 93 

would continue to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301–8317; 

21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 

CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 

2. In § 93.427, the introductory text of 

paragraph (b)(2) would be revised to 

read as follows: 

§ 93.427 Cattle from Mexico. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Cattle that have been exposed to 

splenetic, southern, or tick fever, or that 

have been infested with or exposed to 

fever ticks, may be imported from 

Mexico at one of the land border ports 

in Texas listed in § 93.403(c) or at the 

ports of Santa Teresa, NM, or San Luis, 

AZ, provided that the following 

conditions are strictly observed and 

complied with: 

* * * * * 

Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 

November 2005. 

Elizabeth E. Gaston, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–22337 Filed 11–8–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 2003–NM–271–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–135 Airplanes 

and Model EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, 

–145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and –145EP 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This document revises an 

earlier proposed airworthiness directive 

(AD), applicable to certain Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–135 and EMB–

145 series airplanes, that would have 

required inspecting the pilot’s and copilot’s seat tracks for proper locking of 

the seats, and adjusting or replacing the 

seat tracks, if necessary. This new action 

revises the proposed rule by revising the 

applicability statement, and requiring 

replacement of the seat locking pin on 

certain SICMA-brand seats. The actions 

specified by this new proposed AD are 

intended to prevent uncommanded 

movement of the pilot’s or co-pilot’s 

seat, which could interfere with the 

operation of the airplane and 

consequent temporary loss of airplane 

control. This action is intended to 

address the identified unsafe condition. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

December 5, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

triplicate to the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Transport 

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–NM–

271–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Comments may be inspected at this 

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. Comments may be submitted 

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments 

may also be sent via the Internet using 

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent 

via fax or the Internet must contain 

‘‘Docket No. 2003–NM–271–AD’’ in the 

subject line and need not be submitted 

in triplicate. Comments sent via the 

Internet as attached electronic files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or 

2000 or ASCII text. 

The service information referenced in 

the proposed rule may be obtained from 

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343–CEP 12.225, 

Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil. This 

information may be examined at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1175; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in the making of the 

proposed rule by submitting such 

67936 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

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 action may be changed in light 

of the comments received. 

Submit comments using the following 

format: 

• Organize comments issue-by-issue. 

For example, discuss a request to 

change the compliance time and a 

request to change the service bulletin 

reference as two separate issues. 

• For each issue, state what specific 

change to the proposed AD is being 

requested. 

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or 

data) for each request. 

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 action 

must submit a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket Number 2003–NM–271–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–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

2003–NM–271–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, 

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Discussion 

A proposal to amend part 39 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 39) to add an airworthiness 

directive (AD), applicable to certain 

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–135 and EMB–

145 series airplanes, was published as a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

in the Federal Register on June 18, 2004 

(69 FR 34091). That NPRM would have 

required inspecting the pilot’s and copilot’s seat tracks for proper locking of 

the seats, and adjusting or replacing the 

seat tracks, if necessary. That NPRM 

was prompted by a number of cases 

reported where flight crews had 

difficulty fitting the lock pin into the 

track of their seats during seat 

adjustments due to damage in the seat 

track locking hole. That condition, if not 

corrected, could result in 

uncommanded movement of the pilot’s 

or co-pilot’s seat, which could result in 

interference with the operation of the 

airplane and consequent temporary loss 

of airplane control. 

Actions Since Issuance of Previous 

Proposal 

Since the issuance of the original 

NPRM, the Departmento de Aviacao 

Civil (DAC) has issued a revision of 

Brazilian airworthiness directive 2002–

09–01. That revision (2002–09–01R1, 

effective June 2, 2004) added a 

modification of certain SICMA seats 

installed on Model EMB–135 airplanes 

and Model EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, 

–145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and –145EP 

airplanes. The modification replaces 

certain seat locking pins with new, 

improved seat locking pins. 

We have also learned that the seat 

locking pin was designed with an 

incorrect shape. The use of the 

incorrectly shaped locking pin can 

cause damage to the seat track locking 

holes, and is the main factor that results 

in the uncommanded movement. 

Comments on Original NPRM 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this proposed AD. We 

have considered the comments that 

have been submitted on the original 

NPRM. Due consideration has been 

given to the comments received in 

response to the NPRM. 

Request To Allow Previous Revisions of 

Service Bulletins 

One commenter requests that prior 

revisions levels of EMBRAER Service 

Bulletin 145–53–0027 be included in 

the proposed AD. The commenter has 

accomplished portions of inspections in 

accordance with service bulletin 145–

53–0027, dated May 31, 2001; and 

Change 01, dated March 12, 2002. 

Another commenter, the 

manufacturer, suggests that we change 

the proposed AD to include a paragraph 

allowing actions performed in 

accordance with previous issues of 

SICMA Service Bulletin 147–25–020, 

Issue 2, dated December 22, 2003. 

We agree with the commenters’

requests. We have revised paragraphs (e) 

and (f) of this supplemental NPRM 

(paragraph (e) of the original NPRM) to 

allow previous actions that were 

performed before the effective date of 

the proposed AD in accordance with 

earlier revisions of the service 

information. 

Request To Shorten the Compliance 

Time 

One commenter suggests that the 500- 

flight-hour inspection interval of the 

seat tracks is too long. The commenter 

feels that further degradation of the seat 

tracks within that inspection interval 

may result in a failure prior to the next 

inspection. Also, due to the severity of 

the loss of control in the event of an 

uncommanded movement of the pilot’s 

seat, the commenter suggests that a 

‘‘much shorter inspection interval be 

required.’’

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request to shorten the compliance time. 

In developing an appropriate 

compliance time, we considered the 

safety implications, parts availability, 

and normal maintenance schedules for 

timely accomplishment of the 

modifications. Further, we arrived at the 

proposed compliance time with DAC 

concurrence. In addition, we added 

paragraph (b) to the supplemental 

NPRM to require replacement of 

existing seat locking pins with new, 

improved seat locking pins, which 

addresses the major cause of the 

degradation of the seat tracks. 

Request To Revise Unsafe Condition 

One commenter, the airplane 

manufacturer, states that the unsafe 

condition statement does not fully 

address the cause of the misaligned and 

excessively worn seat tracks. The 

condition of the seat tracks contribute to 

uncommanded seat movements, but the 

main reason for the condition of the seat 

tracks is because the locking pin was 

designed with the wrong shape. The 

commenter also asserts that the issuance 

of the SICMA Service Bulletin 147–25–

020, Issue 2, dated December 22, 2003, 

which addresses the locking pin, is the 

reason why the DAC issued the revised 

Brazilian airworthiness directive 2002–

09–01R1, effective June 2, 2004. We 

infer that the commenter is requesting 

that the unsafe condition statement be 

revised to include the origins of the 

damage to the seat tracks. 

We agree with the commenter that 

further information on the origins of the 

unsafe condition should be included in 

the supplemental NPRM. We have 

added a statement addressing the origin 

of the seat track damage under ‘‘Actions 

Since Issuance of Previous Proposal’’

above to supplement the Discussion 

section of the original NPRM. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67937 

Request To Revise Applicability 

Statement of the Proposed AD 

The commenter requests that the 

applicability statement of the original 

NPRM be revised to apply to certain 

SICMA seats having part number (P/Ns) 

1471610–00 through 1471610–03 

inclusive, and P/N 1471611–00 through 

1471611–03 inclusive, ‘‘installed on 

Model EMB–135 and –145 series 

airplanes.’’

We agree with the commenter that the 

applicability statement needs to be 

revised. However, while the faulty 

locking pin was installed only on those 

seats with P/Ns stated above, the seats 

are rotatable and could be installed on 

any Model EMB–135 airplanes and 

EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, –145LR, 

–145XR, –145MP, and –145EP 

airplanes. We find that the suggested 

applicability could inadvertently 

exclude airplanes that may have seat 

track damage from a previous 

installation of an affected SICMA seat 

part number, but do not have an affected 

SICMA seat installed as of the effective 

date of the proposed AD. 

We have concluded that the 

applicability statement must affect all 

Model EMB–135 airplanes and Model 

EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, –145LR, 

–145XR, –145MP, and –145EP 

airplanes. This applicability matches 

the applicability of the revised Brazilian 

airworthiness directive. Affecting all 

Model EMB–135 airplanes and EMB–

145, –145ER, –145MR, –145LR, –145XR, 

–145MP, and –145EP airplanes also 

allows us to prohibit installation of a 

SICMA seat with a faulty locking pin on 

any Model EMB–135 airplanes or Model 

EMB–145, –145ER, –145MR, –145LR, 

–145XR, –145MP, and –145EP airplanes 

(unless modified as required) in 

paragraph (c) of this supplemental 

NPRM, and require certain airplanes to 

be inspected for any seat track damage. 

Request To Require Seat Track 

Inspections 

The commenter also requests that we 

revise the original NPRM to require, for 

airplanes with serial number (S/N) 

145002 through 145560, an inspection 

of the seat tracks in accordance with the 

EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–53–

0027, Revision 03, dated February 5, 

2004, as a concurrent service bulletin 

action to replace the seat locking pin on 

certain seats with affected P/Ns. 

We agree with specifying the airplane 

serial numbers, as called out by the 

commenter, in paragraph (a)(3) of the 

supplemental NPRM. The revision 

would simplify the paragraph without 

excluding airplanes that may have a 

damaged seat track. This difference has 

been coordinated with the DAC. 

Request To Require Seat Locking Pin 

Replacement 

In addition, the commenter requests 

that we revise the original NPRM to 

require replacement of seat locking pins 

on all SICMA seats having part number 

(P/N) 1471610–00 through 1471610–03 

inclusive, and P/N 1471611–00 through 

1471611–03 inclusive, installed on 

Model EMB–135 airplanes and EMB–

145, –145ER, –145MR, –145LR, –145XR, 

–145MP, and –145EP airplanes. 

We agree with the commenter that the 

faulty seat locking pins need to be 

replaced with new pins. We have added 

paragraph (b) to the supplemental 

NPRM. 

Conclusion 

Since these changes expand the scope 

of the originally proposed rule, the FAA 

has determined that it is necessary to 

reopen the comment period to provide 

additional opportunity for public 

comment. 

Explanation of Change to Applicability 

We have revised the applicability of 

the original NPRM to identify model 

designations as published in the most 

recent type certificate data sheet for the 

affected models. 

Cost Impact 

The FAA estimates that 550 airplanes 

of U.S. registry would be affected by this 

supplemental NPRM. The following 

table shows the estimated cost impact 

for airplanes affected by this 

supplemental NPRM. The average labor 

rate is $65 per work hour. 

Action 

Number of 

airplanes 

affected 

Work hours Parts cost Total cost 

Inspection to determine seat part and serial numbers 550 1 (none) $35,750, or $65 per airplane. 

Inspection (Part I of EMBRAER SB 145–53–0027, 

Revision 03, February 5, 2004).

459 4 (none) $119,340, or $260 per airplane. 

Inspection and Alignment (Part III of EMRAER 

SB145–53–0027, Revision 03, February 5, 2004).

348 4 (none) $90,480, or $260 per airplane. 

Locking Pin and Spring Replacement (SICMA Aero 

Seat SB 147–25–020, Issue 2, December 22, 

2003).

459 1 $684 $343,791, or $749 per airplane. 

The cost impact figures discussed 

above are based on assumptions that no 

operator has yet accomplished any of 

the proposed requirements of this AD 

action, and that no operator would 

accomplish those actions in the future if 

this AD were not adopted. The cost 

impact figures discussed in AD 

rulemaking actions represent only the 

time necessary to perform the specific 

actions actually required by the AD. 

These figures typically do not include 

incidental costs, such as the time 

required to gain access and close up, 

planning time, or time necessitated by 

other administrative actions. 

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 Impact 

The regulations proposed herein 

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. Therefore, 

it is determined that this proposal 

67938 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this proposed regulation (1) 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if 

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft 

regulatory evaluation prepared for this 

action is contained in the Rules Docket. 

A copy of it may be obtained by 

contacting the Rules Docket at the 

location provided under the caption 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the Federal Aviation 

Administration proposes to amend part 

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(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. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER): Docket 2003–NM–271–AD. 

Applicability: All Model EMB–135BJ, 

–135ER, –135KE, –135KL, and –135LR 

airplanes; and Model EMB–145, –145ER, 

–145MR, –145LR, –145XR, –145MP, and 

–145EP airplanes, certificated in any 

category. 

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent uncommanded movement of 

the pilot’s or copilot’s seat, which could 

interfere with the operation of the airplane 

and consequent temporary loss of airplane 

control, accomplish the following: 

Initial Inspection and Corrective Action 

(a) Within 500 flight hours after the 

effective date of this AD, do the actions 

specified in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and 

(a)(3), as applicable. 

(1) For all airplanes: Do an inspection of 

the pilot’s and co-pilot’s seats for part 

numbers (P/N) and serial numbers (S/N). A 

review of airplane maintenance records is 

acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the P/ 

N and S/N of the seats can be conclusively 

determined from that review. 

(i) If any seat is found to have P/N 

1471610–00 or 1471611–00, and the S/N is 

000 through 324 inclusive, before further 

flight, do general visual and detailed 

inspection of the seat tracks for proper 

locking of the seats, and do all applicable 

related investigative actions and corrective 

actions, in accordance with Parts I and II, as 

applicable, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the EMBRAER Service 

Bulletin 145–53–0027, Revision 03, dated 

February 5, 2004. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual 

examination of an interior or exterior area, 

installation, or assembly to detect obvious 

damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of 

inspection is made from within touching 

distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror 

may be necessary to ensure visual access to 

all surfaces in the inspection area. This level 

of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or 

droplight and may require removal or 

opening of access panels or doors. Stands, 

ladders, or platforms may be required to gain 

proximity to the area being checked.’’

Note 2: 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.’’

Note 3: EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–

53–0027, Revision 03, dated February 5, 

2004, refers to EMBRAER Model EMB–145 

Structural Repair Manual, Chapter 53–12–11, 

dated July 18, 2001, as an additional source 

of information on the limits of acceptable 

wear. 

(ii) If seats are found not to have P/N 

1471610–00 or 1471611–00, and a S/N that 

is up to and including 324 inclusive, no 

further action is required by this paragraph. 

(2) For airplanes having S/N 145004 

through 145290 inclusive, do the actions 

specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of 

this AD, as applicable. 

(i) For airplanes with a seat track having 

P/N 145–33669–001: Do general visual and 

detailed inspections of the seat track(s) for 

proper locking of the seat and excessive 

wear, and do any applicable corrective 

action, in accordance with Part I and II, as 

applicable, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 

145–53–0027, Revision 03, dated February 5, 

2004. Replace seat tracks that are found to 

have excessive wear within 50 flight hours 

after the inspection with a new seat track 

having P/N 145–33669–003 or 145–33669–

601. Do any other applicable corrective 

action before further flight. Repeat the 

general visual and detailed inspections 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight 

hours until the seat track is replaced by a 

new seat track having P/N 145–33669–003 or 

145–33669–601. 

(ii) For airplanes without a seat track 

having P/N 145–33669–001, no further action 

is required by this paragraph. 

(3) For airplanes having S/N 145002 

through 145560 inclusive: If any seat is found 

during the inspection required by paragraph 

(a)(1) of this AD that does not have a P/N and 

S/N specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this 

AD, within 500 flight hours after the effective 

date of this AD, do a general visual and 

detailed inspection of the pilot’s and copilot’s seats for proper locking of the seats, 

and do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective action in accordance with Part 

III of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–53–0027, 

Revision 03, dated February 5, 2004, except 

as provided by paragraph (d) of this AD. Do 

any corrective actions before further flight. 

Replacement 

(b) For airplanes with a SICMA seat(s) 

bearing a part number (P/N) listed in Table 

1 of this AD, within 1,000 flight hours after 

the effective date of this AD, replace the seat 

locking pin with a new, improved seat 

locking pin in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of SICMA Aero 

Seat Service Bulletin 147–25–020, Issue 2, 

dated December 22, 2003. For airplanes 

without any SICMA seat bearing a P/N listed 

in Table 1 of this AD, no further action is 

required by this paragraph. 

TABLE 1.—SICMA SEAT P/NS

Part Number 

1471610–00 

1471610–01 

1471610–02 

1471610–03 

1471611–00 

1471611–01 

1471611–02 

1471611–03 

Parts Installation 

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

SICMA seat bearing a P/N listed in Table 1 

of this AD may be installed on any airplane 

unless the seat locking pin has been replaced 

in accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. 

Certain Repairs 

(d) Where the EMBRAER service bulletin 

recommends contacting EMBRAER for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair per a method approved by either the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the 

Departamento de Aviacao Civil (or its 

delegated agent). 

Actions Accomplished Per Previous Issue of 

Service Bulletin 

(e) Accomplishment of the actions 

specified in EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–

53–0027, dated May 31, 2001; Revision 01, 

dated March 12, 2002; or Revision 02, dated 

January 24, 2003; before the effective date of 

this AD, is considered acceptable for 

compliance with the corresponding 

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD. 

(f) Accomplishment of the actions 

specified in SICMA Aero Seat Service 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67939 

Bulletin 147–25–020, dated November 11, 

2003; or Issue 1, dated December 3, 2003; 

before the effective date of this AD, is 

considered acceptable for compliance with 

the requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(g)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

FAA, is authorized to approve alternative 

methods of compliance (AMOCs) for this AD. 

(2) Before using any AMOC approved in 

accordance with 14 CFR 39.19 on any 

airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify 

the appropriate principal inspector in the 

FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding 

District Office. 

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in Brazilian airworthiness directive 2002–09–

01R1, dated June 2, 2004. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

25, 2005. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–22311 Filed 11–8–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19866; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–25–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –300F Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain Boeing Model 767–200, –300, 

and –300F series airplanes. The original 

NPRM would have required verifying 

the part and serial numbers of certain 

main landing gear (MLG) bogie beam 

pivot pins; replacing those pivot pins 

with new or overhauled pivot pins if 

necessary; and ultimately replacing all 

pivot pins with new, improved pivot 

pins. The original NPRM was prompted 

by reports indicating that numerous 

fractures of the MLG bogie beam pivot 

pin have been found and that some 

pivot pins may have had improper 

rework during manufacture. This action 

revises the original NPRM by adding 

new inspections; revising the inspection 

thresholds and repetitive intervals; and 

revising the compliance time for 

replacing all pivot pins with newmaterial pins. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to prevent fracture 

of the MLG bogie beam pivot pin, which 

could lead to possible loss of the MLG 

truck during takeoff or landing and 

consequent loss of control of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by December 

5, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

supplemental NPRM. 

• 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. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street 

SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of 

the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. 

This docket number is FAA–2004–

19866; the directorate identifier for this 

docket is 2004–NM–25–AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Candice Gerretsen, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98055–4056; telephone 

(425) 917–6428; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this supplemental NPRM. 

Send your comments to an address 

listed under ADDRESSES. Include 

‘‘Docket No. FAA–2004–19866; 

Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–25–AD’’

at the beginning of your comments. We 

specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

this supplemental NPRM. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

supplemental NPRM in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments submitted, 

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 supplemental NPRM. Using the 

search function of our docket 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 can review the DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you can visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You can 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 in the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in ADDRESSES. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after the Docket 

Management System (DMS) receives 

them. 

Discussion 

We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 

39 with a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) for an AD (the ‘‘original 

NPRM’’) for certain Boeing Model 767–

200, –300, and –300F series airplanes. 

The original NPRM was published in 

the Federal Register on December 16, 

2004 (69 FR 75270). The original NPRM 

proposed to require verifying the part 

and serial numbers of certain main 

landing gear (MLG) bogie beam pivot 

pins; replacing those pivot pins with 

new or overhauled pivot pins if 

necessary; and ultimately replacing all 

pivot pins with new, improved pivot 

pins. 

Actions Since Original NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the original NPRM, 

the manufacturer notified us that the 

parts necessary to accomplish the 

terminating action are not available in 

quantities that are sufficient for 

operators to accomplish the action 

within the proposed compliance time. 

In addition, the number of pivot pin 

failures has increased. This increase in 

failures combined with the limited