Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 130 / Friday, July 5, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 35127

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein 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 Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

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

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

96–14–01 Boeing: Amendment 39–9683.

Docket 96–NM–128–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–200 ‘‘combi’’

airplanes and Model 747–300 ‘‘combi’’

airplanes; modified in accordance with Heath

Tecna Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)

SA2365NM or STC SA5108NM; certificated

in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent leakage of oxygen from the

passenger oxygen supply lines, which could

prevent an adequate flow of oxygen from

reaching passengers in the event of a

deployment of the passenger oxygen masks,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 15 months after the effective

date of this AD, accomplish the requirements

of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD in

accordance with Heath Tecna Service

Bulletin H0364–35–001, dated March 15,

1996:

(1) Remove the oxygen hose assembly, part

number (P/N) 173479–16; the two bushings,

P/N MS21915–12–10 and P/N AN893–19D;

the tube, P/N HPD5–74223–7; and the two

nuts, P/N AN818–12D. And

(2) Install a union-bulkhead, P/N

MS21924D10, and oxygen hose assembly, P/

N 45901–10–0200.

(b) Prior to further fight after

accomplishing the installation required by

paragraph (a)(2) of this AD, perform an

oxygen system leak test, in accordance with

Boeing 747 Maintenance Manual, Chapter

35.21.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(e) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Heath Tecna Service Bulletin H0364–

35–001, dated March 15, 1996. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Heath

Tecna Interiors, 3225 Woburn Street,

Bellingham, Washington 98226. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

July 22, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 25,

1996.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–16653 Filed 7–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–154–AD; Amendment

39–9684; AD 96–14–02]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes Equipped

With Pratt & Whitney Model JT9D–7R4

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 767

series airplanes, that requires a visual

inspection to verify proper clearance

between the number 18 fuel nozzle

secondary transfer fuel tube and the

pylon drain tube of the engine, and

various follow-on actions. This

amendment also requires the

installation of clamps and associated

fasteners between the environmental

control system (ECS) controller tube and

the pylon drain tube. This amendment

is prompted by reports of chafing of the

number 18 fuel nozzle secondary

transfer fuel tube of the engine due to

an improperly installed or loose pylon

drain tube. The actions specified by this

AD are intended to prevent such

chafing, which could lead to subsequent

fuel leakage and a possible engine fire.

DATES: Effective August 9, 1996.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of August 9,

1996.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. This

information may be examined at the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Monica Merritt, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
35128 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 130 / Friday, July 5, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Washington; telephone (206) 227–2683;

fax (206) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Boeing

Model 767 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

January 31, 1996 (61 FR 3340). That

action proposed to require a visual

inspection to verify proper clearance

between the number 18 fuel nozzle

secondary transfer fuel tube and the

pylon drain tube of the engine, and

various follow-on actions. That action

also proposed to require the installation

of clamps and associated fasteners

between the environmental control

system (ECS) controller tube and the

pylon drain tube.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Proposal

One commenter supports the

proposal.

Request To Revise Description of

Affected Component

One commenter, Boeing, requests that

all references in the proposed rule to the

‘‘ECS’’ controller tube be changed to

‘‘the high pressure controller muscle air

tube.’’ The commenter states that the

high pressure controller and muscle air

tube are components of the airplane

pneumatic system, which provides

engine bleed air to various airplane

systems, including the ECS.

The FAA agrees with the commenter’s

suggestion that the revised wording may

be a more accurate description of the

subject component. However, the

service information (Boeing Service

Bulletin 767–71A0082) that is

referenced in the AD uses the term ‘‘ECS

controller tube’’ throughout the

procedures it contains relative to the

modification. In light of this, the FAA

finds that using the term ‘‘ECS

controller tube’’ in the final rule will

maintain consistency with the

terminology used in the referenced

service bulletin and, thereby, will avoid

confusion.

Request To Revise Description of

Service History

This same commenter requests that

the description of the incidents that

prompted the AD be revised. The

commenter points to a specific

statement that appeared in the

Discussion section of the preamble to

the notice: ‘‘In the engine fire incident,

investigation revealed that the cause of

the chafing was attributed to the

installation of the wrong engine fuel

manifold, which did not provide for

adequate clearance for the fuel tube.’’

The commenter states that subsequent

investigation of this particular incident

revealed that an acceptable clearance

could be maintained even if the wrong

configuration of number 18 fuel tube

was installed. The contributing factor to

the chafing of the number 18 fuel tube

was the mis-installation of the pylon

drain tube.

The FAA acknowledges this new

information. However, it in no way

affects the intent of or need for this AD.

Since the Discussion section is not

repeated in the final rule, no change to

the rule is necessary.

Request To Clarify Damage

Specifications

This same commenter requests that

proposed paragraph (a)(2) be revised to

clarify the amount of damage to the

number 18 fuel tube and the pylon drain

tube of the engine that would require

replacement or repair of those items.

The commenter points out that the

damage specifications indicated in the

proposal are different from those

specified in both the 767 Maintenance

Manual and the Pratt & Whitney JT9D

Engine Manual.

The FAA concurs that clarification is

necessary. Based on information

contained in the two manuals

referenced by the commenter, the FAA

finds that repair or replacement must be

accomplished if damage to the number

18 fuel tube is greater than 0.003 inch,

and if damage to the pylon drain tube

is greater than 0.004 inch. Paragraphs

(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of the final rule

have been changed accordingly.

Additionally, those paragraphs have

been revised to include reference to the

767 Maintenance Manual and the Pratt

& Whitney JT9D Engine Manual as

sources of information relative to

damage measurements.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

One commenter requests that the

compliance time for accomplishing the

inspection be extended from the

proposed 6 months to 12 months. The

commenter, a non-U.S. operator,

requests this extension in order to

accommodate the modification of a

number of engines in its fleet that

currently are equipped with different

clamps.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to extend the

compliance time. In developing an

appropriate compliance time for this

action, the FAA considered not only the

degree of urgency associated with

addressing the subject unsafe condition,

but the availability of required parts and

the practical aspect of accomplishing

the inspection and installing the

modification within an interval of time

that parallels normally scheduled

maintenance for the majority of affected

operators. The FAA has found that an

ample number of modification parts will

be available to accommodate the

affected fleet within the 6-month

compliance period. In light of these

factors, the FAA finds that the

compliance time, as proposed, is

appropriate. However, under the

provisions of paragraph (b) of the final

rule, the FAA may approve requests for

adjustments to the compliance time if

data are submitted to substantiate that

such an adjustment would provide an

acceptable level of safety.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 93 Model

767 series airplanes equipped with Pratt

& Whitney Model JT9D–7R4 engines of

the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 30

airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected

by this AD, that it will take

approximately 4 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

will cost approximately $31 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $8,130, or $271 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein 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 Executive Order 12612,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 130 / Friday, July 5, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 35129

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

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

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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:

96–14–02 Boeing: Amendment 39–9684.

Docket 95–NM–154–AD.

Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes

having line position 1 through 329, inclusive;

equipped with Pratt & Whitney Model JT9D–

7R4 engines; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent chafing of the number 18 fuel

nozzle secondary transfer fuel tube of the

engine, and subsequent fuel leakage and

possible engine fire, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, perform a visual inspection to

verify proper clearance (0.5 inch) between

the number 18 fuel nozzle secondary transfer

fuel tube and the pylon drain tube of the

engine.

(1) If the clearance is equal to or greater

than 0.5 inch: Prior to further flight, install

clamps and associated fasteners between the

environmental control system (ECS) and the

pylon drain tube, in accordance with Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 767–71A0082, dated

July 6, 1995.

(2) If the clearance is less than 0.5 inch:

Prior to further flight, perform a visual

inspection to detect damage of the number 18

fuel nozzle secondary transfer fuel tube and

the pylon drain tube.

(i) If no damage is detected; or if any

damage to the number 18 fuel nozzle

secondary transfer tube is less than or equal

to 0.003 inch deep, as specified in Section

72–09–71 of Pratt & Whitney JT9D Engine

Manual, and if any damage to the drain tube

is less than or equal to 0.004 inch deep, as

specified in the Boeing 767 Maintenance

Manual 28–22–07: Prior to further flight,

relocate the pylon drain tube to meet the 0.5

inch specification. After accomplishing the

relocation, prior to further flight, install the

clamps and associated fasteners between the

ECS and the pylon drain tube, in accordance

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–

71A0082, dated July 6, 1995.

(ii) If any damage to the number 18 fuel

tube is greater than 0.003 inch deep, as

specified in Section 72–09–71 of the Pratt &

Whitney JT9D Engine Manual; or if any

damage to the drain tube is greater than 0.004

inch deep, as specified in the Boeing 767

Maintenance manual 28–22–07: Prior to

further flight, repair or replace the damaged

tube, in accordance with Section 28–00–10 of

the Boeing 767 Overhaul Manual. After

accomplishing the repair or replacement,

prior to further flight, install the clamps and

associated fasteners between the ECS and the

pylon drain tube, in accordance with Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 767–71A0082, dated

July 6, 1995.

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) The installation of the clamps and

associated fasteners shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 767–71A0082, dated July 6, 1995.

This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

August 9, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 25,

1996.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–16652 Filed 7–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 522

Implantation or Injectable Dosage

Form New Animal Drugs; Ceftiofur

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is amending the

animal drug regulations to reflect

approval of a supplemental new animal

drug application (NADA) filed by The

Upjohn Co. The supplemental NADA

provides for a revised indication for use

of a reconstituted solution of ceftiofur

sterile powder for injection in day-old

chicks for control of mortality

associated with Escherichia coli

organisms susceptible to ceftiofur and

for use of the reconstituted injection in

day-old turkey poults for the same

indication.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 5, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George K. Haibel, Center for Veterinary

Medicine (HFV–133), Food and Drug

Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,

Rockville, MD 20855, 301–594–1644.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, MI 49001, is

sponsor of supplemental NADA 140–

338, which provides for use of Naxcel

Sterile Powder (ceftiofur sodium) as a

50 milligrams per milliliter

reconstituted injectable for use in cattle,

swine, day-old chicks, horses, and dogs.

The supplemental NADA provides for:

(1) A revised indication for use in