50894 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed before 

further flight after the effective date of this 

AD, unless the actions have already been 

done. 

(f) Inspect the blade pitch change operating 

link and eyebolt fork assembly for: 

(1) Seizure (the link and eyebolt are seized 

if the torque required to move the link is 300 

inch pounds or more); and 

(2) Cadmium plating on the mating 

surfaces between the operating link and 

eyebolt fork and the holes through the 

eyebolt fork and the operating link. 

(g) If the link and eyebolt fork are not 

seized and have not been cadmium plated, 

they may remain in service. 

(h) If the link and eyebolt fork are not 

seized but cadmium plating is found in the 

prohibited areas, remove the plating by 

means of wet or dry silicon carbide paper, 

fine or medium grade, and conduct a 

magnetic crack test. If no cracks are found, 

the assembly may remain in service until the 

next propeller overhaul for air carrier 

airplanes and airplanes under a continuous 

maintenance program or for 3,300 hours 

time-in-service after the effective date of this 

AD for all other airplanes. At the next 

propeller overhaul for air carrier airplanes 

and airplanes under a continuous 

maintenance program, or within 3,300 hours 

time-in-service after the effective date of this 

AD for all other airplanes, heat treat the links 

and eyebolt forks found to have been 

cadmium plated, to remove embrittlement. 

Use Dowty Rotol Service Bulletin No. 61–

754, dated June 12, 1970, to perform the heat 

treatment. 

(i) If the link and eyebolt fork are seized, 

remove the link and eyebolt fork from service 

and replace them with an assembly having a 

part number approved for that model 

propeller that has not been cadmium plated 

in the prohibited areas. 

(j) If the link or eyebolt fork are found to 

be cracked during the inspection in 

paragraph (h) of this AD, remove the cracked 

part from service and replace it with a part 

having a part number approved for that 

model propeller that has not been cadmium 

plated. 

(k) The inspection required by paragraph 

(f) of this AD need not be performed and the 

propeller may remain in service if: 

(1) The operator can show that no 

cadmium plating exists in the prohibited 

areas of that propeller; or 

(2) It is a new propeller that has never been 

overhauled. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(l) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to 

approve alternative methods of compliance 

for this AD if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(m) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace 

Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 

New England Executive Park, Burlington, 

MA 01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov; 

telephone (781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–

7170, for more information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

August 22, 2008. 

Carlos Pestana, 

Acting Assistant Manager, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–20081 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0934; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–113–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Model DC–9–30, DC–9–40, 

and DC–9–50 Series Airplanes, Model 

DC–9–81 (MD–81), DC–9–82 (MD–82), 

DC–9–83 (MD–83), and DC–9–87 (MD–

87) Airplanes, and Model MD–88 and 

MD–90–30 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

McDonnell Douglas airplanes listed 

above. This proposed AD would require 

modifying the fuel boost pumps for the 

center wing, and forward or aft auxiliary 

fuel tanks. This proposed AD results 

from fuel system reviews conducted by 

the manufacturer. We are proposing this 

AD to prevent possible sources of 

ignition in a fuel tank caused by an 

electrical fault or uncommanded dry 

operation of the fuel boost pumps. An 

ignition source in the fuel tank could 

result in a fire or an explosion and 

consequent loss of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 14, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, 

California 90846, Attention: Data and 

Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A 

(D800–0024). 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serj 

Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

telephone (562) 627–5254; fax (562) 

627–5210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2008–0934; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–113–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

The FAA has examined the 

underlying safety issues involved in fuel 

tank explosions on several large 

transport airplanes, including the 

adequacy of existing regulations, the 

service history of airplanes subject to 

those regulations, and existing 

maintenance practices for fuel tank 

systems. As a result of those findings, 

we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport 

Airplane Fuel Tank System Design 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 50895 

Review, Flammability Reduction and 

Maintenance and Inspection 

Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7, 

2001). In addition to new airworthiness 

standards for transport airplanes and 

new maintenance requirements, this 

rule included Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’

Amendment 21–78, and subsequent 

Amendments 21–82 and 21–83). 

Among other actions, SFAR 88 

requires certain type design (i.e., type 

certificate (TC) and supplemental type 

certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate 

that their fuel tank systems can prevent 

ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This 

requirement applies to type design 

holders for large turbine-powered 

transport airplanes and for subsequent 

modifications to those airplanes. It 

requires them to perform design reviews 

and to develop design changes and 

maintenance procedures if their designs 

do not meet the new fuel tank safety 

standards. As explained in the preamble 

to the rule, we intended to adopt 

airworthiness directives to mandate any 

changes found necessary to address 

unsafe conditions identified as a result 

of these reviews. 

In evaluating these design reviews, we 

have established four criteria intended 

to define the unsafe conditions 

associated with fuel tank systems that 

require corrective actions. The 

percentage of operating time during 

which fuel tanks are exposed to 

flammable conditions is one of these 

criteria. The other three criteria address 

the failure types under evaluation: 

Single failures, single failures in 

combination with a latent condition(s), 

and in-service failure experience. For all 

four criteria, the evaluations included 

consideration of previous actions taken 

that may mitigate the need for further 

action. 

We have determined that the actions 

identified in this AD are necessary to 

reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result 

in fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

Boeing has determined a need to 

protect the fuel boost pump stator lead 

wires from contacting the pump rotor/ 

shaft assembly. Lead wire contact and 

the resulting chafing may result in an 

ignition source (energized rotor 

assembly) being produced in the fuel 

boost pump inlet that could propagate 

into the fuel tank when the fuel boost 

pump inlet is not fully covered by fuel. 

Replacement of the fuel boost pumps 

will minimize the risk of potential 

ignition sources that may occur within 

the fuel tanks at critical fuel boost pump 

locations in the center wing, and 

forward or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. An 

ignition source in the fuel tank could 

result in a fire or an explosion and 

consequent loss of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Service 

Bulletins DC9–28–212 (for Model DC–

9–30, DC–9–40, and DC–9–50 series 

airplanes, and Model DC–9–81 (MD–

81), DC–9–82 (MD–82), DC–9–83 (MD–

83), DC–9–87 (MD–87), and MD–88 

airplanes) and MD90–28–010, (for MD–

90–30 airplanes), both dated February 

22, 2008. The service bulletins describe 

procedures for modifying the fuel boost 

pumps for the center wing, and forward 

or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. The 

modification includes changing or 

replacing the boost pumps, as 

applicable. The change includes 

incorporating a stator lead wire position 

retention feature. 

The Boeing service bulletins 

recommend concurrent accomplishment 

of the modification in Argo-Tech 

Service Bulletin 398000–28–2, dated 

November 8, 2007. The Argo-Tech 

Service Bulletin describes procedures 

for modifying the fuel boost pumps. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all relevant information and 

determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of these same 

type designs. This proposed AD would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the Boeing service 

information described previously. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 804 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. The following table provides 

the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with the modification specified 

in this proposed AD. The fleet cost is 

estimated to be between $1,246,200 and 

$13,087,512. 

Airplane group Work 

hours 

Average labor 

rate per hour Parts Cost per product 

Group 1, Configurations 1 and 2 ....... 1 $80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,550 and $16,118. 

Group 2, Configurations 1 and 2; 

Group 7, Configuration 2.

2 80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,630 and $16,198. 

Group 3, Configurations 1 and 2 ....... 3 80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,710 and $16,278. 

Group 4, Configurations 1 and 2 ....... 1 80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,550 and $16,118. 

Group 5, Configurations 1 and 2 ....... 2 80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,630 and $16,198. 

Group 6, Configurations 1 and 2; 

Group 8, Configurations 1 and 2.

1 80 Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............ Between $1,550 and $16,118. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
50896 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2008–

0934; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–

113–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by October 

14, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas 

Model DC–9–31, DC–9–32, DC–9–32 (VC–

9C), DC–9–32F, DC–9–32F (C–9A, C–9B), 

DC–9–33F, DC–9–34, DC–9–34F, DC–9–41, 

DC–9–51, DC–9–81 (MD–81), DC–9–82 (MD–

82), DC–9–83 (MD–83), and DC–9–87 (MD–

87), MD–88, and MD–90–30 airplanes; 

certificated in any category; as identified in 

Boeing Service Bulletins DC9–28–212 and 

MD90–28–010, both dated February 22, 2008. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent possible 

sources of ignition in a fuel tank caused by 

electrical fault or uncommanded dry 

operation of the fuel boost pumps. An 

ignition source in the fuel tank could result 

in a fire or an explosion and consequent loss 

of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

Modification 

(f) Within 60 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Modify the fuel boost pumps 

for the center wing, and forward or aft 

auxiliary fuel tanks, as applicable, by doing 

all the applicable actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin DC9–28–212 or MD90–28–

010, both dated February 22, 2008, as 

applicable. 

Prior or Concurrent Action 

(g) Prior to or concurrently with 

accomplishing the modification required by 

paragraph (f) of this AD: Do the modification 

specified in Argo-Tech Service Bulletin 

398000–28–2, dated November 8, 2007. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Serj 

Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los Angeles 

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712–

4137; telephone (562) 627–5254; fax (562) 

627–5210; has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

21, 2008. 

Kevin Hull, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–20082 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0933; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–261–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 777 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to all Boeing 

Model 777 airplanes. The existing AD 

requires, for the drive mechanism of the 

horizontal stabilizer, repetitive detailed 

inspections for discrepancies, repetitive 

lubrication of the ballnut and ballscrew, 

repetitive measurements of the freeplay 

between the ballnut and the ballscrew, 

and corrective action if necessary. This 

proposed AD would revise the 

compliance times of the existing AD. 

This proposed AD results from a report 

of extensive corrosion of a ballscrew in 

the drive mechanism of the horizontal 

stabilizer on a Boeing Model 757 

airplane, which is similar in design to 

the ballscrew on Model 777 airplanes. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent an 

undetected failure of the primary load 

path for the ballscrew in the drive 

mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer 

and subsequent wear and failure of the 

secondary load path, which could lead 

to loss of control of the horizontal 

stabilizer and consequent loss of control 

of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 14, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6490; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS