Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Proposed Rules 53773 

specified in paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD, 

as applicable. 

(i) For Model A330 series airplanes: Within 

16,500 flight cycles after replacing the 

bracket. 

(ii) For Model A340–200 and –300 series 

airplanes: Within 9,700 flight cycles after 

replacing the bracket. 

(j) If both flanges of a bracket are found 

broken during any inspection required by 

this AD: Before further flight, replace the 

bracket as specified in paragraph (i) of this 

AD and perform any applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions (which 

may include inspections for damage to 

surrounding structure caused by the broken 

bracket, and corrective actions for any 

damage that is found), in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its 

delegated agent). 

Replacement of Brackets/Investigative and 

Corrective Actions 

(k) Except as required by paragraph (i)(1) 

of this AD: Within 72 months after February 

8, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2006–26– 

12), replace existing brackets having P/N 

F2511012920000 or P/N F2511012920095 

with titanium-reinforced brackets having P/N 

F2511305220096; and perform any related 

investigative and corrective actions (which 

may include detailed inspections for cracking 

of the bracket or damage to surrounding 

structure caused by a broken bracket, and 

applicable corrective actions for any damage 

that is found); in accordance with the 

applicable service bulletin. If any crack is 

found, before further flight, repair in 

accordance with the applicable service 

bulletin. Replacement of the affected bracket 

with a titanium-reinforced bracket having P/ 

N F2511305220096 ends the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (h) or (i) 

of this AD. Although the service bulletins 

specify to submit certain information to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

New Requirements of This AD 

One-Time Inspection 

(l) For airplanes on which the actions 

required by paragraph (k) of this AD have 

been accomplished before the effective date 

of this AD: At the applicable time in 

paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this AD, remove 

the fasteners of the titanium-reinforced 

bracket and, if a fastener is broken, do a 

detailed inspection for cracking of the 

horizontal beam. Do all applicable corrective 

actions before further flight. Do all actions in 

accordance with the applicable service 

bulletin. Where the applicable service 

bulletin specifies to contact Airbus, before 

further flight, repair in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA (or 

its delegated agent). 

(1) For Model A330 series airplanes: Prior 

to the accumulation of 16,500 total flight 

cycles, or within 20 months after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(2) For Model A340–200 and –300 series 

airplanes: Prior to the accumulation of 12,400 

total flight cycles, or within 20 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(m)(1) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send 

information to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1138; fax (425) 227–1149. 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. 

(2) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2006–26–12 are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of this AD. 

Related Information 

(n) EASA airworthiness directives 2007– 

0281 and 2007–0282, both dated November 

6, 2007, also address the subject of this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 9, 2008. 

Michael J. Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–21727 Filed 9–16–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0977; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–124–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet 

Series 100 & 440) 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 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

Bombardier Aerospace has completed a 

system safety review of the CL–600–2B19 

aircraft fuel system against the new fuel tank 

safety standards * * *. 

The assessment showed that insufficient 

electrical bonding between the refuel/defuel 

shutoff valves and the aircraft structure could 

occur due to the presence of a nonconductive gasket (Gask-O-Seal). In addition, 

it was also determined that the presence of 

an anodic coating on the shutoff valve 

electrical conduit connection fitting could 

affect electrical bonding. The above 

conditions, if not corrected, could result in 

arcing and potential ignition source inside 

the fuel tank during lightning strikes and 

consequent fuel tank explosion. 

* * * * * 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 17, 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 W12–40, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office 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 Operations 

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: 

Rocco Viselli, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, 

ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 

11590; telephone (516) 228–7331; fax 

(516) 794–5531. 

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. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
53774 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

FAA–2008–0977; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–124–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 based on 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 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Canada, has issued Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2008–20, 

dated June 12, 2008 (referred to after 

this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

Bombardier Aerospace has completed a 

system safety review of the CL–600–2B19 

aircraft fuel system against the new fuel tank 

safety standards, introduced in Chapter 525 

of the Airworthiness Manual through Notice 

of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002–043. 

The identified non-compliances were 

assessed using Transport Canada Policy 

Letter No. 525–001 to determine if mandatory 

corrective action is required. 

The assessment showed that insufficient 

electrical bonding between the refuel/defuel 

shutoff valves and the aircraft structure could 

occur due to the presence of a nonconductive gasket (Gask-O-Seal). In addition, 

it was also determined that the presence of 

an anodic coating on the shutoff valve 

electrical conduit connection fitting could 

affect electrical bonding. The above 

conditions, if not corrected, could result in 

arcing and potential ignition source inside 

the fuel tank during lightning strikes and 

consequent fuel tank explosion. 

To correct the unsafe condition, this 

directive mandates the modification of the 

[shutoff valves in the] refuel/defuel system. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

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 

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. 

Relevant Service Information 

Bombardier has issued Service 

Bulletin 601R–28–053, Revision C, 

dated March 14, 2006. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 970 products of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 26 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $1,041 per 

product. Where the service information 

lists required parts costs that are 

covered under warranty, we have 

assumed that there will be no charge for 

these costs. As we do not control 

warranty coverage for affected parties, 

some parties may incur costs higher 

than estimated here. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$3,027,370, or $3,121 per product. 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Proposed Rules 53775 

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 

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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it 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: 

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): 

Docket No. FAA–2008–0977; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–124–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by October 

17, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model 

CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) 

airplanes, certificated in any category, as 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of 

this AD. 

(1) Airplanes having serial numbers 7003 

through 7067 and 7069 through 7939 that 

have not had the modification of the refuel/ 

defuel shutoff valves incorporated according 

to the original issue of Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 601R–28–053, dated July 12, 2004; 

(2) Airplanes having serial numbers 7989, 

7990, and 8000 through 8034. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28: Fuel. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

Bombardier Aerospace has completed a 

system safety review of the CL–600–2B19 

aircraft fuel system against the new fuel tank 

safety standards, introduced in Chapter 525 

of the Airworthiness Manual through Notice 

of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002–043. 

The identified non-compliances were 

assessed using Transport Canada Policy 

Letter No. 525–001 to determine if mandatory 

corrective action is required. 

The assessment showed that insufficient 

electrical bonding between the refuel/defuel 

shutoff valves and the aircraft structure could 

occur due to the presence of a nonconductive gasket (Gask-O-Seal). In addition, 

it was also determined that the presence of 

an anodic coating on the shutoff valve 

electrical conduit connection fitting could 

affect electrical bonding. The above 

conditions, if not corrected, could result in 

arcing and potential ignition source inside 

the fuel tank during lightning strikes and 

consequent fuel tank explosion. 

To correct the unsafe condition, this 

directive mandates the modification of the 

[shutoff valves in the] refuel/defuel system. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Within 5,000 flight hours after the 

effective date of this AD, modify the refuel/ 

defuel system in the center wing fuel tank in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

601R–28–053, Revision C, dated March 14, 

2006. 

(2) Modifying the refuel/defuel system is 

also acceptable for compliance with the 

requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD if 

done before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with one of the following service 

bulletins: Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R– 

28–053, Revision A, dated April 21, 2005; or 

Revision B, dated September 15, 2005. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Rocco 

Viselli, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and 

Propulsion Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New 

York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, 

Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 

228–7331; fax (516) 794–5531. 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. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2008–20, dated June 12, 2008; 

and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–28– 

053, Revision C, dated March 14, 2006; for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 9, 2008. 

Michael J. Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–21730 Filed 9–16–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Parts 129 and 165 

[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0446] 

Beverages; Bottled Water 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is proposing to 

amend its bottled water regulations to 

require that source water, which is 

currently subject to weekly 

microbiological testing, be tested 

specifically for total coliform as is done 

for finished bottled water products. 

Further, FDA is proposing that if any 

coliform organisms are detected in 

source water or finished bottled water 

products, bottled water manufacturers 

would be required to test for the 

bacterium Escherichia coli (E. coli), an 

indicator of fecal contamination. FDA 

also is proposing to amend the 

adulteration provision of the bottled 

water standard to reflect the possibility 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS