Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules 54747 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0150; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–325–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –400ER 

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 

NPRM for an airworthiness directive 

(AD) that applies to certain Boeing 

Model 767 series airplanes. The original 

NPRM would have superseded an 

existing AD that currently requires a 

one-time inspection for missing, 

damaged, or incorrectly installed parts 

in the separation link assembly on the 

deployment bar of the emergency escape 

system on the entry or service door, and 

installation of new parts if necessary. 

The original NPRM proposed to require 

replacing the separation link assembly 

on the applicable entry and service 

doors with an improved separation link 

assembly, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. The 

original NPRM also removed certain 

airplanes from the applicability. The 

original NPRM resulted from reports 

that entry and service doors did not 

open fully during deployment of 

emergency escape slides, and additional 

reports of missing snap rings. This 

action revises the original NPRM by 

adding a new inspection for 

discrepancies of the unloaded spring 

dimensions in the separation link 

assembly, and corrective actions if 

necessary. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to prevent failure 

of an entry or service door to open fully 

in the event of an emergency 

evacuation, which could impede exit 

from the airplane. This condition could 

result in injury to passengers or 

crewmembers. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by October 20, 

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: 

Keith Ladderud, Aerospace Engineer, 

Cabin Safety and Environmental 

Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6435; fax (425) 917–6590. 

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–2008–0150; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–325–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 

We proposed to amend part 39 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 39) with a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the 

‘‘original NPRM’’) to supersede AD 

2001–26–19, amendment 39–12585 (67 

FR 265, January 3, 2002). The original 

NPRM applied to certain Boeing Model 

767 series airplanes. The original NPRM 

was published in the Federal Register 

on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7690). The 

original NPRM proposed to require 

replacing the separation link assembly 

on the applicable entry and service 

doors with an improved separation link 

assembly, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Actions Since Issuance of Original 

NPRM 

Since we issued the original NPRM, 

Boeing has issued Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 767–25– 

0428, Revision 1, dated May 8, 2008 (we 

referred to the original service bulletin 

as the appropriate source of information 

for accomplishing the actions). Revision 

1 of the service bulletin adds procedures 

for inspecting unloaded spring 

dimensions in the separation link 

assembly for discrepancies (any nicks or 

scrapes and subsequent breakage or 

other permanent deformation such as 

bent tangs; out of tolerance cap screw) 

using the procedures specified in the 

component maintenance manual, and 

replacing any discrepant spring with a 

new spring. The service bulletin also 

adds new torque values for the cap 

screw. Accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information is 

intended to adequately address the 

unsafe condition. 

Comments 

We have considered the following 

comments on the original NPRM. 

Request for Changes to the Preamble of 

the Original NPRM 

Boeing provided the following 

comments to the original NPRM: 

• Boeing asks that the sentence ‘‘This 

proposed AD would also remove certain 

airplanes from the applicability,’’ be 

removed from the SUMMARY section of 

the original NPRM. Boeing states that it 

is unclear where or how certain 

airplanes have been removed from the 

applicability since the initial release of 

the service bulletin. 

• Boeing asks that the sentence ‘‘We 

have also removed Model 767–300F 

airplanes * * *’’ be removed from the 

‘‘Actions Since Existing AD Was 

Issued’’ section of the original NPRM. 

Boeing states that the separation links 

are not part of the Model 767 Freighter; 

therefore, freighters are not listed in the 

referenced service bulletin. Boeing adds 

that they should not be listed in the AD 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
54748 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

in the first place and should be 

removed. 

• Boeing asks that the word 

‘‘existing’’ be removed from the 

sentence ‘‘Therefore, we have 

determined that the existing separation 

link assembly must be secured with a 

nut and washer * * *’’ That sentence is 

also in the ‘‘Actions Since Existing AD 

Was Issued’’ section of the original 

NPRM. Boeing states that the nut and 

washer must be used with a new 

separation link assembly. 

• Boeing asks that the second through 

the fifth sentences of the ‘‘Relevant 

Service Information’’ section be 

removed. Boeing states that the 

objective of the requested action in the 

service bulletin is to bring the condition 

of the deployment bar assembly as near 

to the ‘‘just manufactured’’ condition as 

possible. Boeing notes that the 

requested action is a reminder to 

perform normal, standard maintenance 

practices and is not related to the root 

cause of the missing snap rings. 

We partially agree with the Boeing 

comments. 

We do not agree to change the 

SUMMARY section to remove the language 

which specified the subject airplanes 

were removed. That language was 

specified in the NPRM because Model 

767–300F airplanes were included in 

the applicability of AD 2001–26–19, but 

would not be included in the 

applicability of this supplemental 

NPRM. 

We acknowledge and agree that 

Boeing’s suggested changes to the other 

sections would further clarify the 

information specified in the original 

NRPM. However, the other sections of 

the original NRPM do not reappear in 

the supplemental NPRM. 

We have made no change to the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

FAA’s Determination and Proposed 

Requirements of the Supplemental 

NPRM 

The changes discussed under 

‘‘Actions Since Issuance of Original 

NPRM’’ expand the scope of the original 

NPRM; therefore, we have determined 

that it is necessary to reopen the 

comment period to provide additional 

opportunity for public comment on this 

supplemental NPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 1,225 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This proposed AD would affect about 

355 airplanes of U.S. registry. The new 

proposed actions would take up to 

about 6 work hours per airplane, at an 

average labor rate of $80 per work hour. 

Required parts would cost up to about 

$10,671 per airplane. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the new 

actions specified in this proposed AD 

for U.S. operators is $3,958,605, or 

$11,151 per airplane. 

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 have 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 that the 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 supplemental NPRM and placed it 

in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation. 

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 Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by removing amendment 39–12585 (67 

FR 265, January 3, 2002) and adding the 

following new airworthiness directive 

(AD): 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–0150; 

Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–325–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by October 20, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2001–26–19. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767– 

200, –300, and –400ER series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, as identified in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

767–25–0428, dated August 23, 2007. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from reports that entry 

and service doors did not open fully during 

deployment of emergency escape slides, and 

additional reports of missing snap rings. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent failure of an 

entry or service door to open fully in the 

event of an emergency evacuation, which 

could impede exit from the airplane. This 

condition could result in injury to passengers 

or crewmembers. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Replacement 

(f) Within 48 months after the effective 

date of this AD, replace the separation link 

assembly on the deployment bar of the 

emergency escape system on all the 

applicable entry and service doors with an 

improved separation link assembly, and do 

all the applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight, by 

accomplishing all of the applicable actions 

specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 767–25–0428, dated August 

23, 2007, or Revision 1, dated May 8, 2008. 

After the effective date of this AD only 

Revision 1 of the service bulletin may be 

used. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules 54749 

accordance with 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 

September 11, 2008. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–22220 Filed 9–22–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1007; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–135–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet 

Series 700, 701 & 702) Airplanes and 

Model CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet 

Series 900) 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–600–2C10/CL–600–2D24 aircraft 

fuel system against new fuel tank safety 

standards. The assessment showed that 

due to the close proximity of 

intrinsically safe fuel system wiring 

with other wiring, a single failure from 

wire chafing at various locations of the 

fuselage could result in an ignition 

source inside the fuel tank. In addition, 

chafing of the temperature sensor wiring 

against the high power wiring in the 

avionics compartment could lead to 

overheating of the temperature sensor 

and hot surface ignition. The presence 

of an ignition source inside the fuel tank 

could result in a 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 23, 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. 

FAA–2008–1007; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–135–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–2008–25, 

dated July 3, 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–600–2C10/ 

CL–600–2D24 aircraft fuel system against 

new fuel tank safety standards, introduced in 

Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual 

through Notice of Proposed Amendment 

(NPA) 2002–043. The identified noncompliances were assessed using Transport 

Canada Policy Letter No. 525–001 to 

determine if mandatory corrective action was 

required. 

The assessment showed that due to the 

close proximity of intrinsically safe fuel 

system wiring with other wiring, a single 

failure from wire chafing at various locations 

of the fuselage could result in an ignition 

source inside the fuel tank. In addition, 

chafing of the temperature sensor wiring 

against the high power wiring in the avionics 

compartment could lead to overheating of the 

temperature sensor and hot surface ignition. 

The presence of an ignition source inside the 

fuel tank could result in a fuel tank 

explosion. 

To correct the unsafe condition, this 

directive mandates the installation of conduit 

and the addition of spacers to protect fuel 

tank wiring. 

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 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS