[Federal Register: July 8, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 130)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 39433-39435]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jy05-9]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
[[Page 39433]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2005-21748; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-071-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 Series
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. For certain
airplanes, this proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for
discrepancies of the tube assemblies and insulation of the metered fire
extinguisher system and the bleed air duct couplings of the auxiliary
power unit (APU) located in the aft cargo compartment; and corrective
actions if necessary. For certain other airplanes, this proposed AD
would require a one-time inspection for sufficient clearance between
the fire extinguishing tube and the APU bleed air duct in the aft cargo
compartment, and modification if necessary. This proposed AD is
prompted by one report indicating that an operator found a hole in the
discharge tube assembly for the metered fire extinguishing system; and
another report indicating that an operator found chafing of the fire
extinguishing tube against the APU duct that resulted in a crack in the
tube. We are proposing this AD to prevent fire extinguishing agent from
leaking out of the tube assembly in the aft cargo compartment which, in
the event of a fire in the aft cargo compartment, could result in an
insufficient concentration of fire extinguishing agent, and consequent
inability of the fire extinguishing system to suppress the fire.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 22, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
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.
By 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-2005-21748; the directorate identifier for this
docket is 2005-NM-071-AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia Smith, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 917-6484; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2005-21748;
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-071-AD'' in the subject line of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments submitted by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, 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 proposed AD. Using the search function of
that 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 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 of the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System
(DMS) receives them.
Discussion
We have received a report indicating that an operator found a hole
in the discharge tube assembly for the metered fire extinguishing
system in the aft cargo compartment at station (STA) 1197, on a Model
767-300 series airplane. The hole in the tube assembly was the result
of a chafing condition between an auxiliary power unit (APU) bleed air
duct coupling and the tube assembly. The tube assembly was attached to
the stanchion, approximately 1.75 inches below the correct location.
The operator also found incorrect installation of the tube assembly on
three additional airplanes. Another report was received indicating that
an operator found chafing of the fire extinguishing tube against the
APU duct on a Model 767-300ER series airplane, resulting in a crack in
the tube at STA 1357. A crack or hole in the tube could allow leakage
of the fire extinguishing agent into an area outside the cargo
compartment in
[[Page 39434]]
the case of an aft cargo fire. In the event of a fire in the aft cargo
compartment, these conditions could result in an insufficient
concentration of fire extinguishing agent, and consequent inability of
the fire extinguishing system to suppress the fire.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-26A0123, dated
August 22, 2002. The service bulletin describes procedures for an
inspection for sufficient clearance between the fire extinguishing tube
and the APU bleed air duct on the left sidewall from STA 1355 to STA
1365; and modification of the fire extinguishing tube assembly if
necessary.
Service Bulletin 767-26A0123 refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
26-0118, Revision 2, dated December 21, 2004, as the appropriate source
of service information for accomplishing the modification of the fire
extinguishing tube assembly. The modification involves replacing one
fire extinguishing tube assembly with two fire extinguishing tube
assemblies and support provisions, and doing a functional test of the
aft metered discharge line.
We have also reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-26A0130,
dated December 2, 2004. The service bulletin divides the affected
airplanes into Groups 1 and 2, and describes procedures for repetitive
detailed inspections for discrepancies of the tube assemblies and
insulation of the metered fire extinguishing system in the aft cargo
compartment; repetitive general visual inspections for discrepancies of
the APU bleed air duct couplings and the tube assemblies of the fire
extinguisher in the aft cargo compartment; and corrective actions if
necessary. The station locations for the inspections vary, depending on
the airplane group specified in the service bulletin. The service
bulletin also describes procedures for a functional test.
The discrepancies include signs of chafing or contact between the
fire extinguisher tube assemblies, the APU bleed air duct couplings
support provisions, and the insulation; loose duct couplings; and
incorrect placement of the tube assembly support provisions, and/or the
duct couplings.
The corrective actions include repairing or replacing any damaged
tube assembly with a new assembly; replacing any damaged insulation
with new insulation; applying the correct torque to any loose duct
couplings; and moving tube assemblies and/or duct couplings to the
correct location.
The installation of tube assemblies in the correct location
eliminates the need for the repetitive inspections, provided initial
inspections and any necessary corrective actions have been done.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which
would require accomplishing the actions specified in Service Bulletin
767-26A0123 and Service Bulletin 767-26A0130, described previously,
except as discussed under ``Difference Between the Proposed AD and
Service Information.''
Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information
Service Bulletin 767-26A0123 recommends that the actions therein be
accomplished ``as soon as manpower, materials, and facilities are
available.'' We find that such a non-specific compliance time may not
ensure that the proposed actions are accomplished in a timely manner.
In developing an appropriate compliance time for these actions, we
considered the safety implications, operators' normal maintenance
schedules, and the compliance time recommended by the airplane
manufacturer. In consideration of these items, we have determined that
within 24 months or 8,000 flight hours, whichever is first, represents
an appropriate interval of time wherein the proposed actions can be
accomplished during scheduled maintenance intervals for the majority of
affected operators, and an acceptable level of safety can be
maintained. This compliance time is consistent with the recommendation
of the airplane manufacturer.
Service Bulletin 767-26A0123 recommends concurrently accomplishing
the service bulletins specified in the table in paragraph 1.B., titled
``Concurrent Requirements,'' for Group 2 airplanes; however, this
proposed AD would not include that requirement. The concurrent service
bulletins describe procedures for installing a metered fire
extinguishing system, but this proposed AD is only applicable to
airplanes that already have that system installed.
These differences have been coordinated with the manufacturer.
Clarification of Inspection Type
Service Bulletin 767-26A0123 refers only to an ``inspection'' for
sufficient clearance between the fire extinguishing tube and the APU
duct. We have determined that the procedures in the service bulletin
should be described as a ``general visual inspection.'' A note has been
included in this AD to define this type of inspection.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 734 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 281 airplanes of
U.S. registry.
The proposed inspection specified in Service Bulletin 767-26A0123
would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of
$65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
proposed inspection for U.S. operators is $18,265, or $65 per airplane.
The proposed inspections specified in Service Bulletin 767-26A0130
would take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of
$65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
proposed inspections for U.S. operators is $36,530, or $130 per
airplane, per inspection cycle.
The proposed functional test specified in Service Bulletin 767-
26A0130 would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor
rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost
of the proposed functional test for U.S. operators, is $18,265, or $65
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.
[[Page 39435]]
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 proposed AD. 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2005-21748; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
071-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this AD action by August 22, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 series
airplanes; certificated in any category; as specified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD.
(1) Airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
26A0130, dated December 2, 2004.
(2) Group 1 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-26A0123, dated August 22, 2002.
(3) Group 2 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-26A0123, dated August 22, 2002, on which the applicable
service bulletin specified in the table in paragraph 1.B., titled
``Concurrent Requirements'' has been accomplished.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by one report indicating that an
operator found a hole in the discharge tube assembly for the metered
fire extinguishing system; and another report indicating that an
operator found chafing of the fire extinguishing tube against the
auxiliary power unit (APU) duct that resulted in a crack in the
tube. We are issuing this AD to prevent fire extinguishing agent
from leaking out of the tube assembly in the aft cargo compartment
which, in the event of a fire in the aft cargo compartment, could
result in an insufficient concentration of fire extinguishing agent,
and consequent inability of the fire extinguishing system to
suppress the fire.
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.
Repetitive Inspections
(f) Within 24 months or 8,000 flight hours after the effective
date of this AD, whichever is first: Accomplish the actions required
by paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
(1) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-26A0130, dated December 2, 2004: Perform general visual and
detailed inspections for discrepancies of the tube assemblies and
insulation of the metered fire extinguisher system and the bleed air
duct couplings of the APU located in the aft cargo compartment and
any applicable corrective actions and functional test, by doing all
the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-26A0130, dated December 2,
2004. Do any applicable corrective actions before further flight in
accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months or 8,000 flight
hours, whichever is first. Installation of the tube assembly in the
correct location, in accordance with the service bulletin,
terminates the repetitive inspections for that assembly only.
(2) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-26A0123, dated August 22, 2002: Perform a general visual
inspection for sufficient clearance between the fire extinguishing
tube and the APU duct on the left sidewall from station 1355 through
1365 inclusive, and do any applicable modification, by doing all the
actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-26A0123, dated August 22, 2002. Do any
applicable modification before further flight.
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
enhance visual access to all exposed 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.''
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(g) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 29, 2005.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-13433 Filed 7-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P