
[Federal Register: September 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 187)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 49798-49801]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29se09-4]                         


[[Page 49798]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0682; Directorate Identifier 2001-NM-237-AD; 
Amendment 39-16025; AD 2009-20-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

 
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Boeing Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes, 
that requires replacing certain door-mounted escape slides and slide-
raft assemblies with new slide-raft assemblies. This AD also requires 
the following actions, as applicable: replacing certain escape system 
latches with new latches; modifying or replacing certain counterbalance 
assemblies with new counterbalance assemblies; and adjusting the door 
counterbalance system. The actions specified by this AD are intended to 
prevent the escape slides and slide-rafts of the forward and mid-cabin 
entry and service doors from being too steep for evacuation in the 
event that the airplane rotates onto the aft fuselage into the extreme 
tip-back condition. In the extreme tip-back condition, the forward and 
mid-cabin exits could result in steeper sliding angles, which could 
cause injury to passengers and crewmembers during an emergency 
evacuation. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe 
condition.

DATES: Effective November 3, 2009.
    The incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of November 3, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; 
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; e-mail 
me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. This 
information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, 
SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this 
material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221 or 425-227-1152.
    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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, 
any comments received, and other information. The address for the 
Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management 
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Guion, 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) 917-6428; fax (425) 917-6590.

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 767-200 and -
300 series airplanes was published as a supplemental notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on June 17, 2008 (73 FR 
34233). That action proposed to require replacing certain door-mounted 
escape slides and slide-raft assemblies with new slide-raft assemblies; 
replacing certain escape system latches with new latches; and modifying 
or replacing certain counterbalance assemblies with new counterbalance 
assemblies; as applicable. The supplemental NPRM also proposed to 
extend the compliance time, add requirements to install a longer firing 
cable and test the valve of the inflation trigger system of the slide-
raft and, for certain airplanes, add procedures to adjust the door 
counterbalance systems.

Explanation of Revised Service Information

    Since we issued the supplemental NPRM, we have reviewed Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008. We 
referred to Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 2, dated 
September 27, 2007, in the supplemental NPRM as the appropriate source 
of service information for replacing the slide-rafts. The procedures in 
Revision 2 and Revision 3 are essentially the same; however, Revision 3 
corrects certain typographical errors, including certain part numbers 
for the slide-rafts.
    We have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to refer to Boeing Service 
Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, as the 
appropriate source of service information. We have also included Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 2, dated September 27, 2007, in 
Table 1 of this AD to state that actions done before the effective date 
of this AD in accordance with Revision 2 are acceptable for compliance 
with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Requests To Withdraw Supplemental NPRM or Extend Compliance Time

    Air Transport Association (ATA), American Airlines, and Delta 
Airlines request that we either withdraw the supplemental NPRM or 
extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts. All Nippon 
Airways requests a compliance time of 8 years (96 months), and ATA 
requests a compliance time of 10 years (120 months) rather than the 72 
months proposed in the supplemental NPRM.
    ATA also cites information to show the improbability of the unsafe 
condition, and maintains that we should withdraw the NPRM due to its 
lack of potential to add safety benefit, its significantly 
disproportional costs, its unjustified compliance period, and the fact 
that the intent of the proposal is already being accomplished on an 
attrition basis. ATA also states that if the FAA disagrees with its 
justifications and proceeds with the final rule, it recommends a 10-
year compliance period for better correlation with risk-management 
methods.
    American Airlines and ATA further object to the requirement to 
replace the slide-rafts. They agree with the manufacturer that the 
unsafe condition specified in the supplemental NPRM is not a safety 
issue. American Airlines and ATA state that the likelihood that the 
scenario described in the supplemental NPRM would result in a time-
limited evacuation is extremely improbable.
    We partially agree with the commenters. We do not agree with the 
requests to withdraw the supplemental NPRM. We have determined that an 
unsafe condition exists. Although the specific conditions addressed in 
the supplemental NPRM have not been

[[Page 49799]]

encountered in service, we have received reports of partial tip-back 
during accidents/incidents that could have resulted in extreme tip-back 
given slightly different conditions, making this type of event 
foreseeable. During at least one of these partial tip-back events, the 
slides were deployed to facilitate evacuation. We do not agree that the 
low probability of encountering such a foreseeable event is 
justification to withdraw the supplemental NPRM. We have also 
determined that an interval based on the ``useful service life'' of the 
slides, which is 15 years, would not address the unsafe condition in a 
timely manner.
    However, we do agree that it is appropriate to extend the 
compliance time. We have determined that a compliance time of 96 months 
represents an appropriate interval of time in which the required 
actions can be performed, while still maintaining an adequate level of 
safety. In developing an appropriate compliance time, we considered the 
safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance 
schedules for timely accomplishment of the modifications. We also 
considered the costs to comply with the actions (see updated cost 
information in the Costs of Compliance section). The revised compliance 
time will allow operators to offset the costs of complying with this AD 
with the costs associated with normal slide replacement. Therefore, we 
have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to extend the compliance time for 
replacing the slide-rafts from 72 months to 96 months.

Requests To Remove Firing Cable Requirement From the Supplemental NPRM

    Continental Airlines, Goodrich, and Boeing ask that we remove 
paragraph (b), ``Modification of the Firing Cable,'' from the 
supplemental NPRM. Delta points out that the requirement to modify the 
firing cable is proposed in Docket FAA-2008-0302 (and is now required 
by AD 2008-21-05, amendment 39-15689 (73 FR 59486, October 9, 2008)) at 
a compliance time of 36 months rather than the 72 months proposed in 
the supplemental NPRM. Boeing states that we should also remove the 
reference to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-25A0395, dated August 
31, 2006, from Table 1 ``Previous Revisions of Service Bulletins,'' 
because that service bulletin relates to the modification specified in 
paragraph (b) of the supplemental NPRM.
    We agree with the commenters' requests to remove paragraph (b) of 
the supplemental NPRM and the reference to Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 767-25A0395, dated August 31, 2006. The requirement to modify 
the firing cable is already included in AD 2008-21-05. Therefore, we 
have revised this AD as requested. The requirement to modify the firing 
cable will remain part of AD 2008-21-05, which also includes other 
tasks related to the firing cable.

Requests To Revise Cost Impact

    Goodrich, and ATA, on behalf of its member American Airlines, 
request that we revise the ``Cost Impact'' paragraph. American Airlines 
states that we did not include the cost of the slide-rafts in the 
original NPRM; as the slide-rafts are the dominant cost of the 
modification, ATA and American Airlines state that the cost estimate is 
both incomplete and inaccurate. Goodrich points out that the costs in 
the supplemental NPRM reflect prices for 2004 and requests that we 
revise the cost of the slide-rafts to 2008 prices.
    We agree with Goodrich to revise the cost of the slide-rafts to 
reflect 2008 prices. The ``Cost Impact'' paragraph below includes the 
current price of the slide-rafts. We acknowledge American Airlines' 
request, but point out that although the original NPRM did not include 
the cost of the slide-rafts, the supplemental NPRM did include those 
costs.

Request To Change Applicability

    Boeing requests that we change the applicability of the 
supplemental NPRM to refer to airplanes identified in Boeing Service 
Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, rather than 
referring only to those Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes that 
have line numbers 1 through 793 inclusive, equipped with door-mounted 
escape slide systems. Boeing states that the applicability, as written 
in the supplemental NPRM, might make an alternative method of 
compliance (AMOC) request necessary for Model 767 door-mounted escape 
system part numbers that are not addressed by the proposed AD.
    We agree with Boeing for the reasons stated, and have revised the 
applicability statement of this AD to include a reference to Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008, which 
includes specific details about which airplanes are affected by this 
AD.

Requests To Extend Comment Period

    Delta Airlines and ATA request additional time to review the 
supplemental NPRM. Delta requests that we extend the comment period for 
an additional 60 days because of the complex nature of the supplemental 
NPRM, the inclusion of multiple service bulletins, the extensive 
background and significant number of comments in response to the 
original NPRM, the hugely significant costs, and the fact that the 
original NPRM was thought to have been withdrawn. ATA also requests an 
extension of 60 days to the comment period, citing costs and the need 
to assess the complex requirements.
    We disagree with the requests to provide additional time to comment 
on the supplemental NPRM. As Delta points out in their comment, there 
was a period of 4.5 years between the release of the original NPRM and 
the supplemental NPRM, which gave operators sufficient time to consider 
the requirements. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Request for Industry-Wide Response

    Delta Airlines requests that ATA coordinate an industry-wide 
response to the supplemental NPRM with the goal of gathering enough 
technical information to support its cancellation. Delta states that, 
given previous discussions with Boeing regarding risk and probability, 
the supplemental NPRM does not appear to have adequate merit. Also, 
given the significant cost impact, the industry would be well-served by 
opening the time to conduct a coordinated effort to ensure that the 
action proposed in the supplemental NPRM is not mandated.
    We neither agree nor disagree with the request for ATA to 
coordinate an industry-wide response. This comment is directed to ATA 
and is beyond the scope of the AD action. We disagree that the 
supplemental NPRM does not have adequate merit. We consider the 
proposed actions to be an adequate response to an unsafe condition. As 
stated previously, although the specific conditions addressed in the 
supplemental NPRM have not been encountered, there have been accidents/
incidents that make this type of event foreseeable. We do not agree 
that the low probability of encountering such a foreseeable event is 
justification for withdrawing the supplemental NPRM. Therefore, we have 
not changed the AD in this regard.
    As explained previously, we also considered the costs to comply 
with the actions proposed in the supplemental NPRM. While we determined 
that a compliance time based on the ``useful service life'' of the 
slides would not address the unsafe condition in a timely manner, we 
did agree to extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts 
from 72 months to 96 months. The revised compliance time will allow

[[Page 49800]]

operators to offset the costs of complying with this AD with the costs 
associated with normal slide replacement. We have revised paragraph (a) 
of this AD to extend the compliance time for replacing the slide-rafts 
from 72 months to 96 months.

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 745 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 261 airplanes of U.S. registry 
are affected by this AD. The work hours and required parts per airplane 
vary according to the configuration group to which the affected 
airplane belongs. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. The 
``Cost Impact per Airplane Configuration Group'' table shows the 
estimated costs.

                                                      Cost Impact per Airplane Configuration Group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                         Fleet cost, by
     Airplane configuration group        U.S.-registered       Work hours          Kit cost          Slide cost     Cost per airplane    configuration
                                            airplanes                                                                                        group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.....................................                208                  6             $1,236           $222,002           $223,718        $46,533,334
2.....................................                 12                 12              2,472            448,502            451,934          5,423,208
3.....................................                 41                 11             98,858            222,002            321,740         13,191,340
4.....................................                  0                 11             34,012            222,002            256,894                  0
5.....................................                  0                 17             35,248            448,502            485,110                  0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the figures in the ``Cost Impact per Airplane 
Configuration Group'' table, the cost impact of this AD on U.S. 
operators is estimated to be $65,147,882.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements 
of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions 
in the future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures 
discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to 
perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

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 Impact

    The regulations adopted herein will 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    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

0
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

0
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]

0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive:

2009-20-02 Boeing: Amendment 39-16025. Docket No. FAA-2008-0682; 
Directorate Identifier 2001-NM-237-AD.

    Applicability: Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes, line 
numbers 1 through 793 inclusive; certificated in any category; 
equipped with door-mounted escape slide systems; as identified in 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To prevent the escape slides and slide-rafts of the forward and 
mid-cabin entry and service doors from being too steep for 
evacuation in the event that the airplane rotates onto the aft 
fuselage into the extreme tip-back condition, accomplish the 
following:

Replacement of Slide-Rafts

    (a) Within 96 months after the effective date of this AD, 
replace the applicable slide-rafts at the applicable door or doors, 
and do all other applicable actions including, but not limited to, 
changing the latches, and replacing or modifying the counterbalance 
assemblies, by accomplishing all applicable actions specified in the 
Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, 
Revision 3, dated July 3, 2008.

Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously

    (b) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with the service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD 
are

[[Page 49801]]

acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of 
this AD.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Boeing Service Bulletin    Revision level             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alert Service Bulletin 767-                1  December 4, 2006.
 25A0266.
Alert Service Bulletin 767-                2  September 27, 2007.
 25A0266.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (c)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 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: 
Andrew Guion, 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) 917-6428; fax (425) 917-6590. Or, e-mail information 
to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
    (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 principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a 
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. 
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Incorporation by Reference

    (d) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25A0266, Revision 
3, dated July 3, 2008, to do the actions required by this AD, unless 
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; e-mail 
me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at 
the FAA, call 425-227-1221 or 425-227-1152.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that 
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records 
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

Effective Date

    (e) This amendment becomes effective on November 3, 2009.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 11, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-22668 Filed 9-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
