[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20013-20016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9341]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 94-NM-91-AD; Amendment 39-9200; AD 95-08-11]
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
Equipped With Off-Wing Escape Slides
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series airplanes, that requires
replacement of the currently installed door opening actuators of the
emergency off-wing escape system with new, improved actuators. This
amendment is prompted by reports indicating that the requirements of a
previously issued AD do not adequately preclude leakage from these
actuators. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent
failure of the escape slide to deploy due to failure of the door
opening/snubbing actuator, which could delay and possibly jeopardize
successful emergency evacuation of an airplane.
DATES: Effective May 24, 1995.
The incorporation by reference of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-
0216, dated February 3, 1994, as listed in regulations, is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register as of May 24, 1995.
The incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed
in the regulations was approved previously by the Director of the
Federal Register as of November 25, 1992 (57 FR 47987, October 21,
1992).
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from OEA Aerospace, Inc., P.O. Box KK, Highway 12, Explosive
Technology Road, Fairfield, California 94533-0659; and Boeing
Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207. This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayson Claar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 227-2784; fax (206) 227-1181.
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 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on August 30, 1994 (59
FR 44672). That action proposed to require replacement of the currently
installed door opening actuators of the emergency off-wing escape
system on Model 767 series airplanes with new, improved actuators.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
Response to Comments
One commenter supports the proposed rule.
One commenter requests that the name and address for obtaining
service information from OEA Aerospace, Inc., be corrected. The FAA
concurs. Since the issuance of the proposal, OEA has changed its name
from OEA, Inc., to [[Page 20014]] OEA Aerospace, Inc., and has
relocated from Colorado to California. Therefore, the ADDRESSES section
and paragraph (g) of the final rule have been revised accordingly.
One commenter requests that all references in the proposal to the
escape system for Model 747 series airplanes be revised to ``the door
opening thrusters of the two-piece off-wing escape ramp and slide
system.'' The commenter notes that this change in nomenclature would
clearly differentiate the escape system installed on Model 747 series
airplanes from those installed on Model 767 series airplanes. The FAA
does not concur. Since this rule is applicable only to Model 767 series
airplanes, the FAA finds that the broad, generic references to the
escape systems cannot and has not created confusion for the operators.
Therefore, no change to the final rule is necessary.
One commenter requests that the description of the unsafe condition
be edited to specify that the unsafe condition would exist during
certain flight configurations or during certain failure modes. The
commenter states that the description should include the fact that only
one door opening/snubbing actuator is necessary to open the door when
the airplane is at a level altitude, and that two door opening/snubbing
actuators are necessary to open the slide compartment door on the
upward facing side when the airplane is at an adverse roll. The FAA
does not concur that a revision to the description is necessary.
According to Sec. 39.1 (``Airworthiness Directives'') of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.1), the issuance of an AD is based on
the finding that an unsafe condition exists or is likely to develop in
aircraft of a particular type design. While the FAA's intent is to
describe as specifically as possible the addressed unsafe condition
that has prompted an AD, the FAA considers that it would be virtually
impossible to list every potential flight configuration or failure mode
for when the unsafe condition may exist or occur. To do so would add
little value, and would make for an especially long, complex, and
cumbersome regulation.
Two commenters request that the proposed compliance time of 2 years
to accomplish the replacement of door opening actuators with new,
improved actuators be extended to 4 years. One of the commenters
asserts that safety of the fleet would be ensured in the interim with
the repetitive inspections (weighing program) currently required by AD
92-16-17, amendment 39-8327 (57 FR 47987, October 21, 1992), which are
restated in proposed paragraph (a). The other commenter notes that the
suggested 4-year compliance time would allow operators to amortize
these costs over a longer period of time, which would significantly
minimize the economic impact of having to purchase and install the new
actuators. Two other commenters point to a potential parts availability
problem due to the large number of airplanes that will be affected by
the proposed rule.
The FAA does not concur with these commenters' request. In
developing an appropriate compliance time for this action, the FAA
considered not only the degree of urgency associated with addressing
the subject unsafe condition, but the manufacturer's recommendation as
to an appropriate compliance time, the availability of required parts,
and the practical aspect of replacing the actuators within a maximum
interval of time allowable for all affected airplanes to continue to
operate without compromising safety. The FAA has been advised that
replacement actuators are readily available; therefore, obtaining them
within the proposed compliance time should not pose a problem for any
affected operator. Further, the FAA took into account the 2-year
compliance time recommended by the manufacturer, as well as the number
of days required for the rulemaking process; in consideration of these
factors, the FAA finds that 2 years after the effective date of this
final rule is consistent with the time recommended by the manufacturer.
However, under the provisions of paragraph (e) of the final rule, the
FAA may approve requests for adjustments to the compliance time if data
are submitted to substantiate that such an adjustment would provide an
acceptable level of safety.
Two commenters request that the proposed requirement of paragraph
(c) to replace the actuators be optional rather than mandatory. These
commenters state that safety of the fleet could be ensured in the
interim with the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (a) of
the proposal. The FAA does not concur. Paragraph (a) merely restates
the requirements of AD 92-16-17, which proved to be unreliable in
accurately determining the fluid level in the actuators. Therefore, the
FAA has determined that these fluid-filled actuators must be replaced
with new, improved actuators that are gas-filled.
One commenter requests that proposed paragraph (d) be revised to
correct a typographical error in the reference to the Boeing part
number. (The OEA part number was correctly referenced in the proposal.
The Boeing part number was provided only for purposes of cross-
referencing the OEA part number. It is only this cross-referenced
Boeing part number that contained a typographical error.) The FAA
concurs. Paragraph (d) of the final rule has been revised accordingly
to correct this typographical error.
One commenter requests that the reference to airplanes in proposed
paragraph (d) be revised to specify that the old oil-filled actuators
may not be installed on Model 767 series airplanes equipped with off-
wing emergency escape systems. The FAA does not concur. Since the rule
is applicable to Boeing Model 767 series airplanes equipped with off-
wing escape slides, the reference to airplanes clearly refers to Boeing
Model 767 series airplanes equipped with off-wing escape slides.
Repeating the applicability statement for this paragraph of the final
rule would only be redundant and would not add to the clarity of the
rule. Conversely, repeating the applicability for this paragraph may
introduce confusion by leading the reader to deduce that the remaining
paragraphs are applicable to other models or configurations.
Two commenters request that the cost of the proposed replacement
action be partially borne by Boeing and partially by OEA. These
commenters point to the faulty design of the OEA actuators that caused
the initial problem (oil leakage from the actuators). Therefore, these
commenters contend that OEA should assume partial financial
responsibility for its faulty design, and that Boeing should assume
partial financial responsibility for this problem since it chose to use
these actuators on its airplanes.
The FAA cannot concur with this request. According to Sec. 39.1 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.1), the issuance of an AD
is based on the finding that an unsafe condition exists or is likely to
develop in aircraft of a particular type design. The FAA has the
authority to issue an AD when it is found that an unsafe condition is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
In accordance with Sec. 39.3 (14 CFR 39.3), operators whose products
are subject to an AD must operate those products in accordance with the
requirements of that AD. While the subject of this AD relates to a
problem with the escape slides, this AD eliminates the unsafe condition
by requiring replacement of the door opening actuators with new,
improved actuators. The AD is the appropriate vehicle for mandating
such actions. The FAA's authority in part 39 does not extend to whether
or how those costs are negotiated. However, operators may negotiate the
costs [[Page 20015]] associated with accomplishing those actions with
manufacturer.
Other Changes to the Final Rule
The FAA has recently reviewed the figures it has used over the past
several years in calculating the economic impact of AD activity. In
order to account for various inflationary costs in the airline
industry, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to increase the
labor rate used in these calculations from $55 per work hour to $60 per
work hour. The economic impact information, below, has been revised to
reflect this increase in the specified hourly labor rate.
As a result of recent communications with the Air Transport
Association (ATA) of America, the FAA has learned that, in general,
some operators may misunderstand the legal effect of AD's on airplanes
that are identified in the applicability provision of the AD, but that
have been altered or repaired in the area addressed by the AD. The FAA
points out that all airplanes identified in the applicability provision
of an AD are legally subject to the AD. If an airplane has been altered
or repaired in the affected area in such a way as to affect compliance
with the AD, the owner or operator is required to obtain FAA approval
for an alternative method of compliance with the AD, in accordance with
the paragraph of each AD that provides for such approvals. A note has
been added to this final rule to clarify this long-standing
requirement.
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.
Economic Impact
There are approximately 460 Model 767 series airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 173
airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.
The inspections and modification currently required by AD 92-16-17,
and retained in this AD, take approximately 12 work hours per airplane
to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required
parts will cost approximately $510 per airplane. Based on these
figures, the total cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated
to be $212,790, or $1,230 per airplane.
The replacement will take approximately 2 work hours per airplane
at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost
approximately $6,400 per airplane. Based on these figures, the total
cost impact of the replacement on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$1,127,960, or $6,520 per airplane.
The total cost impact figure discussed above is based on
assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the
requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish
those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted.
A full cost-benefit analysis has not been accomplished for this
proposed AD. As a matter of law, in order to be airworthy, an aircraft
must conform to its type design and be in a condition for safe
operation. The type design is approved only after the FAA makes a
determination that it complies with all applicable airworthiness
requirements. In adopting and maintaining those requirements, the FAA
has already made the determination that they establish a level of
safety that is cost-beneficial. When the FAA, as in this AD action,
makes a finding of an unsafe condition, this means that this cost-
beneficial level of safety is no longer being achieved and that the
required actions are necessary to restore that level of safety. Because
this level of safety has already been determined to be cost-beneficial,
a full cost-benefit analysis for this AD action would be redundant and
unnecessary.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects 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, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
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
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
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421 and 1423; 49 U.S.C.
106(g); and 14 CFR 11.89.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
95-08-11 Boeing: Amendment 39-9200. Docket 94-NM-91-AD.
Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes equipped with off-wing
escape slides, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (e) to request approval from the FAA. This
approval may address either no action, if the current configuration
eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions necessary to
address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request
should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent failure of the escape slide to deploy, which could
delay and possibly jeopardize successful emergency evacuation of an
airplane, accomplish the following:
(a) Within 18 months after November 25, 1992 (the effective date
of AD 92-16-17, amendment 39-8327), inspect the off-wing escape
slide door opening/snubbing actuators in accordance with OEA Service
Bulletin 3092100-25-002, dated July 26, 1991. Repeat this inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 20 months until the
replacement required by paragraph (c) of this AD is accomplished.
For operators that have previously accomplished this inspection in
accordance with AD 92-16-17: This paragraph requires that the next
scheduled inspection be performed within 20 months after the last
inspection performed in [[Page 20016]] accordance with paragraph
(b)(1) of AD 92-16-17.
(b) Within 18 months after November 25, 1992 (the effective date
of AD 92-16-17, amendment 39-8327), inspect and modify the escape
slide compartment door latching mechanism in accordance with Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-25A0174, dated August 15, 1991.
Accomplishment of the actions required by this paragraph prior to
the effective date of this AD terminates the actions required by
paragraph (b)(2) of AD 92-16-17.
(c) Within 2 years after the effective date of this AD, replace
the currently installed door opening actuator of the emergency off-
wing escape system with a new, improved actuator, in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-0216, dated February 3, 1994.
Accomplishment of this replacement terminates the repetitive
inspection requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.
(d) As of 2 years after the effective date of this AD, only door
opening actuators of the emergency off-wing escape system having OEA
part number 5262100 (Boeing part number S416T208-12) shall be
installed on any airplane.
(e) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
(f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(g) The replacement shall be done in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-25-0216, dated February 3, 1994. This
incorporation by reference is approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. The inspections and modification shall be done in accordance
with OEA Service Bulletin 3092100-25-002, dated July 26, 1991, and
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-25A0174, dated August 15, 1991; as
applicable. The incorporation by reference of these documents was
approved previously by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 as of November 25,
1992 (57 FR 47987, October 21, 1992). Copies may be obtained from
OEA Aerospace, Inc., P.O. Box KK, Highway 12, Explosive Technology
Road, Fairfield, California 94533-0659; and Boeing Commercial
Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
(h) This amendment becomes effective on May 24, 1995.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 10, 1995.
S.R. Miller,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-9341 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
