Proposed Rules. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT)
Action: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
Citation: FR Doc. 06-4631 · RIN 2120-AA64 · Docket No. FAA-2006-24779; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-044-AD · 14 CFR 39

Summary

The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A300 airplanes and Model A310 airplanes and for certain Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require an inspection of the wing and center fuel tanks to determine if certain P-clips are installed and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD also would require an inspection of electrical bonding points of certain equipment in the center fuel tank for the presence of a blue coat and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD also would require installation of new bonding leads and electrical bonding points on certain equipment in the wing, center, and trim fuel tanks, as necessary. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to ensure continuous electrical bonding protection of equipment in the wing, center, and trim fuel tanks and to prevent damage to wiring in the wing and center fuel tanks, due to failed P-clips used for retaining the wiring and pipes, which could result in a possible fuel ignition source in the fuel tanks.

Dates

We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 16, 2006.

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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24779; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-044-AD” at the beginning 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 received 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 may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may 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 receives them. Discussion 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” (67 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. The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) has issued a regulation that is similar to SFAR 88. (The JAA is an associated body of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) representing the civil aviation regulatory authorities of a number of European States who have agreed to co-operate in developing and implementing common safety regulatory standards and procedures.) Under this regulation, the JAA stated that all members of the ECAC that hold type certificates for transport category airplanes are required to conduct a design review against explosion risks. 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. The Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on all Airbus Model A300 airplanes and A310 airplanes and on certain Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes and Model C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called A300-600 series airplanes). The DGAC advises that the inserts on NSA5516-XXND and NSA5516-XXNJ type P-clips, which are used to retain wiring and pipes in wing and center fuel tanks, may swell and soften when immersed in fuel or fuel vapor. Investigation revealed that failed P-clips could chafe through the insulation of the wiring. Damage to wiring in the wing and center fuel tanks, if not corrected, could result in a possible fuel ignition source in the fuel tanks. The DGAC advises that, as a result of fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer, continuous electrical bonding protection of equipment in the wing, center, and trim fuel tanks, as applicable, is also necessary to ensure that the unsafe condition of this AD is addressed. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued the following service bulletins: Airbus— Airbus service bulletin— Dated— Model A300 airplanes A300-28-0079 A300-28-0081 September 29, 2005. July 20, 2005. Model A310 airplanes A310-28-2142 A310-28-2143 A310-28-2153 August 26, 2005. July 20, 2005. July 20, 2005. Model A300-600 series airplanes A300-28-6064 A300-28-6068 A300-28-6077 July 28, 2005. July 20, 2005. July 25, 2005. Service Bulletins A300-28-0081, A300-28-6068, and A310-28-2143 describe procedures for inspecting the left and right wing fuel tanks and center fuel tank to determine if any NSA5516-XXND and NSA5516-XXNJ type P-clips are installed for retaining wiring and pipes in any tank and corrective action if necessary. The corrective action is to replace any NSA5516-XXND and NSA5516-XXNJ type P-clips with NSA5516-XXNF type P-clips. Service Bulletins A300-28-0079, A300-28-6064, and A310-28-2142 describe procedures for checking the electrical bonding points of certain equipment in the center fuel tank for the presence of a blue coat and doing related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. The related investigative action is to measure the electrical resistance between the equipment and structure, if a blue coat is not present. The corrective action is to electrically bond the equipment, if the measured resistance is greater than 10 milliohms. Service Bulletins A300-28-0079, A300-28-6064, and A310-28-2142 also describe procedures for installing new bonding leads and electrical bonding points on certain equipment in the left and right wing fuel tanks and center fuel tank. Service Bulletin A310-28-2153 describes procedures for installing new bonding lead(s) on the water drain system of the trim fuel tank and installing electrical bonding points on the ventilation intake system, vent float valves, ventilation system at numerous positions, water drain valve, water drain system, adapter-bulkhead, indicator-magnetic level, and scavenger fuel pump of the trim fuel tank. Service Bulletin A300-28-6077 describes procedures for installing new bonding lead(s) on the water drain system of the trim fuel tank and installing electrical bonding points on the ventilation intake system, vent float valves, ventilation system at numerous positions, water drain valve, water drain system, adapter-bulkhead, and indicator-magnetic level of the trim fuel tank, for configuration 01 and 02 airplanes. Service Bulletin A300-28-6077 also describes procedures for installing electrical bonding points on the scavenger fuel pump of the trim fuel tank on configuration 03 airplanes and installing electrical bonding on the ventilation intake system of the trim fuel tank on configuration 04 airplanes. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated the service information and issued airworthiness directive F-2006-031, dated February 1, 2006, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of § 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the DGAC's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between the Proposed AD and French Airworthiness Directive.” Differences Between the Proposed AD and French Airworthiness Directive The applicability of French airworthiness directive F-2006-031 excludes A300 airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletins A300-28-0079 and A300-28-0081 were accomplished in service. French airworthiness directive F-2006-031 also excludes A310 airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletins A310-28-2142 and A310-28-2143 were accomplished in service and, for airplanes equipped with trim fuel tanks, on which Airbus Service Bulletin A310-28-2153 was accomplished in service. However, we have not excluded those airplanes in the applicability of this proposed AD; rather, this proposed AD includes a requirement to accomplish the actions specified in those service bulletins, as applicable. This requirement would ensure that the actions specified in the service bulletins and required by this proposed AD are accomplished on all affected airplanes. Operators must continue to operate the airplane in the configuration required by this proposed AD unless an alternative method of compliance is approved. These differences have been coordinated with the DGAC. The applicability of French airworthiness directive F-2006-031 excludes A300-600 airplanes not equipped with trim fuel tanks that have received Airbus Modifications 12308 and 12495 in production. French airworthiness directive F-2006-031 also excludes A300-600 airplanes equipped with trim fuel tanks that have received Airbus Modifications 12308, 12495, 12294, and 12476 in production. However, the DGAC has informed us that the applicability of French airworthiness directive F-2006-031 should have excluded A300-600 airplanes not equipped with trim fuel tanks on which Airbus Modifications 12226, 12365, and 12308 have been incorporated in production and A300-600 airplanes equipped with trim fuel tanks on which Airbus Modifications 12226, 12365, 12308, 12294, and 12476 have been incorporated in production; therefore, we have excluded these airplanes in the applicability of this proposed AD. Clarification of Inspection Terminology The “inspection” specified in Service Bulletins A300-28-0081, A300-28-6068, and A310-28-2143 and the “check” specified in Service Bulletins A300-28-0079, A300-28-6064, and A310-28-2142 are referred to as a “general visual inspection” in this proposed AD. We have included the definition for a detailed inspection in a note in this proposed AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 29 Model A300 airplanes, 63 Model 310 airplanes, and 102 Model A300-600 series airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs, at an average labor rate of $80 per hour, for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. For some actions, the estimated work hours and cost of parts in the following table depend on the airplane configuration. Estimated Costs Model Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.- registered airplanes Fleet cost A300 airplanes Inspect wing and center fuel tanks for P-clips 40 None $3,200 29 $92,800 Install bonding leads/points in wing and center fuel tank 136-155 $3,800-$5,200 $14,680-$17,600 29 $425,720-$510,400 A310 airplanes Inspect wing and center fuel tanks for P-clips 40 None $3,200 63 $201,600 Install bonding leads/points in wing and center fuel tank 248-285 $8,840-$9,190 $28,680-$31,990 63 $1,806,840-$2,015,370 Inspect and install bonding leads/points in the trim fuel tank 53-61 $50-$70 $4,290-$4,950 63 $270,270-$311,850 A300-600 series airplanes Inspect wing and center fuel tanks for P-clips Install bonding leads/points in wing and center fuel tank 40 157-185 None $8,840-$9,190 $3,200 $21,400-$23,990 102 102 $326,400 $2,182,800-$2,446,980 Inspect and install bonding leads/points in the trim fuel tank 2-61 $50-$70 $210-$4,950 102 $21,420-$504,900 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 proposed AD 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2006-24779; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-044-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 16, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category. (1) All Model A300 airplanes and Model A310 airplanes. (2) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes; except those airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (c)(2)(ii) of this AD. (i) Airplanes not equipped with trim fuel tanks on which Airbus Modifications 12226, 12365, and 12308 have been incorporated in production. (ii) Airplanes equipped with trim fuel tanks on which Airbus Modifications 12226, 12365, 12308, 12294, and 12476 have been incorporated in production. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to ensure continuous electrical bonding protection of equipment in the wing, center, and trim fuel tanks and to prevent damage to wiring in the wing and center fuel tanks, due to failed P-clips used for retaining the wiring and pipes, which could result in a possible fuel ignition source in the fuel tanks. 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. Service Bulletin References (f) The term “service bulletin,” as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin identified in Table 1 of this AD, as applicable. Table 1.—Service Bulletin References For Airbus— And the actions specified in— Airbus service bulletin— Dated— Model A300 airplanes paragraph (g) of this AD A300-28-0081 July 20, 2005. paragraph (h) of this AD A300-28-0079 September 29, 2005. Model A310 airplanes paragraph (g) of this AD A310-28-2143 July 20, 2005. paragraph (h) of this AD A310-28-2142 August 26, 2005. paragraph (i) of this AD A310-28-2153 July 20, 2005. Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes paragraph (g) of this AD A300-28-6068 July 20, 2005. paragraph (h) of this AD A300-28-6064 July 28, 2005. paragraph (i) of this AD A300-28-6077 July 25, 2005. Inspection and Corrective Actions (g) Within 59 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a general visual inspection of the right and left wing fuel tanks and center fuel tank, if applicable, to determine if any NSA5516-XXND and NSA5516-XXNJ type P-clips are installed for retaining wiring and pipes in any tank, and do all applicable corrective actions before further flight after the inspection, by accomplishing all the actions specified in the service bulletin. 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 ensure visual access to all 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.” Installation of Bonding Leads and Points for Wing and Center Fuel Tanks (h) Within 59 months after the effective date of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, by accomplishing all the actions specified in the service bulletin. (1) In the center fuel tank, if applicable, do a general visual inspection of the electrical bonding points of the equipment identified in the service bulletin for the presence of a blue coat, and do all related investigative and corrective actions before further flight after the inspection. (2) In the left and right wing fuel tanks and center fuel tank, if applicable, install bonding leads and electrical bonding points on the equipment identified in the service bulletin. Installation of Bonding Leads and Points for the Trim Fuel Tank (i) For Model A310 airplanes; Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes; equipped with a trim fuel tank: Within 59 months after the effective date of this AD, install a new bonding lead(s) on the water drain system of the trim fuel tank and install electrical bonding points on the equipment identified in the service bulletin in the trim fuel tank, by accomplishing all the actions specified in the service bulletin, as applicable. Parts Installation (j) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any NSA5516-XXND or NSA5516-XXNJ type P-clip for retaining wiring and pipes in any wing, center, or trim fuel tank, on any airplane. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (l) French airworthiness directive F-2006-031, dated February 1, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 8, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7481 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-23690; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-133-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 Series Airplanes; and Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R Series Airplanes, and Model C4-605R Variant F Airplanes (Collectively Called A300-600 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 Airbus Model A300 B2, A300 B4, and A300-600 series airplanes. The original NPRM would have superseded two existing ADs. One AD currently requires an inspection for cracks of the lower outboard flange of gantry No. 4 in the main landing gear (MLG) bay area, and repair if necessary. The other AD currently requires, among other actions, repetitive inspections of the gantry lower flanges, and repair if necessary. The original NPRM proposed to require new repetitive inspections for cracks in the lower flange of certain gantries, and repair if necessary, which ends the existing inspection requirements. The original NPRM also provided for optional terminating actions for the new repetitive inspections. This new action revises the original NPRM by including additional airplanes that were excluded from the applicability. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the lower flanges of gantries 1 through 5 inclusive in the MLG bay area, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by June 12, 2006. 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. • Governmentwide 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. • 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. Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-1622; fax (425) 227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “Docket No. FAA-2006-23690; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-133-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in light of those comments. We will post all comments submitted, 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 may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may 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 ADDRESSES . Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (the “original NPRM”) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2003-26-10, amendment 39-13408 (69 FR 867, January 7, 2004), and AD 2004-18-13, amendment 39-13792 (69 FR 55329, September 14, 2004). The original NPRM applied to certain Airbus Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes; and Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called A300-600 series airplanes). The original NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2006 (71 FR 4313). The original NPRM proposed to continue to require an inspection for cracks of the lower outboard flange of gantry No. 4 in the main landing gear (MLG) bay area, and repair if necessary. The original NPRM also proposed to continue to require repetitive inspections of the gantry lower flanges, and repair if necessary. In addition, the original NPRM proposed to require new repetitive inspections for cracks in the lower flange of certain gantries, and repair if necessary, which ends the existing inspection requirements. The original NPRM also proposed optional terminating actions for the new repetitive inspections. Comments We have considered the following comment on the original NPRM. Request To Revise the Applicability Airbus requests that airplanes on which Airbus Modifications 13037 (Airbus Service Bulletins A300-53-0380 and A300-53-6153) and 12413 (Airbus Service Bulletins A300-53-0360 and A300-53-6132), as applicable, have been installed in service, and airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12924 has been incorporated in production be excluded from Table 1—Applicability of the original NPRM. The commenter states that the effectivity of French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1, issued September 28, 2005, takes these modification into account, except for Airbus Modification 12924. The commenter states that the Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, plans to revise French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1 to address Airbus Modification 12924. We do not agree with Airbus to exclude airplanes on which a particular modification or service bulletin has been accomplished in service. Paragraph (m) of this supplemental NPRM includes an optional terminating action for accomplishing the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0380, dated August 5, 2005; Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0360, dated May 3, 2002; Airbus Service Bulleitn A300-53-6132, dated February 5, 2002; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6153, dated August 24, 2005; as applicable. If an operator chooses to accomplish this optional terminating action, it must continue to operate the airplane in that configuration unless an alternative method of compliance is approved. Therefore, we have determined that excluding those airplanes from the applicability of this supplemental NPRM is not appropriate. This difference between French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1 and this supplemental NPRM has been coordinated with the DGAC. We also do not agree with the commenter to exclude airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12924 has been incorporated in production. We have confirmed with the DGAC that the omission of this modification in French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1 was an oversight. However, since the issuance of the original NPRM, we have determined that all combinations of the Airbus modifications specified in the effectivity of French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1 include an in-service service bulletin. Therefore, we have revised Table 1 of the applicability of this supplemental NPRM to not include any exceptions for accomplishing those Airbus modifications. Change to Labor Rate After the original NPRM was issued, we reviewed the figures we have used over the past several years to calculate AD costs to operators. To account for various inflationary costs in the airline industry, we find it necessary to increase the labor rate used in these calculations from $65 per work hour to $80 per work hour. The cost impact information, below, reflects this increase in the specified hourly labor rate. FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM The change to the applicability discussed above expands 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 This proposed AD would affect about 165 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Not all actions must be completed on all airplanes. Estimated Costs for Required Actions Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.- registered airplanes Fleet cost One-time inspection (required by AD 2003-26-10) 1 $80 None $80 23 $1,840. One-time inspection (required by AD 2004-18-13) 4 80 None $320 43 $13,760. Repetitive inspections (required by AD 2004-18-13) 12 80 None $960, per inspection cycle 78 $74,880, per inspection cycle. Repetitive inspections (new proposed actions) 16 80 None $1,280, per inspection cycle 78 $99,840, per inspection cycle. Estimated Costs for Optional Actions Optional action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.- registered airplanes Reinforcement specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0380, dated August 5, 2005 807 $80 Between $87,100 and $121,560 depending on kit purchased Between $151,660 and $186,120 depending on airplane configuration 23 Reinforcement specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6153, dated August 24, 2005 807 80 Between $82,460 and $87,070 depending on kit purchased Between $147,020 and $151,630 depending on airplane configuration 120 Reinforcement specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0360, dated May 3, 2002 Between 24 and 128 depending on airplane configuration 80 Between $250 and $1,000 depending on kit purchased Between $2,170 and $11,240 depending on airplane configuration 23 Reinforcement specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6132, dated February 5, 2002 109 80 Between $260 and $950 depending on kit purchased Between $8,980 and $9,670 depending on airplane configuration 120 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 amendments 39-13408 (69 FR 867, January 7, 2004) and 39-13792 (69 FR 55329, September 14, 2004) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2006-23690; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-133-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 12, 2006. Affected ADs (b) This AD supersedes ADs 2003-26-10 and 2004-18-13. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Airbus airplanes identified in Table 1 of this AD, certificated in any category. Table 1.—Applicability Affected Airbus airplanes (1) All Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, and B2-203 airplanes (2) All Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes (3) All Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes (4) All Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes (5) All Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes (6) All Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report of a large fatigue crack along the outboard flange of beam No. 4. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the lower flanges of the left and right gantries 1 through 5 inclusive in the main landing gear (MLG) bay area, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. 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. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2003-26-10 One-Time Inspection (f) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10147 has not been done: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD: Do a one-time detailed inspection for cracking of the lower outboard flange of gantry No. 4 in the MLG bay area per paragraph 4.2.1 of Airbus All Operators Telex (AOT) A300-53A0371, Revision 01 (for Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes); or AOT A300-53A6145, Revision 01 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes); both dated September 10, 2003; as applicable. (1) Before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight cycles since the date of issuance of the original Airworthiness Certificate or the date of issuance of the Export Certificate of Airworthiness, whichever is first. (2) Within 30 days after January 22, 2004 (the effective date AD 2003-26-10). Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is defined as: “An intensive visual examination of a specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate access procedures may be required.” Repair (g) Repair any cracking found during the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD before further flight, per a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) (or its delegated agent). Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004-18-13 One-Time Inspection and Corrective Action (h) For Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, and B2-203 airplanes, and Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes, on which Airbus Modification 3474 has been done: Prior to the accumulation of 16,300 total flight cycles, or within 500 flight cycles after July 30, 1998 (the effective date of AD 98-13-37), whichever occurs later, perform a one-time ultrasonic inspection for cracking of the gantry lower flanges in the MLG bay area, in accordance with Airbus AOT 53-11, dated October 13, 1997. (1) If any cracking is detected, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with the AOT. (2) If no cracking is detected, no further action is required by this paragraph. Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions (i) For Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-605R, B4-620, B4-622R, C4-605R Variant F airplanes, and F4-605R airplanes, on which Airbus Modification 12169 has not been done in production: Perform the requirements of paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), (i)(3), and (i)(4) of this AD, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6128, dated March 5, 2001. (1) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD, perform initial ultrasonic inspections or high frequency eddy current inspections (HFEC) for cracks of the lower flanges of gantries 3, 4, and 5 between fuselage frames FR47 and FR54, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions, including the Synoptic Chart contained in Figure 2, sheets 1 through 5 inclusive, of the service bulletin. (i) In accordance with the thresholds specified in the Synoptic Chart contained in Figure 2, sheets 1 through 5 inclusive, of the service bulletin; or (ii) Within 200 flight cycles after October 19, 2004 (the effective date AD 2004-18-13). (2) Perform repetitive ultrasonic inspections or high-frequency eddy current inspections for cracks of the lower flanges of gantries 3, 4, and 5 between fuselage frames FR47 and FR54, in accordance with the thresholds and Accomplishment Instructions, including the Synoptic Chart contained in Figure 2, sheets 1 through 5 inclusive, of the service bulletin. (3) Perform repairs and reinforcements, in accordance with the thresholds and the Accomplishment Instructions, including the Synoptic Chart contained in Figure 2, sheets 1 through 5 inclusive, of the service bulletin, except as specified in paragraph (i)(4) of this AD. (4) If a new crack is found during any action required by paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD and the Synoptic Chart contained in Figure 2, sheets 1 through 5 inclusive, of the service bulletin specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action: Prior to further flight, repair per a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, or the DGAC (or its delegated agent). Credit for Inspections Accomplished in Accordance with AOT (j) Any inspection accomplished before October 19, 2004, in accordance with Airbus AOT 53-11, dated October 13, 1997, is acceptable for compliance with the corresponding inspection specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, for that inspection area only. Operators must do the applicable inspections in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD for the remaining inspection areas. New Requirements of This AD Repetitive Inspections (k) At the later of the applicable times specified in the “Threshold (FC)” and “Grace Period” columns of Tables 1 and 2 in paragraph 1.E of the applicable service bulletin specified in Table 2 of this AD: Do an ultrasonic inspection or HFEC inspection, including rework of the pressure diaphragm, for cracks in the lower flanges of the left and right gantries 1 through 5 inclusive between FR47 and FR54, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin in Table 2 of this AD. Repeat the inspection at the applicable times specified in the “Interval (FC)” column of Tables 1 and 2 in paragraph 1.E of the applicable service bulletin in Table 2 of this AD. Accomplishment of the initial inspection ends the inspections required by paragraphs (f), (h), and (i) of this AD. Table 2.—Service Bulletins Airbus service bulletin— For airplanes identified in— (1) A300-53-0379, Revision 01, dated October 4, 2005 Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD. (2) A300-53-6152, Revision 01, dated October 4, 2005 Paragraphs (c)(3) through (c)(6) of this AD inclusive. Corrective Action (l) If any crack is detected during any ultrasonic or HFEC inspection required by paragraph (k) of this AD, before further flight, repair the crack in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin in Table 2 of this AD, except as provided by paragraph (n) of this AD. Optional Terminating Actions (m) Accomplishment of the actions specified in Table 3 of this AD ends the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (k) of this AD. Table 3.—Optional Terminating Actions Before or at the same time with— Reinforce— By doing all the actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin— For airplanes identified in— (1) The actions required by paragraph (k) of this AD and the action specified in paragraph (m)(2) of this AD The flanges of the left and right portals 1 through 5 inclusive between FR47 and FR54 of the landing gear, including a rotating probe inspection for cracks of holes and repair if necessary A300-53-0380, dated August 5, 2005, except as provided by paragraph (n) of this AD A300-53-6153, dated August 24, 2005, except as provided by paragraph (n) of this AD Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD. Paragraphs (c)(3) through (c)(6) of this AD inclusive. (2) The actions required by paragraph (k) of this AD Portals 3, 4, and 5 of the plates/skin A300-53-0360, dated May 3, 2002, except as provided by paragraph (n) of this AD Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD > A300-53-6132, dated February 5, 2002, except as provided by paragraph (n) of this AD. Paragraphs (c)(3) through (c)(6) of this AD inclusive Repair of Certain Cracks (n) Where the applicable service bulletin recommends contacting Airbus for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the crack in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116; or the DGAC (or its delegated agent). Credit for Original Service Bulletins (o) Accomplishing the inspections and repair before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0379, dated May 9, 2005, or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6152, dated May 9, 2005, as applicable, is acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (k) and (l) of this AD. No Inspection Report (p) Although the service bulletins in this AD specify to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (q)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (r) French airworthiness directive F-2005-091 R1, issued September 28, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 8, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7477 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24780; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-069-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F 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 McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This proposed AD would require installing or replacing with improved parts, as applicable, the bonding straps between the metallic frame of the fillet and the wing leading edge ribs, on both the left and right sides. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks in the event of a severe lightning strike, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 3, 2006. 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. • 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. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5262; fax (562) 627-5210. 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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24780; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-069-AD” at the beginning 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 received 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 may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may 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 receives them. Discussion 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” (67 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. Engineering review of the extended wing-to-fuselage fillet on certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F airplanes revealed an increase in the nonmetallic area of the fillet. Engineering reviews of the conventional wing-to-fuselage fillet on certain of the same airplane models revealed that the support ribs of the fuselage-mounted fillet are not grounded, but should be. These conditions, in combination with a severe lightning strike and flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-109, Revision 4, dated October 7, 1992 (for airplanes with extended wing-to-fuselage fillets); and McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-111, Revision 3, dated August 24, 1992 (for airplanes with conventional wing-to-fuselage fillets). The service bulletins describe procedures for installing or replacing with improved parts, as applicable, the bonding straps between the metallic frame of the fillet and the wing leading edge ribs, on both the left and right sides. For airplanes with extended wing-to-fuselage fillets, the service bulletin indicates that there are six bonding straps. For airplanes with conventional wing-to-fuselage fillets, the service bulletin indicates that there are ten bonding straps. 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. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletins.” Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletins McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-109 recommends doing the installation or replacement at the earliest practical maintenance period, and McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-111 recommends doing the installation or maintenance at the first convenient check, but no later than 7,500 flight-hours after receiving the service bulletin. We have determined that these intervals would not address the identified unsafe condition soon enough to ensure an adequate level of safety for the affected fleet. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered the manufacturer's recommendation, the degree of urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition, and the average utilization of the affected fleet. In light of all of these factors, we find that a compliance time of the earlier of 7,500 flight hours or 60 months after the effective date of this AD represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. This difference has been coordinated with Boeing, and Boeing concurs. Costs of Compliance There are about 457 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 280 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take between 9 and 17 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts would cost between $3,720 and $4,169 per airplane. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD is between $4,440 and $5,529 per airplane, or between $1,243,200 and $1,548,120 for the U.S.-registered fleet. 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 proposed AD 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2006-24780; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-069-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 3, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, DC-10-40F, airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in the applicable service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD. Table 1.—Service Bulletins McDonnell Douglas DC-10 service bulletin Revision level Date For airplanes with— 53-109 4 October 7, 1992 Extended wing-to-fuselage fillets. 53-111 3 August 24, 1992 Conventional wing-to-fuselage fillets. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks in the event of a severe lightning strike, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. 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. Installation or Replacement (f) Within 7,500 flight hours or 60 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs earlier: Install or replace with improved parts, as applicable, the bonding straps between the metallic frame of the fillet and the wing leading edge ribs, on both the left and right sides, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin identified in Table 1 of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 8, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7476 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24787; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-043-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F Airplanes; Model DC-10-15 Airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) Airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F Airplanes; Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F Airplanes; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F 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 McDonnell Douglas transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would require fabrication and installation of a wire harness guard in the right wheel well of the main landing gear (MLG), and related investigative and corrective actions as necessary. For certain airplanes, the proposed AD also would require replacement of the electrical connectors of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps with improved electrical connectors and related investigative and corrective actions. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to prevent damage to the wire support bracket and wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pump and, for certain airplanes, water intrusion through the electrical connectors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump. These conditions could lead to a potential ignition source in the right wheel well of the MLG around the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 3, 2006. 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. • 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. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Sujishi, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety/Mechanical and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5353; fax (562) 627-5210. 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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24787; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-043-AD” at the beginning 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 received 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 may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov . Examining the Docket You may 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 receives them. Discussion 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” (67 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. We have received two reports indicating that the auxiliary hydraulic pump system failed on McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-30F airplanes. Failure of the hydraulic pump resulted in several feet of burnt electrical wiring between the auxiliary hydraulic pump motor and the right wheel well of the main landing gear (MLG). Operators also found damage to the adjacent structure, control cables, hydraulic pipes, and hoses. Investigation revealed that electrical arcing between damaged wiring and the adjacent structure caused a short in the pump motor, which led to the failure of the hydraulic pump. The damaged wiring was caused by maintenance personnel stepping on the wiring assembly. Damage to the wire support bracket and wiring, if not corrected, could lead to a potential ignition source in the right wheel well of the MLG around the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. We have also received a third report that the auxiliary hydraulic pump failed on a McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 airplane. Investigation of the third report revealed that water entered into the auxiliary hydraulic pump through the electrical connectors, causing electrical arcing. The electrical arcing led to the failure of the hydraulic pump. Water intrusion through the electrical connectors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump, if not corrected, could lead to a potential ignition source in the right wheel well of the MLG around the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. Other Related Rulemaking On February 26, 2004, we issued AD 2004-05-20, amendment 39-13515 (69 FR 11504, March 11, 2004). That AD is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes; Model DC-10-15 airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes; Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes. That AD requires modification of the installation wiring for the electric motor operated auxiliary hydraulic pumps in the right wheel well area of the main landing gear, and repetitive inspections of the numbers 1 and 2 electric motors of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps for electrical resistance, continuity, mechanical rotation, and associated airplane wiring resistance/voltage; and corrective actions if necessary. We issued that AD to prevent failure of the electric motors of the hydraulic pump and associated wiring, which could result in fire at the auxiliary hydraulic pump and consequent damage to the adjacent electrical equipment and/or structure. The repetitive inspections of that AD ensure that any damage to the wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps can be detected and corrected. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed the following service information: Airplanes Service bulletin Dated McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes; Model DC-10-15 airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-29A146, Revision 1 April 6, 2005. McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 29-135 September 8, 1993. McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-29A060 April 30, 2001. Boeing Alert Service Bulletins DC10-29A146 and MD11-29A060 describe procedures for fabricating a wire harness guard and installing it in the right wheel well of the main landing gear (MLG), and doing related investigative and corrective actions. The related investigative actions are a visual inspection of the wiring installations of the auxiliary hydraulic pump in the right main wheel well at station Y = 1381 for chafing; and verification that the area around the wiring of auxiliary hydraulic pump is clean and free of debris. The corrective action is to repair any damaged or chafed wiring. McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 29-135 describes procedures for replacing the electrical connectors, having part number (P/N) FC6DE24-10S or DC62E24-10SN, of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps at the right wheel well of the MLG with improved electrical connectors having P/N DC62F24-10SN, and doing a related investigative action. The related investigative action is a test of the auxiliary hydraulic system. 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. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletins.” Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletins Boeing Alert Service Bulletins DC10-29A146 and MD11-29A060 describe procedures for verifying that the area around the wiring of auxiliary hydraulic pump is clean and free of debris. However, the service bulletins do not specify what corrective action to take if any debris is found in the area around the wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pump. This NPRM proposes to require cleaning the area of the debris before further flight. Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletins DC10-29A146 and MD11-29A060 recommend accomplishing the modification within a compliance time of 18 months, this NPRM would require a compliance time of 60 months. Since issuance of those service bulletins, the manufacturer has reviewed the identified unsafe condition in response to SFAR 88. As a result, the manufacturer recommends extending the compliance time to 60 months because the unsafe condition occurs in an area outside of the fuel tank. Also as stated previously, we issued AD 2004-05-20 that in part requires repetitive inspections of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps at intervals of 2,500 flight hours. AD 2004-05-20 ensures that any damage to the wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps can be detected and corrected. For these reasons, we find that a compliance time of 60 months represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. This NPRM identifies the correct P/N for a certain rivet that is incorrectly specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-29A060. P/N MS20470AD5-7, shown in the parts and material table in paragraph 2.C.2 of the service bulletin, is not a valid P/N. The correct P/N that must be used is P/N MS20470AD6-7; this P/N is correctly referenced in Figure 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. The manufacturer is aware of this discrepancy, concurs with the change, and has issued Information Notice MD11-29A060 IN 01, dated August 15, 2002, to inform operators of the error. We have included this information in paragraph (g) of this NPRM. McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 29-135 specifies testing the auxiliary hydraulic system, but does not specify what corrective action to take if the auxiliary hydraulic system fails that test. This NPRM proposes to require, before further flight, repairing the auxiliary hydraulic system according to a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA. Chapter 29-20-00 of the DC-10 Aircraft Maintenance Manual is one approved method for repairing the auxiliary hydraulic system. Although McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 29-135 recommends accomplishing the replacements at the earliest practical maintenance period, we have determined that this imprecise compliance time would not address the identified unsafe condition in a timely manner. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this NPRM, we considered not only the manufacturer's recommendation, but the degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe condition, the average utilization of the affected fleet, and the time necessary to perform the replacements. In light of all of these factors, we find a compliance time of 60 months for completing the replacements to be warranted, in that it represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. This difference has been coordinated with the manufacturer. Clarification of Concurrent Requirements Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-29A146 recommends accomplishing Boeing Service Bulletins DC10-29A144 and DC10-29A142 concurrently for ease of maintenance and scheduling. Also, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-29A060 recommends accomplishing Boeing Service Bulletins MD11-29A059 and MD11-29A057 concurrently for ease of maintenance and scheduling. This NPRM, however, would not require operators to accomplish any of these service bulletins concurrently. Clarification of Inspection Terminology The “visual inspection” specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletins DC10-29A146 and MD11-29A060 is referred to as a “general visual inspection” in this NPRM. We have included the definition for a general visual inspection in a note in this NPRM. Costs of Compliance There are about 627 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 303 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs, at an average labor rate of $80 per hour, for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Estimated Costs Models Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, DC-10-40F, MD-10-10F, and MD-10-30F airplanes Fabrication and Installation 3 $889 $1,129 206 $232,574 Replacement 2 290 450 206 92,700 MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes Fabrication and installation 3 866 1,106 97 107,282 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 proposed AD 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2006-24787; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-043-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 3, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to the McDonnell Douglas airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category. (1) Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes; Model DC-10-15 airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes; fuselage numbers (FNs) 1 through 446 inclusive. (2) Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes; F/Ns 0447, 0448, 0449, 0451 through 0464 inclusive, 0466 through 0489 inclusive, 0491 through 0517 inclusive, 0519 through 0552 inclusive, and 0554 through 0646 inclusive. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent damage to the wire support bracket and wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pump and, for certain airplanes, water intrusion through the electrical connectors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump. These conditions could lead to a potential ignition source in the right wheel well of the main landing gear (MLG) around the fuel tank, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. 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. Installation and Replacement for Certain Airplanes (f) For Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes; Model DC-10-15 airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes: Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD. (1) Fabricate a wire harness guard and install it in the right wheel well of the MLG, and do all related investigative and applicable corrective actions, by accomplishing all of the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-29A146, Revision 1, dated April 6, 2005; except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. If any debris is found in the area around the wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pump, before further flight, clean the area of the debris. (2) Replace any electrical connector having part number (P/N) DC62E24-10SN or FC6DE24-10S of the auxiliary hydraulic pumps at the right wheel well of the MLG with improved electrical connectors having P/N DC62F24-10SN, and do the related investigative action before further flight, by accomplishing all of actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 29-135, dated September 8, 1993. If the auxiliary hydraulic system fails the test, before further flight, repair the auxiliary hydraulic system according to a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Chapter 29-20-00 of the DC-10 Aircraft Maintenance Manual is one approved method. Installation for Other Certain Airplanes (g) For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, fabricate and install a wire harness guard in the right wheel well of the MLG, and do all related investigative and applicable corrective actions, by accomplishing all of the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-29A060, dated April 30, 2001; except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. If any debris is found in the area around the wiring of the auxiliary hydraulic pump, before further flight, clean the area of the debris. Rivet P/N MS20470AD5-7, shown in the parts and material table in paragraph 2.C.2 of the service bulletin, is not a valid P/N; the correct P/N that must be used is P/N MS20470AD6-7. Exception to Service Bulletins (h) Where Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-29A146, Revision 1, dated April 6, 2005; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-29A060, dated April 30, 2001, specify doing a visual inspection of the wiring installations of the auxiliary hydraulic pump in the right main wheel well at station Y=1381 for chafing, do a general visual inspection. 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 ensure visual access to all 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.” Credit for Original Issue of Service Bulletin (i) For Model DC-10-10 and DC-10-10F airplanes; Model DC-10-15 airplanes; Model DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes: Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-29A146, dated April 30, 2001, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (j)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7475 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24786; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-087-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 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 McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 airplanes. This proposed AD would require installing a clamp, a bonding jumper assembly, and attaching hardware to the refueling manifold in the right wing refueling station area. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to prevent arcing on the in-tank side of the fueling valve during a lightning strike, which could result in an ignition source that could ignite fuel vapor and cause a fuel tank explosion. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 3, 2006. 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. • 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. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Bond, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5253; fax (562) 627-5210. 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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24786; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-087-AD” at the beginning 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 received 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 may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov . Examining the Docket You may 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 receives them. Discussion 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” (67 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. We have received a report indicating that a SFAR 88 review of the fuel system on McDonnell Douglas Model MD-80 airplanes revealed a potential for arcing on the in-tank side of the fueling valve during a lightning strike. The non-conductive coating, which keeps the rigid pipes and valves electrically isolated, may wear off or be scratched. Any wear or scratch in the coating could allow lightning-induced current to flow from the refueling manifold to the airplane structure through the fueling valve and could cause arcing. Arcing on the in-tank side of the fueling valve could result in an ignition source that could ignite fuel vapor and cause a fuel tank explosion. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-213, dated May 16, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for installing a clamp, a bonding jumper assembly, and attaching hardware to the refueling manifold in the right wing refueling station area. 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. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Costs of Compliance There are about 994 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 573 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $8 per airplane. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $96,264, or $168 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 proposed AD 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2006-24786; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-087-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 3, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-213, dated May 16, 2005. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent arcing on the in-tank side of the fueling valve during a lightning strike, which could result in an ignition source that could ignite fuel vapor and cause a fuel tank explosion. 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. Electrical Bond Installation (f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, install a clamp, a bonding jumper assembly, and attaching hardware to the refueling manifold in the right wing refueling station area; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-28-213, dated May 16, 2005. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7479 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2006-24788; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-073-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 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 EMBRAER Model ERJ 170 airplanes. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection for proper crimping of the terminal lugs for the power cables of each integrated drive generator (IDG), installing a new sleeve on the terminal, and re-crimping if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report that the terminal lugs for the power cables of the IDGs may not be adequately crimped, which could allow the cables to be pulled out of the terminals with no significant force. We are proposing this AD to prevent loss of all normal electrical power for the airplane, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 16, 2006. 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. • 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. Contact Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149. 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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24788; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-073-AD” at the beginning 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 received 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 may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may 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 receives them. Discussion The Departamento de Aviac ão Civil (DAC), which is the airworthiness authority for Brazil, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on certain EMBRAER Model ERJ 170 airplanes. The DAC advises that during a heavy maintenance action, it was discovered that four terminal lugs for the power cables of the integrated drive generators (IDGs) were not adequately crimped during installation, which could allow the cables to be pulled out of the terminals with no significant force. This condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of all normal electrical power for the airplane, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. Relevant Service Information EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin 170-24-0028, dated January 4, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing an inspection of the crimping of terminal lugs for the power cables of each IDG, and corrective actions. The corrective actions are installing a new sleeve on the terminal, and re-crimping if necessary. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The DAC mandated the service information and issued Brazilian airworthiness directive 2006-02-04, dated March 15, 2006, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Brazil. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD This airplane model is manufactured in Brazil and is type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DAC has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the DAC's findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. Clarification of Inspection Terminology In this proposed AD, the “detailed visual inspection” specified in the Brazilian airworthiness directive is referred to as a “detailed inspection.” We have included the definition for a detailed inspection in a note in the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 54 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. The manufacturer states that it will supply required parts to the operators at no cost. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $4,320, or $80 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 proposed AD 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-2006-24788; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-073-AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 16, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to EMBRAER Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE, and -100 SU airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-24-0028, dated January 4, 2006. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report that the terminal lugs for the power cables of the integrated drive generators (IDGs) may not be adequately crimped, which could allow the cables to be pulled out of the terminals with no significant force. We are issuing this AD to prevent the loss of all normal electrical power for the airplane, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. 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. Inspection and Corrective Actions (f) Within 600 flight hours after the effective date of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for proper crimping of terminal lugs for the power cables of each IDG, and install a new sleeve on the terminal. If the terminal lugs are not properly installed and crimped: Before further flight, re-crimp and install a new sleeve on the terminal. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBREAR Service Bulletin 170-24-0028, dated January 4, 2006. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: “An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.” Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (h) Brazilian airworthiness directive 2006-02-04, dated March 15, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-7474 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [USCG-2001-10881] RIN 1625-AA36 Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Amendment AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing a supplemental change to its notice of proposed rulemaking for modifying drawbridge operating regulations. This proposed supplemental change will consolidate all temporary changes to a drawbridge operating schedule into either a deviation or a rulemaking based on the length of time of the temporary change. This new proposed change is intended to provide more easily understood regulatory requirements. This proposed change will not affect the requirements for emergency closures or permanent changes to an operating schedule. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management Facility on or before July 17, 2006. Comments sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB on or before July 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number USCG-2001-10881 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods: (1) Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. (3) Fax: 202-493-2251. (4) 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. The telephone number is 202-366-9329. (5) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. You must also mail comments on collection of information to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard. The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at 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. You may also find this docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Chris Jaufmann, Office of Bridge Administration, United States Coast Guard Headquarters, 202-267-0368. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Dockets Operations, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-493-0402. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking, USCG-2001-10881, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material by mail, hand delivery, fax, or electronic means to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES ; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this supplemental proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Office of Bridge Administration at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would be helpful, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register . Regulatory History On April 17, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Amendment to Drawbridge Operation Regulations” in the Federal Register (68 FR 18922). We received 11 letters commenting on the proposed rule; however none of those comments were the cause for this supplemental proposed rule. Responses to these comments are addressed below. No public meeting was requested and none was held. Background and Purpose The last major update to the drawbridge regulations in 33 CFR part 117 was in 1984. The Coast Guard published a NPRM on April 17, 2003 (68 FR 18922) which proposed revising part 117 to provide clearer language and more easily understood regulatory requirements. However, after further review the Coast Guard determined that certain proposed changes and clarifications made the regulatory process more cumbersome. Currently the Coast Guard has two deviations that allow bridge owners to change operating schedules for 60 days for maintenance and repair needs, and 90 days to test a new operating schedule. In our NPRM, we proposed a third deviation for short term events, and a notice requirement for winter operations in the northern region of the Eighth Coast Guard District and all of the Ninth Coast Guard District. In order to simplify our bridge program's regulatory process, the Coast Guard is proposing to remove the aforementioned notice and three enumerated deviations, and to consolidate all temporary changes to a drawbridge operating schedule into one of two categories: (1) A deviation, when the temporary change will be for a period of 180 days or less, or; (2) a rulemaking, when the temporary change will be for a period greater then 180 days. This new supplemental proposed rule will amend § 117.35 and remove §§ 117.37, 117.43, and 117.45. This will not affect the bridge owners' responsibility to notify the Coast Guard in a timely manner with their request to change an operating schedule or the discretion of the District Commander to accept the request. Discussion of Proposed Rule In this supplemental proposed rule, the Coast Guard proposes to simplify the regulatory process by creating a single deviation for temporary changes to drawbridge operating schedules lasting 180 days or less. This deviation provision would allow the District Commanders the flexibility to maximize waterway use for navigation prior to and during varying weather conditions, repair/maintenance situations, reasons of public health and safety, and public events. Any temporary change of an operating schedule lasting greater then 180 days or any permanent change to an operating schedule will require a full rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. This supplemental proposed rule will remove the need for separate provisions for winter drawbridge operations in the Ninth Coast Guard District (§ 117.45), the 60 day deviation for repairs (§ 117.35(d)), and the 90 day test deviation (§ 117.43). This proposed rule also removes the need for the proposed deviation for short term public events (§ 117.37) and the proposed winter operating provision for the northern areas of the Eighth Coast Guard District found in § 117.45 of the NPRM. We also propose to add two new definitions which define the terms drawbridge and drawspan. The Coast Guard will make conforming changes to subpart B removing various terms such as Span, Lift, Draw, or any other unnecessary unique designation used to describe the drawbridge or drawspan and replacing them with the appropriate term. In the NPRM, the Coast Guard also proposed to add six new definitions to the part; to make a substantive revision to the regulation governing the removable span bridge across Lindsey Slough; and to include in subpart A, a specific requirement that bridge owners must cycle the drawspan(s) of their drawbridges periodically to ensure operation of the drawbridge. We also proposed to rewrite and reorganize sections in subpart A, and to make technical and conforming changes in subpart B. This SNPRM will not affect those proposed changes. Discussion of Comments and Changes The 11 letters received during the comment period came from state, regional, city, and county transportation offices; a railway association; a railroad company; and two private citizens. For our discussion of these comments, we combined remarks from all comments on each issue, and have addressed the issues, starting with the proposed change that generated the largest number of comments to the proposed change that generated the least. Change in Drawbridge Operating Schedule for Maintenance Issue —All 11 comments objected to our proposal to require submission of requests for change to a drawbridge operation schedule 90 days before the start date of the schedule change. The comments focused on difficulties in scheduling maintenance work that far in advance because changes in weather and tidal conditions, contracting issues, and unpredictable occurrences often cause delays in starting or finishing maintenance work on drawbridges. These delays cause changes to the dates for scheduled maintenance requested by the bridge owners. Response —The proposed change to § 117.35 was intended to clarify the procedures for temporary changes to drawbridge operating schedules. The proposed 90 days reflects the amount of time the Coast Guard may need to review a requested change; obtain any necessary additional information; and to prepare decision letters and publish in the Federal Register and other appropriate media, any necessary rulemaking documents related to the change. The full 90-day time period is not needed in every case, nor is it a requirement that precludes processing a request received fewer than 90 days before the needed change. District Commanders have the discretion to process a request even if it is received fewer than 90 days before the needed change. We have revised the language in § 117.35(c)(3) to state that the District Commander has the discretion to authorize a request submitted less than 90 days before the schedule change. As to unforeseen delays in starting or completing maintenance work, the requested closure period should include a sufficient number of days to accommodate some unanticipated delays in starting or completing the work. The District Commander's authorization to change the operating schedule would then require that if these additional days are not needed, the drawbridge should operate under its normal schedule until the work begins or is returned to its normal schedule immediately after the work is completed. General Requirements for Drawbridge Owners Issue —In the NPRM, we proposed to change the § 117.7 requirement to operate a drawbridge at “sufficient intervals” to a more specific requirement to “cycle the drawspans a minimum of once every six months.” We also proposed to remove the language “Except for drawbridges not required to open for the passage of vessels.” Two comments on this section stated that, if we removed the exception language from § 117.7, the proposed specific requirement for cycling the drawbridge once every six months would cause “undue burden on the bridge owner.” Response —The Coast Guard agrees that requiring cycling of the drawspans “every six months” may not be necessary. We have changed the proposed text to eliminate the six month requirement and replace it with language that allows the bridge owner to determine the number of times the drawspans needs to be cycled, so long as the number of cycles “ensures operation of the drawbridge.” This allows the bridge owner the flexibility to determine how often cycling the drawspan would be appropriate to maintain their drawbridge in operating condition. The Coast Guard has also decided not to remove the “exception” term from § 117.7. Some drawbridges authorized to remain closed to navigation prior to this proposed rule cannot meet the cycling requirement without incurring costs to bring the drawbridge back to operational condition. Removal of the word “except” would cause an unnecessary reactivation of drawbridges, which had been authorized to remain closed to navigation before an order from the District Commander to return them to operating condition. Therefore, the Coast Guard will only require drawbridges authorized to remain closed after the effective date of the final rule to meet the cycling and maintenance requirements in § 117.7 unless a previously exempted bridge has been restored to operation at which point they will be subject to requirements of this part. Authorized Closure of a Drawbridge Issue —Two comments addressed proposed changes to § 117.39. The concerns in these comments are similar to the comments for § 117.7 regarding the cycling of the drawbridge, costs, and necessity of maintaining a drawbridge that has been authorized to remain closed to navigation and unattended. Both comments indicated that the statement “The District Commander may condition approval on the continued maintenance of the operating machinery” should remain in the section. Response —Based on these comments, we have changed the section heading and rewritten the regulatory text to clarify that these requirements apply to drawbridges that are authorized to remain closed after the effective date of the final rule. The text in § 117.39(c)(2) allows the District Commander to set out in the approval letter any appropriate conditions including the continued maintenance of the operating machinery. The authorization to remain closed is a regulatory permission that allows the drawbridge to be untended and closed to navigation. The authorization is not a change to the bridge permit, it is a change to the operation requirements for the drawbridge and it is effective until revoked or revised. The authorization does not alter the bridge permit, which requires drawbridges to remain operational, i.e. capable of operating. Changes made to a drawbridge that would effectively render it inoperable, for example, removal of operating equipment or alteration of transportation surfaces so the draw cannot open, require a change to the permit. This type of change can only be done with an amendment to the permit, not a regulatory change to the operating schedule. Closure of Drawbridge for Emergency Repair Issue —Two comments addressed § 117.36. One comment was concerned that the removal of the phrase “vital, unscheduled repair or maintenance work shall be performed without delay * * *” from § 117.35, and not added to the new § 117.36, would take away the ability of the bridge owner to immediately close the drawbridge in case of a mechanical or structural failure and would require full rulemaking before closing the drawbridge. The second comment indicated that there was a “fine line” between what constitutes an emergency and an unscheduled repair. Response —The section heading for § 117.36 states that this section pertains to “Closure of drawbridge for emergency repair.” Need for a “vital, unscheduled repair” is an emergency that requires immediate attention for safety. If a drawbridge is unexpectedly inoperable, or should be rendered inoperable because of some mechanical or structural problem, then the drawbridge owner should close the drawbridge and notify the District Commander without delay. The District Commander will issue appropriate notification to inform the public of the situation. In this case, there is no need for rulemaking and § 117.36 does not suggest that. If the drawbridge can operate safely until needed unscheduled repairs or maintenance is done, then any change to the operating schedule to accommodate the repair work must be approved by the District Commander. In these cases, where the repair or maintenance is necessary, but the drawspan can continue to operate safely, the drawbridge owner must request a temporary change in the operating schedule so the District Commander can provide appropriate notice to the public. Permanent Changes to Drawbridge Operation Issue —We received one comment on the proposed new § 117.8. The comment suggested that a time limit of 30 days be placed on the District Commander in responding to a request for a permanent change to a drawbridge-operating schedule. Response —The Coast Guard does not agree that a specific time limit should be set for the District Commander's response to a request to change a drawbridge operating schedule. Reviewing submitted information and gathering necessary additional information to determine whether a permanent change is needed, as well as reviewing environmental considerations, and reviewing how the balance between the competing needs of land and marine traffic would be affected, may take longer than 30 days. Temporary Change in Drawbridge Operating Schedule for Local Public Events Issue —We received one comment on proposed § 117.37. The comment stated that, “The requirement in § 117.37 that advance notice be published in the Federal Register adds to the lead time for this type of activity without providing benefit to the river users” and that the Local Notice to Mariners “requires less lead time” and “is much more likely to be consulted by mariners, the impacted user group, than the Federal Register .” The comment also stated that in both § 117.35 and § 117.37 it appears that a Deviation is more stringent than a Temporary Rule. Response —At the time the notice of proposed rulemaking was published, it was the Coast Guard's intent to introduce a third deviation for public events. However, after careful consideration, it was determined that combining all three deviations into one helped to streamline the drawbridge regulatory process. We believe the comment may still apply to this change, and address it accordingly. A deviation, authorized in part 117, is an alternative tool to rulemaking under certain conditions. When the requirements set out in § 117.35 are met, the District Commander may issue a deviation, instead of a rule, to authorize a temporary change in a drawbridge operation schedule. While this deviation is not a rule subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, we are still required to publish that rule in the Federal Register pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Publishing it prior to its effective date, while not technically required, is certainly well within the spirit of FOIA, and as such it is the Coast Guard's policy to do so whenever possible. This does not prevent a District Commander from also publishing Notices of Deviation in local notices to mariners, or by any other means available. Deviation for Testing Drawbridge Operation Changes Issue —We received one comment on proposed § 117.43. The comment objects to allowing the public to request testing a change to a drawbridge operating schedule. Response —As local conditions change, such as vehicle and waterway traffic, a drawbridge operating schedule may no longer meet local needs. 33 CFR 1.05-20, states that “any member of the public may petition the Coast Guard to undertake a rulemaking action.” Once the request and all pertinent information have been reviewed, the District Commander will determine if the requested change is appropriate. Under the supplemental proposed rule, the specific deviation for testing a rule will be removed and the action of testing a new operating schedule will fall under the new proposed deviation for any modification to an operating schedule. This change will not affect the ability of the public to request a change to an operating schedule. Other Changes In § 117.35 we are changing the number of days it normally takes a District Commander to respond to a request for a temporary change to an operating schedule from five working days to ten working days. Due to workload issues five working days is often an insufficient amount of time to gather additional necessary information and coordinate with affected waterway users before responding to a request. The NPRM proposed a number of minor edits to specific sections in subpart B. However, since the publication of the NPRM, some districts have changed or proposed to change these sections and the proposed changes in our NPRM are no longer needed. Therefore these sections have been removed from this final rule. The Coast Guard has revised the text in § 117.8(a) and (b) to clarify that anyone, not just the bridge owner, may request a change to the operating schedule of a drawbridge. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. There will be no cost to the general public. This proposal is to provide a more user-friendly part 117 that will remove redundancies and regulations that are no longer functional, make corrections and amendments, and provide clearer language for the user. The new proposed deviation would not have a significant effect on the economy. These requests for deviations will be reviewed by the District Commander or his/her delegee, taking waterway users and traffic into consideration. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601-612], we considered whether this proposed rulemaking would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104-121], we offer to assist small entities in understanding the proposed rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This rule calls for a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Under the provisions of 33 U.S.C. 499, the Secretary of Homeland Security is mandated to prescribe rules and regulations for governing the operation of drawbridges. This authorization was delegated to the Commandant of the Coast Guard under Department of Homeland Security Delegation number 0170.1 and the drawbridge operating regulations are set out in 33 CFR part 117. To change any regulation, 5 U.S.C. 553 requires rulemaking to be published in the Federal Register and that the notice shall include a statement of time, place, and nature of public rulemaking proceedings. The information collected for the rule can only be obtained from the bridge owners. The information collection requirements are contained in 33 CFR 117.8, 117.35, 117.36, 117.39, 117.40, and 117.42. Need for Information: To change any regulation, 5 U.S.C. 553 requires rulemaking to be published in the Federal Register . The information needed to change a drawbridge operating schedule can only be obtained from the bridge owners. The information collection requirements are contained in 33 CFR part 33 CFR 117.8, 117.35, 117.36, 117.39, 117.40, and 117.42. As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of this rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of information and OMB has approved the collection. The part number is 117 of title 33 and the corresponding approval number from OMB is OMB Control Number 1625-0109 which expires on 30 September 2008. You are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Federalism We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13132 and have determined that this proposed rule would not have implications for Federalism under that Order. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This proposed rule is not economically significant and does not concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( e.g. , specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction from further environmental documentation. Promulgation of changes to drawbridge regulations has been found to not have significant effects on the human environment. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an “Environmental Analysis Check List” is not required for this rule. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. Regulations For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. Revise the authority citation for part 117 to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Revise § 117.1 to read as follows: § 117.1 Purpose. (a) This part prescribes the general and special drawbridge operating regulations that apply to the drawbridges across the navigable waters of the United States and its territories. The authority to regulate drawbridges across the navigable waters of the United States is vested in the Secretary of Homeland Security. (b) Subpart A of this part contains the general operation requirements that apply to all drawbridges. (c) Subpart B of this part contains specific requirements for operation of individual drawbridges. These requirements are in addition to or vary from the general requirements in subpart A. Specific sections in subpart B, which vary from a general requirement in subpart A, supersede the general requirement. All other general requirements in subpart A, that are not at variance, apply to the drawbridges and removable span bridges listed in subpart B. § 117.3 [Removed] 3. Remove § 117.3. 4. Revise § 117.4 to read as follows: § 117.4 Definitions. The following definitions apply to this part: Appurtenance means an attachment or accessory extending beyond the hull or superstructure that is not an integral part of the vessel and is not needed for a vessel's piloting, propelling, controlling, or collision avoidance capabilities. Automated drawbridge means a drawbridge that is operated by an automated mechanism, not a drawtender. An automated drawbridge is normally kept in the open to navigation position and closes when the mechanism is activated. Deviation means a District Commander's action authorizing a drawbridge owner to temporarily not comply with the drawbridge opening requirements in this part. District Commander means the Commander of the Coast Guard District in which the drawbridge is located. Drawbridge means a bridge with an operational span that is intended to be opened for the passage of waterway traffic. Drawspan means the operational span of a drawbridge. Lowerable means the non-structural vessel appurtenance can be mechanically or manually lowered and raised again. The term lowerable also applies to a nonstructural vessel appurtenance, which can be modified to make the item flexible, hinged, collapsible, or telescopic so that it can be mechanically or manually lowered and raised again. Nonstructural means that the item is not rigidly fixed to the vessel and could be relocated or altered. Not essential to navigation means that a nonstructural vessel appurtenance, when in the lowered position, would not adversely affect the vessel's piloting, propulsion, control, or collision-avoidance capabilities. Public vessel means a vessel that is owned and operated by the United States Government and is not engaged in commercial service, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101. Remotely operated drawbridge means a drawbridge that is operated by remote control from a location away from the drawbridge. Removable span bridge means a bridge that requires the complete removal of a span by means other than machinery installed on the bridge to open the bridge to navigation. Untended means that there is no tender at the drawbridge. 5. Revise § 117.5 to read as follows: § 117.5 When the drawbridge must open. Except as otherwise authorized or required by this part, drawbridges must open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request or signal to open is given in accordance with this subpart. 6. Revise § 117.7 to read as follows: § 117.7 General requirements of drawbridge owners. Except for drawbridges that have been authorized, before [effective date of final rule], to remain closed to navigation or otherwise specified in subpart B of this part, drawbridge owners must: (a) Provide the necessary drawtender(s) for the safe and prompt opening of the drawbridge. (b) Maintain the working machinery of the drawbridge in good operating condition. (c) Cycle the drawspan(s) periodically to ensure operation of the drawbridge. (d) Ensure that the drawbridge operates in accordance with the requirements of this part. (e) Any drawbridge allowed to remain closed to navigation prior to [effective date of final rule], when necessary, must be returned to operable condition within the designated time set forth by the District Commander and will become subject to the requirements of this part. 7. Add § 117.8 to read as follows: § 117.8 Permanent changes to drawbridge operation. (a) To request a permanent change to a drawbridge operation requirement in this part, anyone may submit a written request, together with documentation supporting or justifying the requested change, to the District Commander. (b) If after evaluating the request, the District Commander determines that the requested change is not needed, he or she will respond to the request in writing and provide the reasons for denial of the requested change. (c) If the District Commander decides that a change may be needed, he or she will begin a rulemaking to implement the change. 8. In § 117.31 revise the section heading and paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.31 Drawbridge operations for emergency vehicles and emergency vessels. (a) A drawtender, who receives notification that an emergency vehicle is responding to an emergency situation, must make all reasonable efforts to have the drawspan closed at the time the emergency vehicle arrives. 9. Revise § 117.35 to read as follows: § 117.35 Temporary change to a drawbridge operating schedule. (a) For any temporary change to the operating schedule of a drawbridge, lasting less than or equal to 180 days, the District Commander may issue a deviation approval letter to the bridge owner and publish a “Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation” in the Federal Register . (b) If the time period for a temporary change to the operating schedule of a drawbridge will be greater than 180 days, the District Commander will follow appropriate rulemaking procedures and publish a temporary rule in the Federal Register prior to the start of the action. (c) Request for change. (1) To temporarily change the drawbridge-operating requirements the bridge owner must submit a written request to the District Commander for approval of the change. (2) The request must describe the reason for the closure and the dates and times scheduled for the start and end of the change. (3) Requests should be submitted as early as possible, preferably 90 days before the start of the action. District Commanders have discretion to accept requests submitted less than 90 days before a needed change if those requests can be processed before the date of the needed change. (d) Determination. The District Commander's determination to allow the schedule change is normally forwarded to the bridge owner within ten working days after receipt of the request. If the request is denied, the reasons for the denial will be set out in the District Commander's decision letter. (e) The drawbridge will return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period. (f) If the authorized closure period for an event is broken into separate time periods on the same day or on consecutive days, the drawbridge must provide normal openings for navigation between the authorized closures. (g) The District Commander will also announce the change to the operating schedule in the Local Notice to Mariners and other appropriate local media. 10. Add § 117.36 to read as follows: § 117.36 Closure of drawbridge for emergency repair. (a) When a drawbridge unexpectedly becomes inoperable, or should be immediately rendered inoperable because of mechanical failure or structural defect, the drawbridge owner must notify the District Commander of the closure without delay and give the reason for the emergency closure of the drawbridge and an estimated time when the drawbridge will return to operating condition. (b) The District Commander will notify mariners about the drawbridge status through Broadcast Notices to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners and any other appropriate local media. (c) Repair work under this section must be performed with all due speed in order to return the drawbridge to operation as soon as possible. 11. Revise § 117.39 to read as follows: § 117.39 Authorized closure of drawbridge due to infrequent requests for openings. (a) When there have been no requests for drawbridge openings for at least two years, a bridge owner may request that the District Commander authorize the drawbridge to remain closed to navigation and to be untended. (b) Requests to remain closed to navigation, under this section, must be submitted in writing to the District Commander for approval. (c) The District Commander may: (1) Authorize the closure of the drawbridge; (2) Set out any conditions in addition to the requirement in paragraph (d) of this section; and (3) Revoke an authorization and order the drawbridge returned to operation when necessary. (d) All drawbridges authorized to remain closed to navigation, under this section, must be maintained in operable condition. (e) Authorization under this section does not: (1) Authorize physical changes to the drawbridge structure, or (2) Authorize removal of the operating machinery. (f) Drawbridges authorized under this section to remain closed to navigation and to be untended will be identified in subpart B of this part. 12. Add § 117.40 to read as follows: § 117.40 Advance notice for drawbridge opening. (a) Upon written request by the owner of a drawbridge, the District Commander may authorize a drawbridge to operate under an advance notice for opening. The drawbridge tender, after receiving the advance notice must open the drawbridge at the requested time and allow for a reasonable delay in arrival of the vessel giving the advance notice. (b) If the request is approved, a description of the advanced notice for the drawbridge will be added to subpart B of this part. 13. Revise § 117.41 to read as follows: § 117.41 Maintaining drawbridges in the fully open position. (a) Drawbridges permanently maintained in the fully open to navigation position may discontinue drawtender service as long as the drawbridge remains fully open to navigation. The drawbridge must remain in the fully open position until drawtender service is restored. (b) If a drawbridge is normally maintained in the fully open to navigation position, but closes to navigation for the passage of pedestrian, vehicular, rail, or other traffic, the drawbridge must be tended unless: (1) Special operating requirements are established in subpart B of this part for that drawbridge; (2) Or, the drawbridge is remotely operated or automated. 14. Add § 117.42 to read as follows: § 117.42 Remotely operated and automated drawbridges. (a) Upon written request by the owner of a drawbridge, the District Commander may authorize a drawbridge to operate under an automated system or from a remote location. (b) If the request is approved, a description of the full operation of the remotely operated or automated drawbridge will be added to subpart B of this part. Subpart B—Specific Requirements 15. Revise § 117.51 to read as follows: § 117.51 General. The drawbridges in this subpart are listed by the state in which they are located and by the waterway they cross. Waterways are arranged alphabetically by state. The drawbridges listed under a waterway are generally arranged in order from the mouth of the waterway moving upstream. The drawbridges on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway are listed from north to south and on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from east to west. § 117.53 [Removed] 16. Remove § 117.53. 17. In § 117.55 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.55 Posting of requirements. (a) The owner of each drawbridge under this subpart, other than removable span bridges, must ensure that a sign summarizing the requirements in this subpart applicable to the drawbridge is posted both upstream and downstream of the drawbridge. The requirements to be posted need not include those in subpart A or §§ 117.51 through 117.59 of this part. § 117.57 [Removed] 18. Remove § 117.57. 19. Revise § 117.145 to read as follows: § 117.145 Burns Cutoff. The drawspan for the Daggett Road Drawbridge, mile 3.0 at Stockton, must open on signal if at least 48 hours notice is given to the Port of Stockton. 20. Revise § 117.155 to read as follows: § 117.155 Eureka Slough. The drawspan for the Northwestern Pacific Railroad Authority Drawbridge, mile 0.3 at Eureka, need not be opened for the passage of vessels. The owner or agency controlling the drawbridge must restore the drawspan to full operation within six months of notification from the District Commander. 21. Revise § 117.165 to read as follows: § 117.165 Lindsey Slough. The center drawspan of the Hastings Farms Highway Bridge, mile 2.0 between Egbert and Lower Hastings Tracts, must be removed for the passage of vessels if at least 72 hours notice is given to the Hastings Island Land Company office at Rio Vista. § 117.181 [Amended] 22. In § 117.181 remove the last sentence of the section. § 117.187 [Amended] 23. In § 117.187 remove the last sentence in paragraph (b). 24. Revise § 117.193 to read as follows: § 117.193 San Leandro Bay. The drawspans of the California Department of Transportation Highway and Bicycle drawbridges, mile 0.0 and mile 0.1, between Alameda and Bay Farm Island, must open on signal; except that, from 5 a.m. to 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., the drawspans must open on signal if at least 12 hours notice is given. Notice must be given to the drawtender of the Bay Farm Island drawbridges from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and to the drawtender of the Park Street Drawbridge at Alameda at all other times. The drawspans need not be opened for the passage of vessels from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. § 117.195 [Amended] 25. In § 117.195 remove the last sentence in this section. 26. In § 117.219 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.219 Pequonnock River. (a) Public vessels of the United States must be passed through as soon as possible. 27. In § 117.221 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.221 Saugatuck River. (a) Public vessels of the United States must be passed through as soon as possible. 28. In § 117.224 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.224 Thames River. (a) Immediately on signal for public vessels of the United States and commercial vessels; except, when a train scheduled to cross the drawbridge, without stopping, has passed the Midway, Groton, or New London stations and is in motion toward the drawbridge, the drawspan must not be opened for the passage of any vessel until the train has crossed the drawbridge; and 29. Revise § 117.225 to read as follows: § 117.225 Yellow Mill Channel. The drawspan of the Stratford Avenue Bridge, mile 0.3 at Bridgeport, must open on signal if at least 24-hours notice is given. Public vessels of the United States must pass through as soon as possible. 30. In § 117.255 add paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 117.255 Potomac River. (c) This section is also issued under the authority of Public Law 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039. 31. In § 117.261 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.261 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from St. Marys River to Key Largo. (a) General. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge listed in this section at anytime. 32. Revise § 117.269 to read as follows: § 117.269 Biscayne Bay. The east drawspan of the Venetian Causeway Drawbridge, between Miami and Miami Beach, must open on signal; except that, from November 1 through April 30 from 7:15 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. and 4:45 p.m. to 6:15 p.m. Monday through Friday, the draw need not be opened. However, the drawspan must open at 7:45 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 5:15 p.m., and 5:45 p.m. if any vessels are waiting to pass. The drawspan must open on-signal on Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, New Year's Day, and Washington's Birthday. The drawspan must open at anytime for public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows. § 117.271 [Amended] 33. In § 117.271 remove paragraph (b) and remove the paragraph designator from paragraph (a). 34. Revise § 117.273 to read as follows: § 117.273 Canaveral Barge Canal. (a) The drawspan of the Christa McAuliffe Drawbridge, SR 3, mile 1.0, across the Canaveral Barge Canal need only open daily for vessel traffic on the hour and half-hour from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.; except that from 6:15 a.m. to 8:15 a.m. and from 3:10 p.m. to 5:59 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, the drawspan need not open. From 10:01 p.m. to 5:59 a.m., everyday, the drawspan must open on signal if at least 3 hours notice is given to the drawtender. The drawspan must open as soon as possible for the passage of public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows. (b) The drawspan of the SR401 Drawbridge, mile 5.5 at Port Canaveral, must open on signal; except that, from 6:30 a.m. to 8 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday through Friday except Federal holidays, the drawspan need not be opened for the passage of vessels. From 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., the drawspan must open on signal if at least three hours notice is given. The drawspan must open as soon as possible for the passage of pubic vessels of the United States and tugs with tows. § 117.277 [Removed] 35. Remove § 117.277. 36.In § 117.287 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.287 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. (a) Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge listed in this section at anytime. 37. Revise § 117.289 to read as follows: § 117.289 Hillsboro Inlet. The drawspans of the SR A-1-A Drawbridge, mile 0.3 at Hillsboro Beach, must open on signal; except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., the drawspans need be opened only on the hour, quarter hour, half hour, and three quarter hour. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed at anytime. 38. In § 117.291 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.291 Hillsborough River. (a) The drawspans for the drawbridges at Platt Street, mile 0.0, Brorein Street, mile 0.16, Kennedy Boulevard, mile 0.4, Cass Street, mile 0.7, Laurel Street, mile 1.0, West Columbus Drive, mile 2.3, and West Hillsborough Avenue, mile 4.8, must open on signal if at least two hours notice is given; except that, the drawspan must open on signal as soon as possible for public vessels of the United States. 39. Revise § 117.311 to read as follows: § 117.311 New Pass. The drawspan for the State Road 789 Drawbridge, mile 0.05, at Sarasota, need only open on the hour, twenty minutes past the hour, and forty minutes past the hour from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. From 6 p.m. to 7 a.m., the drawspan must open on signal if at least 3 hours notice is given to the drawtender. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed at anytime. 40. In § 117.313 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.313 New River. (a) The drawspan for the S.E. Third Avenue Drawbridge, mile 1.4 at Fort Lauderdale, must open on signal; except that, from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding Saturday, Sunday, and all federal, state, and local holidays, the drawspan need not be opened for the passage of vessels. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed at anytime. 41. Revise § 117.315 to read as follows: § 117.315 New River, South Fork. (a) The drawspan for the Southwest 12th Street Drawbridge, mile 0.9 at Fort Lauderdale, must open on signal; except that, from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding Saturday, Sunday, and federal, state, and local holidays, the drawspan need not be opened for the passage of vessels. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed through the draw as soon as possible. (b) The drawspan for the SR84 Drawbridge, mile 4.4 at Fort Lauderdale, must open on signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must be passed through the draw as soon as possible. 42. In § 117.317 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.317 Okeechobee Waterway. (a) Exempt vessels. This term means public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows. 43. In § 117.325 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.325 St. Johns River. (a) The drawspan for the Main Street (US17) drawbridge, mile 24.7, at Jacksonville, must open on signal except that, from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday except Federal holidays, the drawspan need not be opened for the passage of vessels. 44. In § 117.353 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.353 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Savannah River to St. Marys River. (a) General. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows must, upon proper signal, be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge in this section at anytime. §§ 117.486 through 117.488 [Redesignated] 45. Redesignate §§ 117.486 through 117.488 as follows: Old section New section 117.486 117.487 117.487 117.488 117.488 117.486 46. In § 117.531 revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: § 117.531 Piscataqua River. (a) * * * (1) Public vessels of the United States, commercial vessels over 100 gross tons, inbound ferry service vessels and inbound commercial fishing vessels must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge as soon as possible. The opening signal from these vessels is four or more short blasts of a whistle, horn or a radio request. § 117.535 [Removed] 47. Remove § 117.535. 48. In § 117.571 revise paragraph (d) to read as follows: § 117.571 Spa Creek. (d) The drawspan must always open on signal for public vessels of the United States. 49. In § 117.573 revise paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 117.573 Stoney Creek. (c) Public vessels of the United States must be passed as soon as possible. 50. In § 117.588 revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows: § 117.588 Bass River. (a) Public vessels of the United States must be passed as soon as possible. (c) That the drawspan for the Hall Whitaker Drawbridge must open on signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. 51. In § 117.605 revise paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 117.605 Merrimack River. (c) The drawspans for the Massachusetts Department of Public Works drawbridges, mile 5.8 at Newburyport and mile 12.6 at Rock Village, and Groveland Drawbridge, mile 16.5 at Groveland, must open on signal if at least two hours notice is given. Public vessels of the United States must be passed through the drawspans as soon as possible. 52. In § 117.620 revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows: § 117.620 Westport River—East Branch. (a) Public vessels of the United States must be passed as soon as possible. (c) That the drawspan for the Westport Point Drawbridge, mile 1.2 at Westport, must open on signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. 53. Revise § 117.683 to read as follows: § 117.683 Pearl River. See § 117.486, Pearl River, listed under Louisiana. 54. In § 117.703 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.703 Bass River. (a) The drawspan must open on signal if at least six hours notice is given, except that public vessels of the United States must be passed as soon as possible. 55. In § 117.713 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.713 Cooper River. (a) The drawspans for the State Street Drawbridge, mile 0.3 and the Conrail Drawbridge at North River Avenue, mile 0.9, must open on signal if at least four hours notice is given. § 117.731 [Redesignated as § 117.730] 56. Redesignate § 117.731 as § 117.730. § 117.731a [Redesignate as § 117.731 and Amend] 57. Redesignate § 117.731a as § 117.731 and in newly redesignated § 117.731, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 117.731 Mullica River. (c) The drawspan must open as soon as possible for public vessels of the United States during the periods when four hours notice is required. § 117.733 [Amended] 58. In § 117.733 remove paragraph (a) and redesignate paragraphs (b) through (j) as paragraphs (a) through (i) respectively. 59. Revise § 117.736 to read as follows: § 117.736 Oceanport Creek. The drawspan for the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations Drawbridge, mile 8.4 near Oceanport, must open on signal from May 15 through September 15 between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m.; except that, the drawspan need not open 6 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m on weekdays, excluding all federal holidays except for Martin Luther King Day. The drawspan must open on signal upon four hours notice from May 15 through September 15 between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m., and from September 16 through May 14; except that, the drawspan need not be opened from 6 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on weekdays, excluding all Federal holidays except for Martin Luther King Day. Public vessels of the United States must be passed as soon as possible at anytime. 60. In § 117.738 revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: § 117.738 Overpeck Creek. (a) * * * (2) Public vessels of the United States must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge as soon as possible. § 117.739 [Amended] 61. In § 117.739 remove paragraphs (o) and (p)(2); redesignate paragraph (p)(3) as (p)(2) and redesignate paragraphs (p) through (u) as paragraphs (o) through (t) respectively. 62. In § 117.745 revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (b), introductory text, to read as follows: § 117.745 Rancocas River (Creek). (a) * * * (1) Public vessels of the United States must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge as soon as possible without delay at anytime. The opening signal from these vessels is four or more short blasts of a whistle or horn, or a radio request. (b) The drawspan for the SR#543 Drawbridge, mile 1.3 at Riverside and the SR#38 Drawbridge, mile 7.8 at Centerton, must operate as follows: § 117.775 [Removed] 63. Remove § 117.775. § 117.783 [Removed] 64. Remove § 117.783. 65. In § 117.789, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.789 Harlem River. (a) The drawspan of each drawbridge across the Harlem River, except the Spuyten Duyvil Railroad Drawbridge, need not be opened from 5 p.m. to 10 a.m. However, at all times, public vessels of the United States must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge, listed in this section, as soon as possible. 66. In § 117.791 remove paragraph (a)(3); redesignate paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) as (a)(3) and (a)(4), respectively, and revise paragraph (f)(4) to read as follows: § 117.791 Hudson River. (f) * * * (4) During the period that the Federal Lock at Troy is inoperative, the drawspans need not be opened for the passage of vessels. § 117.795 [Amended] 67. In § 117.795, remove paragraph (c). 68. In § 117.797 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.797 Lake Champlain. (a) The drawspan for each drawbridge listed in this section must open as soon as possible for public vessels of the United States. 69. In § 117.799 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.799 Long Island, New York Inland Waterway from East Rockaway Inlet to Shinnecock Canal. (a) At all times, public vessels of the United States, state must be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge listed in this section as soon as possible. § 117.821 [Amended] 70. In § 117.821 remove paragraph (a)(1) and redesignate (a)(2) through (a)(6) as (a)(1) through (a)(5) respectively. 71. In § 117.824 revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: § 117.824 Neuse River. (a) * * * (3) Must always open on signal for public vessels of the United States. 72. In § 117.843 revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: § 117.843 Trent River. (a) * * * (3) Must always open on signal for public vessels of the United States. § 117.867 [Removed] 73. Remove § 117.867. § 117.881 [Amended] 74. In § 117.881 remove paragraph (b) and paragraph designator (a) from the remaining text. § 117.885 [Removed] 75. Remove § 117.885. § 117.891 [Removed] 76. Remove § 117.891. 77. Revise § 117.892 to read as follows: § 117.892 South Slough. The drawspan for the Oregon State Highway Drawbridge across South Slough at Charleston must open on signal for the passage of vessels, except that between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., from June 1 through September 30, the drawspan need be opened only on the hour and half-hour. This exception must not apply to commercial tugs and/or tows or public vessels of the United States. 78. In § 117.911 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.911 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Little River to Savannah River. (a) General. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows, upon proper signal, will be passed through the drawspan of each drawbridge listed in this section at anytime. § 117.949 [Amended] 79. In § 117.949 remove the last sentence of the section. 80. Revise § 117.968 to read as follows: § 117.968 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The drawspan for the Port Isabel Drawbridge, mile 666.0, must open on signal; except that, from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m. on weekdays only, excluding Federal, state, and local holidays, the drawspan need open only on the hour for pleasure craft. The drawspan must open on signal at anytime for commercial vessels. When the drawspan is open for a commercial vessel, waiting pleasure craft must be passed. 81. Revise § 117.977 to read as follows: § 117.977 Pelican Island Causeway, Galveston Channel. The drawspan for the Pelican Island Causeway Drawbridge across Galveston Channel, mile 4.5 of the Galveston Channel, (GIWW mile 356.1) at Galveston, Texas, must open on signal; except that, from 6:40 a.m. to 8:10 a.m., 12 noon to 1 p.m., and 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday through Friday except Federal holidays, the drawspan need not be opened for passage of vessels. Public vessels of the United States must be passed at anytime. 82. In § 117.993 revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 117.993 Lake Champlain. (a) The drawspan for each of the drawbridges listed in this section must open as soon as possible for the passage of public vessels of the United States. 83. In § 117.1023 revise paragraph (b) to read as follows: § 117.1023 Pamunkey River. (b) Public vessels of the United States must pass at anytime. § 117.1039 [Removed] 84. Remove § 117.1039. Appendix A to Part 117 [Removed] 85. Remove Appendix A To part 117. Dated: May 5, 2006. T.H. Gilmour, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention. [FR Doc. 06-4631 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am]