AD 2014-09-09

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of two in-service occurrences on Model 737-400 airplanes of total loss of boost pump pressure of the fuel feed system, followed by loss of fuel system suction feed capability on one engine, and in-flight shutdown of the engine. This AD requires revising the maintenance program to incorporate a revision to the Airworthiness Limitations Section of the maintenance planning data (MPD) document. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct failure of the engine fuel suction feed of the fuel system, which, in the event of total loss of the fuel boost pumps, could result in dual engine flameout, inability to restart the engines, and consequent forced landing of the airplane.

Final rule.

Adoption of the Amendment \n\n\n\tAccordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: \n\nPART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES \n\n0 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: \n\n\n\tAuthority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. \n\nSec. 39.13 (Amended) \n\n0 2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): \n\n2014-09-09 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17844; Docket No. FAA- 2008-0618; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-355-AD. \n\n(a) Effective Date \n\n\n\tThis AD is effective July 1, 2014. \n\n(b) Affected ADs \n\n\n\tNone. \n\n(c) Applicability \n\n\n\tThis AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes, certificated in any category. \n\n(d) Subject \n\n\n\tAir Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 2800, Aircraft Fuel System. \n\n(e) Unsafe Condition \n\n\n\tThis AD was prompted by reports of two in-service occurrences on Model 737-400 airplanes of total loss of boost pump pressure of the fuel feed system, followed by loss of fuel system suction feed capability on one engine, and in-flight shutdown of the engine. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct failure of the engine fuel suction feed of the fuel system, which, in the event of total loss of the fuel boost pumps, could result in dual engine flameout, inability to restart the engines, and consequent forced landing of the airplane. \n\n(f) Compliance \n\n\n\tComply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. \n\n(g) Maintenance Program Revision \n\n\n\tWithin 90 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance program to incorporate the airworthiness limitation \n\n((Page 30007)) \n\n(AWL) identified in Appendix 1 of this AD, AWL No. 28-AWL-101, Engine Fuel Suction Feed Operational Test. The initial compliance time for accomplishing AWL No. 28-AWL-101 is within 7,500 flight hours or 3 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever is first. \n\n(h) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs) \n\n\n\tAfter accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., tests), intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless the actions, intervals, or CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. \n\n(i) Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service Information \n\n\n\tThis paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using AWL No. 28-AWL-101, Engine Fuel Suction Feed Operational Test, of Section D.2., Engine Suction Fuel System, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622W001-9, Revision February 2012, or Revision June2013, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, provided the revised ''interval'' specified in Appendix 1 of this AD is incorporated into the existing maintenance program within 90 days after the effective date of this AD. \n\n(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) \n\n\n\t(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in the Related Information section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. \n\t(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. \n\n(k) Related Information \n\n\n\t(1) For more information about this AD, contact Sue Lucier, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6438; fax: 425- 917-6590; email: suzanne.lucier@faa.gov. \n\t(2) For service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. \n\n(l) Material Incorporated by Reference \n\n\n\tNone. \n\nAppendix 1 of AD 2014-09-09 \n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tAWL No. Task Interval Applicability Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28-AWL-101....................... ALI.................. 7,500 FH or 3 years, ALL.................. Engine Fuel Suction Feed Operational Test. \n\twhichever is first. \n\tAn Engine Fuel Suction Feed Operational Test \n\tmust be accomplished successfully on each \n\tengine individually. This test is required \n\tin order to protect against engine flameout \n\tduring suction feed operations, and must \n\tmeet the following requirements (refer to \n\tBoeing AMM 28-22-00): \n\tFuel Tank Quantity Limitations: \n\tEngine No. 1 \n\ta. The Center Tank Fuel Quantity must not \n\texceed 5,000 lbs (2,270 kg). \n\tb. The Main Tank No. 1 Fuel Quantity must be \n\tbetween 1,400 lbs-1,600 lbs (600 kg-800 \n\tkg). \n\tNOTE: Excess fuel can be transferred to Main \n\tTank No. 2. \n\tEngine No. 2 \n\ta. The Center Tank Fuel Quantity must not \n\texceed 5,000 lbs(2,270 kg). \n\tb. The Main Tank No. 2 Fuel Quantity must be \n\tbetween 1,400 lbs-1,600 lbs (600 kg-800 \n\tkg). \n\tNOTE: Excess fuel can be transferred to Main \n\tTank No. 1. \n\tTest Procedural Limitations: \n\t1. The Fuel Cross-Feed Valve must be CLOSED. \n\t2. The APU Selector Switch must be OFF. \n\t3. Idle Engine Warm-up time of minimum two \n\tminutes with Boost Pump ON. \n\t4. Idle Engine Suction Feed (Boost Pump OFF) \n\toperation for a minimum of five minutes. \n\tNOTE: APU may be used to start the engines \n\tprovided the Fuel Tank Quantity and Test \n\tProcedural Limitations are met. \n\tThe test is considered a success if engine \n\toperation is maintained during the five- \n\tminute period and engine parameters (N1, \n\tN2, and Fuel Flow) do not decay relative to \n\tthose observed with Boost Pump ON. \n\tA suction feed system that fails the \n\toperational test must be repaired or \n\tmaintained, and successfully pass the \n\tEngine Suction Feed Operational Test prior \n\tto further flight.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\n\n\n\n\n((Page 30008))

Discussion \n\n\n\tWe issued a second supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes. The second SNPRM published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2013 (78 FR 45898). The second SNPRM proposed to add Model 777F series airplanes to the applicability. \n\tWe preceded the second SNPRM with the first SNPRM, which published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2013 (78 FR 14722). The first SNPRM proposed to revise the maintenance program to incorporate a revision to the Airworthiness Limitations Section of the maintenance planning data (MPD) document. \n\tWe preceded the first SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on June 6, 2008 (73 FR 32253). The NPRM was prompted by reports of two in-service occurrences on Model 737-400 airplanes of total loss of boost pump pressure of the fuel feed system, followed by loss of fuel system suction feed capability on one engine, and in-flight shutdown of the engine. The subject area on Model 777 airplanes is almost identical to that area on Model 737-400 airplanes; therefore, Model 777 airplanes may be subject to the unsafe condition revealed on Model 737-400 airplanes. The NPRM proposed to require performing repetitive operational tests of the engine fuel suction feed of the fuel system, and other related testing if necessary. \n\tWe are issuing this AD to detect and correct failure of the engine fuel suction feed of the fuel system, which, in the event of total loss of the fuel boost pumps, could result in dual engine flameout, inability to restart the engines, and consequent forced landing of the airplane. \n\nComments \n\n\n\tWe gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the second SNPRM (78 FR 45898, July 30, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment. FedEx concurs with the proposed requirements. \n\nRequest To Allow the Use of Later Revisions of the Maintenance Planning Document (MPD) \n\n\n\tUnited Airlines (UAL) asked that we allow using the latest MPD revision of \n\n((Page 30006)) \n\nMay 2013 for accomplishing the required actions. UAL stated that paragraph (l) of the second SNPRM (78 FR 45898, July 30, 2013) provides credit for doing the actions required by paragraph (g) of the second SNPRM before the effective date of the AD, if the actions were done using Revision February 2012 of the MPD. UAL suggested that credit for Revision May 2013 of the MPD also be included in paragraph (l) of the second SNPRM. \n\tWe agree to give credit for the latest revision of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622W001-9, which is Revision dated June 2013; provided the revised ''interval'' specified in Appendix 1 of this AD is incorporated into the existing maintenance program within 90 days after the effective date of this AD. We have revised paragraph (i) of this AD accordingly. \n\nRequest To Clarify Reason for the Unsafe Condition \n\n\n\tBoeing asked that we clarify the reason for the unsafe condition identified in the second SNPRM (78 FR 45898, July 30, 2013). Boeing asked that we provide additional clarification that there are no reports of any in-service events on Model 777 airplanes. \n\tWe acknowledge the commenter's concern, but do not find it necessary to clarify the unsafe condition further. We clarified the reason for the unsafe condition in the first SNPRM (78 FR 45898, July 30, 2013) per a similar request from Boeing regarding the fact that there had been no events on Model 777 airplanes. In light of this, we find that further clarification is not necessary. We have made no change to the final rule in this regard. \n\nChange to Final Rule \n\n\n\tWe removed the on-condition costs specified in the ''Costs of Compliance'' section of this final rule because there are no on- condition actions. \n\nConclusion \n\n\n\tWe reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed. \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tWe estimate that this AD affects 676 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: \n\n\n\tEstimated Costs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tAction Labor cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maintenance Program Revision.... 1 work-hour x $85 $85 per test................ $57,460, per test. \n\tper hour = $85. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\nAuthority for This Rulemaking \n\n\n\tTitle 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. \n\tWe 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. \n\nRegulatory Findings \n\n\n\tThis AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. \n\tFor the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: \n\t(1) Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, \n\t(2) Is not a ''significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), \n\t(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and \n\t(4) 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. \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.