Discussion \n\n\n\tWe issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to the specified products. That supplemental NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2011 (76 FR 18664). That supplemental NPRM proposed to require installing new panel assemblies in the main equipment center or on the forward cargo compartment sidewall and removing certain relays from some panels in the main equipment center. That supplemental NPRM also proposed to require revising the maintenance program to incorporate Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) No. 28-AWL-27 and No. 28-AWL-28. For certain airplanes that supplemental NPRM proposed to require prior or concurrent \n\n((Page 2443)) \n\ninstallation of a second fuel crossfeed valve. That supplemental NPRM also proposed an alternative location for the installation of the new panel assemblies for airplanes that have the optional water system drain plumbing and changing the interconnecting wiring between the P141 panel and the P36 and P37 panels. For airplanes with a deactivated center fuel tank, that supplemental NPRM proposed to require an alternative functional test for the left and right override/jettison pumps. \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 supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) and the FAA's response to each comment. \n\nSupport for Supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) \n\n\n\tBoeing concurs with the content of the supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011). Continental Airlines has no technical objections or comments to the supplemental NPRM. \n\nRequests To Revise or Remove Paragraph (j) of the Supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) \n\n\n\tSeveral commenters requested to either revise or remove paragraph (j) of the supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011). ABX Air recommended that paragraph (j) of the supplemental NPRM be revised to specify that prior or concurrent accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28-0034, Revision 3, dated March 14, 1996, is only required if Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, has been done in accordance with the requirements in paragraph (g) of the supplemental NPRM. ABX added that an operator may choose not to incorporate Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28-0034 as long as an alternative method which complies with the requirements in paragraph (g) is approved in accordance with paragraph (o) of the supplemental NPRM. British Airways (BAB) requested that the requirement in paragraph (j) of the supplemental NPRM be removed for any alternative designs (e.g., TDG Aerospace UFI). Japan Airlines (JAL) noted that the installation of a second crossfeed valve, as required by paragraph (j) of the supplemental NPRM, does not have a direct relationship with the electrical fault or uncommanded dry operation of the main tank boost pumps and center auxiliary tank override and jettison pumps, and is not a possible source of ignition. \n\tWe acknowledge the commenters' concerns and have removed paragraph (j) from this AD. The installation of a dual crossfeed valve system is an option that operators may do to improve airplane reliability, or as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to the requirements of AD 88-21-03 R1, Amendment 39-6077 (53 FR 46605, November 18, 1988). That action (installation of a dual crossfeed configuration) is not necessary for the installation of the ground fault interrupter (GFI) or to address uncommanded dry operation of the main boost pumps and center auxiliary tank override and jettison pumps. This AD requires installation of GFI for both single and dual crossfeed valve configurations. We agree that a single crossfeed valve configuration is acceptable (not incorporating Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28-0034, Revision 3, dated March 14, 1996),and we are working with Boeing to expedite the revision of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085 in order to provide procedures for a modification to add GFI protection on airplanes with single crossfeed valve configurations. \n\tIn addition, we have clarified the actions by revising paragraph (g) of this AD to specify the actions for airplanes with a dual crossfeed valve configuration and adding paragraph (h) of this AD to specify actions for airplanes with a single crossfeed valve configuration (i.e., a dual crossfeed valve configuration has not been installed in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28-0034). For airplanes with a dual crossfeed valve configuration, the installation specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, must be done. For airplanes with a single crossfeed valve configuration, there are two options: (1) Doing the installation specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, provided that prior to or concurrently with the installation of the ground fault interrupt relays, a dual crossfeed valve is installed in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28- 0034, Revision 3, dated March 14, 1996, or (2) maintaining the single crossfeed valve configuration and modifying the airplane to install a GFI using a method approved by the FAA. We have revised the subsequent paragraph identifiers accordingly. \n\nRequests To Postpone AD Issuance \n\n\n\tAll Nippon Airways (ANA), ABX, BAB, and JAL requested that issuance of the AD be postponed until Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, has been revised. ABX noted that Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, contains instructions to modify airplanes with two fuel crossfeed valves, but no instructions to modify airplanes with one crossfeed valve. The commenters stated that Boeing is in the process of revising this service bulletin to change the concurrent requirement and provide wiring changes and an alternative installation for airplanes having a single crossfeed valve system. \n\tWe do not agree to delay issuance of this AD until Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2010, is revised, due to the severity of the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. As noted previously, paragraph (h) of this AD has been added to provide two options for airplanes that currently have a single crossfeed valve configuration. Also noted previously, Boeing is currently revising Service Bulletin 767-28A0085, and it will be issued after it is completed. Therefore, as specified previously, we have changed paragraph (g) of this AD and added paragraph (h) of this AD. \n\nRequests To Allow AMOCs to AD 2009-16-06, Amendment 39-15989 (74 FR 38905, August 5, 2009), To Terminate Paragraph (i) of the Supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) \n\n\n\tTwo commenters requested that we allow AMOCs for AD 2009-16-06, Amendment 39-15989 (74 FR 38905, August 5, 2009), to terminate the requirements of paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011). United Airlines (UA) requested that the supplemental NPRM include a new paragraph to allow an AMOC to AD 2009-16-06, to terminate prior or concurrent installation of an automatic shutoff system for the auxiliary fuel tank pump as required by paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM. UA stated that accomplishing the requirements in AD 2009-16-06 terminates the requirements in paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM, and noted that during compliance with that AD it obtained FAA AMOC Letter 140S-09-331, dated September 25, 2009, to install an automatic system for the auxiliary fuel tank pump in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0083, Revision 1, dated April 26, 2007. That AMOC was only applicable to three of UA's 35 Model 767-300 airplanes because Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0083, Revision 1, dated April 26, 2007, was accomplished on the remaining 32 airplanesbefore the effective date of AD 2009-16-06. UPS stated that it obtained \n\n((Page 2444)) \n\nFAA-AMOC 140S-10-218, dated June 22, 2010, which approved the use of alternate terminal blocks because those identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-28A0083, Revision 2, dated February 12, 2009, had been superseded. UPS requested that paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM be updated to include that any approved AMOCs terminate the requirements of paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM. \n\tWe acknowledge the commenters' concerns and provide the following. The related FAA-approved AMOCs should be accepted for terminating the requirements of paragraph (j) of this AD (referred to as paragraph (i) in the supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011)), because the intent of those requirements is met by those AMOCs. It is not necessary to add a new paragraph or revise paragraph (j) of this AD, because accomplishing the AMOCs to AD 2009-16-06, Amendment 39-15989 (74 FR 38905, August 5, 2009), meets the requirements of AD 2009-16-06, and therefore terminates the requirements of paragraph (j) of this AD. Paragraph (j) of this AD already states that ''Accomplishing the requirements of AD 2009-16-06, terminates the requirements of this paragraph.'' We have made no change to the AD in this regard. \n\nRequests To Revise Paragraph (k) of the Supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) \n\n\n\tUA asked that paragraph (k) of the supplemental NPRM (76 FR 18664, April 5, 2011) be revised to add a reference to Revision May 2010 of Section 9 of the Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, D622T001-9. UA stated that paragraph (k) requires concurrent revision of the maintenance program by incorporating Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) No. 28-AWL-27 and No. 28-AWL-28 of Section 9 of the Boeing 767 MPD Document, D622T001-9, Revision April 2008; Revision March 2009; or Revision May 2009. UA added that subsequent to Revision May 2009, Boeing has issued Revision May 2010. UPS alsorequested that paragraph (k) of the supplemental NPRM be revised to add Revision 22, dated April 2011, of Section 9 of the Boeing 767 MPD, Document D622T001-9. \n\tWe agree that Boeing 767 MPD Document, D622T001-9, Revision May 2010 should be added to paragraph (k) of this AD. However, we do not agree to add Revision 22, dated April 2011. That revision does not affect Section 9 of MPD Document D622T001-9, as referred to in paragraph (k) of this AD. We have revised paragraph (k) of this AD accordingly. \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 the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tWe estimate that this AD will affect 416 airplanes of U.S. registry. \n\tWe estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:Estimated Costs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tCost on U.S. \n\tAction Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Installation of GFI equipment Between 216 and Between $52,285 Between $70,645 Up to $31,964,608. \n\tand wiring. 279 work-hours x and $53,123. and $76,838. \n\t$85 per hour = \n\tbetween $18,360 \n\tand $23,715. Installation of second crossfeed Between 274 and Between $30,838 Between $54,128 Between \n\tvalve (prior/concurrent action). 302 work-hours x and $66,903. and $92,573. $22,517,248 and \n\t$85 per hour = $38,510,368. \n\tbetween $23,290 \n\tand $25,670. Installing automatic shutoff Between 3 and 29 Between $421 and Between $676 and Between $281,216 \n\tsystem (prior/concurrent work-hours x $85 $9,374. $11,839. and $4,925,024. \n\taction; required by AD 2009-16- per hour = \n\t06, Amendment 39-15989 (74 FR between $255 and \n\t38905, August 5, 2009)). $2,465. Revising the maintenance program 1................. None.............. $85............... $35,360. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\n\n\tAccording to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate. \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 ofthe 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\tWe have determined that this 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\n((Page 2445)) \n\n\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.