Airworthiness Directives; Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) Units, 62321-62327 [2011-26084]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
cooperative agreement, or cooperative
research and development agreement
reserved, set aside, or otherwise
classified as intended for award to
women-owned small business concerns
or economically disadvantaged womenowned small business concerns.
(2) Submission of a bid proposal for
a Federal grant, contract, subcontract,
cooperative agreement or cooperative
research and development agreement
which in any way encourages a Federal
agency to classify the bid or proposal, if
awarded, as an award to a womenowned small business concern or
economically disadvantaged womenowned small business concern.
(3) Registration on any Federal
electronic database for the purpose of
being considered for award of a Federal
grant, contract, subcontract, cooperative
agreement, or cooperative research and
development agreement, as a womenowned small business concern or
economically disadvantaged womenowned small business concern.
(c) Signature Requirement. Each
solicitation, bid, or application for a
Federal contract, subcontract, or grant
shall contain a certification concerning
the women-owned small business or
economically disadvantaged womenowned small business status of a
business concern seeking the Federal
contract, subcontract or grant. An
authorized official must sign the
certification on the same page
containing the women-owned small
business or economically disadvantaged
women-owned small business status
claimed by the concern.
(d) Limitation of Liability. Paragraphs
(a)–(c) shall not apply in the case of
unintentional errors or technical
malfunctions that demonstrate that a
misrepresentation of women-owned
small business or economically
disadvantaged women-owned small
business status was not affirmative,
intentional or willful. Consideration
shall be given to the firm’s internal
management procedures governing
WOSB representation or certification,
the clarity or ambiguity of the
representation or certification
requirement, and the efforts made to
correct an incorrect or invalid
representation or certification in a
timely manner. In no case shall an
individual or firm be liable for
erroneous representations or
certifications made by Government
personnel.
(e) Additional Penalties for
Misrepresentation.
(1) Suspension or debarment. The
SBA debarring official or the agency
debarring official may suspend or debar
a person or concern for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
misrepresentation pursuant to the
procedures set forth in 48 CFR subpart
9.4.
(2) Civil Penalties. Persons or
concerns are subject to severe penalties
under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C.
3729–3733, and under the Program
Fraud Civil Remedies Act, 331 U.S.C.
3801–3812, and any other applicable
laws.
(3) Persons or concerns are subject to
severe criminal penalties for knowingly
misrepresenting the women-owned
status of a concern in connection with
procurement programs pursuant to
section 16(d) of the Small Business Act,
15 U.S.C. 645(d), as amended; 18 U.S.C.
1001; and 31 U.S.C. 3729–3733. Persons
or concern are subject to criminal
penalties for knowingly making false
statements or misrepresentations to SBA
for the purpose of influencing any
actions of SBA pursuant to section 16(a)
of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C.
645(a), as amended, including failure to
correct ‘‘continuing representations’’ that
are no longer true.
18. Add new § 127.701 to read as
follows:
§ 127.701 What must a concern do in order
to be identified as a Women-Owned Small
Business concern in any Federal
procurement databases?
(a) In order to be identified as a
Women-Owned business concern in the
Online Representations and
Certifications Application (ORCA)
database (or any successor thereto) a
concern must certify its Women-Owned
small business status in connection with
specific eligibility requirements at least
annually.
(b) If a firm identified as a WomenOwned small business concern in ORCA
fails to certify its status within one year
of a status certification, the firm will not
be listed as a Women-Owned small
business concern in ORCA, unless and
until the firm recertifies its WomenOwned status.
Dated: September 26, 2011.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011–25656 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
62321
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2010–1204; Directorate
Identifier 2010–NM–147–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Aviation
Communication & Surveillance
Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and
Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Units
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
We are revising an earlier
proposed airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Aviation Communication &
Surveillance Systems (ACSS) traffic
alert and collision avoidance system
(TCAS) units installed on but not
limited to various transport and small
airplanes. That NPRM proposed to
require upgrading software. That NPRM
was prompted by reports of anomalies
with TCAS units during a flight test
over a high density airport. The TCAS
units dropped several reduced
surveillance aircraft tracks because of
interference limiting. This action revises
that NPRM by proposing to require new
updated software for certain TCAS
units. We are proposing this
supplemental NPRM to correct the
unsafe condition on these products.
Since these actions impose an
additional burden over that proposed in
the NPRM, we are reopening the
comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed
changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this supplemental NPRM by November
7, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
62322
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Aviation
Communication & Surveillance
Systems, LLC, 19810 North 7th Avenue,
Phoenix, Arizona 85027–4741; phone:
623–445–7040; fax: 623–445–7004;
e-mail: acss.orderadmin@L–3com.com;
Internet: https://www.acss.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abby Malmir, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California 90712–4137; phone: 562–
627–5351; fax: 562–627–5210; e-mail:
abby.malmir@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2010–1204; Directorate Identifier
2010–NM–147–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
Discussion
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to Aviation Communication &
Surveillance Systems (ACSS) traffic
alert and collision avoidance system
(TCAS) units with part numbers
identified in ACSS Technical
Newsletter 8008359, Revision A, dated
January 12, 2011, as installed on but not
limited to various transport and small
airplanes, certificated in any category.
That NPRM was published in the
Federal Register on December 28, 2010
(75 FR 81512). That NPRM proposed to
require upgrading software.
That NPRM was prompted by reports
of anomalies with TCAS units during a
flight test over high density airports
(Chicago, New York, and Atlanta). The
TCAS units dropped several reduced
surveillance aircraft tracks because of
interference limiting. This action revises
that NPRM by proposing to require new
updated software for certain TCAS
units. We are proposing this
supplemental NPRM to correct the
unsafe condition on some of these
products (the TCAS II, TCAS 2000, and
T2CAS) that have an issue on some
installations on which the TCAS unit
reverts to the standby (STBY) mode
(TCAS OFF) when the active
transponder senses an altitude miscompare between two Gilham altitude
input or other possible air data source
failure. This potential safety issue is
dependent on the altitude interface to
the transponder and the transponder
used.
Actions Since Previous NPRM Was
Issued
Since we issued the previous NPRM,
we have determined that certain
software referenced in the original
NPRM may not adequately address the
unsafe condition for certain affected
airplanes. ACSS has revised the
associated service bulletins, as
described below under ‘‘Request to
Delay AD Pending TCAS Validation.’’
We are issuing this supplemental NPRM
to propose installing the new upgraded
software via the revised versions of
these service bulletins. The revised
service bulletins provide instructions on
how to accomplish the software
upgrade; the specific software
approvals, however, are still pending
and are expected to be complete before
the final rule is issued.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
comment on the previous NPRM. The
following presents the comments
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
received on the NPRM and the FAA’s
response to each comment.
Support for NPRM
Boeing concurred with the contents of
the original NPRM.
Requests To Withdraw NPRM
ACSS disagreed with certain
information in the Discussion section of
the original NPRM.
The Discussion section stated that
anomalies with ACSS TCAS units
‘‘occurred during a flight test over a high
density airport.’’ ACSS stated that it
provided the initial report of the
anomaly to the FAA in late 2009, and
that the FAA reproduced that scenario
during another flight test in early 2010.
ACSS noted, however, that in over 35
million flight hours of ACSS TCAS
systems in field operation, no operator
has ever reported to ACSS any such
anomaly being observed. Moreover,
ACSS is not aware of any such reports
having been provided to the FAA. ACSS
concludes that the probability of such
an event is low enough that an AD to
address the potential situation is
unnecessary.
The Discussion section of the original
NPRM also stated that dropped tracks
by the TCAS units could lead to
‘‘possible loss of separation of air traffic
and possible mid-air collision.’’ ACSS
noted that the calculated probability
associated with such a possible event is
very low. To support this assertion,
ACSS referred to Section 2.3 of ACSS
Continuing Operational Safety
Probability Assessment of the
Interference Limiting Function,
Document 8008352–001, Revision C,
dated January 6, 2011. ACSS reported
that it has never received any report of
such an operational anomaly from field
operation. ACSS added that this
analysis would indicate that the
probability of such an event is low
enough that an AD to address the
potential situation is unnecessary.
We infer that the commenter is
requesting that we withdraw the NPRM.
We disagree. While the commenter
claims that the probability is low,
information gathered from several flight
tests at different regional airports,
analysis of flight and other testing data,
and various meetings and discussions
among various FAA offices, ACSS, and
an FAA TCAS contractor indicate that
the risk from the identified condition is
unacceptable, and it is necessary to
proceed with this action.
Request To Delay AD Pending TCAS
Validation
Dassault Aviation (Dassault) stated
that the technical standard order (TSO)
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
for TCAS 2000, new part number (P/N)
7517900–55001 (referenced in
corresponding ACSS Service Bulletin
8008229–001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900–34–6040), Revision 01, dated
September 30, 2010), has been
approved, but the TSO for TCAS 3000,
new P/N 9003000–55004
(corresponding ACSS Service Bulletin
8008235–001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003000–34–6006), Revision 02, dated
February 3, 2011), was scheduled to be
approved in June 2011. Dassault reports
that, as an airplane manufacturer and
system integrator, it must certify those
TCAS units against airworthiness
requirements and ensure that modified
units still operate properly within their
target system environment. Dassault
proposed that we wait to issue the final
rule until the new TCAS units can be
validated within their hosting avionics
environment.
We agree, for the reasons provided by
the commenter. We have reviewed the
following revised service bulletins:
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008221–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–
6014), Revision 01, dated February 4,
2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008222–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–
6015), Revision 01, dated February 4,
2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008223–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–
6016), Revision 01, dated February 4,
2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008229–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–
6040), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008230–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 4066010–34–
6036), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008231–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–
6041), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–
6016), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008234–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–
6017), Revision 02, dated June 30, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008235–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9003000–34–
6006), Revision 02, dated February 3,
2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–
6042), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011.
• ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–
6018), Revision 02, dated June 30, 2011.
These revisions provide procedures for
installing new updated software. We
have revised this supplemental NPRM
to refer to the most recent service
information, and provided credit for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
actions done before the effective date of
the AD using previous service
information as acceptable for
compliance with the AD requirements.
Request To Clarify Applicability
Several commenters reported
difficulty determining the applicability
of the original NPRM.
David Schober stated that the
applicability of the original NPRM is
defined in service bulletins that are not
available to the general public, so some
readers might not be able to determine
which airplanes or components are
affected. Mr. Schober added that a
mechanic or repair station that does not
have access to the service bulletins
could return a noncompliant airplane to
service.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) requested that we revise the
original NPRM to specify the affected
part numbers or software version.
ACSS noted that the applicability of
the original NPRM did not identify
specific TCAS part numbers associated
with the referenced service bulletins.
ACSS accordingly issued ACSS
Technical Newsletter 8008359, which
cross-references the service bulletins
and specific TCAS part numbers. ACSS
recommended that we revise the
original NPRM to refer to this
document.
We agree with the request. This
supplemental NPRM includes the
information in table 1 of ACSS
Technical Newsletter 8008359, Revision
A, dated January 12, 2011, which
provides additional information about
affected TCAS part numbers. Following
paragraph (c) of this supplemental
NPRM, we have added new Note 1,
which introduces new table 1 to list the
service information and the
corresponding affected parts.
Request To Explain Effect of Revised
Service Information on Applicability
Mr. Schober expressed concern for the
potential effect on the applicability if
the referenced service information is
revised. Mr. Schober asserted that
revising the service information to
include additional units not considered
at this time would bypass the public
comment required by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
(Pub. L. 79–404, 5 U.S.C. 551, et seq.).
We agree to clarify the applicability of
this supplemental NPRM. Where an AD
refers to a service document for
airplanes or components in the
applicability, that service bulletin is
specifically identified by its revision
level. Only that revision level may be
used to determine the applicability of
the AD. Therefore, since the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
62323
applicability of the AD cannot change in
the future except by revising or
superseding the AD, this supplemental
NPRM does not violate the APA. We
have not changed the supplemental
NPRM regarding this issue.
Request To Provide Additional
Information
ACSS asserts that the information
provided under the Summary and
Discussion sections in the original
NPRM provides very limited detail
regarding the interference limiting issue.
To help operators fully understand and
assess the operational aspects of the
interference limiting issue, ACSS
recommended that we provide ACSS
Technical Newsletter 8008359, ‘‘Change
7 Interference Limiting Airworthiness
Directive FAQs,’’ Revision A, dated
January 12, 2011.
We agree. As explained previously,
we have changed paragraph (c) in this
supplemental NPRM to refer to this
technical newsletter, which will be
submitted to the Office of the Federal
Register for approval of incorporation by
reference in the final rule AD.
Request To Delay AD Issuance
Empire Airlines (Empire) reported it
could not respond to the original NPRM
because the necessary information was
not available and the proposed
modification had not been submitted for
TSO approval yet. Empire suggested
that we issue the NPRM when more
information is available.
We disagree with the request. As
noted previously in ‘‘Actions Since
Previous NPRM was Issued,’’ ACSS is
upgrading the software of each TCAS
model and submitting it one at a time
to the FAA for review and approval. We
anticipate that all necessary software
will be FAA approved and released
before we issue the final rule. In
proposing the compliance time of 48
months in the NPRM, we anticipated
that the software would be released
within the first year after the final rule
was issued. Therefore, the compliance
time proposed in the NPRM has been
reduced from 48 months to 36 months
in this supplemental NPRM.
Request To Consider Effect of TCAS
Certification
Dassault showed concern about the
detrimental effect the original NPRM
will have on the airplane delivery
process for aircraft manufacturers
around the world. Dassault reported that
on the production line many airplanes
equipped with the old TCAS part
numbers are awaiting completion and
final delivery. As a result, Dassault will
be unable to issue a statement of
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
62324
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
conformity (per FAA Order 8130.2G,
Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft
and Related Products, dated August 31,
2010) or a certificate of airworthiness
(per EASA regulations) on these
airplanes. Dassault requested relief in
the form of two options: (1) Delaying
issuance of the final rule for 12 months
until ACSS can upgrade affected TCAS
units currently installed so that Dassault
can certify the interference limiting
change and retrofit the equipment, or (2)
excluding TCAS 3000 old part numbers
currently on Dassault Falcon Jet and
Dassault Aviation completion/
production lines that are waiting entry
into service so that, once in the field,
the equipment would be in compliance
with the AD.
We disagree that further revision of
this supplemental NPRM is necessary.
As stated previously, we anticipate that
all necessary software will be approved
and released before we issue the final
rule. Therefore, Dassault will be able to
install the required software in each
airplane delivered after this AD’s
effective date and issue statements of
conformity for those airplanes.
Request To Clarify Effect of the
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) on
Applicability
Mr. Schober stated that many affected
TCAS units use an STC as the approved
data, and most of those STCs identify
equipment eligible for installation by
part number. The commenter asserted
that the referenced service information
rolls the part numbers of the units, so
those units would no longer be eligible
for installation via the original STC.
We agree to provide clarification. As
indicated previously, we have added
new table 1 in this supplemental NPRM
to match each affected part number to
its corresponding service document.
Request To Correct Statement of Unsafe
Condition
ACSS noted an inaccuracy in the
following text from the NPRM Summary
section:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
The TCAS units dropped several reduced
surveillance aircraft tracks because of
interference limiting. We are proposing this
AD to prevent TCAS units from dropping
tracks, which could compromise separation
of air traffic and lead to subsequent mid-air
collisions.
ACSS stated that the IL function—even
the changed implementation approved
by the FAA and proposed by the
NPRM—will still result in dropped
tracks, because that is the purpose of the
IL function. ACSS agreed with the
Relevant Service Information section of
the NPRM, which stated that the change
simply ‘‘improves tracking.’’ The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
commenter therefore suggested that we
revise the NPRM to state that the AD
will ‘‘minimize’’ rather than prevent
dropped tracks.
We disagree. The current ACSS
implementation of TCAS is susceptible
to dropping surveillance aircraft tracks
because of interference limiting. This
supplemental NPRM would require
revising the current TCAS software to
prevent dropping of TA and potential
RA tracking cause by interference
limiting.We have not changed this
supplemental NPRM regarding this
issue. The supplemental NPRM also
corrects the altitude source issue in
some of the ACSS TCAS product
installations.
Request for Information on the Incident
J. Twombly asked whether the ACSS
anomaly that prompted the NPRM had
any effect on the operation of the
aircraft’s transponder, or whether the
transponder continued to operate in a
normal manner, broadcasting and
responding to interrogations,
notwithstanding the ACSS anomaly.
The commenter further questioned
whether the transponder performance
was verified during the investigation.
The Mode S transponder of the
airplane was verified to be performing
in normal status operation during the
flight test, despite the TCAS operational
issue of the interference limiting
anomaly. This anomaly in TCAS has no
effect on Mode S transponder operation.
We have made no change to this
supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request To Revise FAA’s Determination
ACSS requested that we revise the
following sentence from the ‘‘FAA’s
Determination and Requirements of
This Proposed AD’’ section of the
original NPRM:
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all relevant information and
determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in
other products of these same type designs.
ACSS clarified that the operation of the
IL function in question was not the
result of an error in implementation.
The IL function was specifically
implemented to operate as it does in
order to comply with the requirements
of the TSO MOPS for Change 7 (i.e.,
TSO–C119b), as ACSS interpreted those
requirements. As such, ACSS
considered the NPRM misleading in its
statement that the unsafe condition was
likely to exist or develop in ‘‘other
products of these same type designs.’’
ACSS had already implemented the
FAA-directed change in all current and
future versions (e.g., TSO–C119c;
Change 7.1-compliant systems). ACSS
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recommended that we revise the
statement to indicate that the unsafe
condition ‘‘exists in various ACSS TCAS
systems.’’
We disagree with the request. We
have determined that the identified
unsafe condition exists in the affected
TCAS products, and might develop in
products with the same type design,
unless the actions proposed in this
supplemental NPRM are done. We have
not changed the supplemental NPRM
regarding this issue.
Request To Revise Certain Assertions
Made in Original NPRM
ACSS questioned the accuracy of the
following statement from the Discussion
section of the NPRM: ‘‘When the TCAS
unit interrogated aircraft in a high
density airport area, some of the targets
disappeared from the cockpit display or
were not recognized.’’ ACSS asserted
that this claim is incorrect, and added
that the TCAS system continues to
monitor the airspace and receive Mode
S squitter information from all aircraft
within detection range, even when the
interrogation power is being limited by
the IL function. ACSS therefore
suggested that we revise the statement
to remove the words ‘‘or were not
recognized.’’
Although the Discussion section from
an NPRM is not repeated in a
supplemental NPRM, we agree to
provide clarification. The statement
quoted by the commenter appears to be
taken out of context from a more
complete document. As long as
information is within detection range
and is being processed, MODE S
recognition exists. But when tracking
power is not available as a result of IL,
not only will tracks disappear from the
display, those targets will not be tracked
because the lack of power does not
permit maintenance of tracks. Therefore
the tracks are dropped and will not be
recognized and may result in loss of
separation of own aircraft with other
target aircraft. We have not changed the
supplemental NPRM regarding this
issue.
Request To Revise Proposed Cost
Estimate
Mr. Schober noted that the Costs of
Compliance section of the original
NPRM considered only the actual
updating of the unit—not the time to
remove the unit, package and ship the
unit to a repair station, return the unit
to the aircraft owner, and re-install the
unit, or the down time for the airplane
for this maintenance evolution and the
associated lost revenue.
Empire asserted that it would be
necessary to read each ACSS service
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
62325
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
document listed in the original NPRM to
determine the applicability, and
wondered whether we included this
research time in our calculations for
determining the financial impact of the
original NPRM.
We infer that the commenters want us
to revise the estimated costs to account
for those variables. We disagree. The
cost information in this supplemental
NPRM describes only the direct costs of
the specific required actions. Based on
the best data available, the manufacturer
provided the number of work-hours
necessary to do the proposed actions.
This number represents the time
necessary to perform only the actions
actually proposed by this supplemental
NPRM. We recognize that, in doing
actions required by an AD, operators
might incur incidental costs in addition
to the direct costs. But the cost analysis
in AD rulemaking actions typically does
not include incidental costs such as the
time necessary for planning, airplane
down time, or time necessitated by
other administrative actions. Those
incidental costs, which might vary
significantly among operators, are
almost impossible to calculate. We have
not changed the supplemental NPRM
regarding this issue.
Certain changes described above expand
the scope of the original NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period
to provide additional opportunity for
the public to comment on this
supplemental NPRM.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this supplemental
NPRM because we evaluated all the
relevant information and determined
the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist in other
products of these same type designs.
Costs of Compliance
Proposed Requirements of the
Supplemental NPRM
This supplemental NPRM would
require upgrading software.
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 9,000 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Cost per
product
Cost on U.S.
operators
Software upgrade ............................................
2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 .............
$2,870
$3,040
$27,360,000
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
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 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 this 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),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(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.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
Aviation Communication & Surveillance
Systems, LLC: Docket No. FAA–2010–
1204; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM–
147–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November
7, 2011.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
(c) Applicability
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
This AD applies to Aviation
Communication & Surveillance Systems
(ACSS) traffic alert and collision avoidance
system (TCAS) units with part numbers
identified in ACSS Technical Newsletter
8008359, as installed on but not limited to
various transport and small airplanes,
certificated in any category.
Note 1: Table 1 of this AD also provides
a cross-referenced list of part numbers with
associated service bulletins to help operators
identify affected parts.
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:
TABLE 1—SERVICE BULLETIN AND LRU CROSS-REFERENCE
ACCS product—
Affected LRU part Nos. (P/Ns)—
ACSS Service Bulletin—
TCAS 3000SP ..............................
9003500–10900, –10901, –10902, –55900, –55901,
–55902, –57901, –65900, –65901, –65902.
8008221–001, Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6014).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
62326
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—SERVICE BULLETIN AND LRU CROSS-REFERENCE—Continued
ACCS product—
Affected LRU part Nos. (P/Ns)—
ACSS Service Bulletin—
TCAS 3000SP ..............................
9003500–10001, –10002, –10003, –10004, –55001,
–55002, –55003, –55004, –65001, –65002,
–65003, –65004.
9003500–10802 ..........................................................
8008222–001, Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6015).
TCAS 3000SP ..............................
TCAS 2000 ..................................
TCAS II ........................................
7517900–10003, –10004, –10006, –10007, –10011,
–55003, –55004, –55006, –55007, –55009,
–55011, –71003, –71004, –71006, –71007,
–71011.
4066010–910, –912 ....................................................
Military TCAS 2000 ......................
7517900–56101, –56102, –56104, –56105, 56107 ....
T2CAS ..........................................
9000000–10002, –10003, –10004, –10005, –10006,
–10008, –10204, –10205, –10206, –10208,
–20002, –20003, –20004, –20005, –20006,
–20008, –20204, –20205, –20206, –20208,
–55002, –55003, –55004, –55005, –55006,
–55008, –55204, –55205, –55206, –55208.
9000000–10110, –11111 ............................................
T2CAS ..........................................
TCAS 3000 ..................................
Military TCAS 2000 MASS ..........
9003000–10001, –10002, –10003, –55001, –55002,
–55003, –65001, –65002, –65003.
7517900–20001, –20002, –65001, –65002 ................
Military T2CAS MASS ..................
9000000–30006, –40006, –60006 ..............................
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 34, Navigation.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of
anomalies with TCAS units during a flight
test over a high density airport. The TCAS
units dropped several reduced surveillance
aircraft tracks because of interference
limiting. We are issuing this AD to prevent
TCAS units from dropping tracks, which
could compromise separation of air traffic
and lead to subsequent mid–air collisions.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
(g) Upgrade Software
Within 36 months after the effective date
of this AD, upgrade software for the ACSS
TCAS, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable ACSS publication identified in
table 1 of this AD.
Note 2: ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233–
001 (ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–
6016), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011,
contains three part numbers (P/Ns 9000000–
10007, –20007, and –55007) that were never
produced.
(h) Actions Done in Accordance With
Previous Service Information
A software upgrade done before the
effective date of this AD in accordance with
the applicable service bulletin identified in
paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(13) of this AD
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
8008223–001, Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6016.
8008229–001, Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6040).
8008230–001, Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 4066010–34–6036).
8008231–001, Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6041).
8008233–001, Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6016).
8008234–001, Revision 02, dated June 30,
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6017).
8008235–001, Revision 02, dated February 3,
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003000–34–6006).
8008236–001, Revision 03, dated June 30,
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6042).
8008238–001, Revision 02, dated June 30,
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6018).
is acceptable for compliance with the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(1) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008221–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6014),
dated May 27, 2010.
(2) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008222–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6015),
dated May 27, 2010.
(3) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008223–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003500–34–6016),
dated May 27, 2010.
(4) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008229–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6040),
Revision 01, dated September 30, 2010.
(5) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008230–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 4066010–34–6036),
Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
(6) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008231–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6041),
Revision 01, dated October 15, 2010.
(7) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6016),
Revision 02, dated February 1, 2011.
(8) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008234–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6017),
Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
(9) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008235–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9003000–34–6006),
dated June 4, 2010.
(10) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6042),
dated May 27, 2010.
(11) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 7517900–34–6042),
Revision 02, dated February 1, 2011.
(12) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6018),
dated June 4, 2010.
(13) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238–001
(ATA Service Bulletin 9000000–34–6018),
Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2011
2011
2011
2011
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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.
(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.
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Abby Malmir, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130L,
FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712–
4137; phone: 562–627–5351; fax: 562–627–
5210; e-mail: abby.malmir@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Aviation Communication &
Surveillance Systems, LLC, 19810 North 7th
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85027–4741;
phone: 623–445–7040; fax: 623–445–7004; email: acss.orderadmin@L–3com.com;
Internet: https://www.acss.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 29, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–26084 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–125949–10]
RIN 1545–BJ64
Retail Inventory Method
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document contains
proposed regulations relating to the
retail inventory method of accounting.
The regulations restate and clarify the
computation of ending inventory values
under the retail inventory method and
provide a special rule for certain
taxpayers that receive margin protection
payments and similar vendor
allowances. The regulations affect
taxpayers that are retailers and elect to
use a retail inventory method.
DATES: Written or electronically
generated comments and requests for a
public hearing must be received by
January 5, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–125949–10), room
5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O.
Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station,
Washington, DC 20044. Submissions
may be hand delivered Monday through
Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and
4 p.m. to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–125949–
10), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC. Alternatively,
taxpayers may submit comments
electronically via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–125949–
10).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations,
Natasha M. Mulleneaux, (202) 622–
3967; concerning submission of
comments and requests for a public
hearing, Richard Hurst at
Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This document contains proposed
amendments to 26 CFR part 1 relating
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
to the retail inventory method under
§ 1.471–8 of the Income Tax
Regulations.
Section 471 provides that a taxpayer’s
method of accounting for inventories
must clearly reflect income. Section
1.471–2(c) provides that the bases of
inventory valuation most commonly
used and meeting the requirements of
section 471 are (1) cost and (2) cost or
market, whichever is lower (LCM).
Section 1.471–8 allows retailers to
approximate cost or LCM by using the
retail inventory method. A last-in, first
out (LIFO) taxpayer that elects to use the
retail inventory method must
approximate cost.
Under the retail inventory method,
the retail selling price of ending
inventory is converted to approximate
cost or approximate LCM using a costto-retail ratio, or cost complement. The
numerator of the cost complement is the
value of beginning inventory plus the
cost of purchases during the taxable
year, and the denominator is the retail
selling prices of beginning inventories
plus the initial retail selling prices of
purchases. The cost complement is then
multiplied by the retail selling price of
ending inventory (multiplicand) to
determine the ending inventory value.
Section 1.471–3 provides that, for
inventory valuation purposes, the cost
of purchases during the year generally
includes invoice price less trade or
other discounts. A discount may be
based on a retailer’s sales volume (salesbased allowance) or on the quantity of
merchandise a retailer purchases
(volume-based allowance), or may relate
to a retailer’s reduction in retail selling
price (markdown allowance or margin
protection payment). A vendor may
provide a retailer with a markdown
allowance or margin protection payment
when the retailer temporarily or
permanently reduces the retail selling
price of its inventory to sell it. A
markdown allowance or margin
protection payment differs from other
types of discounts because it is intended
to maintain the retailer’s profit margin
and therefore is directly related to the
inventory selling price.
Under proposed § 1.471–3(e) (75 FR
78944), the amount of an allowance,
discount, or price rebate a taxpayer
earns by selling specific merchandise (a
sales-based vendor allowance) is a
reduction in the cost of the merchandise
sold and does not reduce the inventory
cost or value of goods on hand at the
end of the taxable year.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
62327
Explanation of Provisions
1. Overview
The proposed regulations restructure
and restate the regulations under
§ 1.471–8 in plain language. The
proposed regulations also add rules
addressing the treatment of sales-based
vendor allowances and of vendor
markdown allowances and margin
protection payments in the retail
inventory method computation.
2. Sales-Based Vendor Allowances
The proposed regulations clarify the
interaction of proposed § 1.471–3(e)
with the retail inventory method by
excluding from the numerator of the
cost complement formula the amount of
a sales-based vendor allowance.
3. Computation of Cost Complement
Under the Retail LCM Method
The retail inventory method
determines an ending inventory value
by maintaining proportionality between
costs and selling prices. Under the retail
LCM method, a reduction in retail
selling price reduces the value of ending
inventory in the same ratio as the cost
complement.
If a taxpayer earns an allowance,
discount, or price rebate, the inventory
cost in the numerator of the cost
complement declines, resulting in a
reduction of ending inventory value
computed under the retail inventory
method. If the allowance, discount, or
price rebate is related to a permanent
markdown of the retail selling price (as
in the case of a markdown allowance or
margin protection payment), ending
inventory value is further reduced as a
result of the decrease in ending retail
selling prices (the multiplicand in the
formula). This additional reduction of
ending inventory value caused by
reducing both the numerator of the cost
complement and the multiplicand (1)
Generally results in a lower ending
inventory value for a retail LCM method
taxpayer than for a similarly situated
first-in, first-out (FIFO) taxpayer that
values inventory at LCM, and (2) does
not clearly reflect income.
To address this distortion, the
proposed regulations provide that a
retail LCM method taxpayer may not
reduce the numerator of the cost
complement for an allowance, discount,
or price rebate that is related to or
intended to compensate for a permanent
markdown of retail selling prices. Thus,
in the case of markdown allowances and
margin protection payments, the value
of ending inventory as computed under
the retail LCM method is reduced solely
as a result of the reduction in retail
selling price, avoiding an unwarranted
E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM
07OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 195 (Friday, October 7, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62321-62327]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26084]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2010-1204; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Aviation Communication & Surveillance
Systems (ACSS) Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Units
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for certain Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems (ACSS)
traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) units installed on
but not limited to various transport and small airplanes. That NPRM
proposed to require upgrading software. That NPRM was prompted by
reports of anomalies with TCAS units during a flight test over a high
density airport. The TCAS units dropped several reduced surveillance
aircraft tracks because of interference limiting. This action revises
that NPRM by proposing to require new updated software for certain TCAS
units. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to correct the unsafe
condition on these products. Since these actions impose an additional
burden over that proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment
period to allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed
changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by November
7, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
[[Page 62322]]
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Aviation
Communication & Surveillance Systems, LLC, 19810 North 7th Avenue,
Phoenix, Arizona 85027-4741; phone: 623-445-7040; fax: 623-445-7004; e-
mail: 3com.com">acss.orderadmin@L-3com.com; Internet: https://www.acss.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abby Malmir, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5351; fax: 562-627-5210; e-mail:
abby.malmir@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-1204;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
would apply to Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems (ACSS)
traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) units with part
numbers identified in ACSS Technical Newsletter 8008359, Revision A,
dated January 12, 2011, as installed on but not limited to various
transport and small airplanes, certificated in any category. That NPRM
was published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2010 (75 FR
81512). That NPRM proposed to require upgrading software.
That NPRM was prompted by reports of anomalies with TCAS units
during a flight test over high density airports (Chicago, New York, and
Atlanta). The TCAS units dropped several reduced surveillance aircraft
tracks because of interference limiting. This action revises that NPRM
by proposing to require new updated software for certain TCAS units. We
are proposing this supplemental NPRM to correct the unsafe condition on
some of these products (the TCAS II, TCAS 2000, and T2CAS) that have an
issue on some installations on which the TCAS unit reverts to the
standby (STBY) mode (TCAS OFF) when the active transponder senses an
altitude mis-compare between two Gilham altitude input or other
possible air data source failure. This potential safety issue is
dependent on the altitude interface to the transponder and the
transponder used.
Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the previous NPRM, we have determined that certain
software referenced in the original NPRM may not adequately address the
unsafe condition for certain affected airplanes. ACSS has revised the
associated service bulletins, as described below under ``Request to
Delay AD Pending TCAS Validation.'' We are issuing this supplemental
NPRM to propose installing the new upgraded software via the revised
versions of these service bulletins. The revised service bulletins
provide instructions on how to accomplish the software upgrade; the
specific software approvals, however, are still pending and are
expected to be complete before the final rule is issued.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the previous NPRM.
The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.
Support for NPRM
Boeing concurred with the contents of the original NPRM.
Requests To Withdraw NPRM
ACSS disagreed with certain information in the Discussion section
of the original NPRM.
The Discussion section stated that anomalies with ACSS TCAS units
``occurred during a flight test over a high density airport.'' ACSS
stated that it provided the initial report of the anomaly to the FAA in
late 2009, and that the FAA reproduced that scenario during another
flight test in early 2010. ACSS noted, however, that in over 35 million
flight hours of ACSS TCAS systems in field operation, no operator has
ever reported to ACSS any such anomaly being observed. Moreover, ACSS
is not aware of any such reports having been provided to the FAA. ACSS
concludes that the probability of such an event is low enough that an
AD to address the potential situation is unnecessary.
The Discussion section of the original NPRM also stated that
dropped tracks by the TCAS units could lead to ``possible loss of
separation of air traffic and possible mid-air collision.'' ACSS noted
that the calculated probability associated with such a possible event
is very low. To support this assertion, ACSS referred to Section 2.3 of
ACSS Continuing Operational Safety Probability Assessment of the
Interference Limiting Function, Document 8008352-001, Revision C, dated
January 6, 2011. ACSS reported that it has never received any report of
such an operational anomaly from field operation. ACSS added that this
analysis would indicate that the probability of such an event is low
enough that an AD to address the potential situation is unnecessary.
We infer that the commenter is requesting that we withdraw the
NPRM. We disagree. While the commenter claims that the probability is
low, information gathered from several flight tests at different
regional airports, analysis of flight and other testing data, and
various meetings and discussions among various FAA offices, ACSS, and
an FAA TCAS contractor indicate that the risk from the identified
condition is unacceptable, and it is necessary to proceed with this
action.
Request To Delay AD Pending TCAS Validation
Dassault Aviation (Dassault) stated that the technical standard
order (TSO)
[[Page 62323]]
for TCAS 2000, new part number (P/N) 7517900-55001 (referenced in
corresponding ACSS Service Bulletin 8008229-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6040), Revision 01, dated September 30, 2010), has been
approved, but the TSO for TCAS 3000, new P/N 9003000-55004
(corresponding ACSS Service Bulletin 8008235-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003000-34-6006), Revision 02, dated February 3, 2011), was scheduled
to be approved in June 2011. Dassault reports that, as an airplane
manufacturer and system integrator, it must certify those TCAS units
against airworthiness requirements and ensure that modified units still
operate properly within their target system environment. Dassault
proposed that we wait to issue the final rule until the new TCAS units
can be validated within their hosting avionics environment.
We agree, for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have
reviewed the following revised service bulletins:
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008221-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6014), Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008222-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6015), Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008223-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6016), Revision 01, dated February 4, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008229-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6040), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008230-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
4066010-34-6036), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008231-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6041), Revision 02, dated June 28, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6016), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008234-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6017), Revision 02, dated June 30, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008235-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003000-34-6006), Revision 02, dated February 3, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6042), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011.
ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6018), Revision 02, dated June 30, 2011.
These revisions provide procedures for installing new updated software.
We have revised this supplemental NPRM to refer to the most recent
service information, and provided credit for actions done before the
effective date of the AD using previous service information as
acceptable for compliance with the AD requirements.
Request To Clarify Applicability
Several commenters reported difficulty determining the
applicability of the original NPRM.
David Schober stated that the applicability of the original NPRM is
defined in service bulletins that are not available to the general
public, so some readers might not be able to determine which airplanes
or components are affected. Mr. Schober added that a mechanic or repair
station that does not have access to the service bulletins could return
a noncompliant airplane to service.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) requested that we revise
the original NPRM to specify the affected part numbers or software
version.
ACSS noted that the applicability of the original NPRM did not
identify specific TCAS part numbers associated with the referenced
service bulletins. ACSS accordingly issued ACSS Technical Newsletter
8008359, which cross-references the service bulletins and specific TCAS
part numbers. ACSS recommended that we revise the original NPRM to
refer to this document.
We agree with the request. This supplemental NPRM includes the
information in table 1 of ACSS Technical Newsletter 8008359, Revision
A, dated January 12, 2011, which provides additional information about
affected TCAS part numbers. Following paragraph (c) of this
supplemental NPRM, we have added new Note 1, which introduces new table
1 to list the service information and the corresponding affected parts.
Request To Explain Effect of Revised Service Information on
Applicability
Mr. Schober expressed concern for the potential effect on the
applicability if the referenced service information is revised. Mr.
Schober asserted that revising the service information to include
additional units not considered at this time would bypass the public
comment required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (Pub. L. 79-
404, 5 U.S.C. 551, et seq.).
We agree to clarify the applicability of this supplemental NPRM.
Where an AD refers to a service document for airplanes or components in
the applicability, that service bulletin is specifically identified by
its revision level. Only that revision level may be used to determine
the applicability of the AD. Therefore, since the applicability of the
AD cannot change in the future except by revising or superseding the
AD, this supplemental NPRM does not violate the APA. We have not
changed the supplemental NPRM regarding this issue.
Request To Provide Additional Information
ACSS asserts that the information provided under the Summary and
Discussion sections in the original NPRM provides very limited detail
regarding the interference limiting issue. To help operators fully
understand and assess the operational aspects of the interference
limiting issue, ACSS recommended that we provide ACSS Technical
Newsletter 8008359, ``Change 7 Interference Limiting Airworthiness
Directive FAQs,'' Revision A, dated January 12, 2011.
We agree. As explained previously, we have changed paragraph (c) in
this supplemental NPRM to refer to this technical newsletter, which
will be submitted to the Office of the Federal Register for approval of
incorporation by reference in the final rule AD.
Request To Delay AD Issuance
Empire Airlines (Empire) reported it could not respond to the
original NPRM because the necessary information was not available and
the proposed modification had not been submitted for TSO approval yet.
Empire suggested that we issue the NPRM when more information is
available.
We disagree with the request. As noted previously in ``Actions
Since Previous NPRM was Issued,'' ACSS is upgrading the software of
each TCAS model and submitting it one at a time to the FAA for review
and approval. We anticipate that all necessary software will be FAA
approved and released before we issue the final rule. In proposing the
compliance time of 48 months in the NPRM, we anticipated that the
software would be released within the first year after the final rule
was issued. Therefore, the compliance time proposed in the NPRM has
been reduced from 48 months to 36 months in this supplemental NPRM.
Request To Consider Effect of TCAS Certification
Dassault showed concern about the detrimental effect the original
NPRM will have on the airplane delivery process for aircraft
manufacturers around the world. Dassault reported that on the
production line many airplanes equipped with the old TCAS part numbers
are awaiting completion and final delivery. As a result, Dassault will
be unable to issue a statement of
[[Page 62324]]
conformity (per FAA Order 8130.2G, Airworthiness Certification of
Aircraft and Related Products, dated August 31, 2010) or a certificate
of airworthiness (per EASA regulations) on these airplanes. Dassault
requested relief in the form of two options: (1) Delaying issuance of
the final rule for 12 months until ACSS can upgrade affected TCAS units
currently installed so that Dassault can certify the interference
limiting change and retrofit the equipment, or (2) excluding TCAS 3000
old part numbers currently on Dassault Falcon Jet and Dassault Aviation
completion/production lines that are waiting entry into service so
that, once in the field, the equipment would be in compliance with the
AD.
We disagree that further revision of this supplemental NPRM is
necessary. As stated previously, we anticipate that all necessary
software will be approved and released before we issue the final rule.
Therefore, Dassault will be able to install the required software in
each airplane delivered after this AD's effective date and issue
statements of conformity for those airplanes.
Request To Clarify Effect of the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) on
Applicability
Mr. Schober stated that many affected TCAS units use an STC as the
approved data, and most of those STCs identify equipment eligible for
installation by part number. The commenter asserted that the referenced
service information rolls the part numbers of the units, so those units
would no longer be eligible for installation via the original STC.
We agree to provide clarification. As indicated previously, we have
added new table 1 in this supplemental NPRM to match each affected part
number to its corresponding service document.
Request To Correct Statement of Unsafe Condition
ACSS noted an inaccuracy in the following text from the NPRM
Summary section:
The TCAS units dropped several reduced surveillance aircraft
tracks because of interference limiting. We are proposing this AD to
prevent TCAS units from dropping tracks, which could compromise
separation of air traffic and lead to subsequent mid-air collisions.
ACSS stated that the IL function--even the changed implementation
approved by the FAA and proposed by the NPRM--will still result in
dropped tracks, because that is the purpose of the IL function. ACSS
agreed with the Relevant Service Information section of the NPRM, which
stated that the change simply ``improves tracking.'' The commenter
therefore suggested that we revise the NPRM to state that the AD will
``minimize'' rather than prevent dropped tracks.
We disagree. The current ACSS implementation of TCAS is susceptible
to dropping surveillance aircraft tracks because of interference
limiting. This supplemental NPRM would require revising the current
TCAS software to prevent dropping of TA and potential RA tracking cause
by interference limiting.We have not changed this supplemental NPRM
regarding this issue. The supplemental NPRM also corrects the altitude
source issue in some of the ACSS TCAS product installations.
Request for Information on the Incident
J. Twombly asked whether the ACSS anomaly that prompted the NPRM
had any effect on the operation of the aircraft's transponder, or
whether the transponder continued to operate in a normal manner,
broadcasting and responding to interrogations, notwithstanding the ACSS
anomaly. The commenter further questioned whether the transponder
performance was verified during the investigation.
The Mode S transponder of the airplane was verified to be
performing in normal status operation during the flight test, despite
the TCAS operational issue of the interference limiting anomaly. This
anomaly in TCAS has no effect on Mode S transponder operation. We have
made no change to this supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request To Revise FAA's Determination
ACSS requested that we revise the following sentence from the
``FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD'' section of
the original NPRM:
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously
is likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.
ACSS clarified that the operation of the IL function in question was
not the result of an error in implementation. The IL function was
specifically implemented to operate as it does in order to comply with
the requirements of the TSO MOPS for Change 7 (i.e., TSO-C119b), as
ACSS interpreted those requirements. As such, ACSS considered the NPRM
misleading in its statement that the unsafe condition was likely to
exist or develop in ``other products of these same type designs.'' ACSS
had already implemented the FAA-directed change in all current and
future versions (e.g., TSO-C119c; Change 7.1-compliant systems). ACSS
recommended that we revise the statement to indicate that the unsafe
condition ``exists in various ACSS TCAS systems.''
We disagree with the request. We have determined that the
identified unsafe condition exists in the affected TCAS products, and
might develop in products with the same type design, unless the actions
proposed in this supplemental NPRM are done. We have not changed the
supplemental NPRM regarding this issue.
Request To Revise Certain Assertions Made in Original NPRM
ACSS questioned the accuracy of the following statement from the
Discussion section of the NPRM: ``When the TCAS unit interrogated
aircraft in a high density airport area, some of the targets
disappeared from the cockpit display or were not recognized.'' ACSS
asserted that this claim is incorrect, and added that the TCAS system
continues to monitor the airspace and receive Mode S squitter
information from all aircraft within detection range, even when the
interrogation power is being limited by the IL function. ACSS therefore
suggested that we revise the statement to remove the words ``or were
not recognized.''
Although the Discussion section from an NPRM is not repeated in a
supplemental NPRM, we agree to provide clarification. The statement
quoted by the commenter appears to be taken out of context from a more
complete document. As long as information is within detection range and
is being processed, MODE S recognition exists. But when tracking power
is not available as a result of IL, not only will tracks disappear from
the display, those targets will not be tracked because the lack of
power does not permit maintenance of tracks. Therefore the tracks are
dropped and will not be recognized and may result in loss of separation
of own aircraft with other target aircraft. We have not changed the
supplemental NPRM regarding this issue.
Request To Revise Proposed Cost Estimate
Mr. Schober noted that the Costs of Compliance section of the
original NPRM considered only the actual updating of the unit--not the
time to remove the unit, package and ship the unit to a repair station,
return the unit to the aircraft owner, and re-install the unit, or the
down time for the airplane for this maintenance evolution and the
associated lost revenue.
Empire asserted that it would be necessary to read each ACSS
service
[[Page 62325]]
document listed in the original NPRM to determine the applicability,
and wondered whether we included this research time in our calculations
for determining the financial impact of the original NPRM.
We infer that the commenters want us to revise the estimated costs
to account for those variables. We disagree. The cost information in
this supplemental NPRM describes only the direct costs of the specific
required actions. Based on the best data available, the manufacturer
provided the number of work-hours necessary to do the proposed actions.
This number represents the time necessary to perform only the actions
actually proposed by this supplemental NPRM. We recognize that, in
doing actions required by an AD, operators might incur incidental costs
in addition to the direct costs. But the cost analysis in AD rulemaking
actions typically does not include incidental costs such as the time
necessary for planning, airplane down time, or time necessitated by
other administrative actions. Those incidental costs, which might vary
significantly among operators, are almost impossible to calculate. We
have not changed the supplemental NPRM regarding this issue.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this supplemental NPRM because we evaluated all
the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist in other products of these same type
designs. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the
original NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to
reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the
public to comment on this supplemental NPRM.
Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
This supplemental NPRM would require upgrading software.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 9,000 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Software upgrade.................... 2 work-hours x $85 per $2,870 $3,040 $27,360,000
hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 this 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),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems, LLC: Docket No. FAA-
2010-1204; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-147-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November 7, 2011.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems
(ACSS) traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) units
with part numbers identified in ACSS Technical Newsletter 8008359,
as installed on but not limited to various transport and small
airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1: Table 1 of this AD also provides a cross-referenced
list of part numbers with associated service bulletins to help
operators identify affected parts.
Table 1--Service Bulletin and LRU Cross-Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected LRU part Nos. (P/
ACCS product-- Ns)-- ACSS Service Bulletin--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCAS 3000SP.......................................... 9003500-10900, -10901, - 8008221-001, Revision 01,
10902, -55900, -55901, - dated February 4, 2011
55902, -57901, -65900, - (ATA Service Bulletin
65901, -65902. 9003500-34-6014).
[[Page 62326]]
TCAS 3000SP.......................................... 9003500-10001, -10002, - 8008222-001, Revision 01,
10003, -10004, -55001, - dated February 4, 2011
55002, -55003, -55004, - (ATA Service Bulletin
65001, -65002, -65003, - 9003500-34-6015).
65004.
TCAS 3000SP.......................................... 9003500-10802............... 8008223-001, Revision 01,
dated February 4, 2011
(ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6016.
TCAS 2000............................................ 7517900-10003, -10004, - 8008229-001, Revision 02,
10006, -10007, -10011, - dated June 28, 2011 (ATA
55003, -55004, -55006, - Service Bulletin 7517900-
55007, -55009, -55011, - 34-6040).
71003, -71004, -71006, -
71007, -71011.
TCAS II.............................................. 4066010-910, -912........... 8008230-001, Revision 02,
dated June 28, 2011 (ATA
Service Bulletin 4066010-
34-6036).
Military TCAS 2000................................... 7517900-56101, -56102, - 8008231-001, Revision 02,
56104, -56105, 56107. dated June 28, 2011 (ATA
Service Bulletin 7517900-
34-6041).
T2CAS................................................ 9000000-10002, -10003, - 8008233-001, Revision 03,
10004, -10005, -10006, - dated June 30, 2011 (ATA
10008, -10204, -10205, - Service Bulletin 9000000-
10206, -10208, -20002, - 34-6016).
20003, -20004, -20005, -
20006, -20008, -20204, -
20205, -20206, -20208, -
55002, -55003, -55004, -
55005, -55006, -55008, -
55204, -55205, -55206, -
55208.
T2CAS................................................ 9000000-10110, -11111....... 8008234-001, Revision 02,
dated June 30, 2011 (ATA
Service Bulletin 9000000-
34-6017).
TCAS 3000............................................ 9003000-10001, -10002, - 8008235-001, Revision 02,
10003, -55001, -55002, - dated February 3, 2011
55003, -65001, -65002, - (ATA Service Bulletin
65003. 9003000-34-6006).
Military TCAS 2000 MASS.............................. 7517900-20001, -20002, - 8008236-001, Revision 03,
65001, -65002. dated June 30, 2011 (ATA
Service Bulletin 7517900-
34-6042).
Military T2CAS MASS.................................. 9000000-30006, -40006, - 8008238-001, Revision 02,
60006. dated June 30, 2011 (ATA
Service Bulletin 9000000-
34-6018).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of anomalies with TCAS units
during a flight test over a high density airport. The TCAS units
dropped several reduced surveillance aircraft tracks because of
interference limiting. We are issuing this AD to prevent TCAS units
from dropping tracks, which could compromise separation of air
traffic and lead to subsequent mid-air collisions.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Upgrade Software
Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, upgrade
software for the ACSS TCAS, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable ACSS publication identified in table
1 of this AD.
Note 2: ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6016), Revision 03, dated June 30, 2011, contains three
part numbers (P/Ns 9000000-10007, -20007, and -55007) that were
never produced.
(h) Actions Done in Accordance With Previous Service Information
A software upgrade done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the applicable service bulletin identified in
paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(13) of this AD is acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(1) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008221-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6014), dated May 27, 2010.
(2) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008222-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6015), dated May 27, 2010.
(3) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008223-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003500-34-6016), dated May 27, 2010.
(4) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008229-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6040), Revision 01, dated September 30, 2010.
(5) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008230-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
4066010-34-6036), Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
(6) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008231-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6041), Revision 01, dated October 15, 2010.
(7) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008233-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6016), Revision 02, dated February 1, 2011.
(8) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008234-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6017), Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
(9) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008235-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9003000-34-6006), dated June 4, 2010.
(10) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6042), dated May 27, 2010.
(11) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008236-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
7517900-34-6042), Revision 02, dated February 1, 2011.
(12) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6018), dated June 4, 2010.
(13) ACSS Service Bulletin 8008238-001 (ATA Service Bulletin
9000000-34-6018), Revision 01, dated February 1, 2011.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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.
(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.
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Abby Malmir,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los
Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-
4137; phone: 562-627-5351; fax: 562-627-5210; e-mail:
abby.malmir@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Aviation Communication & Surveillance Systems, LLC, 19810 North 7th
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85027-4741; phone: 623-445-7040; fax: 623-
445-7004; e-mail: 3com.com">acss.orderadmin@L-3com.com; Internet: https://www.acss.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
[[Page 62327]]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 29, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-26084 Filed 10-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
