Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 73897-73902 [2012-29714]
Download as PDF
73897
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 239
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207;
telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1;
fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Examining the AD Docket
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0421; Directorate
Identifier 2012–NM–042–AD; Amendment
39–17284; AD 2012–25–03]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 757
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report of in-flight fracture of the right
windshield (window 1) on the flight
deck and multiple reports of electrical
arcs at the terminal blocks of the flight
deck windshields resulting in smoke
and fire. This AD requires repetitive
inspections of electrical heat terminals
on the left and right windshields for
damage, and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD allows replacing an
affected windshield with a windshield
equipped with different electrical
connections, which would terminate the
repetitive inspections for that
windshield. We are issuing this AD to
prevent smoke and fire in the flight
deck, which can lead to loss of
visibility, and injuries to or
incapacitation of the flightcrew.
DATES: This AD is effective January 16,
2013.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of January 16, 2013.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at http://
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 AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
Document Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–
917–6478; fax: 425–917–6590; email:
Elias.Natsiopoulos@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to the specified products. That
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on April 25, 2012 (77 FR
24643). That NPRM proposed to require
repetitive inspections of electrical heat
terminals on the left and right
windshields for damage, and corrective
actions if necessary. That NPRM also
proposed to allow replacing an affected
windshield with a windshield equipped
with different electrical connections,
which would terminate the repetitive
inspections for that windshield.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comments
received on the proposal (77 FR 24643,
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
April 25, 2012) and the FAA’s response
to each comment.
Support for the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012)
The Air Line Pilots Association,
International stated that the proposed
actions will enhance safety, and that it
supports the intent and language of the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
UPS stated that it agrees with the
intent of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012).
Requests To Issue Supersedure AD or
Withdraw NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012)
FedEx and UPS recommended
superseding AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804,
July 13, 2010), to add the additional
inspection requirements described in
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated
December 16, 2011, instead of issuing a
new AD that would require
accomplishing the actions proposed in
the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25,
2012). FedEx stated that issuing this
new AD will impose an additional
burden on the operators. UPS stated that
the addition of new requirements for the
J5 terminal in the NPRM conflicts with
the requirements of AD 2010–15–01.
UPS stated that issuing a superseding
AD would ease tracking and avoid
conflicting requirements.
United Airlines (United) stated that
an additional inspection is not
warranted and that more issues are
likely to arise by disturbing the
terminals. We infer that United is
requesting that we withdraw the NPRM
(77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
We do not agree with the commenters’
requests. The additional inspection
requirements of this AD apply only to
Model 757 airplanes; and AD 2010–15–
01, Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR
39804, July 13, 2010), applies to Model
757, 767, and 777 airplanes.
Superseding AD 2010–15–01 would
delay accomplishment of the actions
required by this AD, which would be
inappropriate in light of the unsafe
condition identified on the J1 and J4
upper windshield electrical power
terminal connections on Model 757
airplanes.
In regard to United’s comment, the
unsafe condition identified in the J1 and
J4 upper windshield electrical power
terminal connections significantly
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
73898
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
outweighs the potential for an operator
to inadvertently create a new problem
during the accomplishment of the
actions required by this AD.
As for UPS’s concern about
conflicting J5 terminal requirements
between AD 2010–15–01, Amendment
39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010),
and this AD, we point out that
accomplishing the actions required by
this AD terminates the requirements of
AD 2010–15–01 for Model 757 airplanes
only. Paragraphs (h) and (l) of this AD
provide further clarification regarding
this issue.
We have not changed the AD in this
regard.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
Request To Include Additional
Airplane Model in This AD
The National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB) requested that the NPRM
(77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) also apply
to Model 747, 767, and 777 airplanes,
because a similar window design is
used on these models, as stated in NTSB
Safety Recommendation A–07–50, dated
September 4, 2007. (See http://
www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2007/
A07_49_50.pdf.).
In addition, the NTSB stated that AD
2010–15–01, Amendment 39–16367 (75
FR 39804, July 13, 2010), was applicable
to certain Model 757, 767, and 777
airplanes—not just Model 757 airplanes.
The NTSB noted that there is another
AD action similar to AD 2010–15–01 for
Model 747 airplanes.
We disagree to add Model 747, 767,
and 777 airplanes to the applicability of
this AD. AD 2010–15–01, Amendment
39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010),
which is applicable to certain Model
757, 767, and 777 airplanes, addresses
an unsafe condition on the lower
windshield terminals. There were four
reported Model 757 windshield upper
terminal overheat/arcing events. We
have not received any reports of upper
terminal overheat/arcing events on
Model 767 and 777 airplane
windshields, and only one reported
upper terminal overheat/arcing event on
a Model 747 airplane windshield.
Boeing increased the specified torque
for installation of the windshield
terminals for Model 747, 767, and 777
airplanes and communicated this
information to operators. Due to the
number of reported events on Model
757 airplanes and the lower specified
torque for windshield installations on
Model 757 airplanes, this AD is
applicable to that model only. We have
not changed the AD in this regard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
Requests To Improve Inspection
Procedures
American Airlines (AAL) and the
NTSB requested that we revise the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) to
provide instructions for more effective
inspections in detecting and correcting
all failure modes of the windshield
electrical terminal connections.
AAL stated that it is concerned that
the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012)
does not offer a comprehensive solution
to flight deck window heat smoke
events, and that inspection of the J1, J4,
and J5 electrical terminals for loose
connections might not prevent electrical
arcs at the windshield side of the
terminal blocks. AAL stated that its
analysis and service history have shown
that damage of the solder joints inside
the windshield terminal blocks are the
primary root cause of the smoke and
odor events in the flight deck window
heat system. AAL stated that the NPRM
should also address the electrical
connections at the windshield side of
the terminal block, specifically the use
of unclenched, low temperature solder
joints connecting the braid wire to the
terminal block.
The NTSB stated that it agrees that
windshield heat system terminal blocks
J1 and J4 should be added to the NPRM
(77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012), but that
the FAA needs to revise the NPRM to
ensure that the inspections are effective
in detecting and correcting the potential
problem involving loose electrical
connections. The NTSB cited two
serious incidents that it investigated
during 2010, which involved in-flight
fires and electrical odors that the actions
required in AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804,
July 13, 2010) (which requires
inspection of terminal block J5) did not
adequately address.
We partially agree. We agree with
AAL that the required inspection would
not detect arcing events in the solder
joints inside the terminal blocks of the
PPG Aerospace (PPG) windshields.
However, we disagree with AAL’s
suggestion to revise this AD to address
the solder joints connecting the braid
wire to the terminal block inside the
windshield; this is not feasible, as there
are currently no non-destructive
inspection methods developed to detect
and correct damage inside the
windshield terminal block. Electrical
current through a loose electrical
connector will generate heat which can
compromise the adjacent solder joint.
The requirements of paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this AD focus on proper
connection of screw/lug connectors,
which will protect against smoke/fire
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
events at the connector and damage to
the adjacent solder joint.
We disagree with the NTSB that the
inspections required by this AD are not
effective. We point out that the screw/
lug-type connection is partially exposed
to flight deck activities and can be
bumped during cleaning of the
windshield or by any clipboards/books
or other articles placed on the glare
shield. Therefore, while the inspections
required by AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804,
July 13, 2010), and this new AD might
not eliminate all occurrences of terminal
overheat/arcing, they should reduce the
likelihood of events as demonstrated
since the issuance of AD 2010–15–01.
The most straightforward way to
eliminate overheat/arcing events, and to
terminate the detailed inspections
required by this AD, is replacing the
screw/lug-type windshields with
windshields having pin/socket-type
power connections. This option is
specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
However, we also consider a properly
installed screw/lug connector to provide
an adequate conductive path to prevent
overheating of the electrical connection.
This is addressed in the requirements of
paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD. In
addition, if we were to add a
requirement that operators must do that
replacement, we would need to issue a
supplemental NPRM, and therefore,
would delay issuance of the final rule.
To delay this final rule would be
inappropriate, since we have
determined that an unsafe condition
exists and the actions required by this
AD adequately address the identified
unsafe condition. We have not changed
the AD in this regard.
Requests for Additional Terminating
Action
Boeing requested that GKN Aerospace
(GKN) windshields having part numbers
(P/Ns) 141T4800–15 and 141T4800–16
(with pin/socket terminals) be approved
as optional parts for the terminating
action specified in paragraph (k) of the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
We agree with the commenter’s
request, because we have approved
alternative methods of compliance
(AMOCs) for paragraphs (f), (g), (h), and
(i) of AD 2010–15–01, Amendment 39–
16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), to
allow installation of GKN windshields
having P/Ns 141T4800–15 and
141T4800–16 for Model 757 airplanes
only.
We have added new paragraphs (n)(3)
and (n)(4) to this AD, which state that
AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2010–15–01 are
approved as AMOCs for the actions
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
specified in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j),
and (k) of this AD.
In addition, AAL stated that
installation of a GKN flight deck
windshield having P/N 141T4800
should be included as a terminating
action to the inspection requirements
stated in the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012). AAL stated that the P/N
141T4800 window does not incorporate
the solder joint, which causes an
extreme arcing ignition source and
possible glass damage.
We partially agree. We agree with
AAL that damaged solder joints are a
cause of electrical arcs, because the heat
caused by a loose terminal exceeds the
rated melting point of the solder, which
could result in high voltage arcing that
might damage the windshield glass. We
disagree with AAL to include all GKN
windshields having P/N 141T4800 as
terminating action for this AD because
some of these have screw/lug heat
terminals and some have pin/socket
heat terminals. A main cause of an
overheated terminal, and resultant
melting of the solder and subsequent
arcing, is a loose, cross-threaded, or
incorrectly installed screw. Since we
have received reports of arcing/smoking
on GKN windshields having P/N
141T4800 with screw/lug heat
terminals, we have determined that
these windshields do not provide an
acceptable level of safety without
accomplishing the repetitive inspections
required by this AD and cannot be
included as a terminating action for this
AD. Windshields with pin/socket heat
terminals are terminating action as
specified in paragraphs (k) and (n)(4) of
this AD. We have not changed the AD
in this regard.
Request To Change the Compliance
Time
FedEx recommended retaining the
500-flight-hour or 150-day compliance
time, whichever occurs first, as
specified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision
3, dated December 16, 2011, for certain
inspections, in lieu of the 500 flight
hours proposed by the NPRM (77 FR
24643, April 25, 2012). FedEx stated
that some airplanes have a low average
utilization rate (3.3 or less flight hours
per day) and it is possible to reach 150
days before 500 flight hours.
We do not agree to change the
compliance time. We have determined
that the 150-day compliance time is too
restrictive, and a compliance time of
500 flight hours for the initial and
certain other inspections addresses the
identified unsafe condition soon enough
to ensure an adequate level of safety. As
we noted in the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
April 25, 2012), this difference between
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated
December 16, 2011, and this AD was
coordinated with Boeing. We have not
changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Change Repetitive
Inspection Interval
FedEx recommended having one
repetitive inspection interval for both
GKN and PPG windows. FedEx
recommended a repetitive inspection
interval of 6,000 flight hours or 24
months, whichever occurs first. FedEx
stated that this will help operators
manage the repetitive inspection
interval without the need to require
maintenance ‘‘to check on the
manufacturer of the windows and/or
part numbers.’’
We disagree with having the same
repetitive inspection interval for both
GKN and PPG windows. Having this
one inspection interval would reduce
the repetitive inspection interval for the
GKN-manufactured windshields from
12,000 flight hours or 48 months, to
6,000 flight hours or 24 months,
whichever occurs later. The reason for
the longer repetitive inspection interval
for the GKN windshields is that the
frequency of overheat/arcing events on
the GKN windshields with screw/lugtype electrical connections is
significantly lower and the effects are
not as severe as those of the PPG
windshields. FedEx may choose to
inspect all its airplanes at the more
restrictive interval, if desired, to
simplify its maintenance program. We
have not changed the AD in this regard.
Requests To Change the Replacement
Window Inspection Requirements
FedEx and UPS requested we delete
the requirements of paragraph (i) of the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012). In
eliminating paragraph (i) from the
NPRM, FedEx also suggested that we
change the repetitive inspection
intervals specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2) of the NPRM to ‘‘every 500
flight hours’’ (reduced from 6,000 or
12,000 flight hours, as proposed) or 150
days (reduced from 24 or 48 months, as
proposed), whichever comes first, to
address the unsafe condition. FedEx and
UPS stated that it is difficult for the
operators to meet the requirements of
paragraph (i) of the NPRM, especially if
the windshield is removed due to pilot
and/or maintenance write-ups and/or
non-routine findings during operation.
We do not agree to remove paragraph
(i) of the AD, or to change the repetitive
inspection intervals of paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2) of the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012). However, we have
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73899
revised paragraph (i) of this AD to limit
the inspection to windshields that are
replaced and connections that are reassembled in accordance with the
requirements of this AD. The current
Boeing Model 757 airplane maintenance
manual (AMM) provides instructions for
tasks associated with the windshield
heating system, including replacement
of a windshield with another
windshield with screw/lug electrical
connectors and for testing of the
window heater element loop resistance.
These tasks specify the correct torque
for assembly of the windshield electrical
terminal connections. We find that reinspecting windshields after
replacement or disassembly as part of
routine maintenance is not necessary
since the AMM specifies the proper
torque.
We have revised (and reformatted)
paragraph (i) of this AD to clarify that
the inspections are done on windshields
replaced or connections re-assembled in
accordance with the service information
specified in this AD. Therefore, this AD
only requires re-inspection of
windshield terminal installations on
airplanes on which corrective actions
required by this AD must be done.
Request for Clarification of
Re-Assembly
UPS questioned whether popping off
the plastic cover on the Wallace-Black
and Cory/Tri-Star lug connectors to gain
access for visual inspection is a ‘‘reassembly’’ when the cover is popped
back on. UPS stated that if it is a reassembly, then another re-inspection is
required at 500 flight hours, which
starts a repetitive inspection loop that
cannot be terminated. UPS stated that
the only conceivable reason for ‘‘reassembling’’ any J1, J4, or J5 connection
would be for a finding of an improper
assembly (i.e., cross-threading, gapping,
low screw torque, loose screw), and that
these issues have been adequately
addressed in AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804,
July 13, 2010), and in the previous
inspections of the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012).
We agree to provide clarification.
Removing and installing the cover, as
described in Figure 1 and Figure 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
30–0019, Revision 3, dated December
15, 2011, is not considered ‘‘reassembly’’ for the requirements
specified in paragraph (i) of this AD. We
have not changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Revise the AMM
UPS requested that the Boeing AMM
be revised to include the re-inspection
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
73900
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
requirements of paragraph (i) of the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012), or
that a requirement similar to a critical
design configuration control limitation/
airworthiness limitation (CDCCL/AWL)
be added to the appropriate AMM
section. UPS stated that the reinspection requirements in paragraph (i)
of the NPRM include unscheduled
maintenance activities, and UPS, like
other operators, has no means to
identify and impose a required reinspection when the re-inspection is not
in the instructions for continued
airworthiness (ICAs), namely, the AMM.
UPS stated that having the operator
change its manual to include a ‘‘unique’’
requirement is not a viable solution.
We disagree with the request.
However, as previously stated, we have
removed the requirement to inspect
windows replaced during normal
maintenance. We find that the safety of
the fleet of affected airplanes will be
ensured by the revised requirements of
paragraph (i) of this AD. In addition, if
we were to add a requirement to include
a CDCCL or AWL in the maintenance
program instead of the inspection
specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, we
would need to issue a supplemental
NPRM, and therefore, would delay
issuance of the final rule. To delay this
final rule would be inappropriate, since
we have determined that an unsafe
condition exists and the actions
required by this AD, including the
inspections specified in paragraph (i) of
this AD, must be conducted to ensure
continued safety. We have not changed
the AD in this regard.
Request for Temporary Repair for
Missing Terminal Covers
UPS requested approval to operate
with missing plastic protective terminal
covers on the lug-screw-style
connectors. UPS stated that, with the
increased amount of inspection activity
required on these terminals, it is
common for the plastic protective
covers to be missing. UPS stated that
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated
December 15, 2011, specifies the
inspection of these covers for signs of
heat damage. UPS stated that there is no
provision for a missing cover. UPS
requested that provisions be made for
dispatching an airplane with a simple
temporary repair for those instances
when a cover is missing; since failure to
resolve this minor point will result in
grounded airplanes for the sake of an
inexpensive cover.
We partially agree. We disagree with
granting approval to operate with
missing plastic protective terminal
covers on the lug-screw-style connectors
in this AD. We agree that the availability
of an alternative to seal the windshield
terminal(s) would provide relief if the
type design part is missing from the
terminal and it is not readily available
at the time it is needed. According to
Boeing, the use of Dow Corning RTV–
3145 sealant, also called DC–3145
potting compound, would be acceptable
to use in place of the missing cover. The
procedure to apply the DC–3145 sealant
is specified in the Boeing Standard
Wiring Practices Manual, Chapter 20–
60–08. Operators can submit a request
for an AMOC, including the specific
details of when and how this
substitution would be used, in
accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
We have not changed the AD in this
regard.
Additional Changes Made to This AD
We have added new paragraph (c)(3)
to this AD to state that installation of
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/
Regulatory-and-Guidance-Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/
082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/
$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect
the ability to accomplish the actions
required by this AD. Therefore, for
airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is
installed, a ‘‘change in product’’ AMOC
approval request is not necessary to
comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17. For all other AMOC requests, the
operator must request approval for an
AMOC in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (n) of
this AD.
Conclusion
We 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—
and minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM (77 FR
24643, April 25, 2012) for correcting the
unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012).
We also determined that these
changes will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the
scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 664
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Detailed inspection of windshields ..............
3 work-hours × $85 per hour =
$255 per inspection cycle.
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary corrective actions that
Parts cost
Cost per product
$0
would be required based on the results
of the inspection. We have no way of
$255 per inspection
cycle.
Cost on U.S.
operators
$169,320 per inspection cycle.
determining the number of aircraft that
might need these corrective actions.
ON-CONDITION COSTS
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Cost per product
Windshield replacement and changes to related
wiring including lug replacement.
9 work-hours × $85 per hour = $765
per windshield.
$19,687 per windshield
$20,452 per windshield.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Authority for This Rulemaking
§ 39.13
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
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(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.
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2012–25–03 The Boeing Company:
Amendment 39–17284; Docket No.
FAA–2012–0421; Directorate Identifier
2011–NM–042–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective January 16, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD affects AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of
this AD.
(1) Model 757–200, –200PF, and –200CB
series airplanes identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–0019,
Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011.
(2) Model 757–300 airplanes identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–30–0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011.
(3) Installation of Supplemental Type
Certificate (STC) ST01920SE (http://
rgl.faa.gov/
Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/
0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/
$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the
ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which
STC ST01920SE is installed, a ‘‘change in
product’’ alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to
comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17. For all other AMOC requests, the
operator must request approval for an AMOC
in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (n) of this AD.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 30, Ice and Rain Protection.
Adoption of the Amendment
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a report of inflight fracture of the right windshield
(window 1) on the flight deck and multiple
reports of electrical arcs at the terminal
blocks of the flight deck windshields
resulting in smoke and fire. We are issuing
this AD to prevent smoke and fire in the
flight deck, which can lead to loss of
visibility, and injuries to or incapacitation of
the flightcrew.
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
(g) Inspection and Repair
Within 500 flight hours after the effective
date of this AD, except as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD: Do a detailed
inspection for damage of the wiring and
electrical terminal blocks (J1, J4, and J5
terminals) at the left and right flight deck
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73901
window 1 windshield, and do all applicable
corrective actions, by accomplishing all the
applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–
0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011
(for Model 757–200, -200PF, and -200CB
series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 3,
dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757–300
series airplanes). Except as provided by
paragraph (j) of this AD, do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.
Repeat the detailed inspection thereafter at
the applicable interval specified in paragraph
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD. Doing the
replacement specified in paragraph (k) of this
AD terminates the repetitive inspection
requirements of this paragraph for that
replaced flight deck windshield.
(1) For flight deck windshields
manufactured by GKN Aerospace (GKN) with
screw/lug electrical connections, repeat the
detailed inspection thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 12,000 flight hours or 48 months,
whichever occurs later.
(2) For flight deck windshields
manufactured by PPG Aerospace (PPG) with
screw/lug electrical connections, repeat the
detailed inspection thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 24 months,
whichever occurs later.
(h) Compliance Time Exception for Previous
Inspection
For airplanes on which inspections of the
J1, J4, and J5 terminals specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–
0019, Revision 2, dated April 19, 2010 (for
Model 757–200, –200PF, and –200CB series
airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 2010 (for Model 757–300
series airplanes); were accomplished before
the effective date of this AD: Do the actions
required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the
applicable compliance time specified in
paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraph
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
(1) For flight deck windshields
manufactured by GKN with screw/lug
electrical connections: At the later of the
times specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and
(h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Within 12,000 flight hours or 48
months, whichever occurs later, after
accomplishing the inspection.
(ii) Within 500 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD.
(2) For flight deck windshields
manufactured by PPG with screw/lug
electrical connections: At the later of the
times specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and
(h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Within 6,000 flight hours or 24 months,
whichever occurs later, after accomplishing
the inspection.
(ii) Within 500 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD.
(i) Inspection for Replaced Windshield or
Re-Assembled Heat Power Connection
(1) For airplanes on which any windshield
is replaced after the effective date of this AD
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
73902
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
with a windshield that uses screws and lugs
for electrical heat connection, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757–200, –200PF, and
–200CB series airplanes); or Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–0020,
Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011 (for
Model 757–300 series airplanes): Do the
actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD
within 500 flight hours after the windshield
replacement; and thereafter at the applicable
interval specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which any windshield
heat power connection is re-assembled after
the effective date of this AD on windshields
that use screws and lugs for windshield heat
connections, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–
0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011
(for Model 757–200, –200PF, and –200CB
series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 3,
dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757–300
series airplanes): Do the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD within 500 flight
hours after the connection re-assembly; and
thereafter at the applicable interval specified
in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
(j) Exception to Compliance Time for Certain
Windshield Replacement
If, during the inspection required by
paragraph (g) or (i) of this AD, the screw is
found cross threaded: Do the applicable
actions specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2)
of this AD.
(1) If the terminal lug is loose and cannot
be tightened: Before further flight, replace
that windshield, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–
0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011
(for Model 757–200, –200PF, and –200CB
series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 3,
dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757–300
series airplanes).
(2) If the terminal lug is tight or can be
tightened: Replace that windshield within
500 flight hours after the inspection, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated
December 16, 2011 (for Model 757–200,
–200PF, and –200CB series airplanes); or
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–30–0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757–300 series
airplanes).
(k) Optional Terminating Action
Replacing a flight deck windshield that
uses screws and lugs for the electrical
connections with a flight deck windshield
that uses pins and sockets for the electrical
connections, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–30–
0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011
(for Model 757–200, –200PF, and –200CB
series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 3,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:22 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757–300
series airplanes); ends the repetitive
inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of
this AD for that windshield.
(l) Related AD Termination
Accomplishing the actions required by this
AD terminates the requirements of
paragraphs (g), (j), and (k) of AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010), for that airplane only.
(m) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
actions required by this AD, if those actions
were performed before the effective date of
this AD using Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 2,
dated April 19, 2010 (for Model 757–200,
–200PF, and –200CB series airplanes); or
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–30–0020, Revision 2, dated March 31,
2010 (for Model 757–300 series airplanes);
which are not incorporated by reference in
this AD.
(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(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.
(3) AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010), that are associated with the J5 (lower)
terminal only are approved as AMOCs for the
actions specified in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j),
and (k) of this AD for the J5 (lower) terminal
only.
(4) AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2010–15–01,
Amendment 39–16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010), that install windows with pin/socket
electrical connectors (both upper and lower)
are approved as AMOCs for the actions
specified in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k)
of this AD.
(o) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch,
ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–
917–6478; fax: 425–917–6590; email:
Elias.Natsiopoulos@faa.gov.
(2) For Boeing service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data &
Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC
2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–
5680; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review
copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0019, Revision 3, dated
December 16, 2011.
(ii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–30–0020, Revision 3, dated
December 16, 2011.
(3) For Boeing service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data &
Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC
2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone
206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–
5680; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 30, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–29714 Filed 12–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0496; Directorate
Identifier 2011–NM–263–AD; Amendment
39–17283; AD 2012–25–02]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier,
Inc. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73897-73902]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29714]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 73897]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2012-0421; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-042-AD;
Amendment 39-17284; AD 2012-25-03]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report of in-flight fracture of the right windshield (window 1) on the
flight deck and multiple reports of electrical arcs at the terminal
blocks of the flight deck windshields resulting in smoke and fire. This
AD requires repetitive inspections of electrical heat terminals on the
left and right windshields for damage, and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD allows replacing an affected windshield with a
windshield equipped with different electrical connections, which would
terminate the repetitive inspections for that windshield. We are
issuing this AD to prevent smoke and fire in the flight deck, which can
lead to loss of visibility, and injuries to or incapacitation of the
flightcrew.
DATES: This AD is effective January 16, 2013.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of January 16,
2013.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 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 http://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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elias Natsiopoulos, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone: 425-917-6478; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
Elias.Natsiopoulos@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 25, 2012 (77 FR
24643). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections of
electrical heat terminals on the left and right windshields for damage,
and corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to allow
replacing an affected windshield with a windshield equipped with
different electrical connections, which would terminate the repetitive
inspections for that windshield.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) and the FAA's response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012)
The Air Line Pilots Association, International stated that the
proposed actions will enhance safety, and that it supports the intent
and language of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
UPS stated that it agrees with the intent of the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012).
Requests To Issue Supersedure AD or Withdraw NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012)
FedEx and UPS recommended superseding AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-
16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), to add the additional inspection
requirements described in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011, instead of issuing a
new AD that would require accomplishing the actions proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012). FedEx stated that issuing this new
AD will impose an additional burden on the operators. UPS stated that
the addition of new requirements for the J5 terminal in the NPRM
conflicts with the requirements of AD 2010-15-01. UPS stated that
issuing a superseding AD would ease tracking and avoid conflicting
requirements.
United Airlines (United) stated that an additional inspection is
not warranted and that more issues are likely to arise by disturbing
the terminals. We infer that United is requesting that we withdraw the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
We do not agree with the commenters' requests. The additional
inspection requirements of this AD apply only to Model 757 airplanes;
and AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010),
applies to Model 757, 767, and 777 airplanes. Superseding AD 2010-15-01
would delay accomplishment of the actions required by this AD, which
would be inappropriate in light of the unsafe condition identified on
the J1 and J4 upper windshield electrical power terminal connections on
Model 757 airplanes.
In regard to United's comment, the unsafe condition identified in
the J1 and J4 upper windshield electrical power terminal connections
significantly
[[Page 73898]]
outweighs the potential for an operator to inadvertently create a new
problem during the accomplishment of the actions required by this AD.
As for UPS's concern about conflicting J5 terminal requirements
between AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010),
and this AD, we point out that accomplishing the actions required by
this AD terminates the requirements of AD 2010-15-01 for Model 757
airplanes only. Paragraphs (h) and (l) of this AD provide further
clarification regarding this issue.
We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Include Additional Airplane Model in This AD
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) requested that the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) also apply to Model 747, 767, and
777 airplanes, because a similar window design is used on these models,
as stated in NTSB Safety Recommendation A-07-50, dated September 4,
2007. (See http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2007/A07_49_50.pdf.).
In addition, the NTSB stated that AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367
(75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), was applicable to certain Model 757, 767,
and 777 airplanes--not just Model 757 airplanes. The NTSB noted that
there is another AD action similar to AD 2010-15-01 for Model 747
airplanes.
We disagree to add Model 747, 767, and 777 airplanes to the
applicability of this AD. AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR
39804, July 13, 2010), which is applicable to certain Model 757, 767,
and 777 airplanes, addresses an unsafe condition on the lower
windshield terminals. There were four reported Model 757 windshield
upper terminal overheat/arcing events. We have not received any reports
of upper terminal overheat/arcing events on Model 767 and 777 airplane
windshields, and only one reported upper terminal overheat/arcing event
on a Model 747 airplane windshield. Boeing increased the specified
torque for installation of the windshield terminals for Model 747, 767,
and 777 airplanes and communicated this information to operators. Due
to the number of reported events on Model 757 airplanes and the lower
specified torque for windshield installations on Model 757 airplanes,
this AD is applicable to that model only. We have not changed the AD in
this regard.
Requests To Improve Inspection Procedures
American Airlines (AAL) and the NTSB requested that we revise the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) to provide instructions for more
effective inspections in detecting and correcting all failure modes of
the windshield electrical terminal connections.
AAL stated that it is concerned that the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012) does not offer a comprehensive solution to flight deck window
heat smoke events, and that inspection of the J1, J4, and J5 electrical
terminals for loose connections might not prevent electrical arcs at
the windshield side of the terminal blocks. AAL stated that its
analysis and service history have shown that damage of the solder
joints inside the windshield terminal blocks are the primary root cause
of the smoke and odor events in the flight deck window heat system. AAL
stated that the NPRM should also address the electrical connections at
the windshield side of the terminal block, specifically the use of
unclenched, low temperature solder joints connecting the braid wire to
the terminal block.
The NTSB stated that it agrees that windshield heat system terminal
blocks J1 and J4 should be added to the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25,
2012), but that the FAA needs to revise the NPRM to ensure that the
inspections are effective in detecting and correcting the potential
problem involving loose electrical connections. The NTSB cited two
serious incidents that it investigated during 2010, which involved in-
flight fires and electrical odors that the actions required in AD 2010-
15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010) (which requires
inspection of terminal block J5) did not adequately address.
We partially agree. We agree with AAL that the required inspection
would not detect arcing events in the solder joints inside the terminal
blocks of the PPG Aerospace (PPG) windshields. However, we disagree
with AAL's suggestion to revise this AD to address the solder joints
connecting the braid wire to the terminal block inside the windshield;
this is not feasible, as there are currently no non-destructive
inspection methods developed to detect and correct damage inside the
windshield terminal block. Electrical current through a loose
electrical connector will generate heat which can compromise the
adjacent solder joint. The requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and (i)
of this AD focus on proper connection of screw/lug connectors, which
will protect against smoke/fire events at the connector and damage to
the adjacent solder joint.
We disagree with the NTSB that the inspections required by this AD
are not effective. We point out that the screw/lug-type connection is
partially exposed to flight deck activities and can be bumped during
cleaning of the windshield or by any clipboards/books or other articles
placed on the glare shield. Therefore, while the inspections required
by AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), and
this new AD might not eliminate all occurrences of terminal overheat/
arcing, they should reduce the likelihood of events as demonstrated
since the issuance of AD 2010-15-01.
The most straightforward way to eliminate overheat/arcing events,
and to terminate the detailed inspections required by this AD, is
replacing the screw/lug-type windshields with windshields having pin/
socket-type power connections. This option is specified in paragraph
(k) of this AD. However, we also consider a properly installed screw/
lug connector to provide an adequate conductive path to prevent
overheating of the electrical connection. This is addressed in the
requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD. In addition,
if we were to add a requirement that operators must do that
replacement, we would need to issue a supplemental NPRM, and therefore,
would delay issuance of the final rule. To delay this final rule would
be inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe condition
exists and the actions required by this AD adequately address the
identified unsafe condition. We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Requests for Additional Terminating Action
Boeing requested that GKN Aerospace (GKN) windshields having part
numbers (P/Ns) 141T4800-15 and 141T4800-16 (with pin/socket terminals)
be approved as optional parts for the terminating action specified in
paragraph (k) of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
We agree with the commenter's request, because we have approved
alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) for paragraphs (f), (g), (h),
and (i) of AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010), to allow installation of GKN windshields having P/Ns 141T4800-15
and 141T4800-16 for Model 757 airplanes only.
We have added new paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) to this AD, which
state that AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2010-15-01
are approved as AMOCs for the actions
[[Page 73899]]
specified in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) of this AD.
In addition, AAL stated that installation of a GKN flight deck
windshield having P/N 141T4800 should be included as a terminating
action to the inspection requirements stated in the NPRM (77 FR 24643,
April 25, 2012). AAL stated that the P/N 141T4800 window does not
incorporate the solder joint, which causes an extreme arcing ignition
source and possible glass damage.
We partially agree. We agree with AAL that damaged solder joints
are a cause of electrical arcs, because the heat caused by a loose
terminal exceeds the rated melting point of the solder, which could
result in high voltage arcing that might damage the windshield glass.
We disagree with AAL to include all GKN windshields having P/N 141T4800
as terminating action for this AD because some of these have screw/lug
heat terminals and some have pin/socket heat terminals. A main cause of
an overheated terminal, and resultant melting of the solder and
subsequent arcing, is a loose, cross-threaded, or incorrectly installed
screw. Since we have received reports of arcing/smoking on GKN
windshields having P/N 141T4800 with screw/lug heat terminals, we have
determined that these windshields do not provide an acceptable level of
safety without accomplishing the repetitive inspections required by
this AD and cannot be included as a terminating action for this AD.
Windshields with pin/socket heat terminals are terminating action as
specified in paragraphs (k) and (n)(4) of this AD. We have not changed
the AD in this regard.
Request To Change the Compliance Time
FedEx recommended retaining the 500-flight-hour or 150-day
compliance time, whichever occurs first, as specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16,
2011, for certain inspections, in lieu of the 500 flight hours proposed
by the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012). FedEx stated that some
airplanes have a low average utilization rate (3.3 or less flight hours
per day) and it is possible to reach 150 days before 500 flight hours.
We do not agree to change the compliance time. We have determined
that the 150-day compliance time is too restrictive, and a compliance
time of 500 flight hours for the initial and certain other inspections
addresses the identified unsafe condition soon enough to ensure an
adequate level of safety. As we noted in the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012), this difference between Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011, and this AD
was coordinated with Boeing. We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Change Repetitive Inspection Interval
FedEx recommended having one repetitive inspection interval for
both GKN and PPG windows. FedEx recommended a repetitive inspection
interval of 6,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first.
FedEx stated that this will help operators manage the repetitive
inspection interval without the need to require maintenance ``to check
on the manufacturer of the windows and/or part numbers.''
We disagree with having the same repetitive inspection interval for
both GKN and PPG windows. Having this one inspection interval would
reduce the repetitive inspection interval for the GKN-manufactured
windshields from 12,000 flight hours or 48 months, to 6,000 flight
hours or 24 months, whichever occurs later. The reason for the longer
repetitive inspection interval for the GKN windshields is that the
frequency of overheat/arcing events on the GKN windshields with screw/
lug-type electrical connections is significantly lower and the effects
are not as severe as those of the PPG windshields. FedEx may choose to
inspect all its airplanes at the more restrictive interval, if desired,
to simplify its maintenance program. We have not changed the AD in this
regard.
Requests To Change the Replacement Window Inspection Requirements
FedEx and UPS requested we delete the requirements of paragraph (i)
of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012). In eliminating paragraph (i)
from the NPRM, FedEx also suggested that we change the repetitive
inspection intervals specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of the
NPRM to ``every 500 flight hours'' (reduced from 6,000 or 12,000 flight
hours, as proposed) or 150 days (reduced from 24 or 48 months, as
proposed), whichever comes first, to address the unsafe condition.
FedEx and UPS stated that it is difficult for the operators to meet the
requirements of paragraph (i) of the NPRM, especially if the windshield
is removed due to pilot and/or maintenance write-ups and/or non-routine
findings during operation.
We do not agree to remove paragraph (i) of the AD, or to change the
repetitive inspection intervals of paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012). However, we have revised paragraph
(i) of this AD to limit the inspection to windshields that are replaced
and connections that are re-assembled in accordance with the
requirements of this AD. The current Boeing Model 757 airplane
maintenance manual (AMM) provides instructions for tasks associated
with the windshield heating system, including replacement of a
windshield with another windshield with screw/lug electrical connectors
and for testing of the window heater element loop resistance. These
tasks specify the correct torque for assembly of the windshield
electrical terminal connections. We find that re-inspecting windshields
after replacement or disassembly as part of routine maintenance is not
necessary since the AMM specifies the proper torque.
We have revised (and reformatted) paragraph (i) of this AD to
clarify that the inspections are done on windshields replaced or
connections re-assembled in accordance with the service information
specified in this AD. Therefore, this AD only requires re-inspection of
windshield terminal installations on airplanes on which corrective
actions required by this AD must be done.
Request for Clarification of Re-Assembly
UPS questioned whether popping off the plastic cover on the
Wallace-Black and Cory/Tri-Star lug connectors to gain access for
visual inspection is a ``re-assembly'' when the cover is popped back
on. UPS stated that if it is a re-assembly, then another re-inspection
is required at 500 flight hours, which starts a repetitive inspection
loop that cannot be terminated. UPS stated that the only conceivable
reason for ``re-assembling'' any J1, J4, or J5 connection would be for
a finding of an improper assembly (i.e., cross-threading, gapping, low
screw torque, loose screw), and that these issues have been adequately
addressed in AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13,
2010), and in the previous inspections of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April
25, 2012).
We agree to provide clarification. Removing and installing the
cover, as described in Figure 1 and Figure 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019,
Revision 3, dated December 15, 2011, is not considered ``re-assembly''
for the requirements specified in paragraph (i) of this AD. We have not
changed the AD in this regard.
Request To Revise the AMM
UPS requested that the Boeing AMM be revised to include the re-
inspection
[[Page 73900]]
requirements of paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25,
2012), or that a requirement similar to a critical design configuration
control limitation/airworthiness limitation (CDCCL/AWL) be added to the
appropriate AMM section. UPS stated that the re-inspection requirements
in paragraph (i) of the NPRM include unscheduled maintenance
activities, and UPS, like other operators, has no means to identify and
impose a required re-inspection when the re-inspection is not in the
instructions for continued airworthiness (ICAs), namely, the AMM. UPS
stated that having the operator change its manual to include a
``unique'' requirement is not a viable solution.
We disagree with the request. However, as previously stated, we
have removed the requirement to inspect windows replaced during normal
maintenance. We find that the safety of the fleet of affected airplanes
will be ensured by the revised requirements of paragraph (i) of this
AD. In addition, if we were to add a requirement to include a CDCCL or
AWL in the maintenance program instead of the inspection specified in
paragraph (i) of this AD, we would need to issue a supplemental NPRM,
and therefore, would delay issuance of the final rule. To delay this
final rule would be inappropriate, since we have determined that an
unsafe condition exists and the actions required by this AD, including
the inspections specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, must be
conducted to ensure continued safety. We have not changed the AD in
this regard.
Request for Temporary Repair for Missing Terminal Covers
UPS requested approval to operate with missing plastic protective
terminal covers on the lug-screw-style connectors. UPS stated that,
with the increased amount of inspection activity required on these
terminals, it is common for the plastic protective covers to be
missing. UPS stated that Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-
30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 15, 2011, specifies the inspection
of these covers for signs of heat damage. UPS stated that there is no
provision for a missing cover. UPS requested that provisions be made
for dispatching an airplane with a simple temporary repair for those
instances when a cover is missing; since failure to resolve this minor
point will result in grounded airplanes for the sake of an inexpensive
cover.
We partially agree. We disagree with granting approval to operate
with missing plastic protective terminal covers on the lug-screw-style
connectors in this AD. We agree that the availability of an alternative
to seal the windshield terminal(s) would provide relief if the type
design part is missing from the terminal and it is not readily
available at the time it is needed. According to Boeing, the use of Dow
Corning RTV-3145 sealant, also called DC-3145 potting compound, would
be acceptable to use in place of the missing cover. The procedure to
apply the DC-3145 sealant is specified in the Boeing Standard Wiring
Practices Manual, Chapter 20-60-08. Operators can submit a request for
an AMOC, including the specific details of when and how this
substitution would be used, in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (n) of this AD. We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Additional Changes Made to This AD
We have added new paragraph (c)(3) to this AD to state that
installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01920SE (http://
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory-and-Guidance-Library/rgstc.nsf/0/
082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect
the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore,
for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is installed, a ``change in
product'' AMOC approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17. For all other AMOC requests, the operator
must request approval for an AMOC in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
Conclusion
We 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--and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 24643, April 25, 2012).
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 664 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed inspection of 3 work-hours x $85 $0 $255 per inspection $169,320 per
windshields. per hour = $255 per cycle. inspection cycle.
inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary corrective
actions that would be required based on the results of the inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need
these corrective actions.
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windshield replacement and changes 9 work-hours x $85 per $19,687 per windshield. $20,452 per windshield.
to related wiring including lug hour = $765 per
replacement. windshield.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73901]]
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
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(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.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
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]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2012-25-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17284; Docket No. FAA-
2012-0421; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-042-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective January 16, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD affects AD 2010-15-01, Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804,
July 13, 2010).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company airplanes, certificated in
any category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this
AD.
(1) Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019,
Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011.
(2) Model 757-300 airplanes identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011.
(3) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory--and--Guidance--Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17. For all other AMOC requests, the
operator must request approval for an AMOC in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 30, Ice and Rain Protection.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a report of in-flight fracture of the
right windshield (window 1) on the flight deck and multiple reports
of electrical arcs at the terminal blocks of the flight deck
windshields resulting in smoke and fire. We are issuing this AD to
prevent smoke and fire in the flight deck, which can lead to loss of
visibility, and injuries to or incapacitation of the flightcrew.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Inspection and Repair
Within 500 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Do a detailed
inspection for damage of the wiring and electrical terminal blocks
(J1, J4, and J5 terminals) at the left and right flight deck window
1 windshield, and do all applicable corrective actions, by
accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model
757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes); or Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes). Except as provided by
paragraph (j) of this AD, do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight. Repeat the detailed inspection thereafter at
the applicable interval specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of
this AD. Doing the replacement specified in paragraph (k) of this AD
terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of this paragraph
for that replaced flight deck windshield.
(1) For flight deck windshields manufactured by GKN Aerospace
(GKN) with screw/lug electrical connections, repeat the detailed
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight hours
or 48 months, whichever occurs later.
(2) For flight deck windshields manufactured by PPG Aerospace
(PPG) with screw/lug electrical connections, repeat the detailed
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours
or 24 months, whichever occurs later.
(h) Compliance Time Exception for Previous Inspection
For airplanes on which inspections of the J1, J4, and J5
terminals specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 2, dated
April 19, 2010 (for Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series
airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-
0020, Revision 2, dated March 31, 2010 (for Model 757-300 series
airplanes); were accomplished before the effective date of this AD:
Do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2)
of this AD. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable
intervals specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
(1) For flight deck windshields manufactured by GKN with screw/
lug electrical connections: At the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Within 12,000 flight hours or 48 months, whichever occurs
later, after accomplishing the inspection.
(ii) Within 500 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD.
(2) For flight deck windshields manufactured by PPG with screw/
lug electrical connections: At the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Within 6,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs
later, after accomplishing the inspection.
(ii) Within 500 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD.
(i) Inspection for Replaced Windshield or Re-Assembled Heat Power
Connection
(1) For airplanes on which any windshield is replaced after the
effective date of this AD
[[Page 73902]]
with a windshield that uses screws and lugs for electrical heat
connection, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3,
dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB
series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-
30-0020, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757-300
series airplanes): Do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this
AD within 500 flight hours after the windshield replacement; and
thereafter at the applicable interval specified in paragraph (g)(1)
or (g)(2) of this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which any windshield heat power connection
is re-assembled after the effective date of this AD on windshields
that use screws and lugs for windshield heat connections, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes);
or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision
3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes): Do
the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD within 500 flight
hours after the connection re-assembly; and thereafter at the
applicable interval specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this
AD.
(j) Exception to Compliance Time for Certain Windshield Replacement
If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) or (i) of
this AD, the screw is found cross threaded: Do the applicable
actions specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD.
(1) If the terminal lug is loose and cannot be tightened: Before
further flight, replace that windshield, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model
757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes); or Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes).
(2) If the terminal lug is tight or can be tightened: Replace
that windshield within 500 flight hours after the inspection, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes);
or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision
3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes).
(k) Optional Terminating Action
Replacing a flight deck windshield that uses screws and lugs for
the electrical connections with a flight deck windshield that uses
pins and sockets for the electrical connections, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-30-0019, Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011 (for Model
757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series airplanes); or Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision 3, dated December
16, 2011 (for Model 757-300 series airplanes); ends the repetitive
inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD for that
windshield.
(l) Related AD Termination
Accomplishing the actions required by this AD terminates the
requirements of paragraphs (g), (j), and (k) of AD 2010-15-01,
Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), for that airplane
only.
(m) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by this
AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of
this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019,
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2010 (for Model 757-200, -200PF, and -
200CB series airplanes); or Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-30-0020, Revision 2, dated March 31, 2010 (for Model
757-300 series airplanes); which are not incorporated by reference
in this AD.
(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(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.
(3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2010-15-01,
Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), that are associated
with the J5 (lower) terminal only are approved as AMOCs for the
actions specified in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) of this
AD for the J5 (lower) terminal only.
(4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2010-15-01,
Amendment 39-16367 (75 FR 39804, July 13, 2010), that install
windows with pin/socket electrical connectors (both upper and lower)
are approved as AMOCs for the actions specified in paragraphs (g),
(h), (i), (j), and (k) of this AD.
(o) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Elias
Natsiopoulos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-
130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6478; fax: 425-
917-6590; email: Elias.Natsiopoulos@faa.gov.
(2) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0019,
Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011.
(ii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-30-0020,
Revision 3, dated December 16, 2011.
(3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 30, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-29714 Filed 12-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P