Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 14982-14987 [2014-04826]

Download as PDF 14982 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on April 22, 2014. (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 57A1218, Revision 6, dated June 9, 2011. (ii) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 57A1277, Revision 3, dated May 16, 2012. (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on August 31, 2010 (75 FR 43803, July 27, 2010). (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 57A1218, Revision 5, dated February 9, 2009. (ii) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 57A1277, Revision 1, dated November 25, 2003. (5) For Boeing service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; Internet https:// www.myboeingfleet.com. (6) You may view this service information at 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. (7) 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 February 18, 2014. Ross Landes, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2014–04819 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2013–0326; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–089–AD; Amendment 39–17786; AD 2014–05–13] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004–12– 07 for certain The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. AD 2004–12–07 required modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 certain other airplanes, AD 2004–12–07 required a one-time detailed inspection of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary. This new AD specifies a maximum compliance time limit. This AD was prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that were used during the initial design. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut. DATES: This AD is effective April 22, 2014. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of April 22, 2014. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of July 21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004). The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999). 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 view this 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– 0326; 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 Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6440; fax: 425–917–6590; email: Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004). AD 2004–12–07 applied to certain The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2013 (78 FR 22215). The NPRM was prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that were used during the initial design. The NPRM proposed to retain the requirements of AD 2004–12–07, which required modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain other airplanes, AD 2004–12–07 required a one-time detailed inspection of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary. The NPRM proposed to specify a maximum compliance time limit to modify the nacelle strut and wing structure. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) and the FAA’s response to each comment. Support for the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) Boeing stated that it concurs with the contents of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013). E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations Clarification of Effect of Winglet Installation Request To Change When Concurrent Actions Are To Be Done Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental type certificate (STC) ST01518SE does not affect the actions specified in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013). We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) as (c)(1) and added new paragraph (c)(2) to this final rule to state that installation of STC ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/ Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/ rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a 4005d308b/Body/0.48A!Open Element&FieldElemFormat=gif) does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this final rule. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01518SE 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. American Airlines (AAL) requested that we change paragraph (j) (concurrent actions) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which specifies doing the actions at the same time as paragraph (i) of the NPRM, to specify that the concurrent actions are to be done at the same time as the actions required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. AAL stated that the pylon modification action is mandated by paragraph (g) of the NPRM, and paragraph (i) of the NPRM mandates only the time at which the modification must be accomplished. We do not agree with the commenter’s request because, although the requirement for the modification is first specified in paragraph (g) of this final rule, which is a restatement from AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), the new requirement is in paragraph (i) of this final rule. Paragraph (i) of this final rule correctly references paragraph (g) of this final rule. If the concurrent actions specified in paragraph (j) of this final rule are to be accomplished at the same time as paragraph (g) of this final rule, as the commenter suggests, that would make the requirement retroactive, and would potentially put operators out of compliance. We have not changed this final rule in this regard. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES Request To Clarify Concurrent Requirements FedEx requested that we clarify the requirements of paragraph (j) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which specified concurrent actions. FedEx explained that the NPRM requirement and paragraph 1.B., of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, conflict with the information in paragraph D., of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. FedEx stated that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, states that Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994 (the concurrent actions required by paragraph (j) of the NPRM); no longer need to be accomplished. We agree to clarify the concurrent actions. Table I of paragraph D. in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, is in error. We have added Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this final rule, which states that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, incorrectly states that the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no longer need to be accomplished. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 Request for Repair Credit AAL requested that we allow credit for repairs specified in paragraph (k) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) that are made ‘‘before the effective date of this AD’’ using Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, dated March 31, 1994; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994. We do not agree with the commenter’s request. Paragraph (k)(1) of this final rule requires that cracking be repaired using a method approved by the FAA as specified in paragraph (n) of the final rule. Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0028, dated March 31, 1994; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; do not contain procedures for repairing cracking, and only specify to contact Boeing if cracking is found. We infer that the commenter is requesting credit for any repair done in accordance with procedures provided by Boeing or with the operator’s own methods. The commenter has not provided any details about any such repairs, and therefore we cannot give credit for these repairs. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n) of this final rule, repairs may be approved if substantiating data PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 14983 are provided showing that the repair provides an acceptable level of safety. For paragraph (k)(2) of this final rule, Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994, is already specified as the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing repair of the holes. In addition, since Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, dated March 31, 1994, does not contain procedures for repairing holes, we cannot give credit for Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0028, dated March 31, 1994. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n) of this final rule, repairs may be approved if substantiating data are provided showing that the repair provides an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed this final rule in this regard. Request To Clarify Inspections AAL requested that we not require the paragraph following the compliance table in paragraph l.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. AAL stated that the interim inspections specified in the paragraph following the compliance table in paragraph l.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, are unclear and that, if required, the inspections should be specified in a new (additional) paragraph. We agree to clarify. Paragraphs (g) and (i) of this final rule specifically require accomplishment of the modification of the strut as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, and do not require any interim inspections. Although there are certain inspections specifically required in paragraphs (h) and (j) of this final rule, there are no interim inspections specified in any paragraph of this final rule. Therefore, the interim inspections defined in the paragraph following the table in paragraph l.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, are not required by this final rule. We have not changed this final rule in this regard. Request To Do Work Out of Sequence AAL requested that we allow instructions to be worked out of sequence. AAL stated that by requiring operators to adhere to the sequence of steps as organized in the service information, based on the strictest interpretation, it can place an undue burden on operators and drive longer aircraft out-of-service time. AAL asserted that not allowing instructions to be worked out of sequence prevents operators from working on the wing E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1 14984 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously. AAL also stated that without the leeway to work steps out of sequence, if damage is encountered during a particular step, maintenance must wait for a disposition and corrective action for that damage before continuing to the next step. We partially agree with the commenter’s request. We agree with revising the final rule to allow work to be accomplished on the wing structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously, and for work to be accomplished on both pylons simultaneously, because no detrimental effect on the airplane results from accomplishing the service information in this way. We disagree with allowing all service information steps to be worked out of sequence. This allowance could be interpreted as allowing service information steps at one pylon, or at one wing location, to be performed out of sequence, which could detrimentally affect the result of the modification. We also disagree with stating that opposite sides of the strut can be worked at different rates, as some tasks are necessary to be performed in sequence. For further clarification of strut task sequencing, operators may request approval of an AMOC by providing additional details defining the tasks using the procedures defined in paragraph (n) of this final rule. We have added new paragraph (l) to this final rule, which states that although Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut modifications to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both struts to be modified simultaneously. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs accordingly. We have also referenced paragraph (l) in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this final rule. Request To Require Only Certain Service Information Steps AAL requested that we require only the steps in the service information that are critical for safety of flight. AAL suggested that only Part II, Steps 6, 7, and 9–12; Part III, Steps 4–24; Part IV, Steps 3–7; and Part VI, Steps 3–16 and 19; of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, should be required. AAL stated that preparation and open-up and closeup instructions are not necessary to mandate and can be left to operator discretion on the best methods without affecting the ability to address the safety issue that exists. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 We do not agree with AAL’s request. Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, already allows operator’s discretion for certain actions. Note 8 of paragraph 3.B.A., ‘‘General Information,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, specifies that when the words ‘‘refer to’’ are used for a procedure, operators may use an accepted alternative procedure. Note 11 of paragraph 3.B.A., ‘‘General Information,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, specifies that for access, all the identified parts do not need to be removed if you can get access without removing the identified parts and that additional parts may be removed if needed. However, due to the complexity of the modification to the strut, certain preparation and installation steps are needed to prevent damage to the strut structure, systems components, and the engine. In addition, a fuel leak check is specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, to ensure that the modification and reassembly were completed and that no hidden damage exists. Therefore, no changes have been made to this final rule in this regard. Although we have not revised this final rule, we do agree with the concept of minimizing AD requirements when appropriate. The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a new process for annotating which steps in the service information are ‘‘required for compliance’’ (RC) with an AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks in the service information is expected to improve an owner’s/ operator’s understanding of AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. In response to the AD Implementation ARC, the FAA released AC 20–176, dated December 19, 2011 (http:// rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_ Guidance_Library/ rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/ a78cc91a47b192278625796b0075f419/ $FILE/AC%2020-176.pdf); and Order 8110.117, dated September 12, 2012 (http://rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_ Guidance_Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/ 984bb9eb07cdd86986257a7f0070744c/ $FILE/Order%208110.117.pdf), which include the concept of RC. The FAA has begun implementing this concept in ADs when we receive service information containing RC steps. While some design approval holders have PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 implemented the RC concept, the implementation is voluntary. The FAA does not intend to develop or revise AD requirements to incorporate the RC concept if it is not included in the service information. Contrary to AAL’s statement that ADs should mandate only those service bulletin provisions that are necessary to ensure safety of flight, ADs generally contain requirements that are reasonably related to addressing the unsafe condition, as determined by the FAA and the design approval holder that developed the service bulletin. Typically, operators’ maintenance programs were not developed in recognition of the unsafe condition that is being addressed by an AD. Whenever we issue an AD, those programs had failed to prevent the unsafe condition in the first place. Therefore, many provisions of ADs address aspects of accomplishing the required maintenance that are necessary to prevent operators from inadvertently aggravating the unsafe condition or introducing new unsafe conditions. For many years, the Air Transport Association (now Airlines for America, A4A) has sponsored the ‘‘Lead Airline’’ program through which individual airlines are provided an opportunity to prototype manufacturers’ draft service instructions before they are finalized. One objective of this activity is to minimize the procedures included in the instructions that are considered unnecessary. Therefore, when the FAA receives a manufacturer’s service bulletin, we recognize that the procedures specified have been determined to be necessary by both the manufacturer and affected operators. As in this case, the instructions provided in service bulletins referenced in ADs are reasonably related to addressing the unsafe condition. As always, if AAL or any other operator prefers to address the unsafe condition by means other than those specified in the referenced service information, they may request approval for an alternative method of compliance using the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this final rule, and, if approved, may use it instead of the procedures specified in the service information. Request To Correct Typographical Error AAL requested that we revise paragraph (j)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) to remove the extra word ‘‘dated’’ from the service information citation. E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations We agree to correct the typographical error and have removed the extra word ‘‘dated.’’ Additional Change Made to This Final Rule The information in paragraph (l)(3) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) has been separated into two paragraphs in this final rule (paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this final rule). In addition, we changed the reference in paragraph (m)(3) of this final rule to refer to the actions required by paragraph (j)(1) of this final rule. We also changed the reference in paragraph (m)(4) to this final rule to refer to the actions required by paragraph (j)(2) of this final rule. The content has not been changed. The information in paragraph (m)(4) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) has been added to new paragraph (n)(4) of this final rule. The content has not been changed. Conclusion We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this 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 (78 FR 14985 22215, April 15, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition; and • Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013). We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD affects 176 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: ESTIMATED COSTS Labor cost Modification ......................................................... [retained from AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004)]. One-time Inspection [retained from AD 2004– 12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004)]. Concurrent modification [new action, 30 airplanes]. Concurrent inspection and fastener installation [new action, 12 airplanes]. Up to 1,188 work-hours × $85 per hour = $100,980. $0 Up to $100,980 .... Up to $17,772,480. 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85. 0 $85 ....................... $14,960. 142 work-hours × $85 per hour = $12,070. 104 work-hours × $85 per hour = $8,840. 0 $12,070 ................ $362,100. 0 $8,840 .................. $106,080. We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD. According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 Parts cost that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. 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. Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators Action 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 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), and adding the following new AD: ■ 2014–05–13 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39–17786; Docket No. FAA–2013–0326; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–089–AD. (a) Effective Date This AD is effective April 22, 2014. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (b) Affected ADs This AD supersedes AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004). Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. (c) Applicability (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757–200, –200PF, and PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1 14986 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations –200CB series airplanes, certificated in any category, line numbers 1 through 735 inclusive, equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01518SE (http:// rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_ Library/rgstc.nsf/0/ 48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/Body/ 0.48A!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01518SE 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. (d) Subject Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54, Nacelles/Pylons. (e) Unsafe Condition This AD was prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that were used during the initial design. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES (f) Compliance Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. (g) Retained Modification This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with new service information: Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, dated July 17, 1997; Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002; or Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified in paragraph (l) of this AD; at the later of the times specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD. All of the terminating actions described in paragraph I.C., Table I, ‘‘Strut Improvement Bulletins,’’ on page 6 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, dated July 17, 1997; page 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; and on page 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002; as applicable; must be accomplished prior to, or concurrently with, the accomplishment of the modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure required by this paragraph. After July 21, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004– 12–07), use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. After the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. Accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph. (1) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total flight cycles, or prior to 20 years since VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 the date of manufacture of the airplane, whichever occurs first. (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the effective date of AD 99–24–07, Amendment 39–11431 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999)). (h) Retained Inspection and Repair This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with new service information. For airplanes on which the modification required by paragraph (g) of this AD has been done according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, dated July 17, 1997: Within 15,000 flight cycles after doing the modification required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 3 years after July 21, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004–12–07), whichever is later; do a one-time detailed inspection of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper alignment, according to Part II of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified by paragraph (l) of this AD. If the gusset is not aligned properly: Before further flight, machine the gusset to the specified angle according to the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, for accomplishing the actions required by this paragraph. (i) New Compliance Time Limitation For airplanes on which the modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure required by paragraph (g) of this AD has not been done as of the effective date of this AD: Do the modification required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD. (1) At the time specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, except that where this service bulletin specifies a compliance time ‘‘from the date on Revision 4 of this service bulletin,’’ this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD. (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the effective date of AD 99–24–07, Amendment 39–11431 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999)). (j) New Concurrent Actions Concurrently with or prior to the accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. (1) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985: Modify the nacelle strut upper spar, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985. (2) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994: Do a detailed inspection and non-destructive test inspection for cracking of the lower chord, mid-chord, and holes (for cracking, galling, corrosion, or damage due to fastener removal), in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994. Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD: Paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, incorrectly states that the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no longer need to be accomplished. (k) Repair (1) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the cracking using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD. (2) If any holes with galling, corrosion, or damage due to fastener removal are found during any inspection required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the holes, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994. (l) Work Sequence Requirement Although Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut modifications to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both struts to be modified simultaneously. (m) Credit for Previous Actions (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011; which are not incorporated by reference in this AD. (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011; which are not incorporated by reference in this AD. (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, dated December 14, 1984, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD. (4) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, dated March 31, 1994, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD. (n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (1) The Manager, Seattle 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 paragraph (o)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@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) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2004–12–07, Amendment 39–13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), are approved as AMOCs for paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, except for AMOCs that approved a revised compliance time. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES (o) Related Information (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057– 3356; phone: 425–917–6440; fax: 425–917– 6590; email: Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov. (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified in paragraphs (p)(6) and (p)(7) of this AD. (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 this AD specifies otherwise. (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on April 22, 2014. (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985. (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994. (iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on July 21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004). (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:18 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002. (5) The following service information was approved for IBR on January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999). (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0035, dated July 17, 1997. (ii) Reserved. (6) 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; phone: 206–544– 5000, extension 1; fax: 206–766–5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. (7) You may view copies of this 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. (8) 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 February 19, 2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2014–04826 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2013–0369; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–128–AD; Amendment 39–17793; AD 2014–05–20] 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 all The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of fractured rudder pedal pushrod connecting bolts in a rudder pedal assembly. This AD requires repetitive replacements of the rudder pedal pushrod connecting bolts and repetitive inspections of the rudder pedal assembly bolt holes in each of the captain and the first officer rudder pedal assemblies, and if necessary, repair or replacement of worn rudder pedal assemblies. We are issuing this AD to prevent fracture of the rudder pedal pushrod connecting bolts during pedal SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 14987 use, which could result in large involuntary inputs to the rudder and nose-wheel steering and an asymmetric application of braking, if pedal brakes are applied, leading to a runway excursion. DATES: This AD is effective April 22, 2014. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of April 22, 2014. 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 view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356. 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– 0369; 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 Docket 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: Marie Hogestad, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 130S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425– 917–6418; fax: 425–917–6590; email: marie.hogestad@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 10, 2013 (78 FR 27315). The NPRM was prompted by reports of fractured rudder pedal pushrod connecting bolts in a rudder pedal assembly. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM 18MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14982-14987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04826]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0326; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-089-AD; 
Amendment 39-17786; AD 2014-05-13]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-12-07 for 
certain The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes equipped with 
Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. AD 2004-12-07 required modification of the 
nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive 
detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or 
missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain 
other airplanes, AD 2004-12-07 required a one-time detailed inspection 
of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper 
alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current 
inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if 
necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or 
missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary. 
This new AD specifies a maximum compliance time limit. This AD was 
prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational loads 
applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that were 
used during the initial design. We are issuing this AD to prevent 
fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced 
structural integrity of the strut.

DATES: This AD is effective April 22, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of April 22, 
2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of July 
21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004).
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of 
January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999).

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 view this 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0326; 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 Docket 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: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6440; 
fax: 425-917-6590; email: Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, 
June 16, 2004). AD 2004-12-07 applied to certain The Boeing Company 
Model 757 series airplanes equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. The 
NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2013 (78 FR 22215). 
The NPRM was prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational 
loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that 
were used during the initial design. The NPRM proposed to retain the 
requirements of AD 2004-12-07, which required modification of the 
nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive 
detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or 
missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain 
other airplanes, AD 2004-12-07 required a one-time detailed inspection 
of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper 
alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current 
inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if 
necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or 
missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary. The 
NPRM proposed to specify a maximum compliance time limit to modify the 
nacelle strut and wing structure. We are issuing this AD to prevent 
fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced 
structural integrity of the strut.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 
(78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013)

    Boeing stated that it concurs with the contents of the NPRM (78 FR 
22215, April 15, 2013).

[[Page 14983]]

Clarification of Effect of Winglet Installation

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental 
type certificate (STC) ST01518SE does not affect the actions specified 
in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013).
    We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of 
the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) as (c)(1) and added new 
paragraph (c)(2) to this final rule to state that installation of STC 
ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/Body/0.48A!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) does not affect the ability to 
accomplish the actions required by this final rule. Therefore, for 
airplanes on which STC ST01518SE 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.

Request To Clarify Concurrent Requirements

    FedEx requested that we clarify the requirements of paragraph (j) 
of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which specified concurrent 
actions. FedEx explained that the NPRM requirement and paragraph 1.B., 
of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 
2011, conflict with the information in paragraph D., of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. FedEx stated 
that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, 
dated December 2, 2011, states that Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 
757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994 (the concurrent actions 
required by paragraph (j) of the NPRM); no longer need to be 
accomplished.
    We agree to clarify the concurrent actions. Table I of paragraph D. 
in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 
2011, is in error. We have added Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this final 
rule, which states that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, incorrectly states that the 
actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, 
dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, 
Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no longer need to be accomplished.

Request To Change When Concurrent Actions Are To Be Done

    American Airlines (AAL) requested that we change paragraph (j) 
(concurrent actions) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which 
specifies doing the actions at the same time as paragraph (i) of the 
NPRM, to specify that the concurrent actions are to be done at the same 
time as the actions required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. AAL stated 
that the pylon modification action is mandated by paragraph (g) of the 
NPRM, and paragraph (i) of the NPRM mandates only the time at which the 
modification must be accomplished.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request because, although the 
requirement for the modification is first specified in paragraph (g) of 
this final rule, which is a restatement from AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 
39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), the new requirement is in 
paragraph (i) of this final rule. Paragraph (i) of this final rule 
correctly references paragraph (g) of this final rule. If the 
concurrent actions specified in paragraph (j) of this final rule are to 
be accomplished at the same time as paragraph (g) of this final rule, 
as the commenter suggests, that would make the requirement retroactive, 
and would potentially put operators out of compliance. We have not 
changed this final rule in this regard.

Request for Repair Credit

    AAL requested that we allow credit for repairs specified in 
paragraph (k) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) that are made 
``before the effective date of this AD'' using Boeing Service Bulletin 
757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. Paragraph (k)(1) of 
this final rule requires that cracking be repaired using a method 
approved by the FAA as specified in paragraph (n) of the final rule. 
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994; and Boeing 
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; do not 
contain procedures for repairing cracking, and only specify to contact 
Boeing if cracking is found. We infer that the commenter is requesting 
credit for any repair done in accordance with procedures provided by 
Boeing or with the operator's own methods. The commenter has not 
provided any details about any such repairs, and therefore we cannot 
give credit for these repairs. However, under the provisions of 
paragraph (n) of this final rule, repairs may be approved if 
substantiating data are provided showing that the repair provides an 
acceptable level of safety.
    For paragraph (k)(2) of this final rule, Boeing Service Bulletin 
757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994, is already specified as 
the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing repair 
of the holes. In addition, since Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, 
dated March 31, 1994, does not contain procedures for repairing holes, 
we cannot give credit for Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated 
March 31, 1994. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n) of this 
final rule, repairs may be approved if substantiating data are provided 
showing that the repair provides an acceptable level of safety. We have 
not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Clarify Inspections

    AAL requested that we not require the paragraph following the 
compliance table in paragraph l.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. AAL stated 
that the interim inspections specified in the paragraph following the 
compliance table in paragraph l.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, are unclear 
and that, if required, the inspections should be specified in a new 
(additional) paragraph.
    We agree to clarify. Paragraphs (g) and (i) of this final rule 
specifically require accomplishment of the modification of the strut as 
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated 
December 2, 2011, and do not require any interim inspections. Although 
there are certain inspections specifically required in paragraphs (h) 
and (j) of this final rule, there are no interim inspections specified 
in any paragraph of this final rule. Therefore, the interim inspections 
defined in the paragraph following the table in paragraph l.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, 
dated December 2, 2011, are not required by this final rule. We have 
not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Do Work Out of Sequence

    AAL requested that we allow instructions to be worked out of 
sequence. AAL stated that by requiring operators to adhere to the 
sequence of steps as organized in the service information, based on the 
strictest interpretation, it can place an undue burden on operators and 
drive longer aircraft out-of-service time. AAL asserted that not 
allowing instructions to be worked out of sequence prevents operators 
from working on the wing

[[Page 14984]]

structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously. AAL also 
stated that without the leeway to work steps out of sequence, if damage 
is encountered during a particular step, maintenance must wait for a 
disposition and corrective action for that damage before continuing to 
the next step.
    We partially agree with the commenter's request. We agree with 
revising the final rule to allow work to be accomplished on the wing 
structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously, and for work 
to be accomplished on both pylons simultaneously, because no 
detrimental effect on the airplane results from accomplishing the 
service information in this way.
    We disagree with allowing all service information steps to be 
worked out of sequence. This allowance could be interpreted as allowing 
service information steps at one pylon, or at one wing location, to be 
performed out of sequence, which could detrimentally affect the result 
of the modification.
    We also disagree with stating that opposite sides of the strut can 
be worked at different rates, as some tasks are necessary to be 
performed in sequence. For further clarification of strut task 
sequencing, operators may request approval of an AMOC by providing 
additional details defining the tasks using the procedures defined in 
paragraph (n) of this final rule.
    We have added new paragraph (l) to this final rule, which states 
that although Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated 
December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the 
strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut modifications 
to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both struts to be 
modified simultaneously. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs 
accordingly. We have also referenced paragraph (l) in paragraphs (g) 
and (h) of this final rule.

Request To Require Only Certain Service Information Steps

    AAL requested that we require only the steps in the service 
information that are critical for safety of flight. AAL suggested that 
only Part II, Steps 6, 7, and 9-12; Part III, Steps 4-24; Part IV, 
Steps 3-7; and Part VI, Steps 3-16 and 19; of Boeing Service Bulletin 
757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, should be required. 
AAL stated that preparation and open-up and close-up instructions are 
not necessary to mandate and can be left to operator discretion on the 
best methods without affecting the ability to address the safety issue 
that exists.
    We do not agree with AAL's request. Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, already allows operator's 
discretion for certain actions. Note 8 of paragraph 3.B.A., ``General 
Information,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, 
dated December 2, 2011, specifies that when the words ``refer to'' are 
used for a procedure, operators may use an accepted alternative 
procedure. Note 11 of paragraph 3.B.A., ``General Information,'' of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 
2011, specifies that for access, all the identified parts do not need 
to be removed if you can get access without removing the identified 
parts and that additional parts may be removed if needed.
    However, due to the complexity of the modification to the strut, 
certain preparation and installation steps are needed to prevent damage 
to the strut structure, systems components, and the engine. In 
addition, a fuel leak check is specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 
757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, to ensure that the 
modification and reassembly were completed and that no hidden damage 
exists. Therefore, no changes have been made to this final rule in this 
regard.
    Although we have not revised this final rule, we do agree with the 
concept of minimizing AD requirements when appropriate. The FAA worked 
in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives 
Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to enhance the AD 
system. One enhancement is a new process for annotating which steps in 
the service information are ``required for compliance'' (RC) with an 
AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks in the service 
information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding 
of AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD 
compliance. In response to the AD Implementation ARC, the FAA released 
AC 20-176, dated December 19, 2011 (http://rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
a78cc91a47b192278625796b0075f419/$FILE/AC%2020-176.pdf); and Order 
8110.117, dated September 12, 2012 (http://rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/984bb9eb07cdd86986257a7f0070744c/
$FILE/Order%208110.117.pdf), which include the concept of RC. The FAA 
has begun implementing this concept in ADs when we receive service 
information containing RC steps. While some design approval holders 
have implemented the RC concept, the implementation is voluntary. The 
FAA does not intend to develop or revise AD requirements to incorporate 
the RC concept if it is not included in the service information.
    Contrary to AAL's statement that ADs should mandate only those 
service bulletin provisions that are necessary to ensure safety of 
flight, ADs generally contain requirements that are reasonably related 
to addressing the unsafe condition, as determined by the FAA and the 
design approval holder that developed the service bulletin. Typically, 
operators' maintenance programs were not developed in recognition of 
the unsafe condition that is being addressed by an AD. Whenever we 
issue an AD, those programs had failed to prevent the unsafe condition 
in the first place. Therefore, many provisions of ADs address aspects 
of accomplishing the required maintenance that are necessary to prevent 
operators from inadvertently aggravating the unsafe condition or 
introducing new unsafe conditions.
    For many years, the Air Transport Association (now Airlines for 
America, A4A) has sponsored the ``Lead Airline'' program through which 
individual airlines are provided an opportunity to prototype 
manufacturers' draft service instructions before they are finalized. 
One objective of this activity is to minimize the procedures included 
in the instructions that are considered unnecessary. Therefore, when 
the FAA receives a manufacturer's service bulletin, we recognize that 
the procedures specified have been determined to be necessary by both 
the manufacturer and affected operators. As in this case, the 
instructions provided in service bulletins referenced in ADs are 
reasonably related to addressing the unsafe condition.
    As always, if AAL or any other operator prefers to address the 
unsafe condition by means other than those specified in the referenced 
service information, they may request approval for an alternative 
method of compliance using the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of 
this final rule, and, if approved, may use it instead of the procedures 
specified in the service information.

Request To Correct Typographical Error

    AAL requested that we revise paragraph (j)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR 
22215, April 15, 2013) to remove the extra word ``dated'' from the 
service information citation.

[[Page 14985]]

    We agree to correct the typographical error and have removed the 
extra word ``dated.''

Additional Change Made to This Final Rule

    The information in paragraph (l)(3) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 
15, 2013) has been separated into two paragraphs in this final rule 
(paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this final rule). In addition, we 
changed the reference in paragraph (m)(3) of this final rule to refer 
to the actions required by paragraph (j)(1) of this final rule. We also 
changed the reference in paragraph (m)(4) to this final rule to refer 
to the actions required by paragraph (j)(2) of this final rule. The 
content has not been changed.
    The information in paragraph (m)(4) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 
15, 2013) has been added to new paragraph (n)(4) of this final rule. 
The content has not been changed.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this 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 (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition; 
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 176 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Action                             Labor cost              Parts cost         Cost per product             Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification............................  Up to 1,188 work-hours x $85                $0  Up to $100,980...........  Up to $17,772,480.
[retained from AD 2004-12-07, Amendment    per hour = $100,980.
 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004)].
One-time Inspection [retained from AD     1 work-hour x $85 per hour =                 0  $85......................  $14,960.
 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR     $85.
 33561, June 16, 2004)].
Concurrent modification [new action, 30   142 work-hours x $85 per hour                0  $12,070..................  $362,100.
 airplanes].                               = $12,070.
Concurrent inspection and fastener        104 work-hours x $85 per hour                0  $8,840...................  $106,080.
 installation [new action, 12 airplanes].  = $8,840.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be 
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected 
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected 
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost 
estimate.

Authority for this Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), and adding 
the following new AD:

2014-05-13 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17786; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0326; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-089-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 22, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 
33561, June 16, 2004).

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, 
and

[[Page 14986]]

-200CB series airplanes, certificated in any category, line numbers 
1 through 735 inclusive, equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) 
ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/Body/0.48A!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) does not affect the ability 
to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for 
airplanes on which STC ST01518SE 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.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54, Nacelles/
Pylons.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports indicating that the actual 
operational loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the 
analytical loads that were used during the initial design. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut 
structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Retained Modification

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with 
new service information: Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure 
according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 
1997; Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; Revision 2, dated June 13, 
2002; or Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified in 
paragraph (l) of this AD; at the later of the times specified in 
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, except as required by 
paragraph (i) of this AD. All of the terminating actions described 
in paragraph I.C., Table I, ``Strut Improvement Bulletins,'' on page 
6 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997; page 
7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April 
15, 1999; and on page 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, 
Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002; as applicable; must be accomplished 
prior to, or concurrently with, the accomplishment of the 
modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure required by 
this paragraph. After July 21, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-
12-07), use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 2, 
dated June 13, 2002; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, 
Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. After the effective date of this 
AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated 
December 2, 2011. Accomplishment of the actions required by 
paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this 
paragraph.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total flight cycles, or 
prior to 20 years since the date of manufacture of the airplane, 
whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the 
effective date of AD 99-24-07, Amendment 39-11431 (64 FR 66370, 
November 26, 1999)).

(h) Retained Inspection and Repair

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD 
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with 
new service information. For airplanes on which the modification 
required by paragraph (g) of this AD has been done according to 
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997: Within 
15,000 flight cycles after doing the modification required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 3 years after July 21, 2004 (the 
effective date of AD 2004-12-07), whichever is later; do a one-time 
detailed inspection of the middle gusset of the inboard side load 
fitting for proper alignment, according to Part II of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, 
Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision 2, dated June 13, 
2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified by 
paragraph (l) of this AD. If the gusset is not aligned properly: 
Before further flight, machine the gusset to the specified angle 
according to the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision 
2, dated June 13, 2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. As of the 
effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, for accomplishing the 
actions required by this paragraph.

(i) New Compliance Time Limitation

    For airplanes on which the modification of the nacelle strut and 
wing structure required by paragraph (g) of this AD has not been 
done as of the effective date of this AD: Do the modification 
required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the later of the times 
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD.
    (1) At the time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 
2011, except that where this service bulletin specifies a compliance 
time ``from the date on Revision 4 of this service bulletin,'' this 
AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after 
the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the 
effective date of AD 99-24-07, Amendment 39-11431 (64 FR 66370, 
November 26, 1999)).

(j) New Concurrent Actions

    Concurrently with or prior to the accomplishment of the actions 
required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do the actions specified in 
paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985: Modify the nacelle strut 
upper spar, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 
1985.
    (2) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994: Do a detailed inspection 
and non-destructive test inspection for cracking of the lower chord, 
mid-chord, and holes (for cracking, galling, corrosion, or damage 
due to fastener removal), in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, 
dated August 25, 1994.

    Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD: Paragraph D. of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, 
incorrectly states that the actions described in Boeing Service 
Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing 
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no 
longer need to be accomplished.

(k) Repair

    (1) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the 
cracking using a method approved in accordance with the procedures 
specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
    (2) If any holes with galling, corrosion, or damage due to 
fastener removal are found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the 
holes, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994.

(l) Work Sequence Requirement

    Although Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated 
December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the 
strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut 
modifications to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both 
struts to be modified simultaneously.

(m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the 
effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, 
Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011; 
which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the 
effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, 
Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011; 
which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before 
the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, dated December 14, 1984, which is not incorporated by 
reference in this AD.
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before 
the effective date of this AD using Boeing

[[Page 14987]]

Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994, which is not 
incorporated by reference in this AD.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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 paragraph (o)(1) 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) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization 
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make 
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must 
meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 
33561, June 16, 2004), are approved as AMOCs for paragraphs (g) and 
(h) of this AD, except for AMOCs that approved a revised compliance 
time.

(o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh, 
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 
98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6440; fax: 425-917-6590; email: 
Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified 
in paragraphs (p)(6) and (p)(7) of this AD.

(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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
April 22, 2014.
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated 
August 30, 1985.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated 
August 25, 1994.
    (iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated 
December 2, 2011.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
July 21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004).
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April 
15, 1999.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 2, dated June 
13, 2002.
    (5) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999).
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (6) 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; phone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (7) You may view copies of this 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.
    (8) 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 February 19, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-04826 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P