Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 6529 

Cessna Single Engine Modification Kit 

MK400–27–01, dated November 23, 2009; 

and Cessna Single Engine Modification Kit 

MK400–27–01A, dated July 20, 2010, to do 

the actions required by this AD, unless the 

AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SB09– 

27–01, Revision 2, dated November 23, 2009; 

and Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin 

SB09–27–01, Revision 3, dated July 20, 2010; 

Cessna Single Engine Modification Kit 

MK400–27–01, dated November 23, 2009; 

and Cessna Single Engine Modification Kit 

MK400–27–01A, dated July 20, 2010, under 

5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) The Director of the Federal Register 

previously approved the incorporation by 

reference of Cessna Single Engine Service 

Bulletin SB09–27–01, dated April 13, 2009, 

on May 11, 2009 (74 FR 19873, April 30, 

2009). 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Cessna Aircraft Company, 

Product Support, P.O. Box 7706; Wichita, 

Kansas 67277; telephone: (316) 517–5800; 

fax: (316) 942–9006; Internet: http:// 

www.cessna.com. 

(4) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

816–329–4148. 

(5) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at an NARA facility, call 202–741– 

6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 

25, 2011. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–2008 Filed 2–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0761; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–069–AD; Amendment 

39–16598; AD 2011–03–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model 737–100, –200, –200C, 

–300, –400, and –500 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD requires 

installing two warning level indicator 

lights on the P2–2 center instrument 

panel in the flight compartment for 

certain airplanes. For a certain other 

airplane, this AD requires activating the 

cabin altitude warning and takeoff 

configuration warning lights. For all 

airplanes, this AD also requires revising 

the airplane flight manual to remove 

certain requirements included by 

previous AD actions, requires new 

pressure altitude limitations for certain 

airplanes, and advises the flightcrew of 

the following changes: revised 

emergency procedures to use when a 

cabin altitude warning or rapid 

depressurization occurs, and revised 

cabin pressurization procedures for 

normal operations. This AD was 

prompted by a design change in the 

cabin altitude warning system that 

would address the identified unsafe 

condition. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent failure of the flightcrew to 

recognize and react properly to a valid 

cabin altitude warning horn, which 

could result in incapacitation of the 

flightcrew due to hypoxia (lack of 

oxygen in body), and consequent loss of 

control of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective March 14, 

2011. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in the AD 

as of March 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: For 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; e-mail 

me.boecom@boeing.com; 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, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at 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: 

Jeffrey W. Palmer, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 

130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425) 

917–6472; fax: (425) 917–6590; e-mail: 

Jeffrey.W.Palmer@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an airworthiness 

directive (AD) that would apply to the 

specified products. That NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 11, 2010 (75 FR 48620). That 

NPRM proposed to require installing 

two warning level indicator lights on 

the P2–2 center instrument panel in the 

flight compartment for certain airplanes. 

For a certain other airplane, that NPRM 

proposed to require activating the cabin 

altitude warning and takeoff 

configuration warning lights. For all 

airplanes, that NPRM proposed to also 

require revising the airplane flight 

manual (AFM) to remove certain 

requirements included by previous AD 

actions, to require new pressure altitude 

limitations for certain airplanes, and to 

advise the flightcrew of the following 

changes: revised emergency procedures 

to use when a cabin altitude warning or 

rapid depressurization occurs, and 

revised cabin pressurization procedures 

for normal operations. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Support for the NPRM 

The Air Line Pilots Association, 

International supports the proposed AD. 

Request to Delay Rule Pending 

Additional Service Information 

Lufthansa requested that the FAA 

consider the release of Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–21–1164 before releasing 

the AD. Lufthansa stated that Boeing has 

recommended that operators consider 

doing the modifications specified in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–21–1164 

and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1325, dated January 11, 2010, at the 

same time, because both modifications 

require access to the same area of the 

airplane and extensive airplane 

downtime. However, Lufthansa pointed 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
6530 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

out that Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

21–1164 has not yet been published; 

therefore, releasing the AD before 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–21–1164 is 

released would require operators to 

accomplish the modifications 

separately, doubling the time and cost of 

the modifications. 

We do not agree to delay this AD 

pending release of an unrelated service 

bulletin. Accomplishment of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–21–1164 installs a 

second 10,000-foot cabin altitude 

pressure switch, which is not related to 

the unsafe condition identified by this 

AD. To delay this action until the 

manufacturer can release a planned 

service bulletin would be inappropriate, 

since we have determined that an 

unsafe condition exists and that the 

required actions must be accomplished 

to ensure continued safety. Once the 

planned service bulletin is developed, 

approved, and available, we might 

consider additional rulemaking. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (l) of the final rule, we will 

consider requests for approval of an 

extension of the compliance time if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the change would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise the Proposed Costs 

of Compliance 

Continental Airlines (Continental) 

stated that the estimated costs of 

compliance for doing the modification 

are significantly low for the following 

reasons: 

• Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1325, dated January 11, 2010, 

specifies an estimate of 32.5 work-hours 

to do the modification. Continental 

declared that it has historically found 

that Boeing estimates given in service 

bulletins are unachievable. Continental 

believed it would be possible to 

accomplish the modification in 

approximately 50 work hours, if the 

modification is done during a heavy 

maintenance visit. 

• If the proposed compliance time 

remains 36 months, Continental 

asserted that some airplanes will have to 

be modified on ‘‘special holds’’ and the 

added cost would be significant because 

there is much more access, close-up, 

and testing necessary. Continental 

estimates that airplanes modified while 

on ‘‘special holds’’ will require 120 work 

hours, and that cost of lost revenue 

while the airplane is out of service for 

5 days would be $220,000 per airplane. 

• Continental stated that the FAA did 

not account for material costs, and 

pointed out that Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–31A1325, dated January 11, 2010, 

lists a kit that costs $2,738 and is 

required for each airplane. 

From these statements, we infer that 

Continental is requesting that we revise 

the proposed estimated costs for 

accomplishing the modification 

specified in paragraph (g) of the 

proposed AD. We do not agree. In 

establishing the requirements of all ADs, 

we do consider cost impact to operators 

beyond the estimates of parts and labor 

costs contained in AD preambles. For 

example, where safety considerations 

allow, we attempt to set compliance 

times that generally coincide with 

operators’ maintenance schedules. 

However, because operators’ schedules 

vary substantially, we cannot 

accommodate every operator’s optimal 

scheduling in each AD. Each AD does 

allow individual operators to obtain 

approval for extensions of compliance 

times, based on a showing that the 

extension will not affect safety 

adversely. Therefore, we do not 

consider it appropriate to attribute to 

the AD the costs associated with the 

type of special scheduling that might 

otherwise be required. 

Furthermore, we do not consider it 

appropriate to attribute the costs 

associated with aircraft ‘‘down time’’ to 

the AD. Normally, compliance with the 

AD will not necessitate any additional 

down time beyond that of a regularly 

scheduled maintenance hold. Even if 

additional down time is necessary for 

some airplanes in some cases, we do not 

have sufficient information to evaluate 

the number of airplanes that may be so 

affected or the amount of additional 

down time that may be required. 

Therefore, we are unable to estimate 

such costs. 

Additionally, we point out that 

Boeing service bulletins generally 

include task hours necessary to do only 

the change for each airplane, excluding 

lost time. Boeing, in service bulletins, 

also specifically advises operators to 

adjust the task-hour estimates with 

operator task-hour data, if necessary. 

We have not changed the AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Extend Proposed 

Compliance Time 

Continental recommended that the 

proposed compliance time of 36 months 

for installing warning indicator lights 

should be extended to 60 months, 

which would fall during a heavy 

maintenance visit. Continental asserted 

that it operates 37 Model 737–500 

airplanes that would be affected by the 

NPRM, and that modifying all of these 

airplanes within 36 months would 

impose an undue economic burden. 

We do not agree with Continental’s 

request to extend the compliance time. 

We recognize that in some cases, it 

might be necessary for operators to 

accomplish the requirements of the AD 

outside of normal scheduled 

maintenance cycles. However, in 

developing an appropriate compliance 

time for this action, we considered the 

urgency associated with the subject 

unsafe condition, and the practical 

aspect of accomplishing the required 

modification within a period of time 

that corresponds to the normal 

scheduled maintenance for most 

affected operators. Based on the 

available data, we have determined that 

a compliance time of 36 months is the 

longest compliance time we can allow 

that would provide an adequate level of 

safety. However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (l) of the final rule, we will 

consider requests for approval of an 

extension of the compliance time if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the new compliance 

time would provide an acceptable level 

of safety. We have not changed the AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Add Baseline Maximum 

Takeoff/Landing Altitude for Model 

737–100 and –200 Airplanes 

Boeing requested that we consider 

adding a baseline maximum takeoff and 

landing altitude of 8,300 feet for Model 

737–100 and –200 airplanes. Boeing 

pointed out that the NPRM contains an 

8,400-foot pressure altitude as a 

function of the baseline maximum 

takeoff and landing altitude for the 

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 

airplanes. Therefore, Boeing contended 

that the new baseline maximum takeoff 

and landing altitude should be added 

for the Model 737–100 and –200 

airplanes to avoid confusion. 

We do not agree to add a baseline 

maximum takeoff and landing altitude 

of 8,300 feet for Model 737–100 and 

–200 airplanes. We have verified that 

there are no Model 737–100 or –200 

airplanes with high-altitude deviations 

approved between 8,300 and 8,400 feet. 

Therefore, the statement in paragraph 

(i)(1)(ii) of this AD accurately considers 

all Model 737 Classic airplanes as 

appropriate. We have not changed this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise AFM Requirement 

Specified in Paragraph (i)(2)(i) of the 

NPRM 

Boeing requested that we revise 

paragraph (i)(2)(i) of the NPRM to 

correct the title of the procedure that is 

to be deleted. Boeing asserted that the 

procedure title specified in paragraph 

(i)(2)(i) of the NPRM no longer exists, as 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 6531 

the title was changed according to FAA 

Alternative Method of Compliance 

(AMOC) Letter 130S–09–134a, dated 

April 28, 2009. 

We partially agree. We do not agree to 

delete reference to the procedure titled 

‘‘WARNING HORN—CABIN ALTITUDE 

OR CONFIGURATION,’’ because all 

AFMs might not have been changed 

according to FAA AMOC Letter 130S– 

09–134a. Additionally, that procedure 

title is included in the existing 

requirements of AD 2006–13–13, and, 

therefore, it is necessary for this AD to 

refer to the procedure title specified in 

that AD. However, some AFMs have 

been revised according to FAA AMOC 

Letter 130S–09–134a; therefore, we 

agree to revise paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this 

AD to address airplanes with AFMs that 

have been revised according to FAA 

AMOC Letter 130S–09–134a. 

Request To Revise AFM Terminology 

Specified in Paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of the 

NPRM 

Boeing requested that we revise the 

AFM text proposed in paragraph 

(i)(2)(iv) of the NPRM to change 

‘‘Descent’’ to ‘‘Rapid Descent.’’ Boeing 

requested this change to clarify the 

proposed AFM wording. 

We partially agree. We do agree to 

change ‘‘Descent’’ in the AFM text 

required by paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of this 

AD. We have determined that ‘‘Descent’’ 

is not the proper terminology to use in 

this AFM text. However, we do not 

agree to change ‘‘Descent’’ to ‘‘Rapid 

Descent,’’ because that term is also not 

accurate. We have determined that the 

correct terminology is ‘‘Emergency 

Descent.’’ Therefore, we have revised the 

AFM text required by paragraph 

(i)(2)(iv) of this AD to refer to 

‘‘Emergency Descent.’’ 

Request To Revise AFM Requirement 

Specified in Paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of the 

NPRM 

Boeing requested that we revise 

paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of the NPRM to add 

certain steps in the AFM text. Boeing 

asserted that this change is necessary to 

standardize the cabin altitude warning 

procedure across all Boeing airplane 

models. 

We partially agree. We agree that the 

additional steps proposed by Boeing 

would be beneficial, add clarity and 

specificity, and contribute to 

standardization across Boeing airplane 

models. However, we do not agree that 

this AD should require these additional 

steps. Requiring these additional steps 

would alter the actions currently 

required by this AD, so additional 

rulemaking would be required. We have 

determined that the proposed AFM text 

is adequate, and that delaying this 

action would be inappropriate in light 

of the identified unsafe condition. 

However, because we agree that the 

additional steps would be beneficial, we 

have revised this AD to add a new 

paragraph (i)(2)(v) to include the 

additional steps as an option, so that 

operators may use the additional steps 

if they choose. 

Request To Revise AFM Requirement 

Specified in Paragraph (i)(3)(ii) of the 

NPRM 

Boeing requested that we revise 

paragraph (i)(3)(ii) of the NPRM to 

remove the requirement to add ‘‘For 

normal operations, the pressurization 

mode selector should be in AUTO prior 

to takeoff.’’ Boeing pointed out that this 

step is already included in the ‘‘Boeing 

Preflight Procedures—First Officer.’’ 

We do not agree. We have determined 

that, because there is relevant accident 

history associated with incorrect setting 

of this specific switch, continued 

emphasis on the proper positioning of 

this switch prior to takeoff is necessary. 

Therefore, because this step is being 

eliminated by this AD, which terminates 

the requirements of AD 2006–13–13, 

this step must be added back into the 

AFM to emphasize the correct setting of 

this switch. We have not changed this 

AD in this regard. 

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. 

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 will affect 

741 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 

Installation of warning indicator lights ........................... 20 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$1,700.

$2,738 $4,438 $3,288,558 

Activation of the cabin altitude warning system/takeoff 

configuration warning lights (one airplane).

1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .. 0 85 85 

AFM revision ................................................................. 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .. 0 85 62,985 

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 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
6532 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(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 

■ 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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2011–03–14 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–16598; Docket No. 

FAA–2010–0761; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–069–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD is effective March 14, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD affects the ADs identified in 

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this AD. 

This AD does not supersede the requirements 

of these ADs. 

(1) AD 2008–23–07, Amendment 39– 

15728. 

(2) AD 2006–13–13, Amendment 39– 

14666. 

(3) AD 2003–03–15 R1, Amendment 39– 

13366. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to the airplanes, 

certificated in any category, identified in 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD. 

(1) The Boeing Company Model 737–100, 

–200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes, as identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1325, dated January 

11, 2010. 

(2) The Boeing Company Model 737–400 

series airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1398, dated January 

7, 2010. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 31: Instruments. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from a design change 

in the cabin altitude warning system that 

would address the identified unsafe 

condition. The Federal Aviation 

Administration is issuing this AD to prevent 

failure of the flightcrew to recognize and 

react properly to a valid cabin altitude 

warning horn, which could result in 

incapacitation of the flightcrew due to 

hypoxia (lack of oxygen in body) and 

consequent loss of control of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Installation of Warning Indicator Lights 

(g) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1325, dated January 

11, 2010: Within 36 months after the effective 

date of this AD, install two warning level 

indicator lights on the P2–2 center 

instrument panel in the flight compartment, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1325, dated January 11, 2010. 

Activation of Warning Indicator Lights 

(h) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1398, dated January 

7, 2010: Within 36 months after the effective 

date of this AD, activate the cabin altitude 

warning and takeoff configuration warning 

lights, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1398, dated January 

7, 2010. 

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revisions 

(i) Before further flight after doing the 

installation or activation of the warning 

lights required by paragraph (g) or (h) of this 

AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs 

(i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD. 

(1) Revise the Limitations Section of the 

applicable Boeing 737 AFM by doing the 

actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and 

(i)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Delete the ‘‘CABIN ALTITUDE 

WARNING TAKEOFF BRIEFING’’ added by 

AD 2008–23–07. 

(ii) Add the following statement. This may 

be done by inserting a copy of this AD into 

the applicable AFM. 

‘‘For airplanes approved for maximum 

takeoff and landing altitudes above 8,400 feet 

pressure altitude, change the limitation for 

Maximum Takeoff and Landing pressure 

altitude as follows: With the CABIN 

ALTITUDE and TAKEOFF CONFIG lights 

installed and operative on those airplanes 

without the High Altitude Landing switch 

installed, maximum takeoff and landing 

altitude is limited to 9,000 feet pressure 

altitude.’’ 

(2) Revise the Emergency Procedures 

Section of the applicable Boeing 737 AFM by 

doing the actions specified in paragraphs 

(i)(2)(i), (i)(2)(ii), (i)(2)(iii), and (i)(2)(iv) of 

this AD. 

(i) Delete the procedure ‘‘WARNING 

HORN—CABIN ALTITUDE OR 

CONFIGURATION’’ added by AD 2006–13– 

13. If the title of this procedure has been 

changed according to FAA Alternative 

Method of Compliance AMOC Letter 130S– 

09–134a, dated April 28, 2009, delete the 

procedure approved according to that AMOC 

letter. 

(ii) Delete the procedure entitled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE WARNING OR RAPID 

DEPRESSURIZATION’’ added by AD 2003– 

03–15 R1 and modified by paragraph (g) of 

AD 2006–13–13. 

(iii) If the procedure entitled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE (Airplanes with the CABIN 

ALTITUDE lights installed)’’ is currently 

contained in the applicable Boeing 737 AFM, 

delete the procedure entitled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE (Airplanes with the CABIN 

ALTITUDE lights installed).’’ 

(iv) Add the following statement. This may 

be done by inserting a copy of this AD into 

the applicable AFM. 

‘‘CABIN ALTITUDE WARNING OR RAPID 

DEPRESSURIZATION (required by AD 

2011–03–14) 

Condition: The CABIN ALTITUDE warning 

light illuminates or the intermittent warning 

horn sounds in flight above 10,000 ft MSL. 

RECALL 

Oxygen Masks and Regulators ON, 100% 

Crew Communications ESTABLISH 

REFERENCE 

Pressurization Mode Selector MANUAL 

Outflow Valve Switch CLOSE 

If Cabin Altitude is uncontrollable: 

Emergency Descent (If Required) INITIATE 

Passenger Oxygen Switch ON’’ 

(v) The following steps may be added to 

the AFM procedure specified by paragraph 

(i)(2)(iv) of this AD. These steps should be 

added following ‘‘Passenger Oxygen Switch 

*** On.’’ 

‘‘Thrust Levers CLOSE 

Speed Brakes FLIGHT DETENT 

Target Speed VMO/MMO’’ 

(3) Revise the Normal Procedures Section 

of the applicable Boeing 737 AFM by doing 

the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(3)(i) 

and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Delete the ‘‘CABIN ALTITUDE 

WARNING TAKEOFF BRIEFING’’ procedure 

added by AD 2008–23–07. 

(ii) Add the following statement. This may 

be done by inserting a copy of this AD into 

the applicable AFM. 

‘‘For normal operations, the pressurization 

mode selector should be in AUTO prior to 

takeoff. (Required by AD 2011–03–14)’’ 

Note 1: When statements identical to those 

specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(ii), (i)(2)(iv), 

and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD have been included 

in the general revisions of the AFM, the 

general revisions may be inserted into the 

AFM, and the copies of this AD may be 

removed from the AFM. 

Terminating Action for Affected ADs 

(j) Accomplishment of the requirements of 

this AD terminates the specified 

requirements of the ADs identified in 

paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD, 

for only the airplanes identified in 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD. 

(1) AD 2008–23–07: All requirements of 

that AD. 

(2) AD 2006–13–13: All requirements of 

that AD. 

(3) AD 2003–03–15 R1: The requirements 

specified in paragraph (a), Table 2, and 

Figures 2 and 3 of that AD. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 6533 

Special Flight Permit 

(k) Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l)(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. Send information to ATTN: 

Jeffrey W. Palmer, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6472; fax 

(425) 917–6590. Information may be e-mailed 

to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. 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. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

Related Information 

(m) For more information about this AD, 

contact Jeffrey W. Palmer, Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, 

ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone: 

(425) 917–6472; fax: (425) 917–6590; e-mail: 

Jeffrey.W.Palmer@faa.gov. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(n) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–31A1325, dated January 11, 

2010; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1398, dated January 7, 2010; as 

applicable; to do the actions required by this 

AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

the service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 

and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For 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; e-mail me.boecom@boeing.com; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at an NARA facility, call 202–741– 

6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

25, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–2435 Filed 2–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0954; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–078–AD; Amendment 

39–16596; AD 2011–03–12] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Hawker 

Beechcraft Corporation (Type 

Certificate Previously Held by 

Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech 

Aircraft Corporation) Model 400A and 

400T Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD requires 

a detailed inspection for proper sealant 

of the left and right pylon firewall 

structures, and corrective actions if 

necessary. This AD results from reports 

of missing sealant on the left and right 

pylon firewall structures. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct missing 

sealant on the left and right pylon 

firewall structures, which, in the event 

of an engine fire, could result in flames 

penetrating the seams in the firewall 

between the engine and the aft fuselage, 

and a subsequent uncontrolled fire in 

the aft fuselage. 

DATES: This AD is effective March 14, 

2011. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of March 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this AD, contact Hawker 

Beechcraft Corporation, Department 62, 

P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201– 

0085; telephone 316–676–8238; fax 

316–676–6706; e-mail 

tmdc@hawkerbeechcraft.com; Internet 

https://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/ 

service_support/pubs. You may review 

copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at 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: 

Thomas Teplik, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE– 

116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport 

Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent 

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone: 

(316) 946–4196; fax: (316) 946–4107; 

e-mail: Thomas.Teplik@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an airworthiness 

directive (AD) that would apply to the 

specified products. That NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 1, 2010 (75 FR 60669). That 

NPRM proposed to require a detailed 

inspection for proper sealant of the left 

and right pylon firewall structures, and 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM or 

on the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed—except for minor editorial 

changes. We have determined that these 

minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 165 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this AD: 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1