31758 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

C. Conduct of Public Meeting 

DOE will designate a DOE official to 

preside at the public meeting and may 

also employ a professional facilitator to 

aid discussion. The public meeting will 

be conducted in an informal, conference 

style. The meeting will not be a judicial 

or evidentiary public hearing, but DOE 

will conduct it in accordance with 

section 336 of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6306). 

Discussion of proprietary information, 

costs or prices, market share, or other 

commercial matters regulated by U.S. 

anti-trust laws is not permitted. 

DOE reserves the right to schedule the 

order of presentations and to establish 

the procedures governing the conduct of 

the public meeting. A court reporter will 

record the proceedings and prepare a 

transcript. 

At the public meeting, DOE will allow 

time for presentations by participants, 

and encourage all interested parties to 

share their views on issues affecting this 

rulemaking. Each participant may 

present a prepared general statement 

(within time limits determined by DOE) 

before the discussion of specific topics. 

Other participants may comment briefly 

on any general statements. At the end of 

the prepared statements on each specific 

topic, participants may clarify their 

statements briefly and comment on 

statements made by others. Participants 

should be prepared to answer questions 

from DOE and other participants. DOE 

representatives may also ask questions 

about other matters relevant to this 

rulemaking. The official conducting the 

public meeting will accept additional 

comments or questions from those 

attending, as time permits. The 

presiding official will announce any 

further procedural rules or modification 

of procedures needed for the proper 

conduct of the public meeting. 

DOE will make the entire record of 

this proposed rulemaking, including the 

transcript from the public meeting, 

available for inspection at the U.S. 

Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9:00 

a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. Anyone 

may purchase a copy of the transcript 

from the transcribing reporter. 

Additionally, the record for this 

proposed rulemaking will be made 

available at www.regulations.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 24, 

2012. 

Timothy Unruh, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy, 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13099 Filed 5–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0856; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–117–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain the Boeing Company Model 

737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 

series airplanes. That NPRM proposed 

to inspect for part numbers of the 

operational program software of the 

flight control computers, and corrective 

actions if necessary. That NPRM was 

prompted by reports of undetected 

erroneous output from a single radio 

altimeter channel, which resulted in 

premature autothrottle retard during 

approach. This action revises that 

NPRM by also proposing to supersede 

an existing AD. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to detect and 

correct an unsafe condition associated 

with erroneous output from a radio 

altimeter channel, which could result in 

premature autothrottle landing flare 

retard and the loss of automatic speed 

control, and consequent loss of control 

of the airplane. Since the proposal to 

now supersede an existing AD may 

impose an additional burden over that 

proposed in the NPRM, we are 

reopening the comment period to allow 

the public the chance to comment on 

this proposed change. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by July 16, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed 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; email 

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 proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregg Nesemeier, Senior Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment 

Branch, ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; phone: (425) 917–6479; 

fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

gregg.nesemeier@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2010–0856; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–117–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 31759 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to certain the Boeing Company 

Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and 

–900 series airplanes. That NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

September 23, 2010 (75 FR 57885). That 

NPRM proposed to require inspecting 

for part numbers of the operational 

program software (OPS) of the flight 

control computers (FCC), and doing 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM (75 FR 

57885, September 23, 2010) Was Issued 

Since we issued the previous NPRM 

(75 FR 57885, September 23, 2010), we 

have determined that the software 

installation required by AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005), is out of date and new 

software would be required by this 

supplemental NPRM. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the previous NPRM (75 FR 

57885, September 23, 2010). The 

following presents the comments 

received on the previous NPRM and the 

FAA’s response to each comment. 

Support for the Previous NPRM (75 FR 

57885, September 23, 2010) 

The Airline Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA) supports the 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010). 

Request To Supersede Previous AD 

Continental Airlines (Continental) 

requested that we revise the NPRM (75 

FR 57885, September 23, 2010) to 

supersede AD 2005–07–20, Amendment 

39–14045 (70 FR 17603, April 7, 2005). 

Continental explained that this would 

allow the new AD to be accomplished 

without needing an alternative method 

of compliance (AMOC) for AD 2005–07– 

20, which also applied to Model B737 

FCC OPS. 

Alaska Airlines (Alaska) also 

requested that we revise paragraph (b) of 

the NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) to include a reference to AD 

2005–07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 

FR 17603, April 7, 2005), which 

installed a previous version of FCC 

software. Alaska explained that we 

should consider whether AD 2005–07– 

20 should be superseded by the NPRM. 

We agree to revise the NPRM (75 FR 

57885, September 23, 2010) by 

proposing in this supplemental NPRM 

to supersede AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005). AD 2005–07–20, for 

certain Model 737–600, –700, –800, and 

–900 series airplanes, requires installing 

and testing a certain version of OPS for 

the FCC. However, AD 2005–07–20 

requires installation of an older version 

of the OPS for the FCC than what this 

supplemental NPRM would require. We 

have verified with the manufacturer that 

the software specified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010, provides appropriate 

corrective actions for the unsafe 

condition identified for the software 

identified in AD 2005–07–20. We have 

revised this supplemental NPRM in 

order to supersede AD 2005–07–20. We 

have also added paragraph (i)(3) of this 

supplemental NPRM to give credit for 

existing AMOCs. 

Request To Revise Applicability Section 

Continental requested that we revise 

the NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) by changing the Applicability 

section so that the NPRM only applies 

to airplanes with the earlier software. 

Continental explained that it has 

determined that the software required to 

be installed per Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 13, 

2010, is a later version than required to 

be installed by AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005), per Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1164, dated May 20, 

2004. Continental expressed that later 

versions of software always seem to be 

an issue and require an AMOC. 

Continental stated that to eliminate this 

issue, we could either allow later 

software versions or revise the 

applicability so that it only applies to 

airplanes with the earlier software 

installed. Continental suggested that we 

revise the Applicability section of the 

NPRM to include the phrase, ‘‘with 

Flight Control Computers (FCC) 

Operational Program Software (OPS) 

2271–COL–AC1–02, 2270–COL–AC1– 

03, or 2277–COL–AC1–04 installed.’’ 

Continental also contacted the FAA 

regarding its comment and provided 

examples of other AD applicabilities 

that might be used for this NPRM. 

Alaska also requested that we revise 

the Applicability section of the NPRM 

(75 FR 57885, September 23, 2010) to 

exclude airplanes which had FCC 

software installed per an AMOC to AD 

2005–07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 

FR 17603, April 7, 2005). Alaska 

explained that this AMOC to AD 2005– 

07–20 approved the same FCC software 

specified in the NPRM, i.e., FCC 

software 2276–COL–AC1–05 or 2275– 

COL–AC1–06. 

We do not agree to revise the 

Applicability section of this 

supplemental NPRM to limit it to only 

airplanes with certain FCC software 

versions installed. The intent of this 

supplemental NPRM is to ensure that 

the proper software is installed on all 

airplanes listed in the variable number 

table in Section 1.A., Effectivity, of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. If the 

required software is found to already be 

installed by performing the software 

part number inspection specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010, then no 

more work is necessary. We have not 

changed the supplemental NPRM in this 

regard. 

However, we do agree to revise this 

supplemental NPRM to allow for 

installation of versions of the FCC 

software that are approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Organization Designation Authorization 

(ODA) after the issuance of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010. We have revised 

paragraph (h)(1) of this supplemental 

NPRM accordingly. We have also 

clarified paragraph (h)(1) of this 

supplemental NPRM by referring to 

table 2 of that service bulletin for the 

improved software. 

We agree to revise the Applicability 

section (paragraph (c)) of this 

supplemental NPRM for clarity by 

referring to the airplanes identified in 

the variable number table in Section 

1.A., Effectivity, of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 13, 

2010. We intend that this supplemental 

NPRM is applicable to all airplanes 

having variable numbers identified in 

that table, and that the applicability not 

be defined by the ‘‘Group 1’’ description 

in section 1.A. of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 13, 

2010. We find that the effectivity by 

variable number in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 13, 

2010, adequately identifies the airplanes 

affected by the unsafe condition and 

assures that the unsafe condition is 

corrected on affected airplanes. We have 

revised the Applicability section in this 

supplemental NPRM accordingly. 

Request To Include a Terminating 

Action 

Continental requested that we revise 

the NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) to include a note that states: 

‘‘Validation by an operator that aircraft 

that have had part number (P/N) 831– 

5854–150 software loaded into their P/ 

N 822–1604–101 or –151 Flight Control 

Computers in accordance with Boeing 

Service Letter 737–SL–22–059 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31760 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

constitutes a terminating action for this 

AD.’’ Continental reasoned that Boeing 

Service Letter 737–SL–22–059 was 

issued June 29, 2007, and that the letter 

advises operators that they can load 

software P/N 2275–COL–AC1–06 

(Diskette Set Collins P/N 831–5854–150) 

into P/N 822–1604–101 and –151 FCCs. 

Continental explained that the software 

is listed in table 2 of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010. 

We disagree to include the note 

requested by the commenter. We intend 

that the applicability of the 

supplemental NPRM includes all 

airplanes identified in the variable 

number table in Section 1.A, Effectivity, 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, requires that 

operators inspect the FCC OPS part 

numbers, and that if the software part 

number installed is listed in table 2 of 

that service bulletin (which includes P/ 

N 831–5854–150, as the commenter 

stated), no more work is necessary. 

Compliance with the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of the supplemental 

NPRM is then complete. However, if the 

operator finds that a software part 

number listed in table 2 of that service 

bulletin is not installed, they must 

install new software. We have revised 

the AD applicability in paragraph (c) of 

this supplemental NPRM to more 

clearly define the affected airplanes. We 

have not otherwise changed the AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Include Certain Airplanes 

Boeing requested that we revise the 

Summary section and the Applicability 

section of the NPRM (75 FR 57885, 

September 23, 2010) to include the 

phrase, ‘‘airplanes delivered with the 

Collins Enhanced Digital Flight Control 

System (EDFCS).’’ Boeing reasoned that 

the NPRM is only applicable to that 

portion of the Model 737–600, –700, 

–700C, –800, and –900 series airplane 

fleet delivered with the Collins EDFCS 

installed at delivery. 

We agree to revise this supplemental 

NPRM to include the phrase requested 

by Boeing, although we will use the full 

company name of the equipment 

supplier (‘‘Rockwell Collins’’). This 

revision may make it easier for operators 

to quickly determine whether or not this 

AD is applicable to their airplanes. 

Since the effectivity of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010, is limited to airplanes 

equipped with the Rockwell Collins 

EDFCS, this change will have no actual 

effect on the AD applicability. We have 

revised the Applicability section of the 

supplemental NPRM accordingly. 

Request To Rephrase the Unsafe 

Condition 

Boeing requested that we revise the 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) by removing the words ‘‘and 

correct’’ from the phrase ‘‘detect and 

correct’’. Boeing explained that the 

software change described in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, does not ‘‘correct’’ 

erroneous radio altimeter outputs—it 

only ‘‘detects’’ them and inhibits the 

autothrottle landing flare retard mode. 

We partially agree to revise the 

phrasing of the unsafe condition in the 

supplemental NPRM. The software 

change described in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010, enables the airplane 

systems to detect erroneous output from 

a radio altimeter channel and correct 

improper autothrottle system response 

to that erroneous output. While we 

disagree to completely remove the 

phrase ‘‘and correct’’ from the unsafe 

condition statement, we have revised 

the unsafe condition phrasing 

accordingly throughout the 

supplemental NPRM. 

Request To Change Phrasing Regarding 

Crew Response 

Boeing requested that we revise the 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) by adding the phrase, ‘‘absent 

proper crew response,’’ to the following 

sentence throughout the NPRM, as such: 

‘‘We are proposing this AD to detect 

erroneous output from a radio altimeter 

channel, which, absent proper crew 

response, could result in premature 

autothrottle landing flare retard and the 

loss of automatic speed control, and 

may lead to loss of control of the 

airplane.’’ Boeing explained that this 

sentence should directly reflect the fact 

that proper crew response can avoid any 

of the listed contingencies. 

We disagree to revise this 

supplemental NPRM to include the 

phrase requested by Boeing. We do not 

have information at this time that 

confirms Boeing’s comment. We have 

not changed the AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify the Applicability 

Alaska requested that we clarify the 

applicability of the NPRM (75 FR 57885, 

September 23, 2010). Alaska explained 

that the effectivity section of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, could be 

interpreted to mean that airplanes with 

FCC software 2276–COL–AC1–05 or 

2275–COL–AC1–06 installed did not 

require accomplishment of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010, while the 

accomplishment section of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010, could be interpreted to 

require that airplanes be inspected to 

verify that the correct software version 

is installed. 

We agree to clarify the applicability of 

this supplemental NPRM, which 

includes all airplanes identified in the 

airplane variable number table in 

Section 1.A of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 13, 

2010. The applicability of this 

supplemental NPRM is not defined by 

the ‘‘Group 1’’ description in that 

section of that service bulletin. We have 

revised paragraph (c) of this 

supplemental NPRM for clarity by 

referring to the variable number table. 

We have also added Note 1 to paragraph 

(c) of this supplemental NPRM. 

Request To Use the Latest Revision of 

the Service Information 

Alaska requested that we revise the 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) to refer to the latest service 

information, if a later revision is issued. 

Alaska noted that ‘‘computer’’ is 

misspelled in the effectivity section of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. 

We acknowledge that ‘‘computer’’ is 

misspelled in the effectivity section of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. 

However, this typo does not affect the 

applicability of this supplemental 

NPRM. Also, we have not received any 

revised service information; Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, is the latest 

service information. Therefore, we have 

not changed this supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

Request To Correct Effectivity Between 

Service Information 

Continental requested that we 

acknowledge that the effectivity 

between the service information in AD 

2005–07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 

FR 17603, April 7, 2005), and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, is different. 

We agree that the effectivities of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1164, dated May 20, 2004, and 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010; are 

different. (Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–22A1164, dated May 20, 2004, is 

the appropriate source of service 

information for AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005). However, we have 

verified that all airplanes in the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 31761 

effectivity of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–22A1164, dated May 20, 

2004, are also listed in the effectivity of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010, is applicable to a 

larger group of airplanes than Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1164, 

dated May 20, 2004. Therefore, we have 

not changed the supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

Special Flight Permit Paragraph 

We have removed paragraph (h) of the 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010) from this supplemental NPRM. 

Paragraph (h) of the NPRM prohibited 

special flight permits. We have 

determined that special flight permits 

are allowed, as described in Section 

21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199). 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all the 

relevant information and determined 

the unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

in other products of these same type 

designs. Certain changes described 

above expand the scope of the original 

NPRM (75 FR 57885, September 23, 

2010). As a result, we have determined 

that it is necessary to reopen the 

comment period to provide additional 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on this supplemental NPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of the 

Supplemental NPRM 

This supplemental NPRM would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously. 

Change to Existing AD 

This proposed AD would retain all 

requirements of AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005). Since AD 2005–07–20 

was issued, the AD format has been 

revised, and certain paragraphs have 

been rearranged. As a result, the 

corresponding paragraph identifiers 

have changed in this proposed AD, as 

listed in the following table: 

REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS

Requirement in AD 

2005–07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 

FR 17603, April 7, 

2005) 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

proposed AD 

paragraph (f) paragraph (g) 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 207 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Installation [retained actions from existing AD 2005– 

07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, April 

7, 2005].

2 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $170.

$0 $170 $35,190 

Inspection .................................................................... 1 work-hour × $85 per 

hour = $85.

N/A $85 per inspection cycle 17,595 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary installations that would 

be required based on the results of the 

proposed inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need this installation: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

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

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed 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 determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31762 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2005–07–20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 

FR 17603, April 7, 2005), and adding 

the following new AD. 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2010–0856; Directorate Identifier 2010– 

NM–117–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by July 16, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, April 7, 

2005). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 

series airplanes, delivered with the Rockwell 

Collins Enhanced Digital Flight Control 

System (EDFCS), certificated in any category; 

as identified in the Variable Number table in 

Section 1.A., Effectivity, of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated April 

13, 2010. 

Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD: This 

AD is applicable to all airplanes listed in the 

Variable Number table, and is not defined by 

the ‘‘Group 1’’ description in Section 1.A. of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, 

dated April 13, 2010. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 22, Auto Flight. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

undetected erroneous output from a single 

radio altimeter channel, which resulted in 

premature autothrottle retard during 

approach. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct an unsafe condition associated 

with erroneous output from a radio altimeter 

channel, which could result in premature 

autothrottle landing flare retard and the loss 

of automatic speed control, and consequent 

loss of control of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Actions With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the actions 

required by paragraph (f) of AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, April 7, 

2005). For airplanes identified in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1164, dated 

May 20, 2004: Within 12 months after May 

12, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005–07– 

20, Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, 

April 7, 2005)), install and test an updated 

version of the operational program software 

(OPS) of the EDFCS flight control computers 

(FCCs), in accordance with Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–22A1164, dated May 

20, 2004. 

(h) New Requirements 

Within 3 months after the effective date of 

this AD: Inspect to determine the part 

number of the OPS of the FCCs, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. 

Installing software as required by paragraph 

(h)(1) of this AD, or verifying that the 

software is installed as specified by 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, terminates the 

requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(1) For any OPS having a part number 

identified in table 1 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–22A1211, dated April 13, 2010: Before 

further flight, install software specified in 

table 2 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

22A1211, dated April 13, 2010, or install 

software that is approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) after April 

13, 2010, that is fully interchangeable with 

the software specified in table 2 of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–22A1211, dated 

April 13, 2010. Do the installation in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–22A1211, dated April 13, 2010. 

(2) For any OPS having a part number 

identified in table 2 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–22A1211, dated April 13, 2010: No 

further action is required by this paragraph. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(3) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2005–07–20, 

Amendment 39–14045 (70 FR 17603, April 7, 

2005), are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of this AD. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Gregg Nesemeier, Senior Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, 

ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

phone: (425) 917–6479; fax: (425) 917–6590; 

email: gregg.nesemeier@faa.gov. 

(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; email 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 98057–3356. For information on 

the availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 21, 

2012. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13028 Filed 5–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0490; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–066–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all The 

Boeing Company Model 707 airplanes, 

and Model 720 and 720B series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by reports of cracking of the 

midspar fittings, and of the engine and 

nacelle strut separating from the 

airplane. This proposed AD would 

require performing a detailed inspection 

of the midspar fittings of the nacelle 

strut to confirm that the correct part 

number is installed, and installing the 

correct part number if necessary; 

performing repetitive high frequency 

eddy current inspections (HFEC) of the 

midspar fittings of the nacelle strut for 

cracks, and repair if necessary; and 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS