59570 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For Lockheed service information 

identified in this AD, contact Lockheed 

Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin 

Aeronautics Company, Airworthiness Office, 

Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column P–58, 86 S. 

Cobb Drive, Marietta, GA 30063; telephone 

770–494–5444; fax 770–494–5445; email 

ams.portal@lmco.com; Internet http://

www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/

TechPubs.html. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

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

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 18, 2015. 

Dorr M. Anderson, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–24839 Filed 10–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0128; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–133–AD; Amendment 

39–18278; AD 2015–19–16] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for The 

Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes 

equipped with Rolls-Royce Trent 800 

series engines. This AD was prompted 

by reports of in-flight separation of the 

engine’s aft plug from the forward plug, 

which are the two parts of the turbine 

exhaust plug assembly. This AD 

requires installation of a serviceable 

turbine exhaust plug assembly (for 

certain airplanes), and a general visual 

inspection (for certain airplanes) to 

determine the diameter of the bolt used 

at the forward and aft plug interface, 

and applicable corrective actions. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent 

separation of the aft plug from the 

forward plug of the turbine exhaust plug 

assembly, which could result in parts 

departing the airplane and hitting the 

empennage, and destabilizing the 

airplane during a critical flight phase. In 

addition, parts remaining on a runway 

could pose a hazard to another airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective November 6, 

2015. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of November 6, 2015. 

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. It is also available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0128. 

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–2014– 

0128; 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: 

Kevin Nguyen, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6501; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

kevin.nguyen@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 The Boeing Company Model 

777 airplanes equipped with RollsRoyce Trent 800 series engines. The 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on March 3, 2014 (79 FR 

11725); corrected March 11, 2014 (79 FR 

13592). The NPRM was prompted by 

reports of in-flight separation of the 

engine’s aft plug from the forward plug, 

which are the two parts of the turbine 

exhaust plug assembly. The NPRM 

proposed to require installation of a 

serviceable turbine exhaust plug 

assembly (for certain airplanes), and a 

general visual inspection (for certain 

airplanes) to determine the diameter of 

the bolt used at the forward and aft plug 

interface, and applicable corrective 

actions. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent separation of the aft plug from 

the forward plug of the turbine exhaust 

plug assembly, which could result in 

parts departing the airplane and hitting 

the empennage, and destabilizing the 

airplane during a critical flight phase. In 

addition, parts remaining on a runway 

could pose a hazard to another airplane. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM (79 FR 11725, 

March 3, 2014; corrected March 11, 

2014 (79 FR 13592); and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Match Compliance Time 

Cathay Pacific requested that we 

ensure that the AD compliance date will 

be the same as the compliance time of 

Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 3, dated 

August 23, 2012; or Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014. Cathay Pacific reasoned that 

paragraph (i) of the proposed AD 

specified compliance within 60 months 

after the effective date of the proposed 

AD, and both revisions of this service 

information specify a compliance time 

that is within 60 months after the 

Revision 3 date of the service bulletin. 

We infer that Cathay Pacific is 

requesting that we reduce the 

compliance time of this final rule to 

match the compliance time listed in the 

service information. We do not agree 

with the commenter’s request. In 

developing an appropriate compliance 

time for this action, we considered not 

only the degree of urgency associated 

with addressing the subject unsafe 

condition, but the manufacturer’s 

recommendation for an appropriate 

compliance time, the time required for 

the rulemaking process, the availability 

of required parts, and the practical 

aspect of installing the required 

modification within an interval of time 

that corresponds to the typical 

scheduled maintenance for the majority 

of affected operators. Under the 

provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD, 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59571 

we may approve requests for 

adjustments to the compliance time, if 

data are submitted to substantiate that 

such an adjustment would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. We have not 

changed the AD in this regard. 

Request To Define ‘‘Serviceable’’ To 

Include Pre-Boeing Service Bulletin 

777–78–0051 Plug Assemblies 

Cathay Pacific requested that we 

revise paragraph (j) of the proposed AD; 

corrected March 11, 2014 (79 FR 13592) 

to define ‘‘serviceable’’ plug assemblies. 

Cathay Pacific reasoned that both preand post-Boeing Service Bulletin 777– 

78–0051 plug assemblies can be 

installed, and the modification can be 

completed before the required 

compliance time of the NPRM (79 FR 

11725, March 3, 2014; corrected March 

11, 2014 (79 FR 13592)). 

We do not agree to revise paragraph 

(j) of this AD because serviceable 

assemblies are already defined in 

paragraph (h) of this AD. This definition 

applies to the entire AD. Also, preBoeing Service Bulletin 777–78–0051 

plug assemblies do not meet the 

definition of serviceable, as specified in 

the service information. 

Request To Revise Definition of a 

Serviceable Assembly 

American Airlines (AA) requested 

that we revise paragraph (h) of the 

proposed AD to add another definition: 

Serviceable plug assemblies, as those 

maintained in accordance with the 

operator’s continued airworthiness 

maintenance program (CAMP), prior to 

issuance of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 

3, dated August 23, 2012. AA explained 

that prior to release of Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012, due to reported events of exhaust 

plug losses by other operators, AA 

recognized that multiple removals of the 

exhaust aft plug causes the 3/16′′ 

nutplate locking feature to wear out, 

which could then result in loss of the aft 

plug. As a result, AA implemented a 

maintenance program as part of its 

CAMP, which offers a level of safety 

equivalent to that of Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012. During every engine removal, for 

a refurbishment or overhaul shop visit, 

the pre-Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 

3, dated August 23, 2012, exhaust aft 

plug nutplates are replaced with new 

nutplates. 

In addition, AA stated that the holes 

are inspected for elongation and cracks 

in accordance with procedures 

equivalent to Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051 

inspection procedures. Model 777 

Airplane Maintenance Manual Chapter 

78–11–02–400–803–R00, requires that 

the minimum fastener run-on torque of 

2 in-lbs is met during every installation 

of the aft exhaust plug. In addition, each 

of the exhaust aft plug fasteners receives 

a general visual check, using a ladder/ 

stand and a bright light, every 150 flight 

hours. AA expressed that it is currently 

the largest Model 777–200 Trent 800 

operator in the worldwide fleet and has 

not lost an exhaust aft plug due to loose 

or missing fasteners, as its CAMP 

demonstrates an equivalent level of 

safety to the service information. 

As an alternative, AA requested that 

we revise the NPRM (79 FR 11725, 

March 3, 2014; corrected March 11, 

2014 (79 FR 13592)) to include, as 

serviceable exhaust aft plugs, those 

maintained in accordance with the 

operator’s own maintenance program, 

such as AA’s approved CAMP prior to 

issuance of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 

3, dated August 23, 2012, and to remain 

in service until the next engine removal 

for refurbishment or overhaul shop visit, 

or 60 months from the effective date of 

the AD, whichever is later. 

We do not agree to include the 

requested provision. The maintenance 

program described by AA is likely to be 

acceptable in lieu of direct compliance 

with portions of this AD; however, the 

description of that program provided in 

AA’s comment is not sufficient to serve 

as engineering data for the FAA to 

approve as an optional method of 

compliance in this AD. Operators can 

submit a request for approval of an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC), with a more detailed proposal 

to use the maintenance program, 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 Change Compliance Time of 

Parts Installation Limitation 

Boeing and Cathay Pacific requested 

that we revise paragraph (j) of the 

proposed AD to change the installation 

limitation from the effective date of the 

AD to the compliance deadline for the 

AD. Boeing reasoned that paragraph (j) 

of the proposed AD currently creates an 

alternative and indeterminate 

compliance deadline. Boeing explained 

that during the compliance interval and 

prior to the AD deadline, operators may 

be required, due to unforeseen 

circumstances, to install a unit that is 

not a serviceable unit, and that under 

the current wording, this would 

unnecessarily ground the airplane. 

We do not agree to revise paragraph 

(j) of this AD to change the installation 

limitation from the effective date of the 

AD to the compliance date of the AD. 

Grace period compliance times are 

provided in ADs in recognition that an 

immediate unscheduled modification 

requirement would be disruptive. A 

grace period is included to give 

operators a reasonable period of time to 

schedule and perform actions that are 

required by the AD and that otherwise 

would not have occurred. A parts 

installation limitation is included in 

some cases to require that, if the parts 

affected by the AD are already being 

removed for a reason other than the AD 

itself, that opportunity to correct the 

unsafe condition should be taken. We 

determine whether such a parts 

installation limitation should be 

included in the AD, and what the 

specific requirements of the limitation 

will be, based on the risk level 

associated with the unsafe condition 

and the expected availability of required 

replacement parts. 

In this case, we made a determination 

that the risk warranted the 

consideration of a parts installation 

limitation. We also determined that 

sufficient parts would be available to 

meet that limitation, and that sufficient 

time to perform any required actions to 

make a nozzle assembly serviceable as 

defined in paragraph (h) of this AD 

would exist in situations where the 

nozzle might be removed in 

maintenance. Specifically, we 

considered the case of an unscheduled 

engine change where an operator may 

not have included a serviceable nozzle 

assembly with the replacement engine. 

Modification of a nozzle assembly to 

meet the definition of a serviceable 

nozzle can be performed in roughly the 

same or less elapsed time than it takes 

to perform the engine replacement itself. 

We did not foresee any other commonly 

occurring situation where an engine 

nozzle assembly would be removed for 

maintenance. However, as discussed in 

response to the comment issue ‘‘Request 

to Revise Definition of a Serviceable 

Assembly,’’ if an operator specifically 

and adequately addresses the 

management of this unsafe condition 

within its CAMP, we will consider 

AMOC approvals to allow installation of 

nozzle assemblies that do not meet the 

definition of serviceable nozzle in 

paragraph (h) of this AD. 

We clarified paragraph (j) of this AD 

as a result of these comments. We 

considered the explanatory statements 

about the intent of the parts installation 

limitation language used in several 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
59572 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

recent ADs, and determined that 

different language should be used in 

this case to more clearly convey the 

intent of the parts installation limitation 

contained in this AD. We have added 

the words ‘‘or re-install’’ to paragraph (j) 

to clarify that any installation of a 

nozzle assembly, regardless of the 

reason for the removal of the nozzle 

assembly and regardless of the source of 

the replacement nozzle assembly, is 

subject to the parts installation 

limitation of paragraph (j) of this AD. 

Request To Clarify Paragraph (j) of the 

Proposed AD 

AA requested that we clarify 

paragraph (j) of the proposed AD. AA 

explained that paragraph (j) of the 

proposed AD allows that only a 

serviceable turbine exhaust plug 

assembly may be installed on any 

airplane as of the effective date of this 

AD, while paragraph (i) of the proposed 

AD requires a compliance time within a 

certain time after the effective date of 

this AD, without any referral to 

serviceable turbine exhaust plug 

assembly. AA reasoned that as written, 

these steps are confusing and could lead 

operators to believe the actions required 

by the AD are due as of the effective 

date of this AD. 

We agree with the commenter and 

have clarified paragraph (j) of this AD 

by including references to paragraphs 

(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD. 

Request To Clarify the AMOC 

Paragraph 

Boeing requested that we revise 

paragraph (k)(3) of the proposed AD 

(paragraph (l)(3) of this AD) to indicate 

that an AMOC, approved for a repaired 

serviceable unit is to be attached to, and 

travel with, the repaired serviceable 

unit. Boeing explained that the AMOC 

approval should apply to the deviation 

on the serviceable unit and thereby 

travel with the serviceable unit, which 

is rotable and could be installed on 

numerous airplanes during its service 

life. Boeing also explained that a unit 

repaired in accordance with an 

approved AMOC will fulfill the intent of 

airplane safety when the unit is 

installed on an airplane, and that the 

unit will be in compliance with the AD 

as long as the part is serviceable as 

defined by the AD. 

We agree with the commenter and 

have revised paragraph (l)(3) of this AD 

accordingly. 

Request To Use the CAMP 

AA requested that we revise the 

NPRM (79 FR 11725, March 3, 2014; 

corrected March 11, 2014 (79 FR 

13592)), to include language that allows 

the optional re-identification of the 

exhaust plug with the correct postBoeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, part number 

identity in accordance with a method 

approved by the operator’s approved 

CAMP, as the CAMP provides an 

equivalent level of safety. AA explained 

that prior to the release of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777– 

78–0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012, AA implemented a maintenance 

program to install data plates on the 

forward and aft exhaust plug. The plates 

were installed because the manufacturer 

part number and serial number, which 

were chemical-etched on the exhaust 

plug skin by the manufacturer, were no 

longer legible. AA stated that the data 

plates contain the original part number, 

a company-assigned serial number, and 

the text ‘‘MATCHED SET. DO NOT 

SEPARATE.’’ AA added that the 

installed identification plates are in the 

same location as, but a different length 

than, the plates specified in Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777– 

78–0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012. 

We agree to allow alternative 

permanent part-marking methods. If the 

markings contain the required 

information and are permanent, the 

intent of the marking requirement is 

addressed, and additional flexibility is 

provided to operators. Therefore, partmarking methods for the CAMP might 

be approved, provided that the markings 

are permanent and contain the 

information specified in Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014. We have added this information 

to paragraph (g) of this AD accordingly. 

Request To Eliminate AMOC Approval 

Requirement for Previous Repairs 

AA requested that we revise 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD, to 

allow repairs accomplished prior to the 

release of this AD, in accordance with 

Boeing instructions and approved per 

14 CFR part 121.379, or a Boeing ODA, 

to be included as acceptable repairs in 

this AD, without the requirement to 

obtain a Boeing ODA AMOC or Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office AMOC 

approval. 

AA explained that, prior to release of 

the NPRM (79 FR 11725, March 3, 2014; 

corrected March 11, 2014 (79 FR 

13592)); exhaust aft plugs have received 

repairs at the exhaust aft plug mate line 

during inspection or during 

incorporation of Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012, utilizing procedures provided by 

Boeing without Boeing ODA approval; 

rather, the repair was approved per 14 

CFR part 121.379. AA expressed that 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD 

specifies using a repair method 

approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of 

the proposed AD, and these previously 

accomplished repairs, which followed 

Boeing repair instructions, offer an 

equivalent level of safety to the NPRM. 

We partially agree with the request. 

We agree to add paragraph (l)(4) in this 

AD to eliminate the requirement for 

subsequent AMOC approval for repairs 

that were previously approved by the 

Boeing ODA, using an FAA Form 8100– 

9, and having met the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of this AD, for the 

definition of serviceable turbine exhaust 

plug assemblies. We are confident that 

the Boeing ODA repair approval process 

ensures that each repair is reviewed by 

qualified engineering staff with 

knowledge of the original airplane 

design and compliance substantiation. 

At the same time, we want to ensure 

that those repairs would have a 

configuration that meets the definition 

of serviceable turbine exhaust plug 

assemblies as defined in the service 

information. We have added paragraph 

(l)(4) in this AD to state that repairs 

approved prior to the effective date of 

this AD, by the Boeing ODA using FAA 

Form 8100–9, and having met the 

requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD 

for the definition of serviceable turbine 

exhaust plug assemblies, do not require 

AMOC approval. 

We disagree, however, to eliminate 

the AMOC approval requirement for 

repairs approved by other means. Even 

though Boeing Service Engineering may 

have provided a ‘‘no technical 

objection’’ statement, qualified 

engineering staff with knowledge of the 

original airplane design and compliance 

substantiation may not have been 

involved in evaluating the repair. We 

have not changed this AD in this regard. 

Additional Changes to This AD 

We have revised this AD to refer to 

Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated 

February 7, 2014, as the appropriate 

source of service information for the 

required actions. Among other things, 

this service information adds Group 2 

airplanes to paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance;’’ includes a maintenance 

records check; adds a general visual 

inspection to determine the diameter of 

the bolt used at the forward and aft plug 

interface; and adds applicable corrective 

actions—all of which we have clarified 

in new paragraph (g)(4) of this AD. 

Paragraphs (g)(3) and (c) of the proposed 

AD already accounted for the Group 2 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59573 

airplanes defined in Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014. Paragraph (g)(2) of the proposed 

AD accounted for the required actions. 

We have also added a new paragraph 

(k) to this AD to provide credit for 

certain actions, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of 

this AD using Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 

3, dated August 23, 2012. We have 

redesignated the subsequent paragraphs 

of this AD accordingly. 

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 (79 FR 

11725, March 3, 2014; corrected March 

11, 2014 (79 FR 13592)) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 11725, 

March 3, 2014; corrected March 11, 

2014 (79 FR 13592)). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014. Among other things, this service 

information adds Group 2 airplanes to 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance;’’ includes 

a maintenance records check; adds a 

general visual inspection to determine 

the diameter of the bolt used at the 

forward and aft plug interface; and adds 

applicable corrective actions. This 

service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section of 

this AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 35 

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 ....................................................... 5 work-hours × $85 per hour = $425 ............. $0 $425 $14,875 

General visual inspection ................................ 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 ............. $0 $170 $5,950 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary replacement that would 

be required based on the results of the 

inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need this replacement: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Replacement (replacing the 3⁄16-inch bolts with 1⁄4- 

inch bolts).

5 work-hours × $85 per hour = $425 ........................... $0 $425 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

This AD will not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This AD will not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 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): 

2015–19–16 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–18278; Docket No. 

FAA–2014–0128; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–133–AD. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
59574 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective November 6, 2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 777–200, –200LR, –300,–300ER, and 

777F series airplanes; certificated in any 

category; equipped with Rolls-Royce Trent 

800 series engines. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 78, Engine Exhaust. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of inflight separation of the engine’s aft plug from 

the forward plug, which are the two parts of 

the turbine exhaust plug assembly. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent separation of the 

aft plug from the forward plug of the turbine 

exhaust plug assembly, which could result in 

parts departing the airplane and hitting the 

empennage or hitting a person on the ground, 

and destabilizing the airplane during a 

critical flight phase; parts remaining on a 

runway could cause damage to another 

airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Installation and General Visual 

Inspection 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014, 

except as provided by paragraph (i) of this 

AD, do the applicable actions specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), and (g)(4) of 

this AD, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014. 

Alternative part marking methods are 

allowed for the requirements of this 

paragraph, if approved by the FAA principal 

maintenance inspector, provided that the 

markings are permanent and contain the 

information required by Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, 

Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014. 

(1) For airplanes identified as Group 1, 

Configuration 1, in Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, 

dated February 7, 2014: Install a serviceable 

turbine exhaust plug assembly. 

(2) For airplanes identified as Group 1, 

Configurations 2 and 3, in Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, 

Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014: Do a 

general visual inspection to determine the 

diameter of the bolt used at the forward and 

aft plug interface, and before further flight, 

do all applicable corrective actions. 

(3) For airplanes listed in paragraph (c) of 

this AD that are not listed in the ‘‘Effectivity’’ 

section of Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated 

February 7, 2014: Do a general visual 

inspection to determine if a serviceable 

turbine exhaust plug assembly is installed. If 

a serviceable turbine exhaust plug assembly 

is not installed, before further flight, install 

a serviceable turbine exhaust plug assembly. 

(4) For airplanes identified as Group 2, in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014: Do a maintenance records check to 

determine affected turbine exhaust plug 

assemblies, and for affected assemblies, do a 

general visual inspection to determine the 

diameter of the bolt used at the forward and 

aft plug interface, and before further flight, 

do all applicable corrective actions. 

(h) Definition of Serviceable Assembly 

For the purposes of this AD, an acceptable 

serviceable turbine exhaust plug assembly 

must meet the conditions specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. 

(1) A new assembly with part number 

314W5520–22. 

(2) A serviceable assembly as defined in 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014; 

except, for any assembly on which the 

actions specified in Part 2 or Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–78– 

0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 2014, are 

done, and Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated 

February 7, 2014, specifies to contact Boeing 

for repair instructions, this AD requires 

repair before further flight, using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. 

(i) Exception to Service Information 

Specifications 

Where paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated February 7, 

2014, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,’’ or 

‘‘after the Revision 4 date of this service 

bulletin,’’ this AD requires compliance 

within the applicable time after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(j) Parts Installation Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, only a 

serviceable turbine exhaust plug assembly 

that meets the requirements of paragraph 

(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD may be installed 

or reinstalled on any airplane. 

(k) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, 

Revision 3, dated August 23, 2012 (which is 

not incorporated by reference in this AD), 

provided that for Group 1, Configuration 2, 

airplanes, on which the condition defined in 

Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

777–78–0051, Revision 3, dated August 23, 

2012, was found (i.e., only 1⁄4 inch diameter 

bolts are found installed at all 33 locations 

forward and aft plug interface), the reidentification of the forward and aft plug was 

done before further flight after the inspection. 

(l) 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 

paragraph (m) 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. 

An AMOC approved as described in this 

paragraph for a specific serviceable nozzle 

assembly may be transferred with that nozzle 

assembly to another aircraft without an 

additional AMOC approval being required. 

(4) Repairs approved prior to the effective 

date of this AD by the Boeing ODA do not 

require AMOC approval if those repairs were 

approved using FAA Form 8100–9 and those 

repairs meet the definition of a serviceable 

assembly contained in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, 

dated February 7, 2014. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Kevin Nguyen, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) FAA, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6501; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: kevin.nguyen@faa.gov. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD. 

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0051, Revision 4, dated 

February 7, 2014. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For Boeing service information 

identified in this AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & 

Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 

2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59575 

1Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (July 21, 

2010). 

2Pursuant to Section 701 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

Title VII may be cited as the ‘‘Wall Street 

Transparency and Accountability Act of 2010.’’ 

3 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq. (2012). 

4 Dodd-Frank Act Section 733 (amending the CEA 

to add new section 5h). 

5Public Law 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763 (December 

21, 2000). 

6See CFMA Section 101(4) (amending CEA to 

add definition of ‘‘Exempt Commodity,’’ currently 

codified as CEA Section 1(a)(20), 7 U.S.C. 1a(20) 

(2012). 

7 ‘‘Excluded Commodity’’ is also a statutorily 

defined term, currently codified as CEA Section 

1(a)(19), 7 U.S.C. 1a(19) (2012). Generally 

characterized, the term captures, among other 

things specified financial instruments, measures, 

and indexes (e.g., securities and security indexes, 

currencies, interest rates, debt instruments, and 

credit ratings); any ‘‘other rate, differential, index, 

or measure of economic or commercial risk, return 

or value’’ not substantially based on the value of a 

narrow commodity group or solely based on a 

commodity or commodities with no cash value; and 

other economic or commercial indexes, or 

occurrences and contingencies associated with an 

economic consequence, beyond the control of 

parties to the relevant contract, agreement or 

transaction. 

8The definition of ‘‘Eligible Commercial Entity’’ 

is found in Section 1a(17) of the CEA. 7 U.S.C. 

1a(17) (2006). 

9The Commission’s part 36 regulations 

established similar requirements for EBOTs. 

10The definition of ‘‘Eligible Contract 

Participant’’ is found in Section 1a(18) of the CEA, 

7 U.S.C. 1a(18) (2012). 

11The Commission’s Part 36 regulations 

established similar requirements for ECMs. 

12The Dodd-Frank Act amended Section 2(h) of 

the CEA effective July 16, 2011, H.R. 4173, Section 

723(a)(1), Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376, by 

striking existing subsection (h)—‘‘Transactions in 

exempt commodities’’ and inserting new subsection 

(h)—‘‘Clearing requirement’’ not addressed to 

exempt commercial markets. 

13The Dodd-Frank Act repealed Section 5d of the 

CEA effective July 16, 2011, H.R. 4173, Section 

734(a), Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). 

14ECMs and EBOTs were permitted to continue 

operations until July 16, 2012 pursuant to a 

grandfather relief order issued by the Commission 

pursuant to Sections 723(c)(2)(B) and 734(c)(2) of 

the Dodd-Frank Act, respectively. 

15 75 FR 56513 (September 16, 2010). 

206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766– 

5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

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

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 16, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–24677 Filed 10–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 15, 18, 36, 40, 140 

RIN 3038–AE10 

Repeal of the Exempt Commercial 

Market and Exempt Board of Trade 

Exemptions 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is taking final action to 

revise its regulations by removing the 

part 36 regulations. Those regulations 

implemented provisions of the 

Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) that 

established exempt boards of trade and 

exempt commercial markets—two 

categories of derivatives-trading 

platforms that were eliminated from the 

CEA by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act 

(the ‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’). This action 

also removes various cross-references in 

other Commission regulations 

implicating exempt boards of trade and 

exempt commercial markets. 

DATES: This rulemaking is effective on 

October 2, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 

20581; Dana R. Brown, Division of 

Market Oversight, telephone (202) 418– 

5093 and email dbrown@cftc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On July 21, 2010, President Obama 

signed the Dodd-Frank Act into law. 1

Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act 2

amended the CEA 3 to establish a 

comprehensive framework for the 

regulation of over-the-counter 

derivatives, also known as swaps. 

Among other reforms, Title VII requires 

that any person who operates a facility 

to trade swaps register as a designated 

contract market (‘‘DCM’’) or a swap 

execution facility (‘‘SEF’’); 4 the latter is 

a category of trading market newly 

established under the law. 

Concurrently, Title VII eliminated from 

the CEA two categories of exempt 

markets for the trading of derivatives 

originally established in the CEA by the 

Commodity Futures Modernization Act 

of 2000 (‘‘CFMA’’): 5 exempt commercial 

markets (‘‘ECMs’’) and exempt boards of 

trade (‘‘EBOTs’’). 

Under the CFMA’s revisions to the 

CEA, ECMs could trade exempt 

commodities 6 (i.e. any commodity other 

than an excluded commodity 7 and 

agricultural commodities) on electronic 

trading facilities between eligible 

commercial entities 8 without 

complying with comprehensive 

designation criteria and core principles 

that were applicable to designated 

contract markets. A facility that elected 

to operate as an ECM was generally 

exempt from regulation, but was still 

required to comply with certain 

informational and recordkeeping 

requirements, if the market satisfied the 

conditions for the exemption found in 

Sections 2(h)(3) through (5) of the CEA, 

7 U.S.C. 2(h)(3)–(5), including a 

requirement that the ECM notify the 

Commission of its intent to rely upon 

the exemption.9

Under CEA Section 5d, 7 U.S.C. 7a– 

3, EBOTs were facilities that traded 

commodities (other than securities or 

securities indexes) that had a nearly 

inexhaustible deliverable supply and 

either no cash market or a cash market 

so liquid that any contract traded on the 

commodity was highly unlikely to be 

susceptible to manipulation. EBOT 

transactions were limited to eligible 

contract participants 10 and subject to 

minimal trading prohibitions, including 

anti-fraud and anti-manipulation 

restrictions. EBOTs were required to file 

notice with the Commission of their 

election to operate as an EBOT.11

Section 723 of the Dodd-Frank Act 

repealed CEA Section 2(h)(3) as it then 

existed,12 thus eliminating the ECM 

category. Section 734 of the Dodd-Frank 

Act similarly repealed CEA Section 

5d,13 thus eliminating the EBOT 

category. Both Sections 723 and 734 of 

the Dodd-Frank Act contain grandfather 

provisions allowing existing ECMs and 

EBOTs to petition the Commission to 

continue to operate as ECMs and EBOTs 

subject to the requirements of the CEA 

Sections 2(h)(3) and 5d, respectively, for 

a limited period of time.14 Pursuant to 

these grandfather provisions, the 

Commission issued an order in 

September 2010 granting petitioning 

ECMs and EBOTs up to one year of 

grandfather relief from the general 

effective date of the Dodd-Frank Act 

amendments to the CEA (‘‘Grandfather 

Relief Order’’).15

Subsequent to the Grandfather Relief 

Order, the Commission issued a series 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES