50692 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

(3) 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

See the ADDRESSES section for a location 

to examine the regulatory evaluation. 

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 Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

2009–20–08 Boeing: Amendment 39–16031. 

Docket No. FAA–2008–0646; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–359–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective November 5, 

2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 727, 

727C, 727–100, 727–100C, 727–200, and 

727–200F series airplanes, certificated in any 

category. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report of inservice occurrences of loss of fuel system 

suction feed capability, followed by total loss 

of pressure of the fuel feed system. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct failure 

of the engine fuel suction feed of the fuel 

system, which could result in multi-engine 

flameout, inability to restart the engines, and 

consequent forced landing of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

Operational Test/Other Specified Actions 

(f) Within 7,000 flight hours or 18 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first: Perform an operational test of the 

engine fuel suction feed of the fuel system, 

and perform all other related testing and 

corrective actions, as applicable, before 

further flight, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 727–28–80, dated June 21, 

1985. Repeat the operational test thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 7,000 flight hours or 

36 months, whichever occurs first. 

Credit for Actions Done in Accordance With 

AD 2007–11–08, Amendment 39–15065 

(g) Operational tests of the engine fuel 

suction feed of the fuel system and followon corrective actions done in accordance 

with the requirements of AD 2007–11–08 are 

acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of this AD if 

done within the compliance time specified in 

this AD. 

Operator’s Equivalent Procedure 

(h) If any discrepancy is found, and Boeing 

Service Bulletin 727–28–80, dated June 21, 

1985, specifies that certain actions (i.e., a 

vacuum test of the fuel feed system) may be 

accomplished using an operator’s 

‘‘equivalent procedure’’ (with substitute test 

equipment): The actions must be 

accomplished in accordance with Figure 4 of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 727–28–80, dated 

June 21, 1985. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(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: Sue 

Lucier, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6438; fax 

(425) 917–6590. Or, e-mail information to 9- 

ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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 on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(j) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 

727–28–80, dated June 21, 1985, 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 

this 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 or 425–227–1152. 

(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 NARA, 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 

September 18, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–23508 Filed 9–30–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1363; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–104–AD; Amendment 

39–16032; AD 2009–20–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –300F Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Boeing Model 767–200, –300, and 

–300F series airplanes. This AD requires 

repetitive inspections for fatigue 

cracking and corrosion of the upper link 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 50693 

fuse pin of the nacelle struts, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary. This AD also 

provides terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections. This AD results 

from two reports of cracked upper link 

fuse pins. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent fatigue cracking or corrosion of 

the upper link fuse pin, which could 

result in failure of the fuse pin and 

consequent reduced structural integrity 

of the nacelle strut and possible 

separation of the strut and engine from 

the airplane during flight. 

DATES: This AD is effective November 5, 

2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of November 5, 2009. 

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. 

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 (telephone 800–647–5527) 

is the 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: 

Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6577; fax (425) 917–6590. 

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 

certain Boeing Model 767–200, –300, 

and –300F series airplanes. That NPRM 

was published in the Federal Register 

on January 12, 2009 (74 FR 1155). That 

NPRM proposed to require repetitive 

inspections for fatigue cracking and 

corrosion of the upper link fuse pin of 

the nacelle struts, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. That NPRM also proposed to 

provide terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

Support for the AD 

Boeing concurs with the content of 

the NPRM. Air Transport Association 

(ATA) on behalf of its members Delta 

Airlines and United Airlines (UAL) 

agrees with the intent of the NRPM, and 

provides the following 

recommendations from its members. 

Request to Add a Note of Clarification 

Delta asks that we revise the NPRM to 

include a note in the AD which 

specifies that the upper link inspections 

can be done with the pylon and/or 

engine in any position. Delta states that 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 24, 

2008, specifies doing a visual inspection 

with ‘‘the fuse pin in place, without 

engine removal and strut removal.’’ 

Delta notes that there are times when 

engines or pylons are removed for other 

reasons, and it would prefer not to wait 

until the engine and strut are 

reinstalled. Delta states that the 

procedures specified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–54A0074, Revision 

1, dated April 24, 2008, allow fuse pin 

inspections with the engines and pylons 

in any position. Delta adds that related 

service information, Boeing Telex 1– 

1154785301, dated January 21, 2009 

(released after the NPRM was issued), 

specifies that the upper link inspections 

can be done with the pylon and/or 

engine in any position. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request. For the reasons provided by 

Delta, we have included a new Note 1 

after paragraph (f) of this AD to specify 

that the upper link inspections can be 

done with the pylon and/or engine in 

any position. 

Request to Define ‘‘References’’ 

Delta asks that we revise the NPRM to 

include a note to clarify that the 

‘‘References’’ column in the table in 

Figure 2 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 

24, 2008, should be treated as ‘‘refer to’’ 

material (which is information that 

provides guidance for using related 

procedures), as defined in Note 9 of 

paragraph 3.A. of that service bulletin. 

Delta points out that the procedures in 

Boeing Telex 1–1154785301, dated 

January 21, 2009, specify that the 

airplane maintenance manual (AMM) 

and standard operating procedures 

manual (SOPM) are identified in the 

‘‘References’’ column of that table as 

‘‘refer to’’ material so that operator 

equivalent procedures may be used. 

We agree that the material in the 

‘‘References’’ column in the table in 

Figure 2 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 

24, 2008, refers to the procedures in the 

specified manuals and should be treated 

as guidance for using related 

procedures. However, to add a note to 

this AD could be confusing because 

none of the paragraphs in the AD refer 

to the procedures in those manuals. 

Therefore, we have made no change to 

the AD in this regard. 

Request to Add a Note Clarifying 

Application of Primer 

Delta asks that we revise the NPRM to 

include a note to clarify that reapplication of primer in accordance 

with Steps 4.b.(1) and 4.b.(2) of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–54A0074, 

Revision 1, dated April 24, 2008, is 

necessary only to touch up bare areas of 

the fuse pin. Delta states that paragraph 

3.B, Step 4.b., of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–54A0074, Revision 1, 

dated April 24, 2008, specifies applying 

two coats of Boeing Material 

Specification (BMS) 10–11 primer after 

each inspection if no cracks are found 

during the inspection. Delta notes that 

the procedure does not specify 

‘‘touching up primer’’ but rather 

applying two coats each time. Delta 

adds that since the repeat inspection 

interval is much shorter, the fuse pin 

will have ten coats of primer built up 

over the next ten years, and asserts that 

the inspection cannot be done through 

ten coats of primer. Delta points out that 

Boeing has confirmed in Boeing Telex 

1–1154785301, dated January 21, 2009, 

that two coats of primer are required 

only to touch up bare areas on the fuse 

pin. 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary for the reasons provided by 

Delta. We have included a new Note 2 

after paragraph (f) of this AD to specify 

that two coats of primer are necessary 

only to touch up bare areas of the fuse 

pin. 

Request to Provide Credit for 

Inspections Done Using Previous 

Service Information 

UAL asks that operators be given 

credit for inspections done before the 

effective date of the AD in accordance 

with Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54– 

0074, dated March 27, 1997. UAL notes 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

50694 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

that paragraph (h) of the NPRM provides 

credit for the replacement of fuse pins 

done in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–54–0074, dated March 27, 

1997, but does not provide credit for the 

inspections, even though the procedures 

in the original issue and Revision 1 of 

the service bulletin are the same. 

We agree with the commenter. We 

have confirmed that inspections done 

before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

767–54–0074, dated March 27, 1997, are 

acceptable for compliance with the 

inspection requirements of paragraph (f) 

of this AD. However, we point out that 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54–0074, 

dated March 27, 1997, allows the use of 

operator’s equivalent procedures, which 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54–0074, 

Revision 1, dated April 24, 2008, does 

not allow. Therefore, we have revised 

paragraph (h) of this AD to give credit 

for inspections done before the effective 

date of this AD in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54–0074, 

dated March 27, 1997, provided that the 

inspection was not done using 

operator’s equivalent procedures. 

Request to Clarify Certain Language in 

Paragraph (h) of the NPRM 

UAL suggests that paragraph (h) of the 

NPRM be revised to clarify the meaning 

of ‘‘corresponding requirements.’’ UAL 

states that paragraph (h) of the NPRM 

specifies that replacement of the fuse 

pins in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 767–54–0074, dated March 27, 

1997, is acceptable for compliance with 

the ‘‘corresponding requirements’’ of 

this AD. UAL notes that the phrase ‘‘for 

compliance with the ‘corresponding 

requirements’ of this AD’’ is very vague. 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary for the reasons provided by 

the commenter. We have changed 

paragraph (h) of this AD to refer to 

paragraph (f) of this AD for the 

inspections and paragraph (g) of this AD 

for the modification. 

Request to Extend Grace Period 

Aeroflot asks that we increase the 

grace period for the inspections so that 

operators can prepare for 

accomplishment of the requirements in 

the AD. Aeroflot states that it is 

convenient to plan the work with 

common access SC-Checks, and adds 

that the NPRM gives a simple C-Check 

preparation period. Aeroflot states that 

this work has an economic impact with 

the time used in preparation and 

gaining access. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request. In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for this AD, we 

considered not only the safety 

implications, but the manufacturer’s 

recommendations, and the practical 

aspect of accomplishing the actions 

within an interval of time that 

corresponds to typical scheduled 

maintenance for affected operators. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (i) of this AD, we may 

consider 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 made no change to the 

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 affects 354 

airplanes of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take 4 work-hours 

per product to comply with this AD. 

The average labor rate is $80 per workhour. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. 

operators to be $113,280, or $320 per 

product. 

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), and 

(3) 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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

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 AD: 

2009–20–09 Boeing: Amendment 39–16032. 

Docket No. FAA–2008–1363; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–104–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective November 5, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 

767–200, –300, and –300F series airplanes, 

certificated in any category; as identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–54A0074, 

Revision 1, dated April 24, 2008. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from two reports of 

cracked upper link fuse pins. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent fatigue cracking or 

corrosion of the upper link fuse pin, which 

could result in failure of the fuse pin and 

consequent reduced structural integrity of the 

nacelle strut and possible separation of the 

strut and engine from the airplane during 

flight. 

Compliance 

(e) Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 50695 

Initial and Repetitive Inspections/ 

Investigative and Corrective Actions 

(f) Inspect the upper link fuse pin of the 

nacelle struts for fatigue cracking and 

corrosion at the applicable time specified in 

Table 1 of this AD. Do the applicable 

inspection by doing all the applicable actions 

specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 24, 

2008; and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions before 

further flight. Repeat the applicable 

inspection at intervals not to exceed 3,000 

flight cycles or 24 months, whichever is first, 

until the requirements of paragraph (g) of this 

AD have been done. 

TABLE 1—COMPLIANCE TIMES

Engine type At the later of: initial inspection threshold Grace period 

JT9D ................................................................... 14,000 total flight cycles .................................. Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first. 

CF6–80A ............................................................ 24,000 total flight cycles .................................. Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first. 

PW4000 .............................................................. 8,000 total flight cycles .................................... Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first. 

CF6–80C2 .......................................................... 10,000 total flight cycles .................................. Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first. 

RB211 ................................................................. 24,000 total flight cycles .................................. Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first. 

Note 1: The upper link inspections can be 

done with the pylon and/or engine in any 

position. 

Note 2: In paragraph 3.B, Steps 4.b.(1)(a) 

and 4.b.(2)(b)2){a} of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 24, 

2008, the procedures specify to apply two 

layers of Boeing Material Specification (BMS) 

10–11 primer to the inside surface of the fuse 

pin if no crack indication is found. However, 

two layers of primer are only necessary to 

touch up bare areas on the fuse pin if no 

crack indication is found. 

Terminating Action in AD 2000–19–09, 

Amendment 39–11910, and AD 2004–16–12, 

Amendment 39–13768 

(g) Accomplishment of the modification 

specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this 

AD, as applicable, terminates the inspections 

required by paragraph (f) of this AD. 

(1) For Model 767 series airplanes powered 

by Rolls-Royce RB211 series engines, as 

identified in AD 2000–19–09: Modification of 

the nacelle strut and wing structure, as 

required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 

2000–19–09. 

(2) For Model 767–200, –300, and –300F 

series airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney 

and General Electric engines, as identified in 

AD 2004–16–12: Modification of the nacelle 

strut and wing structure, as required by 

paragraphs (a), (b), (d), and (e) of AD 2004– 

16–12. 

Credit for Actions Done Using Previous 

Service Information 

(h) Inspection of the fuse pins before the 

effective date of this AD in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54–0074, dated 

March 27, 1997, is acceptable for compliance 

with the inspections required by paragraph 

(f) of this AD if the inspections are 

accomplished without using an operator’s 

equivalent procedure. Replacement of the 

fuse pins with new fuse pins before the 

effective date of this AD in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54–0074, dated 

March 27, 1997, is acceptable for compliance 

with the modification required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: 

Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

917–6577; fax (425) 917–6590; has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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 on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(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 an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who 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. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(j) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated 

April 24, 2008; 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 

this 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 or 425–227–1152. 

(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 NARA, 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 

September 18, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–23506 Filed 9–30–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES