Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 126 / Tuesday, July 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 37239 

financial data as of December 31 of the 

preceding calendar year. 

(b) Scenarios provided by the 

Corporation. 

In conducting the stress test under 

this subpart, each covered bank must 

use the scenarios provided the 

Corporation. The scenarios provided by 

the Corporation will reflect a minimum 

of three sets of economic and financial 

conditions, including: Baseline, adverse, 

and severely adverse scenarios. The 

Corporation will provide a description 

of the scenarios required under this 

section to each covered bank no later 

than November 15 (for the stress tests 

beginning October 1, 2014) or February 

15 (for the stress test beginning January 

1, 2016, and all stress tests thereafter) of 

that calendar year. 

(c) Significant trading activities. The 

Corporation may require a covered bank 

with significant trading activities, as 

determined by the Corporation, to 

include trading and counterparty 

components in its adverse and severely 

adverse scenarios. The trading and 

counterparty position data used in these 

components will be as of a date between 

October 1 and December 1 (for the stress 

test beginning October 1, 2014) or 

between January 1 and March 1 (for the 

stress test beginning January 1, 2016, 

and all stress tests thereafter) of that 

calendar year selected by the 

Corporation and communicated to the 

covered bank no later than December 1 

(for the stress test beginning October 1, 

2014) or March 1 (for the stress test 

beginning January 1, 2016, and all stress 

tests thereafter) of the calendar year. 

■ 5. Revise § 325.206 paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 325.206 Required reports of stress test 

results to the FDIC and the Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve System 

(a) Report required for annual stress 

test results. 

(1) $10 billion to $50 billion covered 

bank. Prior to January 1, 2016, a $10 

billion to $50 billion covered bank must 

report to the FDIC and to the Board on 

or before March 31 the results of the 

stress test in the manner and form 

specified by the FDIC. Effective January 

1, 2016, a $10 billion to $50 billion 

covered bank must report to the FDIC 

and to the Board on or before July 31 the 

results of the stress test in the manner 

and form specified by the FDIC. 

(2) Over $50 billion covered bank. 

Prior to January 1, 2016, an over $50 

billion covered bank must report to the 

FDIC and to the Board, on or before 

January 5, the results of the stress test 

in the manner and form specified by the 

FDIC. Effective January 1, 2016, an over 

$50 billion covered bank must report to 

the FDIC and to the Board, on or before 

April 7, the results of the stress test in 

the manner and form specified by the 

FDIC. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Revise § 325.207 paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 325.207 Publication of stress test 

results. 

(a) Publication date. 

(1) $10 billion to $50 billion covered 

bank. (i) Prior to January 1, 2016, a $10 

billion to $50 billion covered bank must 

publish a summary of the results of its 

annual stress test in the period starting 

June 15 and ending June 30 (for the 

stress test cycle beginning October 1, 

2014). 

(ii) Effective January 1, 2016, a $10 

billion to $50 billion covered bank must 

publish a summary of the results of its 

annual stress test in the period starting 

October 15 and ending October 31 (for 

the stress test cycle beginning January 1, 

2016 and for all annual stress tests 

thereafter). 

(2) Over $50 billion covered bank. (i) 

Prior to January 1, 2016, an over $50 

billion covered bank must publish a 

summary of the results of its annual 

stress tests in the period starting March 

15 and ending March 31 (for the stress 

test cycle beginning October 1, 2014). 

(ii) Effective January 1, 2016, an over 

$50 billion covered bank must publish 

a summary of the results of its annual 

stress tests in the period starting June 15 

and ending July 15 (for the stress test 

cycle beginning January 1, 2016, and for 

all annual stress tests thereafter) 

provided: 

(A) Unless the FDIC determines 

otherwise, if the over $50 billion 

covered bank is a consolidated 

subsidiary of a bank holding company 

or savings and loan holding company 

subject to supervisory stress tests 

conducted by the Board of Governors of 

the Federal Reserve System under 12 

CFR part 252, then, within the June 15 

to July 15 period, such covered bank 

may not publish the required summary 

of its annual stress test earlier than the 

date that the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System publishes the 

supervisory stress test results of the 

covered bank’s parent holding company. 

(B) If the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System publishes the 

supervisory stress test results of the 

covered bank’s parent holding company 

prior to June 15, then such covered bank 

may publish its stress test results prior 

to June 15, but no later than July 15, 

through actual publication by the 

covered bank or through publication by 

the parent holding company under 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

By order of the Board of Directors. 

Dated at Washington, DC, this 13th day of 

June 2014. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Valerie J. Best, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–14389 Filed 6–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0475; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–199–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 

757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 

series airplanes. The NPRM proposed to 

require, for certain airplanes, installing 

new relays adjacent to two of the spoiler 

control modules. For certain other 

airplanes, the NPRM proposed to 

require torquing the bracket assembly 

installation nuts and ground stud nuts, 

and doing bond resistance tests between 

the bracket assemblies and the terminal 

lugs on the ground studs. The NPRM 

was prompted by numerous reports of 

unintended lateral oscillations during 

final approach, just before landing. This 

action revises the NPRM by adding 

actions that are necessary to address the 

identified unsafe condition. We are 

proposing this supplemental NPRM 

(SNPRM) to reduce the chance of 

unintended lateral oscillations near 

touchdown, which could result in loss 

of lateral control of the airplane, and 

consequent airplane damage or injury to 

flight crew and passengers. Since these 

actions 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 

these proposed changes. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this SNPRM by August 15, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37240 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 126 / Tuesday, July 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

• 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 AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206– 

766–5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2011– 

0475; 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: 

Marie Hogestad, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 

130S, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 

425–917–6418; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: marie.hogestad@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–2011–0475; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–199–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 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to certain The Boeing Company 

Model 757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and 

–300 series airplanes. The NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 24, 2011 (76 FR 30043). The NPRM 

proposed to require, for certain 

airplanes, installing new relays adjacent 

to two of the spoiler control modules 

that would prevent the deployment of 

certain spoiler pairs when landing flaps 

are selected. For certain other airplanes, 

the NPRM proposed to require torquing 

the bracket assembly installation nuts 

and ground stud nuts, and doing bond 

resistance tests between the bracket 

assemblies and the terminal lugs on the 

ground studs. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the NPRM, we have 

determined that additional actions are 

necessary to address the identified 

unsafe condition. The actions include 

installing three new relays on the 

opposite side of the same relay bracket 

assembly; and for certain airplanes, 

doing an additional inspection to ensure 

that the three new relays do not contact 

adjacent wire bundles, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the NPRM (76 FR 30043, 

May 24, 2011). The following presents 

the comments received on the NPRM 

(76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011) and the 

FAA’s response to each comment. 

Support for the NPRM (76 FR 30043, 

May 24, 2011) 

The Airline Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA) stated that it 

supports the intent of the NPRM (76 FR 

30043, May 24, 2011). 

Request To Withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 

30043, May 24, 2011) 

FedEx requested that we withdraw 

the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). 

FedEx stated that since implementation 

of AD 2006–23–15, Amendment 39– 

14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 

2006), there have been no reports of 

lateral pilot-induced oscillation (PIO) or 

unintended lateral oscillations during 

landing from the operators of Model 757 

airplanes. (AD 2006–23–15 requires, 

among other actions, installing a control 

wheel damper assembly and vortex 

generators (vortilons) on the leading 

edge of the outboard main flap.) FedEx 

also stated that the proposed 

modifications to the lateral control 

system are very costly, do not improve 

the lateral handling characteristics, and 

will make the airplane less responsive 

and less maneuverable in the landing 

environment, resulting in the potential 

for an unsafe condition. 

We disagree with the request to 

withdraw the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 

24, 2011). AD 2006–23–15, Amendment 

39–14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 

2006), is considered interim action. The 

manufacturer has identified an 

additional modification that is needed 

to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in AD 2006–23–15. This 

design change was made to reduce the 

lateral power to take out excessive 

airplane roll authority during landing 

operations. This is done by making the 

airplane lateral response to control 

wheel inputs more linear. It should be 

noted that this will make Model 757 

handling characteristics more consistent 

with those of the other Boeing airplane 

models during landing operations. Also, 

even though there have only been 12 

reports of unintended lateral 

oscillations near touchdown, there 

could have been other events that have 

been unrecognized and/or unreported. 

We have determined that it is necessary 

to proceed with this AD action. 

Request To Shorten Compliance Time 

ALPA requested the compliance time 

be shortened from the 60 months 

proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 30043, 

May 24, 2011). ALPA stated that a 

shortened compliance time is justified 

given the serious consequences of 

unintended roll oscillations near the 

ground. 

We disagree with the request to 

shorten the compliance time. In 

developing the compliance time for this 

AD action, we considered not only the 

safety implications of the identified 

unsafe condition, but also the average 

utilization rate of the affected fleet, the 

practical aspects of an orderly 

modification of the fleet, the availability 

of required parts, and the time necessary 

for the rulemaking process. The 60- 

month compliance time following the 

effective date of the final rule was 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 126 / Tuesday, July 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 37241 

determined to be appropriate given the 

interim actions that have already been 

mandated by AD 2006–23–15, 

Amendment 39–14827 (71 FR 66657, 

November 16, 2006). We have not 

changed the SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Use Revised Service 

Bulletin 

American Airlines requested that we 

delay release of the final rule until after 

release of Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 2, so it can be 

incorporated into the AD. American 

Airlines stated that the pending 

Revision 2 of this service bulletin was 

expected to address many of the 

concerns it had regarding the NPRM (76 

FR 30043, May 24, 2011) and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010. 

American Airlines outlined its concerns 

in its comments. 

We have revised this SNPRM to refer 

to Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 

2013, as operators need to have 

comprehensive, clear, and concise 

instructions to accomplish the 

requirements of this AD. 

Also, we reviewed Boeing Service 

Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2012; and Revision 3, 

dated October 28, 2013. Revision 2 was 

issued to add procedures for installing 

three new relays on the opposite side of 

the same relay bracket assembly to 

improve wire routing and maintenance 

access to the relays, and to prevent wire 

chafing on adjacent wire bundles. For 

certain airplanes, a general visual 

inspection was added to ensure the 

three new relays do not contact adjacent 

wire bundles and, if necessary, related 

investigative and corrective actions. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 

2013, was subsequently issued to make 

further improvements and corrections to 

illustrations. 

We have changed the service 

information references in paragraphs (c) 

and (g) of this SNPRM to Boeing Service 

Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 3, 

dated October 28, 2013; and added new 

paragraph (h) to this SNPRM to provide 

credit for the actions required by 

paragraph (g) of this SNPRM, if those 

actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 

2, dated May 25, 2012. 

Request To Clarify the Terms ‘‘Refer to’’ 

and ‘‘In Accordance With’’ 

UPS asked if we agree with the terms 

‘‘refer to’’ and ‘‘in accordance with’’ as 

defined in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

757–27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 

30, 2010. 

We agree with the definition of the 

terms ‘‘refer to’’ and ‘‘in accordance 

with’’ as specified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 

1, dated June 30, 2010; Boeing Service 

Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2012; and Boeing Service 

Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 3, 

dated October 28, 2013. When the 

words ‘‘refer to’’ are used and the 

operator has an accepted alternative 

procedure, the accepted alternative 

procedure may be used. When the 

words ‘‘in accordance with’’ are 

included in the instruction, the 

procedure specified must be used. No 

change to the SNPRM is needed. 

Request To Change Wording 

Boeing requested that we revise the 

SUMMARY and Discussion sections and 

paragraph (e) of the NPRM (76 FR 

30043, May 24, 2011) to change 

‘‘numerous’’ to ‘‘several’’ when 

describing the number of reports of 

unintended lateral oscillations during 

final approach. Boeing stated that this 

wording change would make the 

wording in the NPRM consistent with 

that used in AD 2006–23–15, 

Amendment 39–14827 (71 FR 66657, 

November 16, 2006), which also 

addresses the issue of unintended 

lateral oscillations near touchdown for 

Model 757 airplanes. 

We disagree to change the wording. 

Although the wording is not consistent 

with AD 2006–23–15, Amendment 39– 

14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 

2006), it is accurate because there have 

been 12 confirmed PIO events in Model 

757 history. And there were three other 

events for which a PIO was suspected, 

but without time history data, they 

could not be confirmed. We have not 

changed the SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Allow Use of New Parts 

American Airlines requested that we 

revise the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 

2011) to authorize, without mandating, 

installation of new parts in place of lost 

or damaged hardware. American 

Airlines stated that it finds several areas 

in which Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

757–27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 

30, 2010, states to ‘‘Install (Kept)’’ parts. 

American Airlines stated that no 

authority is given to replace the kept 

parts with new parts of the same part 

number and that, during the course of 

the modification, parts may become 

damaged or lost, therefore rendering the 

kept hardware unserviceable or 

unavailable for installation. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request. As stated previously, we have 

changed this SNPRM to refer to Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 

3, dated October 28, 2013, as the 

appropriate source of service 

information. Note 11 of paragraph 3.A. 

(General Information) of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 

3, dated October 28, 2013, states that, 

where the work instructions include 

installation of a kept part, a new or 

serviceable part with the same part 

number can be installed as an 

alternative to the kept part. 

Request To Evaluate Lateral Control 

Landing Characteristics 

ALPA requested that we evaluate 

whether the maximum demonstrated 

crosswind characteristics are affected by 

the lateral control modifications 

proposed by the NPRM (76 FR 30043, 

May 24, 2011). FedEx stated that the 

current simulator data are based on the 

original Boeing flight test data, which 

will not accurately represent the lateral 

control characteristics if modified by the 

proposed AD. 

We have determined that, at the most 

conservative crosswind case of a trim on 

approach in the maximum 

demonstrated crosswind (30 knots) with 

zero degree crab angle, the additional 

wheel required to trim is small (six 

degrees or less); and that the total 

magnitude of the lateral control required 

to trim is not limiting. The manufacturer 

has stated that it has no plans to make 

any updates to the airplane flight 

manual, nor a plan to release an 

updated simulator data package 

regarding crosswind characteristics. We 

have not changed the SNPRM in this 

regard. 

Request for Clarification of Spoiler/

Speedbrake Test 

UPS requested clarification of the 

spoiler/speedbrake control system 

operational test. UPS stated that Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010, 

referenced in the NPRM (76 FR 30043, 

May 24, 2011), does not provide an 

aircraft maintenance manual (AMM) 

reference for the test. 

We agree to provide clarification. No 

reference to the AMM is needed, 

because the spoiler/speedbrake control 

system operational test is included in 

the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013; in 

a separate section titled ‘‘Operational 

test of the spoiler/speedbrake control 

system.’’ We have not changed the 

SNPRM in this regard. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37242 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 126 / Tuesday, July 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this SNPRM 

because we evaluated all the relevant 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition described previously is likely 

to exist or develop in other products of 

the same type design. Certain changes 

described above expand the scope of the 

NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). 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 SNPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM 

This SNPRM would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ correct or address any 

condition found. Corrective actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

repairs. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this will affect 676 

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 Group 1, Configuration 1 (48 airplanes) ......... 36 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$3,060.

$4,691 $7,751 $372,048 

Installation Group 2, Configuration 1 (588 airplanes) ....... 33 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$2,805.

4,610 7,415 4,360,020 

Installation Group 3, Configuration 1 (12 airplanes) ......... 33 work-hours × 85 per hour = 

$2,805.

4,619 7,424 89,088 

Installation Group 4, Configuration 1 (24 airplanes) ......... 33 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$2,805.

4,610 7,415 177,960 

Installation Group 5, Configuration 1 (4 airplanes) ........... 36 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$3,060.

4,701 7,761 31,044 

Torque Bracket Assembly and Bond Tests Groups 1–5, 

Configuration 2.

12 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$1,020.

0 1,020 689,520 

General Visual Inspection Groups 1–5, Configuration 3 .. 7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 0 595 402,220 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary repairs 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 these repairs: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Adjust Wire Bundle and Install Sleeve, Group 1–5, Configuration 1 ............. 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .... $0 $85 

Inspection, Repair, and Installation Change, Group 1–5, Configuration 2 ..... 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .... 0 85 

Inspection, Repair, Installation Change, and Test, Group 1–5, Configuration 

3.

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

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition parts 

specified in this SNPRM. 

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 proposed 

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. 

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, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 126 / Tuesday, July 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 37243 

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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2011–0475; Directorate Identifier 2010– 

NM–199–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by August 15, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 

series airplanes, certificated in any category, 

as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 27, Flight Controls. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by numerous 

reports of unintended lateral oscillations 

during the final approach, just before 

landing. We are issuing this AD to reduce the 

chance of unintended lateral oscillations near 

touchdown, which could result in loss of 

lateral control of the airplane, and 

consequent airplane damage or injury to 

flight crew and passengers. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Installation and Inspection 

Within 60 months after the effective date 

of this AD, do the applicable actions 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and 

(g)(3) of this AD. 

(1) For Configuration 1 airplanes as defined 

in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Install 

three bracket assemblies and three new 

relays, and make changes to the wire 

bundles, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, Revision 3, 

dated October 28, 2013. 

(2) For Configuration 2 airplanes as defined 

in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Torque 

the bracket assembly nuts and ground stud 

nuts, do bond resistance tests to verify that 

bonding requirements are met, do a general 

visual inspection to ensure that the three new 

relays do not touch the adjacent wire 

bundles, and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. 

Do all applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. 

(3) For Configuration 3 airplanes as defined 

in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–27A0152, 

Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013: Do a 

general visual inspection to ensure that the 

three new relays do not touch the adjacent 

wire bundles, and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. 

Do all applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. 

(h) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 

757–27A0152, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2012. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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 (j)(2) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-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, Los Angeles 

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. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Marie Hogestad, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6418; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: marie.hogestad@faa.gov. 

(2) For information about AMOCs for this 

AD, contact Jen Pei, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130L, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– 

5320; fax: 562–627–5210; email: jen.pei@

faa.gov. 

(3) 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 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 24, 

2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15416 Filed 6–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0348; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–033–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 777–200, 

777–200LR, 777–300ER, and 777F series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report indicating that 

sealant may not have been applied in 

production to the wing skin panel gaps 

above certain underwing fittings. This 

proposed AD would require an 

inspection for missing sealant, and 

applicable other specified, related 

investigative, and corrective actions. We 

are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct missing sealant from the wing 

skin panel gaps above the underwing 

fittings, which could result in corrosion 

and fatigue cracking in the wing skin 

panel, and consequent loss of limit load 

capability of the wing skin and potential 

subsequent structural failure of the 

wings. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 15, 2014. 

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– 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS