```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 134 (Thursday, July 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41041-41045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16333]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
week.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 134 / Thursday, July 12, 2012 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 41041]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1115; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-221-AD; 
Amendment 39-17111; AD 2012-13-09]
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 certain 
The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 
747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 
747SP series airplanes. This AD was prompted by several reports of 
electrical arcs at terminal ``A'' of the electrically heated flight 
deck window 1. This AD requires repetitive inspections for damage of 
the electrical connections at terminal ``A'' of the left and right 
flight deck window 1, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also 
allows for replacing a flight deck window 1 with a new improved flight 
deck window 1 equipped with different electrical connections, which 
would terminate the repetitive inspections for that window. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent smoke and fire in the cockpit, which could 
lead to loss of visibility, and injuries to or incapacitation of the 
flight crew.

DATES: This AD is effective August 16, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of August 16, 
2012.

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; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service 
information at the FAA, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of 
this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, 
any comments received, and other information. The address for the 
Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, 
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West 
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louis Natsiopoulos, Aerospace 
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; phone: 425-917-6478; fax: 425-917-6590; email: 
elias.natsiopoulos@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. 
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 19, 2010 (75 FR 
70868). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for damage 
of the electrical terminal at the left and right flightdeck window 1, 
and corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to allow 
for replacing the flight deck window 1 with a new improved flight deck 
window 1 equipped with different electrical connections, which would 
terminate the repetitive inspections for that flight deck window.

Revised Service Information

    The NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010) referred to Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 2, dated March 
10, 2010, as the appropriate source of service information for the 
proposed actions. Boeing has since revised this service information to 
account for certain inconsistencies and omissions. Some of these 
discrepancies were reported by operators, who commented on these 
inconsistencies and omissions as noted below. We have reviewed Boeing 
Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011, which 
addresses the following commenters' concerns:
     It extends the repetitive inspection intervals for the GKN 
windshields to 12,000 flight hours or 48 months, whichever occurs 
later, and provides more details for the conditions to look for during 
the investigation and corrective actions.
     It changes the inspection specified in Work Packages 1 and 
2 to a detailed inspection (the type of inspection had not been 
specified).
     It revises Figures 1 and 2 to provide a better 
illustration of the electrical connections, change certain data, and 
add new data to the footnotes. Among other things, the new data 
clarifies the conditions to look for when inspecting the connectors, 
clarifies the associated corrective actions including replacing a 
connector if it or its cover has melted; specifies inspection and 
corrective actions of cross-threaded screws, and provides instructions 
on how to select the correct screw for the opted windshield.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 
(75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010) and the FAA's response to each 
comment.

Support for the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010)

    Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), supported the 
intent of the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010).

Request To Correct Service Information Discrepancies

    United Airlines (UAL) reported a number of errors and 
inconsistencies in

[[Page 41042]]

the information and procedures specified in Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 2, dated March 10, 2010 (the 
source of service information for the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 
2010)).
    As explained above, we reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-
2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011, which addresses the 
discrepancies noted by UAL. We have revised this final rule to refer to 
Revision 3 of that service bulletin. We also removed paragraph (j) of 
the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010) (that paragraph had explained 
an exception to the proposed service information), and we re-identified 
subsequent paragraphs accordingly. We have, however, retained paragraph 
(i) in this final rule to ensure that operators are aware of the 
conditions that require window replacement and the compliance time for 
the replacement. We revised the NPRM to add credit for actions 
accomplished before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 2, dated March 10, 
2010.

Request To Extend Initial Compliance Time

    UAL questioned the validity of the initial 500-flight-hour 
compliance time for the inspection, and requested that this compliance 
time be extended to mitigate the risk of operational interruptions. 
Based on the length of time Boeing and the FAA have been aware of the 
issue, UAL felt that increasing this time would have no adverse effect 
on flight safety.
    We disagree to extend the compliance time. Most of the reported 
arcing events occurred within 500 flight hours after incorrect assembly 
of a screw/connector electrical connection during maintenance. We have 
not changed this compliance time in the final rule.

Request To Exclude Certain GKN Windshields

    GKN Aerospace (GKN) requested that we revise the NPRM (75 FR 70868, 
November 19, 2010) to exclude its windshield part numbers 60B10028-17 
and 60B10028-18 (GKN part numbers 06372 and 06373) from the proposed 
inspections. As an alternative, GKN requested that those part numbers 
be given longer compliance times because of the superior design of the 
terminal block connections at both the cockpit and windshield sides of 
the terminal block. GKN pointed out that the primary cause of arcing 
that leads to high temperatures is the melting of the solder joint used 
in the window side of the terminal block used by other manufacturers. 
The GKN-designed and -manufactured windshields do not use a soldered 
joint to connect the power braid to the back of the terminal block. 
Instead, the GKN windshield employs a ring tag crimped to a carrier 
wire, which is attached to the terminal insert by a screw and secured 
against vibration by a lock washer. The carrier wire is mechanically 
crimped to the braid wire from the windshield. The mechanical fixing of 
the power braid to the terminal block at the windshield side is 
superior to the soldered joint used in the standard alternative 
windshields. GKN also pointed out that material choices can reduce the 
potential for cross threading. GKN uses nickel-plated bronze terminal 
inserts, which are aligned with industry-accepted standards for 
electrical terminations that pass high power and high currents. Bronze 
is also more resistive to cross threading than other softer materials 
used in electrical connections by other manufacturers.
    We agree to extend the repetitive inspection interval of GKN-
manufactured windshields with screw/connector electrical heat terminals 
because the material used in the GKN 747 windshield terminal block has 
significantly better high-temperature capability and behaves 
significantly better than PPG's epoxy terminal blocks, and the internal 
crimped connection prevents the sustained arcing that can occur with 
PPG's internal soldered connections. We have revised paragraph (g) in 
this final rule to extend the repetitive inspection intervals for GKN 
windshields with screw/connector electrical connections to 12,000 
flight hours or 48 months, whichever occurs later.
    We disagree, however, to exclude those part numbers from the 
required inspections. Two of five reported Model 747 windshield arcing 
events occurred on these GKN windshields. The GKN windshields using 
screw/connector type electrical terminal connections are therefore 
susceptible to overheat caused by a loose screw or an incorrectly 
assembled terminal. An overheated terminal could damage adjacent parts 
and become an ignition source for combustible material close to the 
overheated terminal. The GKN windshields with screw/connector-type 
electrical terminal connections therefore are not excluded from the 
required actions of the AD.

Request To Clarify Note (d) of Figures 1 and 2

    UAL noted that STEP 2, Note (d), of Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 2, dated March 10, 2010, 
considers some movement (1-3 degrees) of a tight connection to be a 
normal condition. UAL stated that it is not possible to distinguish 
between 3 degrees and, for example, 4 degrees, and requested that we 
clarify this condition.
    We agree to provide the requested clarification. According to 
Boeing, the referenced Note (d) was added in STEP 2, Figures 1 and 2, 
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 2, 
dated March 10, 2010 (which corresponds to Note (e) in Boeing Service 
Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011), in response 
to multiple inquiries from airlines regarding the brass terminal insert 
in the PPG windshield terminals. The airlines were concerned about the 
lack of information regarding the slight movement of the connector with 
light manual pressure while the terminal connection is tight (tight 
screw and not crossthreaded). This Note was added to describe the small 
movement--``approximately 1-3 degrees''--of the shipside of the 
connector with light manual pressure as being normal and not to be 
perceived as a loose terminal connection. The 1- to 3-degree movement 
is an approximation and does not require measurement. We have 
determined that this Note is sufficient as written and provides the 
information requested by the airlines. We have not changed the final 
rule regarding this issue.

Requests To Allow GKN Windshields as Terminating Action for AD

    UAL requested we revise paragraph (k) of the NPRM (75 FR 70868, 
November 19, 2010) (paragraph (j) in this final rule) to consider 
installation of GKN screw-connector-type windshields as terminating 
action in the NPRM. As an alternative, UAL requested that use of GKN 
windshields with pin and socket arrangement part numbers 60B10028-21 
and -22 be considered as terminating action. UAL also noted that the 
primary cause of the electrical arcs is damaged solder joints. UAL 
pointed out that the PPG windshield heat terminal contains an internal 
solder joint, but the GKN windshield heat terminal does not. The GKN 
windshields do not incorporate the design features that cause extreme 
arcing, but use mechanical fasteners instead of solder in their 
terminal internal joints.
    We partially agree with the request. We agree that damaged solder 
joints are the primary cause for the electrical arcs, because the heat 
caused by a loose terminal exceeds the rated melting point of the 
solder, resulting in high voltage

[[Page 41043]]

arcing that may damage the windshield glass. We also agree that the 
failure rate of GKN windshields seems to be substantially lower than 
that of the PPG windshields, and the severity of the failure conditions 
of the GKN windshields is less than those of the PPG windshields. For 
these reasons, we agree to extend the repetitive inspection intervals 
for the GKN windshields. As explained previously, we have revised the 
compliance times for these windshields in paragraph (g) in this final 
rule.
    We disagree, however, to consider installation of GKN windshields 
with screw/connector-type heat terminals as terminating action. The 
primary cause of an overheated terminal is a loose connection of the 
screw due to incorrect torquing during the installation of the screw or 
incorrect installation of the screw. A loose connection increases the 
heat at the terminal, which causes damage to the adjacent parts and may 
become an ignition source for any combustible material close to the 
heated terminal. A loose or incorrectly installed screw is the result 
of limited access on the airplane. The pin-socket connector is 
assembled in a controlled environment on a bench. Installation with 
full access is not subject to the same assembly errors as the screw/
connector terminal, and the robust pin/socket connection can be 
verified by test during the assembly of the terminal. The screw/
connector design proposed by the commenter therefore does not provide 
an acceptable level of safety as a terminating action.
    We also disagree to allow GKN windshields with pin and socket 
arrangement part numbers 60B10028-21 and -22 as terminating action 
because those part numbers are not specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 
747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011, and the adequacy of 
those parts is unknown. Under the provisions of paragraph (l) of the 
final rule, however, we will consider requests to exclude from the 
inspection pin/socket windshield part numbers not specified in that 
service bulletin if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that 
those part numbers would provide an acceptable level of safety.

Request To Clarify Repetitive Interval

    Paragraph (h) of the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010) 
specified that a windshield replaced for failing an inspection must be 
re-inspected within 500 flight hours after replacement. UAL asked 
whether this repetitive inspection requirement applied to any replaced 
windshield--regardless of the reason for the replacement--and 
questioned why the re-inspection would be required only when a 
windshield fails an inspection.
    We agree to provide clarification. It is not necessary to revise 
the AD to require inspection every time a windshield is replaced for 
any other cause than failure of the inspection required by the AD 
because, under those conditions, subsequent inspections are done as 
specified in the airplane maintenance manual. We have not changed the 
final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Clarify Intent of AD

    ALPA suggested that we clarify the intent of the NPRM (75 FR 70868, 
November 19, 2010) by explaining that an investigation showed that the 
electrical arcs are caused by loose terminal ``A'' connections.
    We agree with the request and have revised paragraphs (e) and (g) 
of this final rule to add a reference to ``terminal `A' connections.''

Explanation of Compliance Time

    While Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated 
December 5, 2011, includes a compliance time of 500 flight hours or 150 
days, whichever occurs first, for the detailed inspection specified in 
paragraphs (g), (h) and (i) of this AD, we have determined that a 
compliance time of 500 flight hours, as specified in the NPRM (75 FR 
70868, November 19, 2010), represents an appropriate interval of time 
in which the required actions can be performed and still maintain an 
adequate level of safety.

Window Heat Power Connection Disassembled and Reassembled

    If a window heat power connection, on a windshield that uses a 
screw and connector for window heat power connection, is disassembled 
and reassembled, Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated 
December 5, 2011, specifies a detailed inspection and corrective 
actions within 150 days or 500 flight hours, whichever occurs first, 
after reassembly of the windshield heat power connection. This action 
was not included in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-
2081, Revision 2, dated March 10, 2010, or in the NPRM. Adding this 
action to the AD actions at this time would expand the scope of the 
NPRM and necessitate issuing a supplemental NPRM to give the public the 
opportunity to comment on the added actions. We do not wish to further 
delay this action but may consider further rulemaking in the future to 
require these actions.

Explanation of Additional Changes to NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 
2010)

    We have clarified the replacement conditions for paragraph (i)(2) 
of the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010). That paragraph specified 
a 500-flight-hour compliance time for window replacement if the 
connector is ``tight.'' We have extended this condition to connectors 
that are ``tight or can be tightened by applying the correct torque.''
    References to ``screw/lug'' have been changed to ``screw/
connector'' in this final rule to agree with the terminology used in 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 
2011.

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 and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010) for correcting the unsafe 
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (75 FR 70868, November 19, 2010).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 251 airplanes of U.S. 
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

[[Page 41044]]

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Cost on U.S.
             Action                    Labor cost            Parts cost      Cost per product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.....................  1 work-hour x $85 per   None.............  $85 per            $21,335 per
                                  hour = $85 per                             inspection cycle.  inspection
                                  inspection cycle.                                             cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements 
that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have 
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these 
replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                         Labor cost                Parts cost           Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of windshield..........  Up to 18 work-hours x $85    Up to $47,592.........  Up to $49,122.
                                      per hour = $1,530.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2012-13-09 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17111; Docket No. FAA-
2010-1115; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-221-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 16, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 
747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-
400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated in 
any category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, 
Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association 
(ATA) of America Code 30: Ice and rain protection.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by several reports of electrical arcs at 
the terminal ``A'' connections of the electrically heated flight 
deck window 1. We are issuing this AD to prevent smoke and fire in 
the cockpit, which could lead to loss of visibility, and injuries to 
or incapacitation of the flightcrew.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Detailed Inspection and Corrective Actions

    Within 500 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, do 
a detailed inspection for damage (including but not limited to a 
cross-threaded screw, arcing, loose terminal, and heat damage) of 
the electrical terminal ``A'' block, connector, and wiring of the 
left and right flightdeck window 1, and do all applicable corrective 
actions, by accomplishing the actions specified in Work Packages 1 
and 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 
747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011. Except as provided 
by paragraph (i) of this AD, do all applicable corrective actions 
before further flight. Except as required by paragraph (h) of this 
AD, repeat the detailed inspection thereafter at the applicable 
intervals specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD. Doing 
the replacement specified in paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the 
repetitive inspection requirements of this paragraph for the 
replaced flightdeck window 1.
    (1) For flightdeck window 1 manufactured by GKN with screw/
connector electrical connections: Repeat the detailed inspection at 
intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight hours or 48 months, whichever 
occurs later.
    (2) For flightdeck window 1 manufactured by PPG with screw/
connector electrical connections: Repeat the detailed inspection at 
intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever 
occurs later.

(h) Inspection for Replaced Windshield

    For any window 1 that is replaced with a window 1 that uses 
screw and connector for the electrical heat connection in accordance 
with Work Package 1 or 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 
2011: Within 500 flight hours after the corrective action, do a 
detailed inspection, in accordance with Work Package 1 or 2, as 
applicable, of the

[[Page 41045]]

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, 
Revision 3, dated December 5, 2011, and repeat the detailed 
inspection thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in 
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD. Doing the replacement 
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the repetitive 
inspection requirements of this paragraph for the replaced 
flightdeck window 1.

(i) Window 1 Conditional Replacement

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of 
this AD, a screw is found crossthreaded, do the applicable 
corrective actions specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this 
AD.
    (1) If the connector is loose and cannot be tightened by 
applying the correct torque, before further flight, replace that 
window 1 in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 
2011.
    (2) If the connector is tight or can be tightened by applying 
the correct torque, replace that window 1 within 500 flight hours 
after the inspection, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, 
dated December 5, 2011.

(j) Optional Terminating Action

    Replacing a flightdeck window 1 that uses screw and connector 
for the electrical heat connection with a flightdeck window 1 that 
uses pin and socket for the electrical connection, in accordance 
with Work Package 3 or 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated December 5, 
2011, ends the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD for 
that window 1 only.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the inspections and 
corrective actions required by this AD, and for the window 
replacement specified in paragraph (j) of this AD for the replaced 
window 1 only, if the corresponding actions were performed before 
the effective date of this AD using the service information 
identified in paragraph (k)(1), (k)(2), or (k)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, dated 
August 8, 2006.
    (2) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, 
Revision 1, dated August 20, 2008.
    (3) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, 
Revision 2, dated March 10, 2010.

(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 the Related Information 
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your Principal 
Maintenance Inspector or Principal Avionics Inspector, as 
appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight 
Standards District Office.

(m) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Louis Natsiopoulos, 
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, 
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 
Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6478; fax: 425-917-6590; 
email: Elias.Natsiopoulos@faa.gov.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the following service 
information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use the following service information to do the 
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-30-2081, Revision 3, dated 
December 5, 2011.
    (3) 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; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) 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.
    (5) You may also review copies of the service information that 
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records 
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 27, 2012.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-16333 Filed 7-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```