51724 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(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, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2008–06–03, Amendment 39–15415 (73 

FR 13081, March 12, 2008), and adding 

the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2012–0859; Directorate Identifier 2012– 

NM–090–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by October 11, 2012. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This action rescinds AD 2008–06–03, 

Amendment 39–15415 (73 FR 13081, March 

12, 2008). 

Applicability 

(c) This action applies to The Boeing 

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

and –900 series airplanes; and Model 757– 

200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 series 

airplanes; certificated in any category; as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 

737–28A1207, dated February 15, 2007, and 

757–28A0088, dated January 25, 2007. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

17, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–20968 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0258; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–191–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain The Boeing Company Model 

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

–900ER series airplanes. That NPRM 

proposed to require, for certain 

airplanes, installing two warning level 

indicator lights on each of the P1–3 and 

P3–1 instrument panels in the flight 

compartment. That NPRM also 

proposed to require revising the 

airplane flight manual to remove certain 

requirements of previous AD actions, 

and to advise the flightcrew of the 

following changes: revised non-normal 

procedures to use when a cabin altitude 

warning or rapid depressurization 

occurs, and revised cabin pressurization 

procedures for normal operations. That 

NPRM was prompted by a design 

change in the cabin altitude warning 

system that would address the 

identified unsafe condition. This action 

revises that NPRM by adding airplanes 

to the applicability; adding airplanes to 

the installation requirement, including, 

for certain airplanes, replacing the 

existing P5–16 and P5–10 panels; and, 

for certain airplanes, replacing the basic 

P5–16 panel with a high altitude 

landing P5–16 panel. We are proposing 

this supplemental NPRM to prevent 

failure of the flightcrew to recognize and 

react to a valid cabin altitude warning 

horn, which could result in 

incapacitation of the flightcrew due to 

hypoxia (lack of oxygen in the body), 

and consequent loss of control of the 

airplane. 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 supplemental NPRM by October 11, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124– 

2207; telephone 206–544–5000, 

extension 1, fax 206–766–5680; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey W. Palmer, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 

130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425) 

917–6472; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

jeffrey.w.palmer@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–2011–0258; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–191–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51725 

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 to include an AD that would 

apply to certain The Boeing Company 

Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, 

–900, and –900ER series airplanes. That 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on March 24, 2011 (76 FR 

16579). That NPRM proposed to require 

installing two warning level indicator 

lights on each of the P1–3 and P3–1 

instrument panels in the flight 

compartment. That NPRM also 

proposed to require revising the 

airplane flight manual to remove certain 

requirements of previous AD actions, 

and to advise the flightcrew of the 

following changes: Revised non-normal 

procedures to use when a cabin altitude 

warning or rapid depressurization 

occurs, and revised cabin pressurization 

procedures for normal operations. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM (76 FR 

16579, March 24, 2011) Was Issued 

Since we issued the previous NPRM 

(76 FR 16579, March 24, 2011), we have 

determined that additional airplanes are 

affected by the identified unsafe 

condition, the installation of two 

warning level indicator lights must be 

done on additional airplanes (i.e., 

airplanes with the high altitude landing 

configuration of the cabin altitude 

warning system), and for certain 

airplanes, a replacement of the basic 

P5–16 panel with a high altitude 

landing P5–16 panel must be done. And 

for certain other airplanes replacement 

of the existing P5–16 and P5–10 panels 

must be done. 

Revised Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

3, dated March 28, 2012. The previous 

NPRM (76 FR 16579, March 24, 2011), 

referred to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 1, dated June 

24, 2010, as the appropriate source of 

service information for doing the 

proposed actions. Boeing has revised 

this service information to add airplanes 

to the effectivity (including the 

airplanes that were identified in table 1 

of the previous NPRM) and clarify 

certain actions and figures. We have 

changed paragraph (c) of this 

supplemental NPRM to refer to the 

airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

3, dated March 28, 2012. We have also 

included Revision 3 as the appropriate 

source of service information for 

accomplishing the required actions of 

this supplemental NPRM. We have also 

included credit for actions 

accomplished using Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

1, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

2, dated August 18, 2011; provided 

certain actions have been done on 

certain airplanes. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012, includes concurrent 

accomplishment of Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–21–1171, dated February 

12, 2009, for certain airplanes. Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–21–1171, dated 

February 12, 2009, describes procedures 

for replacing the basic P5–16 panel with 

a high altitude landing P5–16 panel. 

Related Rulemaking 

On August 7, 2009, we issued AD 

2009–16–07, Amendment 39–15990 (74 

FR 41607, August 18, 2009), for certain 

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

–900 series airplanes. That AD requires 

replacing brackets that hold the P5 

panel to the airplane structure, the 

standby compass bracket assembly, the 

generator drive and standby power 

module, and the air conditioning 

module. That AD also requires among 

other actions, inspecting for wire length 

and for damage of the connectors and 

the wire bundles and doing applicable 

corrective actions if necessary. That AD 

also requires an additional operational 

test of the P5–14 panel. 

For airplanes on which the 

modification specified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

1, dated June 24, 2010; or Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

2, dated August 18, 2011; was done, 

those actions could result in noncompliance with the actions required by 

AD 2009–16–07, Amendment 39–15990 

(74 FR 41607, August 18, 2009). For 

airplanes on which the modification in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012, was done, those actions comply 

with the actions required by AD 2009– 

16–07. In light of these factors, operators 

should ensure compliance with AD 

2009–16–07. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the previous NPRM (76 FR 

16579, March 24, 2011). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

NPRM and the FAA’s response to each 

comment. 

Support for NPRM (76 FR 16579, 

March 24, 2011) 

Air Line Pilot’s Association 

International supports the previous 

NPRM (76 FR 16579, March 24, 2011). 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

American Airlines (AAL) stated that it 

started a program for accomplishing the 

actions specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 1, 

dated June 24, 2010. AAL added that 

adoption of a 36-month accomplishment 

schedule will result in six airplanes on 

which the actions cannot be completed 

during its normal heavy maintenance 

schedule; therefore, a special highercost visit will have to be scheduled for 

those airplanes. AAL noted that the 

current flight manual procedures will 

remain in place until all airplanes are 

modified. We infer that AAL is asking 

that the compliance time be extended to 

coincide with its normal heavy 

maintenance schedule. 

We partially agree with the 

commenter. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

intention to keep its current flight 

manual procedures in place until all 

airplanes in its fleet have been 

modified. This will maintain 

continuous standardization of operating 

procedures across the operator’s fleet, 

allowing operation of all airplanes in its 

fleet under one common set of operating 

procedures at all times. Since the 

previous NPRM (76 FR 16579, March 

24, 2011) proposed to require airplane 

flight manual changes before further 

flight after accomplishing the required 

airplane modification, increasing the 

compliance time requirement for the 

airplane flight manual changes is 

necessary in order to allow operators the 

ability to provide this standardization of 

operating procedures. We have 

determined that since all airplanes are 

required to be modified within 36 

months, those airplanes must also have 

the required airplane flight manual 

changes incorporated within the same 

time frame, but not before the required 

airplane modifications have been 

accomplished. We have increased the 

compliance time for the airplane flight 

manual revision required by paragraph 

(j) of this supplemental NPRM to within 

36 months after the effective date of this 

AD and after doing the airplane 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
51726 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

modifications required by paragraph (g) 

of this AD. 

We do not agree to increase the 

compliance time for the modification. 

We acknowledge that in some cases it 

may be necessary to accomplish AD 

requirements outside of normal 

maintenance schedules and that 

additional cost can be incurred. 

However, we performed a risk 

assessment which indicates that a 36- 

month compliance time for 

accomplishing the modification is the 

longest acceptable compliance time 

allowed, in order to provide continued 

operational safety. In developing an 

appropriate compliance time, we 

considered the safety implications and 

normal maintenance schedules for 

timely accomplishment of the actions. 

In light of this, we have determined that 

a 36-month interval is appropriate. 

Under the provisions of paragraph 

(m)(1) of the supplemental NPRM, we 

will consider requests for approval of an 

extension of the compliance time if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the extension would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have made no change to the 

compliance time requirement in 

paragraph (g) of the supplemental 

NPRM. 

Delta Airlines (DAL) asked that the 

previous NPRM (76 FR 16579, March 

24, 2011) include a provision specifying 

that airplanes on which Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, dated 

January 7, 2010, has been done are in 

compliance with the proposed 

requirements. DAL stated that Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 1, dated June 24, 2010, 

indicates that no more work is necessary 

on airplanes changed in accordance 

with the original issue of that service 

bulletin. DAL added that although it has 

not done the actions in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, dated 

January 7, 2010, there may be other 

operators that have. DAL suggested that 

the previous NPRM include a paragraph 

to address those airplanes. 

We do not agree with the commenter. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, dated January 7, 2010, was 

only approved for use on one airplane 

to validate the Accomplishment 

Instructions. That validation revealed 

that extensive corrections to the 

instructions were necessary to 

accomplish the modification; therefore, 

it did not receive FAA approval for 

fleetwide use. In light of this, no credit 

is allowed for prior accomplishment of 

the actions required by this 

supplemental NPRM using Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, dated 

January 7, 2010. If any operators 

incorporated the actions specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, dated January 7, 2010, 

affected operators may request an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) under the provisions of 

paragraph (m)(1) of this supplemental 

NPRM by submitting data substantiating 

that the change would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. We have not 

changed the supplemental NPRM in this 

regard. 

Request To Clarify Certain Notes in the 

Service Information 

DAL asked that we clarify the 

instructions in certain notes specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, Revision 1, dated June 24, 

2010. DAL stated that paragraph (g) of 

the previous NPRM (76 FR 16579, 

March 24, 2011) requires operators to 

install warning level indicator lights in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 1, 

dated June 24, 2010. DAL added that 

Figure 1, Note (b), and Figure 2, Note (b) 

of that service bulletin specify that 

operators can get the new part by 

reworking the existing part; Figure 3, 

Notes (a) and (b) also specify reworking 

the panels. DAL noted that these figures 

specify that the rework is done by using 

the procedures in the referenced BAE 

Systems service bulletins. DAL added 

that Figure 1, Note (b) states ‘‘You can 

get the new part by reworking the 

existing part as given in BAE Systems 

SB 233A2221–31–01, BAE Systems SB 

233A2221–31–02, and BAE Systems SB 

233A2221–31–03.’’ DAL stated that 

rework of the panel in accordance with 

only one of the three BAE Systems 

service bulletins is required, based on 

the number of the panel to be modified. 

DAL noted that it is not possible to 

accomplish all three of the BAE Systems 

service bulletins on one panel since 

each service bulletin is applicable to a 

unique set of part numbers. 

We do not agree with the commenter. 

The manufacturer has not identified the 

dash level of the part numbers in the 

subject notes of the referenced figures 

specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 1, 

dated June 24, 2010. The intent of the 

notes is to allow rework of the 

applicable dash number part according 

to the applicable BAE component 

service bulletin, not by using all three 

BAE component service bulletins. We 

have made no change to the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Component 

Maintenance Manual (CMM) Reference 

DAL asked that we clarify the CMM 

reference specified in paragraph 1.K. 

‘‘Publications Affected’’ of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 

1, dated June 24, 2010. DAL stated that 

this section refers to CMM 31–53; 

however, the correct references should 

be CMM 31–11–30 and CMM 31–11–59. 

DAL notified Boeing of this 

discrepancy; Boeing agreed that the 

reference in this service bulletin is 

incorrect and indicated that it would be 

corrected in a future revision. 

We acknowledge the commenter’s 

concern; however, the list of 

publications does not affect the actions 

required by the AD. In addition, Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 3, dated March 28, 2012, 

changed note (c) in Figures 1 and 2 to 

provide the correct BAE Systems CMM 

references. We have made no change to 

the supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Include Contact 

Information for BAE Systems 

DAL asked that we include contact 

information in the AD so operators can 

obtain the applicable BAE Systems 

service bulletins referenced in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 1, dated June 24, 2010, for 

reworking the existing part. DAL noted 

that the BAE service bulletins contain 

procedures for reworking the existing 

P1–3 and P3–1 panels. DAL added that 

paragraph (m) of the previous NPRM (76 

FR 16579, March 24, 2011) identifies 

Boeing contact information, but does 

not include BAE Systems contact 

information. 

We do not agree with the commenter. 

The BAE Systems service bulletins are 

not referred to in this supplemental 

NPRM; therefore, the BAE Systems 

contact information is not included. 

Operators should contact Boeing for any 

additional documents referred to in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

31A1332, Revision 1, dated June 24, 

2010; Revision 2, dated August 18, 

2011, or Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012. We have made no change to the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Remove Certain Language 

in the Limitations Section of the AFM 

Boeing asked that we change 

paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of the previous 

NPRM (76 FR 16579, March 24, 2011), 

paragraph (j)(3)(ii) of this supplemental 

NPRM, to remove the language ‘‘For 

normal operations, the pressurization 

mode selector should be in AUTO prior 

to takeoff.’’ Boeing stated that this step 

is already included in the Boeing Flight 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51727 

Crew Operations Manual Preflight 

Checklist for the First Officer. 

We do not agree with the commenter. 

We find that there is relevant accident 

history associated with incorrect setting 

of this specific switch; therefore, 

continued emphasis on the proper 

positioning of the switch prior to takeoff 

is required in the airplane flight manual. 

We have made no change to the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Increase Work-Hours 

AAL asked that we increase the work 

hours specified in the previous NPRM 

(76 FR 16579, March 24, 2011). AAL 

stated that an evaluation of the 

referenced service information on its 

prototype airplane resulted in a workhour requirement of 2.5 times greater 

than the 64 hours specified in the 

previous NPRM. AAL added that a 

better estimate for completing the entire 

modification would be 140 work-hours. 

We do not agree with the commenter. 

The cost information in this 

supplemental NPRM describes only the 

direct costs of the specific required 

actions. Based on the best data 

available, the manufacturer provided 

the number of work hours necessary to 

do the required actions. This number 

represents the time necessary to perform 

only the actions actually required by 

this supplemental NPRM. We recognize 

that, in doing the actions required by an 

AD, operators might incur incidental 

costs in addition to the direct costs. But 

the cost analysis in AD rulemaking 

actions typically does not include 

incidental costs such as the time 

necessary for planning, airplane down 

time, or time necessitated by other 

administrative actions. Those incidental 

costs, which might vary significantly 

among operators, are almost impossible 

to calculate. We have made no change 

to the supplemental NPRM in this 

regard. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all the 

relevant information and determined 

the unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

in other products of the same type 

design. Certain changes described above 

expand the scope of the original NPRM 

(76 FR 16579, March 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 

supplemental NPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of the 

Supplemental NPRM 

This supplemental NPRM would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 870 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. The following table provides 

the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD. 

TABLE—ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours Average labor 

rate per hour Parts Cost per product 

Number of 

U.S.-registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Installation of warning indicator lights.Between 34 and 84 $85 Between $2,172 

and $5,238.

Between $5,062 

and $12,378.

870 Between 

$4,403,940 and 

$10,768,860. 

AFM revision .......... 2 ............................. 85 $0 ........................... $170 ....................... 870 $147,900. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2011–0258; Directorate Identifier 2010– 

NM–191–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by October 11, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD affects the ADs identified in 

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this AD. 

This AD does not supersede the requirements 

of these ADs. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
51728 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(1) AD 2003–14–08, Amendment 39–13227 

(68 FR 41519, July 14, 2003). 

(2) AD 2006–13–13, Amendment 39–14666 

(71 FR 35781, June 22, 2006). 

(3) AD 2008–23–07, Amendment 39–15728 

(73 FR 66512, November 10, 2008). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

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

and –900ER series airplanes, certificated in 

any category; identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 3, 

dated March 28, 2012. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 31, Instruments. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a design change 

in the cabin altitude warning system that 

would address the identified unsafe 

condition. We are issuing this AD to prevent 

failure of the flightcrew to recognize and 

react to a valid cabin altitude warning horn, 

which could result in incapacitation of the 

flightcrew due to hypoxia (lack of oxygen in 

the body) and consequent loss of control of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Installation 

Within 36 months after the effective date 

of this AD, install two warning level 

indicator lights on each of the P1–3 and P3– 

1 instrument panels in the flight 

compartment, and as applicable, replace the 

existing P5–16 and P5–10 panels, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012. 

(h) Concurrent Requirements 

For Group 21, Configuration 2 airplanes, as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012: Prior to or concurrently with doing the 

actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 

replace the basic P5–16 panel with a high 

altitude landing P5–16 panel, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–21–1171, dated 

February 12, 2009. 

(i) Credit for Previous Actions 

(1) For Group 1 airplanes identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 1, dated June 24, 2010; except 

Groups 24, 25, and 27 through 33 airplanes 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012: This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 1, dated June 24, 2010, which is not 

incorporated by reference. 

(2) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, Revision 2, 

dated August 18, 2011; except airplanes 

identified in paragraph (i)(3) of this AD and 

Groups 24, 25, and 27 through 33 airplanes 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012: This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 2, dated August 18, 2011, which is 

not incorporated by reference. 

(3) For Group 21, Configuration 2 airplanes 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–31A1332, Revision 3, dated March 28, 

2012: This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 2, dated August 18, 2011, which is 

not incorporated by reference; and provided 

that Boeing Service Bulletin 737–21–1171, 

dated February 12, 2009, was accomplished 

prior to or concurrently with the actions in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–31A1332, 

Revision 2, dated August 18, 2011. 

(j) Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revisions 

Within 36 months after the effective date 

of this AD, and after doing the installation 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do the 

actions specified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), 

and (j)(3) of this AD. 

(1) Revise the Limitations Section of the 

applicable Boeing 737 AFM by doing the 

following action: Delete the ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE WARNING TAKEOFF 

BRIEFING’’ added by AD 2008–23–07, 

Amendment 39–15728 (73 FR 66512, 

November 10, 2008). 

(2) Revise the Non-Normal Procedures 

Section of the applicable Boeing 737 AFM by 

doing the actions specified in paragraphs 

(j)(2)(i), (j)(2)(ii), (j)(2)(iii), and (j)(2)(iv) of 

this AD. 

(i) Delete the procedure titled ‘‘WARNING 

HORN—CABIN ALTITUDE OR 

CONFIGURATION’’ added by AD 2006–13– 

13, Amendment 39–14666 (71 FR 35781, 

June 22, 2006). If the title of this procedure 

has been changed according to FAA 

alternative method of compliance (AMOC) 

Letter 130S–09–134a, dated April 28, 2009, 

delete the procedure that was approved 

according to this AMOC letter. 

(ii) Delete the procedure titled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE WARNING OR RAPID 

DEPRESSURIZATION’’ added by AD 2003– 

14–08, Amendment 39–13227 (68 FR 41519, 

July 14, 2003). 

(iii) If the procedure titled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE (Airplanes with the CABIN 

ALTITUDE lights installed)’’ is currently 

contained in the applicable Boeing 737 AFM, 

delete the procedure titled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE (Airplanes with the CABIN 

ALTITUDE lights installed).’’ 

(iv) Add the following statement. This may 

be done by inserting a copy of this AD into 

the applicable AFM. 

‘‘CABIN ALTITUDE WARNING OR RAPID 

DEPRESSURIZATION 

Condition: The CABIN ALTITUDE warning 

light illuminates or the intermittent warning 

horn sounds in flight above 10,000 ft MSL. 

RECALL 

Oxygen Masks and Regulators ............................................................................................................................................. ON, 100% 

Crew Communications ......................................................................................................................................................... ESTABLISH 

REFERENCE 

Pressurization Mode Selector ............................................................................................................................................... MANUAL 

Outflow Valve Switch .......................................................................................................................................................... CLOSE 

If Cabin Altitude is uncontrollable: 

Emergency Descent (If Required) ......................................................................................................................................... INITIATE 

Passenger Oxygen Switch ..................................................................................................................................................... ON 

Thrust Levers ........................................................................................................................................................................ CLOSE 

Speed Brakes ......................................................................................................................................................................... FLIGHT DETENT 

Target Speed ......................................................................................................................................................................... MO/MMO’’ 

Note 1 to paragraphs (j)(2)(iv) and (j)(3)(ii) 

of this AD: When statements identical to 

those specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(iv) and 

(j)(3)(ii) of this AD have been included in the 

general revisions of the AFM, the general 

revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and 

the copies of this AD may be removed from 

the AFM. 

(3) Revise the Normal Procedures Section 

of the applicable Boeing 737 AFM by doing 

the actions specified in paragraphs (j)(3)(i) 

and (j)(3)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Delete the procedure titled ‘‘CABIN 

ALTITUDE WARNING TAKEOFF 

BRIEFING’’ procedure added by AD 2008– 

23–07, Amendment 39–15728 (73 FR 66512, 

November 10, 2008). 

(ii) Add the following statement. This may 

be done by inserting a copy of this AD into 

the applicable AFM. 

For normal operations, the pressurization 

mode selector should be in AUTO prior to 

takeoff. 

(k) Terminating Action for Affected ADs 

Accomplishing the requirements of this AD 

terminates the requirements of the ADs 

identified in paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), and 

(k)(3) of this AD for only the airplanes 

identified in paragraph (c) of this AD. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51729 

(1) AD 2003–14–08, Amendment 39–13227 

(68 FR 41519, July 14, 2003): The 

requirements specified in Table 1 and Figure 

1 of that AD. 

(2) AD 2006–13–13, Amendment 39–14666 

(71 FR 35781, June 22, 2006): All 

requirements of that AD. 

(3) AD 2008–23–07, Amendment 39–15728 

(73 FR 66512, November 10, 2008): All 

requirements of that AD. 

(l) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has 

the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, 

if requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

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

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(n) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Jeffrey W. Palmer, Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, 

ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone: 

(425) 917–6472; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

jeffrey.w.palmer@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

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

5680; Internet https:// 

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review 

copies of the referenced service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of this 

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

10, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–20880 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0810; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–195–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

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 

Airbus Model A330–200, A330–300, 

A340–200 and A340–300 series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report that revealed the 

wheel axles of the main landing gear 

(MLG) were machined with a radius as 

small as 0.4 millimeters. This proposed 

AD would require replacing the wheel 

axle of the MLG with a serviceable part. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

fatigue of the wheel axle of the MLG, 

which could adversely affect the 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 11, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS— 

Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email 

airworthiness.A330-A340@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office 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 Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1138; fax (425) 227–1149. 

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–2012–0810; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–195–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 based on 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 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2011–0170, 

dated September 7, 2011 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

EASA has received a report via Airbus and 

Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Ltd, from a 

Maintenance repair organisation, concerning 

a specific repair, accomplished on certain 

MLG wheel axles. Investigations revealed 

that the axles have been machined with a 

radius as small as 0.4 mm. 

This condition, if not corrected, has a 

detrimental effect on the fatigue lives of these 

parts, possibly affecting the structural 

integrity of the aeroplane. Fatigue analyses 

were performed, the results of which 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1