65506 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 22, 2012. 

James E. Jackson, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–26499 Filed 10–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1109; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–172–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 supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to certain The Boeing 

Company Model 757–200 and –200PF 

series airplanes. The existing AD 

currently requires modification of the 

nacelle strut and wing structure, and 

repair of any damage found during the 

modification. Since we issued that AD, 

a compliance time error involving the 

optional threshold formula was 

discovered, which could allow an 

airplane to exceed the acceptable 

compliance time for addressing the 

unsafe condition. This proposed AD 

would specify a maximum compliance 

time limit that overrides the optional 

threshold formula results. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent fatigue 

cracking in primary strut structure and 

consequent reduced structural integrity 

of the strut. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 13, 

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: Deliver to Mail 

address above 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, WA 98124–2207; 

phone: 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, 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; 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: 

Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6440; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Nancy.Marsh@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–2012–1109; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–172–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 

On August 29, 2003, we issued AD 

2003–18–05, Amendment 39–13296 (68 

FR 53496, September 11, 2003), for 

certain Model 757 series airplanes 

powered by Pratt & Whitney engines. 

That AD requires modification of the 

nacelle strut and wing structure, and 

repair of any damage found during the 

modification. That AD resulted from 

reports indicating that the actual 

operational loads applied to the nacelle 

are higher than the analytical loads that 

were used during the initial design. 

Subsequent analysis and service history, 

which included numerous reports of 

fatigue cracking on certain strut and 

wing structure, indicated that fatigue 

cracking can occur on the primary strut 

structure before an airplane reaches its 

design service objective. We issued that 

AD to prevent fatigue cracking in 

primary strut structure and consequent 

reduced structural integrity of the strut. 

Actions Since Existing AD (68 FR 

53496, September 11, 2003) Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), an error in the 

optional threshold formula of the 

compliance time was discovered. If the 

optional threshold formula is used, it 

could result in an unacceptable 

compliance time for addressing the 

unsafe condition. 

Relevant Service Information 

AD 2003–18–05, Amendment 39– 

13296 (68 FR 53496, September 11, 

2003), refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 

757–54–0034, dated May 14, 1998; or 

Revision 1, dated October 11, 2001; as 

the appropriate source of service 

information for modifying the nacelle 

strut and wing structure. Boeing has 

since revised this service bulletin. We 

reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757– 

54–0034, Revision 2, dated May 7, 2009. 

This service bulletin specifies a 

compliance time that limits the results 

from the optional threshold compliance 

time formula to within eight years from 

the issuance date of this service 

bulletin. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD 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. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would retain all 

requirements of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003). This proposed AD 

would reduce certain compliance times. 

The optional threshold formula method 

is limited to within eight years after the 

effective date of the AD. This proposed 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 65507 

AD would also require accomplishing 

the actions specified in the service 

information described previously, 

except as discussed under ‘‘Differences 

Between the Proposed AD and the 

Service Information.’’ 

Change to Existing AD (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003) 

This proposed AD would retain all 

requirements of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003). Since AD 2003– 

18–05 was issued, the AD format has 

been revised, and certain paragraphs 

have been rearranged. As a result, the 

corresponding paragraph identifiers 

have changed in this proposed AD, as 

listed in the following table: 

REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS

Requirement in AD 

2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 

(68 FR 53496, September 11, 2003) 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

proposed AD 

paragraph (a) paragraph (g) 

paragraph (b) paragraph (h) 

paragraph (c) paragraph (i) 

paragraph (d) paragraph (j) 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, 

Revision 2, dated May 7, 2009, specifies 

to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 278 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 

Modification [retained actions from AD 2003– 

18–05, Amendment 39-13296 (68 FR 

53496, September 11, 2003)].

800 work-hours × $85 per hour = $68,000 .... $0 $68,000 $18,904,000 

The new requirements of this 

proposed AD add no additional 

economic burden. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

individuals. We do not control warranty 

coverage for affected individuals. As a 

result, we have included all costs in our 

cost estimate. 

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 have 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 that the 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 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2003–18–05, Amendment 39–13296 (68 

FR 53496, September 11, 2003), and 

adding the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2012–1109; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–172–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by December 13, 2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 757–200 and –200PF series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, line numbers 1 

through 735 inclusive, powered by Pratt & 

Whitney engines. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 54, Nacelles/Pylons. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports 

indicating that the actual operational loads 

applied to the nacelle are higher than the 

analytical loads that were used during the 

initial design. Subsequent analysis and 

service history, which includes numerous 

reports of fatigue cracking on certain strut 

and wing structure, indicated that fatigue 

cracking can occur on the primary strut 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with 
65508 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

structure before an airplane reaches its 

design service objective. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary 

strut structure and consequent reduced 

structural integrity of the strut. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Modification, With New Service 

Information and Reduced Compliance Time 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (a) of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), with new service 

information and a reduced compliance time. 

Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure 

on both the left and right sides of the 

airplane, in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 757–54–0034, dated May 14, 1998; 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, 

Revision 1, dated October 11, 2001; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, Revision 2, 

dated May 7, 2009; at the later of the times 

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

AD. As of the effective date of this AD, only 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, 

Revision 2, dated May 7, 2009, may be used 

to accomplish the actions required by this 

paragraph. 

(1) At the earlier of the times specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total 

flight cycles. 

(ii) At the later of the times specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A) or (g)(1)(ii)(B) of this 

AD. 

(A) Within 20 years since the date of 

manufacture. 

(B) Within the compliance time calculated 

using the optional threshold formula 

described in Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– 

0034, Revision 2, dated May 7, 2009, or 

within 8 years after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs first. 

(2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after 

November 13, 2000 (the effective date of AD 

2000–20–09, Amendment 39–11920 (65 FR 

59703, October 6, 2000)). 

(h) Retained Concurrent Requirements, With 

New Service Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (b) of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), with new service 

information. Except as provided by 

paragraph (j) of this AD: Prior to or 

concurrently with the accomplishment of the 

modification of the nacelle strut and wing 

structure required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD, accomplish the actions specified in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0027, 

Revision 1, dated October 27, 1994; and 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0036, dated 

May 14, 1998, or Boeing Service Bulletin 

757–54–0036, Revision 1, dated July 31, 

2006; as applicable; in accordance with those 

service bulletins. As of the effective date of 

this AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 

757–54–0036, Revision 1, dated July 31, 

2006, to accomplish the requirements of this 

paragraph. 

(i) Retained Repair, With New Service 

Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (c) of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), with new service 

information. If any damage to airplane 

structure is found during the 

accomplishment of the modification required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD, and Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, dated May 14, 

1998; Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, 

Revision 1, dated October 11, 2001; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, Revision 2, 

dated May 7, 2009; specifies to contact 

Boeing for appropriate action: Before further 

flight, repair the damage using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (k) of this AD. 

(j) Retained Modification, With New Service 

Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (d) of AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), with new service 

information. Modify the nacelle strut 

(including replacing the upper link with a 

new, improved part, and modifying the wire 

support bracket attached to the upper link), 

in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

757–54–0036, dated May 14, 1998; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 757–54–0036, Revision 1, 

dated July 31, 2006; at the earlier of the times 

specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this 

AD. As of the effective date of this AD, use 

only Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0036, 

Revision 1, dated July 31, 2006, to 

accomplish the requirements of this 

paragraph. 

(1) Prior to or concurrently with 

accomplishment of the modification of the 

nacelle strut and wing structure required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(2) Prior to the accumulation of 27,000 

total flight cycles (for Model 757–200 series 

airplanes) or 29,000 total flight cycles (for 

Model 757–200PF series airplanes), or within 

2 years after October 16, 2003 (the effective 

date of AD 2003–18–05, Amendment 39– 

13296 (68 FR 53496, September 11, 2003)), 

whichever is later. 

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle 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-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. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2003–18–05, 

Amendment 39–13296 (68 FR 53496, 

September 11, 2003), are approved as 

AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of 

this AD. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6440; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: Nancy.Marsh@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, WA 98124–2207; phone: 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, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

16, 2012. 

John P. Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–26477 Filed 10–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 154 

[Docket No. RM12–14–000] 

Annual Charge Filing Procedures for 

Natural Gas Pipelines 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission or 

FERC) is proposing to amend its 

regulations to revise the filing 

requirements for natural gas pipelines 

that choose to recover Commissionassessed annual charges through an 

annual charge adjustment (ACA) clause. 

Currently, natural gas pipelines utilizing 

an ACA clause must make a tariff filing 

to reflect a revised ACA unit charge 

authorized by the Commission for that 

fiscal year. In order to reduce the 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with