41438 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 145 / Monday, July 30, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

were installed from the date of original 

Certificate of Airworthiness. 

(3) Do the following at the times specified 

in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD: 

(i) Perform a visual and non-destructive 

inspection of the upper wing strut fittings for 

cracks following the Accomplishment 

Instructions in Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service 

Bulletin No. 57–004, dated April 16, 2007. 

(ii) Examine for conformity the spherical 

bearings following the Accomplishment 

Instructions in Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service 

Bulletin No. 57–004, dated April 16, 2007. 

(4) If during any inspection required by 

paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this AD cracks are found 

in the upper wing strut fitting, before further 

flight replace the wing strut fitting with a 

new part number (P/N) 111.35.06.185 (left 

side) or P/N 111.35.06.186 (right side) 

following the Accomplishment Instructions 

in Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 

57–004, dated April 16, 2007. Replacement of 

the upper wing strut fitting does not 

terminate the repetitive inspection specified 

in paragraph (f)(3) of this AD. 

(5) If during any inspection required by 

paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this AD the spherical 

bearing is found not in conformity, before 

further flight replace the bearing with a new 

P/N 944.61.00.109 following the 

Accomplishment Instructions in Pilatus 

Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 57–004, 

dated April 16, 2007. Replacement of the 

spherical bearing does not terminate the 

repetitive inspection specified in paragraph 

(f)(3) of this AD. 

(6) Report to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Customer 

Liason Manager results of the inspection/ 

examination using Table 1 of Pilatus Aircraft 

Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 57–004, dated April 

16, 2007. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

(1) The FAA AD is requiring repetitive 

inspections and reporting results to the 

manufacturer, not just a one-time inspection 

and report as required in the MCAI. 

(2) The Service Bulletin specifies 

‘‘subsequent inspections for cracks will be 

included in Chapter 5 of the Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM).’’ The only way 

we (FAA) can mandate these repetitive 

inspections is through an AD. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4059; fax: (816) 329–

4090. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

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

FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer or other source, 

use these actions if they are FAA-approved. 

Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved if they are approved by the State 

of Design Authority (or their delegated 

agent). You are required to assure the product 

is airworthy before it is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120 0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) AD No: 2007–0114, 

dated May 02, 2007; and Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. 

Service Bulletin No. 57–004, dated April 16, 

2007, for related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(i) You must use Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. 

Service Bulletin No. 57–004, dated April 16, 

2007, to do the actions required by this AD, 

unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., 

Customer Liaison Manager, CH–6371 

STANS, Switzerland; telephone: +41 (0)41 

619 6580; fax: +41 (0)41 619 6576; e-mail: 

fodermatt@pilatus-aircaft.com. 

(3) You may review copies at the FAA, 

Central Region, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; or 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 Kansas City, Missouri, on July 19, 

2007. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–14428 Filed 7–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26441; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–204–AD; Amendment 

39–15139; AD 2007–15–10] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Boeing Model 747 airplanes. This AD 

requires an inspection of the No. 2 and 

No. 3 windows on the left and right 

sides of the airplane to determine their 

part numbers, and related investigative 

and corrective actions if necessary. This 

AD results from loss of a No. 3 window 

in-flight. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct cracking in the failsafe interlayer of certain No. 2 and No. 

3 glass windows, which could result in 

loss of the window and consequent 

rapid loss of cabin pressure. Loss of the 

window could also result in crew 

communication difficulties or 

incapacitation of the crew. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

September 4, 2007. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of September 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC. 

Contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207, for service 

information identified in this AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Fox, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6425; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the airworthiness 

directive (AD) docket on the Internet at 

http://dms.dot.gov or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 145 / Monday, July 30, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 41439 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The Docket 

Operations office (telephone (800) 647–

5527) is located on the ground floor of 

the West Building at the street address 

stated in the ADDRESSES section. 

Discussion 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to all Boeing Model 747 airplanes. 

That NPRM was published in the 

Federal Register on December 8, 2006 

(71 FR 71099). That NPRM proposed to 

require an inspection of the No. 2 and 

No. 3 windows on the left and right 

sides of the airplane to determine their 

part numbers, and related investigative 

and corrective actions if necessary. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

Support for the NPRM 

Boeing supports the NPRM, and 

British Airways supports the intent of 

the NPRM. 

Request To Extend Grace Period 

Qantas Airways states that the 

compliance times given in calendar time 

(units of years) in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

56A2012, dated August 24, 2006, are not 

relevant for windows installed after the 

issue date of the service bulletin. As an 

example, the commenter states that a 

window installed on an airplane 5 years 

from now will have already surpassed 

the compliance time at the time of 

installation. Qantas Airways, therefore, 

requests that the calendar times in 

Tables 1, 2, and 3 of the service bulletin 

be revised as follows: ‘‘Within 2 (or 3) 

years after the date on this service 

bulletin, or after the window was 

installed, whichever occurs last.’’

Qantas Airways asserts that this change 

will ensure that the inspection of newly 

installed windows is controlled by 

calendar and flight-hour constraints. 

We agree to clarify the compliance 

time for newly installed windows. If a 

discrepant window is replaced with a 

new window, then the initial detailed 

inspection of the new window must be 

accomplished within either 5,500 or 

22,000 flight hours after installing the 

window, depending on the window part 

number. The inspection must be 

repeated at the interval stated in Table 

2 or 3, as applicable, of the Boeing 

service bulletin. We have revised 

paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify the 

compliance time. 

Request To Include Terminating Action 

GKN Aerospace states that it 

manufactures some of the affected 

windows identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–56A2012, dated 

August 24, 2006. GKN Aerospace states 

that it is concerned about the potential 

removal rates of in-service airplanes to 

address the unsafe condition; therefore, 

it is working to certify an improved 

window design that incorporates a new, 

improved interlayer, which is less 

susceptible to the cracking experienced 

with the existing windows. We infer the 

commenter would like us to include a 

terminating action in this AD. 

We agree that improving the window 

design to prevent cracking is a 

preferable solution than requiring longterm repetitive inspections. In the 

preamble of the NPRM, we stated that 

we considered this action to be an 

interim action. When a final action is 

identified, we may consider further 

rulemaking. We have not changed this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Skip Inspection To 

Determine Part Number 

Boeing Aerospace Operations 

Engineering and Logistics Services 

requests that we allow operators to skip 

the window identification procedure 

and accomplish the rest of the service 

bulletin as though the part number 

could not be identified. The commenter 

states that since some airplanes are 

equipped with unique No. 2 and No. 3 

windows, the window identification 

cannot be accomplished according to 

Part 1 of the Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–56A2012, dated August 24, 

2006, or the replacement according to 

Part 2, step 4 of the service bulletin. 

We do not agree to delete the 

inspection to determine the part 

numbers of the windows. Operators 

who inspect and determine that the 

affected windows are not installed on an 

airplane are not required to accomplish 

the related investigative and corrective 

actions. Therefore, accomplishing the 

inspection to determine the window 

part numbers may relieve some 

operators of the on-condition 

requirements. However, under the 

provisions of paragraph (h) of this AD, 

we may consider requests for approval 

of an alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) if sufficient data are submitted 

to substantiate that such a design 

change would provide an acceptable 

level of safety. We have not changed 

this AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Compliance Times 

British Airways states that the 

compliance times in Tables 2 and 3 of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

56A2012, dated August 24, 2006, should 

be revised as follows: 

• For part numbers (P/Ns) 65B27042- 

( ) and 65B27043-( ), the initial 

inspection should be extended from 

5,500 flight hours to 9,000 flight hours. 

• For P/Ns 65B27046-( ) and 

65B27047-( ), the initial inspection 

should be reduced from 22,000 flight 

hours to 15,000 flight hours, and the 

repetitive interval should be reduced 

from 7,500 flight hours to 3,000 flight 

hours (to match the repetitive interval 

for P/Ns 65B27042-( ) and 65B27043-( )). 

British Airways asserts that, based on 

its experience, the longer compliance 

times for P/Ns 65B27046-( ) and 

65B27047-( ), are not justified. British 

Airways also asserts that requiring 

different repetitive intervals for different 

windows does not make sense since 

many airlines use a mix of windows on 

their airplanes. 

We acknowledge British Airways’

comments but disagree with revising the 

compliance times as proposed by the 

commenter. In developing the 

compliance time for this AD action, we 

considered not only the safety 

implications of the identified unsafe 

condition, but the recommendations of 

the manufacturer, known service 

experience, average utilization rate of 

the affected fleet, and the availability of 

required parts. British Airways refers to 

its service experience but does not 

provide any data to support its 

comment. We invite British Airways to 

submit, to Boeing, any data it has that 

supports its comments related to 

changing certain compliance times. We 

would consider further rulemaking 

should such data support changing the 

compliance times of this AD. To further 

delay this AD would be inappropriate 

considering the need to correct a known 

safety problem in a timely manner. 

Further, operators are always permitted 

to accomplish the requirements of an 

AD at an earlier time than the required 

compliance time; therefore, an operator 

may choose to inspect P/Ns 65B27046- 

( ) and 65B27047-( ) at repetitive 

intervals of 3,000 flight hours. We have 

determined that the compliance times 

recommended in the service bulletin are 

appropriate for addressing the unsafe 

condition and we have not changed this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Delete Grace Period 

British Airways states that the grace 

period of 1,000 flight hours after the 

date on the service bulletin is obsolete, 

since this time period will have been 

exceeded by the time we issued an AD. 

We infer that the commenter would like 

us to delete the grace period from Tables 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
41440 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 145 / Monday, July 30, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

2 and 3 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–56A2012, dated August 24, 2006. 

We disagree with deleting the grace 

period. We would like to point out that 

in paragraph (g) of the NPRM, which is 

retained in this AD, we stated that the 

compliance times given in the service 

bulletin are to be counted from the 

effective date of this AD, not from the 

date on the service bulletin. We have 

not changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Rephrase Compliance Time 

British Airways requests that we 

delete the word ‘‘or’’ where the service 

bulletin compliance times are restated 

in the ‘‘Relevant Service Information’’

section of the NPRM. As justification, 

the commenter states that using the 

word ‘‘or’’ gives an operator the choice 

of choosing between two compliance 

times. 

We disagree with revising this AD, 

since the ‘‘Relevant Service 

Information’’ section is not retained in 

a final rule. We have reviewed the 

NPRM and find that the wording used 

throughout the NPRM is consistent with 

the service bulletin. Further, where we 

restated the service bulletin compliance 

times in the NPRM, the lead-in 

statements clearly specify doing the 

proposed actions at the earlier of the 

compliance times; therefore, the 

compliance time cannot be chosen at an 

operator’s discretion. We have not 

changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance 

• British Airways requests that we 

make the following changes to the 

‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ section: 

• Add the cost of replacing a cracked 

window. The commenter states that the 

‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ section is wrong 

because it does not estimate the cost of 

replacing a cracked window. 

• Include the cost of having to 

remove an airplane from service 40% 

more frequently to accomplish the 

repetitive actions. 

• Revise the estimated work hours. 

The commenter asserts that it should 

take 1⁄2 hour to inspect a window to 

determine its part number, and that the 

inspection for cracks would require 2 

people and would take 1 hour. 

We do not agree to revise the ‘‘Cost of 

Compliance’’ section as the commenter 

proposes. The economic analysis of an 

AD is limited to the cost of actions that 

are actually required. The economic 

analysis does not consider the costs of 

conditional actions, such as repairing a 

crack detected during a required 

inspection (‘‘repair, if necessary’’). Such 

conditional repairs would be required—

regardless of AD direction—to correct 

an unsafe condition identified in an 

airplane and to ensure that the airplane 

is operated in an airworthy condition, as 

required by the Federal Aviation 

Regulations. Furthermore, we do not 

consider it appropriate to attribute the 

costs associated with aircraft ‘‘down 

time’’ to the AD. Also, we have 

determined the cost of compliance from 

information contained in the 

manufacturer’s service information. We 

recognize that individual operators 

might incur costs less than or more than 

our estimate. It is impossible to estimate 

such individual variations. We have not 

changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Service Bulletin 

British Airways submitted several 

comments on the accuracy and clarity of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

56A2012, dated August 24, 2006. We 

infer that the commenter would like us 

delay issuance of the AD until the 

service bulletin is revised to incorporate 

its comments. 

We acknowledge the value of the 

information submitted by the 

commenter. British Airways’ comments 

will be of benefit to any future revisions 

of the service bulletin. In this case, 

however, the service bulletin is 

acceptable for ensuring that the unsafe 

condition is addressed. Therefore, we 

do not agree to delay this action until 

the service bulletin has been revised. To 

do so would be inappropriate, since we 

have determined that an unsafe 

condition exists, and that inspections 

must be conducted to ensure continued 

safety. We have not changed this AD in 

this regard. 

Clarification of AMOC Paragraph 

We have revised this action to clarify 

the appropriate procedure for notifying 

the principal inspector before using any 

approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data, including the comments 

received, and determined that air safety 

and the public interest require adopting 

the AD with the change described 

previously. We have determined that 

this change will neither increase the 

economic burden on any operator nor 

increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 949 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This AD affects about 153 airplanes of 

U.S. registry. The required inspection to 

determine the window part numbers 

takes about 4 work hours per airplane, 

at an average labor rate of $80 per work 

hour. Based on these figures, the 

estimated cost of the AD for U.S. 

operators is $48,960, or $320 per 

airplane. 

The detailed inspection, if necessary, 

takes about 1 work hour per airplane, at 

an average labor rate of $80 per work 

hour. Based on these figures, the 

estimated cost of the detailed inspection 

for U.S. operators is $80 per airplane, 

per inspection cycle, if necessary. 

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 AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

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

(3) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

See the ADDRESSES section for a location 

to examine the regulatory evaluation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 145 / Monday, July 30, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 41441 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

2007–15–10 Boeing: Amendment 39–15139. 

Docket No. FAA–2006–26441; 

Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–204–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective September 4, 

2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Boeing 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. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from loss of a No. 3 

window in-flight. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct cracking in the fail-safe 

interlayer of certain No. 2 and No. 3 glass 

windows, which could result in loss of the 

window and consequent rapid loss of cabin 

pressure. Loss of the window could also 

result in crew communication difficulties or 

incapacitation of the crew. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Inspection, Related Investigative Actions, 

and Corrective Action 

(f) Inspect the No. 2 and No. 3 windows 

on the left and right sides of the airplane to 

determine their part numbers, and do all the 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, by accomplishing all of 

the actions specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–56A2012, dated August 24, 2006, as 

applicable. Do all of these actions at the 

compliance times specified in Tables 1, 2, 

and 3 of paragraph 1.E. of the service 

bulletin, as applicable, except as provided by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. A review of airplane 

maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of 

the inspection if the part numbers of the 

windows can be conclusively determined 

from that review. Repeat the related 

investigative and corrective actions thereafter 

at the interval specified in Table 2 or 3 of the 

service bulletin, as applicable. 

Exceptions to Compliance Times 

(g) Where Tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 

1.E. of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

56A2012, dated August 24, 2006, specify 

counting the compliance time from ‘‘. . . after 

the date on this service bulletin,’’ this AD 

requires counting the compliance time from 

the effective date of this AD. After replacing 

a discrepant window with a new window, do 

the initial detailed inspection of the new 

window at the applicable compliance time: 

(1) within 5,500 flight cycles after installing 

part number (P/N) 65B27042–( ) or 

65B27043–( ), or (2) within 22,000 flight 

cycles after installing P/N 65B27046–( ) or 

65B27047–( ). 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in 

accordance with the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

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

FSDO. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(i) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–56A2012, dated August 24, 

2006, to perform the actions that are required 

by this AD, unless the AD specifies 

otherwise. The Director of the Federal 

Register approved the incorporation by 

reference of this document in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. 

Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, 

for a copy of this service information. You 

may review copies at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington; or 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/federalregister/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 18, 

2007. 

Stephen P. Boyd, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–14426 Filed 7–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9336] 

RIN 1545–BF82 

Return Required by Subchapter T 

Cooperatives Under Section 6012 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Final regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document contains final 

regulations that prescribe the form that 

cooperatives must use to file their 

income tax returns. The regulations 

affect all cooperatives that are currently 

required to file an income tax return on 

either Form 1120, ‘‘U.S. Corporation 

Income Tax Return,’’ or Form 990–C, 

‘‘Farmers’ Cooperative Association 

Income Tax Return.’’ The new form will 

help the IRS to properly identify 

cooperatives and differentiate between 

cooperatives that must file returns 

within 21⁄2 months of the end of the 

taxable year and those that must file 

within 81⁄2 months of the end of the 

taxable year. 

DATES: Effective date: July 30, 2007. 

Applicability date: These regulations 

apply to returns for taxable years ending 

on or after December 31, 2007. In 

addition, taxpayers may rely on the 

regulations in filing returns for taxable 

years ending on or after December 31, 

2006, and before December 31, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew P. Howard, (202) 622–4910 

(not a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Under existing regulations, all 

cooperatives to which subchapter T 

applies (Subchapter T cooperatives) are 

required to make income tax returns. 

Except in the case of farmers’

cooperatives, the regulations require 

that the return be made on Form 1120. 

In the case of farmers’ cooperatives, the 

regulations require that the return be 

made on Form 990–C. 

Most taxpayers required to make an 

income tax return on Form 1120 must 

file their return on or before the 15th 

day of the third month following the 

close of the taxpayer’s taxable year (21⁄2

month deadline). Some Subchapter T 

cooperatives that make their returns on 

Form 1120 are required to file by the 21⁄2

month deadline, but others are not 

required to file their returns until the 

15th day of the ninth month following 

the close of the taxpayer’s taxable year 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES