[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 158 (Friday, August 15, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48024-48028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18313]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0468; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-147-AD; 
Amendment 39-17924; AD 2014-15-21]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2006-26-06 for 
certain The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes 
equipped with Rolls-Royce engines. AD 2006-26-06 required repetitive 
inspections to detect cracks of the outer V-blades of the thrust 
reverser, and corrective action if necessary. AD

[[Page 48025]]

2006-26-06 also provided for an optional terminating action for the 
repetitive inspections. This new AD adds, for airplanes on which the 
optional terminating action is done, repetitive inspections for 
cracking in the outer V-blade fittings of the hinge beam and latch beam 
ends of each thrust reverser half, and replacement of an affected 
thrust reverser half if necessary. This new AD also adds airplanes to 
the applicability. This AD was prompted by reports of cracked outer V-
blade fittings at the hinge beam end of Rolls-Royce engine thrust 
reversers, on airplanes on which the optional terminating action was 
done. We are issuing this AD to prevent separation of a thrust reverser 
from the airplane during normal reverse thrust or during a refused 
takeoff, which could result in unexpected thrust asymmetry and a 
possible runway excursion.

DATES: This AD is effective September 19, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of September 19, 
2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of 
January 11, 2007 (71 FR 77586, December 27, 2006).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.You may view this referenced service information 
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the 
FAA, call 425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Narinder Luthra, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6513; fax: 
425-917-6590; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, 
December 27, 2006). AD 2006-26-06 applied to Boeing Model 777-200 and -
300 series airplanes, equipped with Rolls-Royce engines. The NPRM 
published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2013 (78 FR 40060). The 
NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive inspections to detect 
cracks of the outer V-blades of the thrust reverser, and corrective 
action if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to continue to provide an 
optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. The NPRM 
also proposed to require, for airplanes on which the optional 
terminating action is done, repetitive inspections for cracking in the 
outer V-blade fittings of the hinge beam and latch beam ends of each 
thrust reverser half, and replacement of an affected thrust reverser 
half if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 
(78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Requests To Incorporate Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-
78-0091, Dated June 18, 2013

    Boeing, American Airlines (AAL), Air New Zealand, Delta Airlines, 
and Transaero requested that we allow the modifications and inspections 
defined in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0091, dated 
June 18, 2013, as an alternative to the inspections specified in 
paragraph (j) of the NPRM (78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013). Boeing stated 
that Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0091, dated June 
18, 2013, has been approved as an alternative method of compliance 
(AMOC) with AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, December 
27, 2006), and is intended as an alternative to the inspections 
proposed by the NPRM. Boeing also requested that we provide credit for 
actions specified in paragraph (j) of the NPRM that were done before 
the effective date of the new AD in accordance with Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0091, dated June 18, 2013.
    We disagree with the request. Boeing is considering revising Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0091, dated June 18, 2013, to 
incorporate feedback on the Accomplishment Instructions of the service 
bulletin that resulted from validation of the service bulletin. The new 
revision might include improvements to the L-fitting modification to 
eliminate short edge margin, fastener changes to eliminate 
interference, and other changes to the installation sequence and other 
procedures. We will consider approving the revision of Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0091 as an AMOC to the actions 
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD, once this service bulletin is 
approved and is released. We find that delaying this action would be 
inappropriate in light of the urgency of the identified unsafe 
condition. No change has been made to this final rule in this regard.

Request To Reference Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-
0064, Revision 2, Dated June 14, 2012

    Boeing requested that we add Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012, as a reference 
to paragraph (g) of the NPRM (78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013). Boeing stated 
that Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, 
dated June 14, 2012, reiterates the repetitive inspection intervals 
from Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 1, 
dated November 30, 2006.
    We agree. The compliance times specified in Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 1, dated November 30, 
2006; and Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012; are the same, except that 
Revision 2 states that the compliance times are measured from the 
effective date of AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, 
December 27, 2006), rather than the issue date of Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 1, dated November 30, 
2006. We have revised paragraph (g) of this final rule to add Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 
14, 2012, as a reference for accomplishing the actions.

Request To Change Format of the NPRM (78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013)

    Air New Zealand requested that we change the format of the NPRM (78 
FR 40060, July 3, 2013) to clarify the requirements. The commenter 
requested that we list all repetitive inspection

[[Page 48026]]

requirements for all airplane configurations in one paragraph. The 
commenter stated that the format of the NPRM was confusing.
    We disagree with changing the format as it is consistent with the 
format used for most supersedure ADs. Paragraph (g) of this AD clearly 
identifies the affected airplanes that must continue to accomplish the 
retained repetitive inspections. Paragraph (j) of this AD clearly 
identifies the affected airplanes that must accomplish the new 
repetitive inspections. No change has been made to this final rule in 
this regard.

Request To Consider AD Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD 
ARC) Recommendations

    AAL requested that, in the spirit of the AD ARC to improve the AD 
process, we consider the guidance from the AD ARC when considering its 
comments to the proposed AD. AAL provided a general comment noting that 
certain service information referenced in the proposed AD is quite 
lengthy and contains extremely detailed data, while one of the 
referenced service documents is only 29 pages long. AAL does not 
consider the lengthy service information to be ``AD-Friendly.'' 
Further, AAL stated that the instructions in this service information 
does not differentiate between critical and non-critical tasks and 
figures (i.e., the service information does not incorporate the 
``Required for Compliance'' (RC) concept developed by the AD ARC).
    We agree that it is helpful when service information is presented 
in a way that meets ``AD-Friendly'' guidelines. The focus of AD-
friendly service information is to ensure that the language (including 
compliance times and instructions) in the document is clear and legally 
enforceable and, therefore, easier for the FAA to adopt into an AD. 
However, this focus does not mean the service information will be 
brief. Many service bulletins are necessarily lengthy and complex due, 
in part, to multiple actions, multiple airplane groups/configurations, 
and multiple or complex compliance times.
    The RC concept is an additional improvement to service information. 
The concept was developed between the FAA and industry under the AD ARC 
to further enhance service bulletins and, in turn, the AD process. The 
RC concept is a new process for annotating which steps in the service 
information are ``required for compliance'' with an AD. Differentiating 
these steps from other tasks in the service information is expected to 
improve an owner's/operator's understanding of AD requirements and help 
provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. However, the RC concept 
does not necessarily result in less lengthy service information. 
Details might be necessary to provide clear understanding and accurate 
service instructions.
    In response to the AD ARC's recommendations, the FAA released 
Advisory Circular (AC) 20-176, dated December 19, 2011 (http://
rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--and--Guidance--Library/
rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/a78cc91a47b192278625796b0075f419/$FILE/
AC%2020-176.pdf); and Order 8110.117, dated September 12, 2012 (http://
rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--and--Guidance--Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/
984bb9eb07cdd86986257a7f0070744c/$FILE/Order%208110.117.pdf); which 
discusses the RC concept. The FAA includes this concept in ADs when we 
receive service information containing RC steps. While some design 
approval holders have implemented the RC concept, the implementation is 
voluntary. The FAA does not intend to develop or revise AD requirements 
to incorporate the RC concept if it is not included in the service 
information.

Request To Add More Detail for Compliance Requirements in AD

    AAL requested that rather than requiring compliance with the 
referenced service bulletins, the AD should focus compliance 
requirements on identifying detailed inspections by task name, 
identifying an optional configuration change by part numbers, and 
specifying the corrective action for crack findings. AAL stated that 
requiring compliance with the entirety of the referenced service 
bulletins would introduce an unnecessary and excessive burden on the 
operators, impede progress toward correcting the unsafe condition, and 
introduce unintended compliance risks not relevant to correcting the 
unsafe condition.
    We disagree with the request. As stated previously, the FAA does 
not intend to develop or revise AD requirements to incorporate the RC 
concept if it is not included in the service information. This final 
rule requires certain repetitive inspections and, as applicable, 
certain corrective actions and replacements, which are described in 
detail in the service information. No change has been made to this 
final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM (78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition; 
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 40060, July 3, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD interim action. The manufacturer is currently 
developing a modification that will address the unsafe condition 
identified in this AD. Once this modification is developed, approved, 
and available, we might consider additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 55 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Action                    Labor cost        Cost per product          Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections [retained actions     16 work-hours x $85  $1,360 per           $74,800 per inspection cycle.
 from AD 2006-26-06, Amendment     per hour = $1,360    inspection cycle.
 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, December   per inspection
 27, 2006)].                       cycle.
Repetitive inspections outer      82 work-hours x $85  $6,970 per           $383,350 per inspection cycle.
 V[dash]blade [new action] \1\.    per hour = $6,970    inspection cycle.
                                   per inspection
                                   cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide a cost estimate for the on-condition
  actions specified in this AD.


[[Page 48027]]

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, December 27, 2006), and 
adding the following new AD:

2014-15-21 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17924; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0468; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-147-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 19, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 
77586, December 27, 2006).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -300 
series airplanes, certificated in any category, equipped with Rolls-
Royce engines.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78, Engine 
exhaust.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracked outer V-blade 
fittings at the hinge beam end of Rolls-Royce engine thrust 
reversers, on airplanes on which the optional terminating action was 
done. We are issuing this AD to prevent separation of a thrust 
reverser from the airplane during normal reverse thrust or during a 
refused takeoff, which could result in unexpected thrust asymmetry 
and a possible runway excursion.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Repetitive Inspections With New Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD 
2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, December 27, 2006), 
with new service information. For Group 1, Configuration 1, 
airplanes, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012: Do the 
detailed inspections to detect cracks in the outer V-blade of the 
thrust reversers. Do the inspections in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 1, dated November 30, 2006; or Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated 
June 14, 2012. Do the inspections at the applicable times specified 
in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 1, dated November 30, 2006; 
except where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, 
Revision 1, dated November 30, 2006, specifies an initial compliance 
time after the date on that service bulletin, this AD requires 
compliance within the specified time after January 11, 2007 (the 
effective date of AD 2006-26-06). Do applicable corrective actions 
before further flight, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-
0064, Revision 1, dated November 30, 2006; or Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 
2012; or paragraph (m) of this AD. As of the effective date of this 
AD, use only Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, 
Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012, to accomplish the actions required 
by this paragraph.

(h) Retained Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph restates the credit provisions for the actions 
specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 
FR 77586, December 27, 2006). For Group 1, Configuration 1, 
airplanes as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 
777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012. This paragraph 
provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this 
AD, if those actions were performed before January 11, 2007 (the 
effective date of AD 2006-26-06), using Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, dated August 7, 2006.

(i) Retained Optional Terminating Action With New Requirements and New 
Service Information

    This paragraph restates the optional terminating action 
specified in paragraph (i) of AD 2006-26-06, Amendment 39-14864 (71 
FR 77586, December 27, 2006), with new service information. 
Accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1) or 
(i)(2) of this AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) of 
this AD. For airplanes on which this terminating action has been 
accomplished, operators must do the inspection required by paragraph 
(j) of this AD.
    (1) Accomplishment of the applicable inspections and related 
investigative/corrective actions before the effective date of this 
AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0061, dated July 6, 2006; 
except, where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0061, 
dated July 6, 2006, specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
appropriate action, repair before further flight using a method 
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph 
(m) of this AD.
    (2) Accomplishment of the applicable modification, inspections, 
and related investigative/corrective actions, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletin 777-78-0061, Revision 1, dated August 28, 2007; except, 
where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0061, 
Revision 1, dated August 28, 2007, specifies to contact the 
manufacturer for appropriate action, repair before further flight 
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified 
in paragraph (m) of this AD.

(j) New Repetitive Inspections

    For airplanes in Group 1, Configuration 2, and Groups 2 and 3, 
as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-

[[Page 48028]]

0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012: At the applicable times 
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 
2012, except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD, do a detailed 
inspection for cracking of the outer V-blade fittings at the latch 
beam end and hinge beam end of each thrust reverser half, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 
2012.
    (1) If no cracking is found, repeat the inspections thereafter 
at the times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated 
June 14, 2012.
    (2) If any cracking is found, before further flight, replace the 
affected thrust reverser half with a serviceable thrust reverser 
half, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated 
June 14, 2012. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the times 
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, Revision 2, dated June 14, 
2012.

(k) Service Information Exception

    Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, 
Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012, specifies an initial compliance 
time ``after the date on Revision 2 of this service bulletin,'' this 
AD requires compliance within the specified time after the effective 
date of this AD.

(l) Reporting Not Required

    Although Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, 
Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012, specifies to submit certain 
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that 
requirement.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local 
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending 
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 
attention of the person identified in the Related Information 
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (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 2006-26-06, 
Amendment 39-14864 (71 FR 77586, December 27, 2006), are not 
approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Narinder Luthra, 
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; 
phone: 425-917-6513; fax: 425-917-6590; email: 
[email protected].
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified 
in paragraphs (o)(5) and (o)(6) of this AD.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
September 19, 2014.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0061, 
Revision 1, dated August 28, 2007.
    (ii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0064, 
Revision 2, dated June 14, 2012.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
January 11, 2007 (71 FR 77586, December 27, 2006).
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-78-0061, dated 
July 6, 2006.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at 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.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 23, 2014.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-18313 Filed 8-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P