[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8062-8063]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03155]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0033; FRL 9941-75-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; EPA's ENERGY STAR[supreg] Product Labeling
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``EPA's ENERGY STAR Product
Labeling'' (EPA ICR No. 2078.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0528) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a proposed revision of the ICR, which is currently approved
through February 29, 2016. Public comments were previously requested
via the Federal Register (80 FR 65752) on October 27, 2015, during a
60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for
public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below,
including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 18,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0033, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirsten Hesla, Climate Protection
Partnerships Division, Office of Air and Radiation, Mailcode 6202J,

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
343-2200; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: ENERGY STAR is a voluntary program developed in
collaboration with industry to create a self-sustaining market for
energy efficient products. The center piece of the program is the
ENERGY STAR label, a registered certification label that helps
consumers identify products that save energy, save money, and help
protect the environment without sacrificing quality or performance. In
order to protect the integrity of the label and enhance its
effectiveness in the marketplace, EPA must ensure that products
carrying the label meet appropriate program requirements.
    Program participants submit signed Partnership Agreements
indicating that they will adhere to logo-use guidelines and program
requirements. Retail partners commit to selling, marketing and
promoting ENERGY STAR certified products. Product brand owner partners,
who are usually the manufacturer of the products, commit to having
participating products certified to meet specified energy performance
criteria based on a standard test method and EPA's third party
certification requirements. These requirements for ENERGY STAR product
certification also include provisions for verifying the performance of
certified products through verification testing.
    Now, product information is recorded by Certification Bodies and
shared with EPA using XML-based web services that validate and save the
information in EPA's database. With this new process of obtaining
certified product data, certified model data is automatically updated
daily on the ENERGY STAR Web site. To ensure continued product
performance after initial certification, EPA requires Certification
Bodies to conduct post-market verification testing of a sampling of
ENERGY STAR certified products. Certification Bodies are required to
share information with EPA on products subjected to this post-market
testing twice a year and to immediately report any certified products
that no longer meet the program requirements. This process allows EPA
to monitor the ongoing performance of products and take necessary steps
to maintain consumer confidence in the ENERGY STAR label and protect
the investment of partners.
    Form Numbers: 5900-252, 5900-251, 5900-33, 5900-253, 5900-168,
5900-206, 5900-207, 5900-28, 5900-208, 5900-210, 5900-228, 5900-234,
5900-229, 5900-235, 5900-47, 5900-349, 5900-350, 5900-351, 5900-348,
5900-35, 5900-36, 5900-37, 5900-38, 5900-39, 5900-41, 5900-42, 5900-43,
5900-44, 5900-48, 5900-49, 5900-50, 5900-51, 5900-53, 5900-54, 5900-55,
5900-56, 5900-57, 5900-58, 5900-230, 5900-224, 5900-227, 5900-166,
5900-165, 5900-164, 5900-226, 5900-163, 5900-34, 5900-216, 5900-217,
5900-218, 5900-388.
    Respondents/affected entities: Respondents for this information
collection request include Partners in ENERGY STAR.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 2,080.
    Frequency of response: Initially/one-time and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 41,209 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $3,118,166 (per year), includes $17,285
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 24,129 hours in
the total estimated burden compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB. Although participation in the ENERGY STAR program has steadily
increased, the automated process of sharing information between
Certification Bodies and the Agency has reduced the overall burden for
Partners.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-03155 Filed 2-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 106 (Friday, June 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32433-32437]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13055]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0547; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-234-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

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 all The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. That NPRM proposed
to require a detailed inspection of the inboard and outboard main slat
track downstop assemblies and a torque application to the main track
downstop assembly nuts of slat numbers 1 through 10, excluding the
outboard track of slats 1 and 10; a detailed inspection of all slat
track housings for foreign object debris (FOD) and visible damage; and
corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM was prompted by reports of
fuel leaking from the front spar of the wing through the slat track
housing. This action revises that NPRM by adding inspection results
reporting. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to detect and
correct incorrectly installed main slat track downstop assemblies,
which, when the slat is retracted, could cause a puncture in the slat
track housing and lead to a fuel leak and potential fire. 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 July 16,
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:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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 AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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:<PHONE_NUMBER>) 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, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-
917-6440; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2010-0547;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-234-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

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. That NPRM
published in the Federal Register on June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31327). That
NPRM proposed to require a detailed inspection of the inboard and
outboard main slat track downstop assemblies and a torque application
to the main track downstop assembly nuts of slat numbers 1 through 10,
excluding the outboard track of slats 1 and 10; a detailed inspection
of all slat track housings for FOD and visible damage; and corrective
actions if necessary.

Actions Since Previous NPRM (75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010) Was Issued

    Since we issued the previous NPRM (75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010), we
have determined that the service information referenced in the NPRM,
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September
15, 2009, contains inspections for certain part numbers that do not
exist and errors in certain figures.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068,
Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011. This service information clarifies
certain part numbers, downstop assembly components, and torquing
requirements for downstop fasteners; and adds an option to replace the
slat can instead of repairing it. This service information also
corrects the part numbers to be inspected and corrects the errors found
in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated
September 15, 2009.

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.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the previous NPRM
(75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010). The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Agreement With the Intent of the NPRM (75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010)

    American Airlines (American) stated that, in general, it agrees
with the intent of the previous NPRM (75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010).

Concurrence With the Proposed Inspection and Follow-On Actions

    Continental Airlines (Continental) stated that it concurs with the
proposed inspection and follow-on actions.

Requests To Clarify Reporting Results

    Boeing, Delta Air Lines (Delta), and FedEx requested that we
clarify if reporting the inspection results is required. Boeing stated
that the reporting request is not shown in paragraph (h) of the NPRM
(75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010). Delta stated that reporting for this
subject does not add safety to the rule.
    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1,
dated July 19, 2011, specifies reporting and includes an appendix for
reporting the inspection results. The extent of FOD, visible damage,
and missing parts is not known. Inspection reports will help determine
the extent of the safety issue in the affected fleet. Based on the
results of these reports, we will determine if further rulemaking is
warranted. Therefore, we have added new paragraph (i) in this
supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) to require operators to report the inspection
results.

Request To Make the Inspection Repetitive

    American stated that a repetitive inspection program and/or
airplane maintenance manual (AMM) revision may be necessary to prevent
the unsafe condition. American justified its request by stating that
the hardware may be changed using the AMM after the one-time
inspection, and that maintenance could result in a loose torque to the
downstop assembly nut.
    We disagree with revising this SNPRM to incorporate additional
inspections or AMM revisions at this time. The SNPRM proposes a one-
time inspection, and reporting. If we receive reports of discrepancies
in the downstop hardware or of FOD in the slat cans, we may consider
additional rulemaking to address the unsafe condition. If operators are
doing maintenance on the slat track downstop hardware using the AMMs,
they should follow the instructions in the AMM and correctly torque the
nut. The torque values in the AMM are the same as those in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1, dated July
19, 2011. Boeing is not

aware of any errors in the AMMs. Boeing has also added cautionary notes
to the pertinent sections of the AMM advising the operators to
correctly torque the nut, and to ensure that no FOD has dropped in to
the slat can. We have not changed the SNPRM in this regard.

Request To Delay Issuing the Rule

    FedEx expressed concern over the availability of spare parts. FedEx
stated that some replacement parts are not currently available from
Boeing or are in very limited supply. We infer that FedEx requested we
delay issuing the rule until additional supplies of spare parts are
available.
    We disagree. The objective of this SNPRM is to detect and correct
fuel leaks in the slat cans and prevent a potential fire. To delay this
action would be inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe
condition exists and that inspections must be conducted to ensure
continued safety. Additionally, based on reports received to date,
Boeing does not anticipate the need for significant numbers of part
replacements. We have not changed the SNPRM in this regard.

Request To Correct Service Information

    Continental and Delta requested resolution of the errors in the
service information.
    Continental requested that the illustrated parts catalog be
permitted for use in determining correct part numbers and alternative
part numbers.
    Delta noted that the torque values in the service information may
be incorrect and that the illustrations of proper assembly are
incorrect. Delta also requested that we revise the NPRM (75 FR 31327,
June 3, 2010) to specify that the actions be accomplished using the
better illustrations available in the AMM.
    We agree with the commenters that corrections to Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15, 2009, are
needed. We have revised the SNPRM to require Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011, which
corrects the errors specified by the commenters. We have also added new
paragraph (j) to this SNPRM to provide credit for actions accomplished
before the effective date of the AD in accordance with Boeing Special
Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15, 2009, provided the
inspection results were reported as specified in that service bulletin.

Request To Allow Replacement of Parts

    American requested that the NPRM (75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010) be
revised to allow replacing damaged parts with new parts as an
alternative to repairing damaged parts. American justified its request
by stating that it may be easier to simply replace a damaged housing
than to remove the damage.
    We partially agree. We agree with the commenter that this change is
warranted because a replacement part is an acceptable repair. We
disagree with changing the SNPRM, because Boeing has revised Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, to allow either part
replacement or repair. As stated previously, we have changed the SNPRM
to refer to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068,
Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011.

Request To Account for Errors in Figure 11 of the Service Information

    American and Delta requested a provision in the NPRM (75 FR 31327,
June 3, 2010) to account for errors in Figure 11 of Boeing Special
Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15, 2009. The
commenters justified the request by stating that the dimensioning of
the allowable blendout in Figure 11 of Boeing Special Attention
Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15, 2009, is unclear.
    We partially agree. We agree with the commenters that the figure in
Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated September 15,
2009, is unclear. We disagree with revising this SNPRM, because Boeing
has provided corrected service instructions in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011. As
stated previously, we have changed the SNPRM to refer to this revision
of the service information.

Clarification of Inspection Requirements

    We have revised paragraph (g) of the SNPRM to clarify that the
purpose of the detailed inspection of the inboard and outboard main
track downstop assemblies of slat numbers 1 through 10, excluding the
outboard main track downstop assemblies of slat numbers 1 and 10, is to
determine the assembly order and to detect missing or damaged parts.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM 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
(75 FR 31327, June 3, 2010). 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 SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of the SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the SNPRM and the Service Information.'' This
SNPRM also requires sending the inspection results to Boeing.

Differences Between the SNPRM and the Service Information

    Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1, dated
July 19, 2011, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions
on how to repair certain conditions, but this SNPRM would require
repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using 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) that we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 645 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.........................  20 work-hours x $85 per                  $0          $1,700      $1,096,500
                                      hour = $1,700.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.

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.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0547; Directorate Identifier
2009-NM-234-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 16, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF,
-200CB, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of fuel leaking from the front
spar of the wing through the slat track housing. We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct incorrectly installed main track downstop
assemblies, which, when the slat is retracted, could cause a
puncture in the slat track housing and lead to a fuel leak and
potential fire.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Torque Application

    Except as required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, at the
applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1,
dated July 19, 2011: Do the actions in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)
of this AD.
    (1) Perform a detailed inspection of the inboard and outboard
main track downstop assemblies of slat numbers 1 through 10,
excluding the outboard main track downstop assemblies of slat
numbers 1 and 10, for correct assembly order and missing or damaged
parts; perform a detailed inspection of all slat track housings for
foreign object debris, visible damage, and missing parts; and do all
applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-
0068, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011, except as required by
paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight.
    (2) Apply torque to the main track down stop assembly nuts to
make sure they have been correctly installed, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011.

(h) Exceptions to the Service Bulletin

    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068,
Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011, specifies a compliance time ``after
the date on this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance at
the specified time after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068,
Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011, 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 (l)(1) of this AD.

(i) Reporting Requirement

    If any of the conditions specified in paragraph B.3., ``Part 3--
Appendix A: Inspection Results Report,'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-
0068, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2011, are found during the
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, submit a report of
the inspection findings at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, as specified in Appendix A of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-57-0068, Revision 1,
dated July 19, 2011, to Boeing through the Boeing Communication
System (BCS). The report must include a description of any
discrepancies found, the airplane serial number, and the number of
landings and flight hours on the airplane.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for inspections and corrective
actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if the inspections and
corrective actions were performed before the effective date of this
AD using Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated
September 15, 2009, provided the inspection results were reported as
specified in Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 757-57-0068, dated
September 15, 2009.

(k) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing, and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the

burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW.,
Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

(l) 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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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; phone: 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 18, 2012.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-13055 Filed 5-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P