[Federal Register: April 7, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 66)]
[Notices]
[Page 17823-17825]
[DOCID:fr07ap10-123]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice--Interpretation of 49 CFR 158.45

    The Department received a request for a legal interpretation from
the Interim Trustee of an air carrier in a Chapter 11

liquidation proceeding, regarding an airport's obligation to refund
passenger facility charges (PFCs) for certain tickets purchased by
consumers with credit cards. These tickets were never used due to the
airline's cessation of operations prior to the flight dates. On March
30, 2010, the Department sent the Interim Trustee the response re-
printed below, which supersedes informal communications that the
Department and the FAA have provided in prior instances.
    In the majority of airline customer refund requests, the Department
has made clear that no refund of a PFC is due where no refund of the
ticket is due, as is usually the case for non-refundable tickets. See
14 CFR 158.45(a); 72 FR 28837 at 28843. However, a distinction must be
made in an airline's liquidation where the tickets in question were
purchased by credit card, the defunct airline has not operated the
relevant flights, and the defunct airline is no longer operating (and
no delivery of the airline transportation service is therefore
possible). In such an instance, pursuant to applicable regulations of
the Federal Reserve System, enforced by the Department for airline
ticket sales, a refund is due and owing to the customer, including the
PFC. See Federal Truth in Lending Act/Regulation Z requirements (12 CFR
226.13(e); 14 CFR 374.3(b)). Because the Interim Trustee's letter
requested an interpretation only with respect to tickets purchased with
credit cards, the Department's letter addresses only that situation. We
defer to the Bankruptcy Court on which party may properly claim
repayment of the PFCs from the airports (Aloha's bankruptcy estate or
the credit card processor that has refunded such amounts to the ticket
purchasers), or how such collection should be effected. If any
questions arise, please feel free to contact Ronald Jackson, DOT
Assistant General Counsel for Operations, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on March 31, 2010.
Ronald Jackson,
Assistant General Counsel for Operations.
Dane S. Field
Interim Trustee
Estate of Aloha Airlines
P.O. Box 4198
Honolulu, HI 96812-4198

Re: Passenger Facility Charge Refunds

    Dear Mr. Field: This responds to your March 9, 2009 letter to the
U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) General Counsel submitted in
your capacity as Interim Trustee for Aloha Airlines, which ceased
operations on March 31, 2008. Thank you for your patience as we have
reviewed this matter.
    Specifically, you request ``assistance in providing guidance to the
airports that refund of [Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs)] by airports
is appropriate when refunds for unusable tickets have been refunded to
ticket purchasers as a part of a full ticket refund initiated by the
airline ticket purchasers.'' Your letter refers in particular to
situations in which the customer held a ticket for an Aloha flight
scheduled for March 31, 2008 or later, contacted his/her credit card
processor to request a refund given Aloha's cessation of operations,
and received the refund--including a refund of the PFC associated with
the ticket. Now Aloha's bankruptcy estate seeks to obtain from the
relevant airports the amount of PFCs refunded to these customers, but
not all of the airports have refunded the amounts to Aloha's estate. As
a matter of aviation law (as opposed to bankruptcy law), we believe a
refund of the PFCs by the relevant airports is appropriate where an
airline fails to provide the purchased flight due to liquidation in
bankruptcy.\1\ However, out of deference to the Bankruptcy Court
presiding over Aloha's estate, we offer no opinion on which party may
properly claim repayment of the PFCs from the airports (Aloha's
bankruptcy estate or the credit card processor that has refunded such
amounts to the ticket purchasers), or how such collection should be
effected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Our conclusion is based solely on an analysis of 12 CFR
Section 226 and 49 U.S.C. Section 40117(g)(4), as implemented by the
relevant PFC regulations (as set forth below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of Aloha's position, you cite 14 CFR Section
158.45(a)(3)(i), which states that, ``Any change in itinerary initiated
by a passenger that requires an adjustment to the amount paid by the
passenger is subject to collection or refund of the PFC as
appropriate.'' Section 158.45(a)(3)(ii), on the other hand, states that
a passenger's ``failure to travel on a nonrefundable or expired ticket
is not a change in itinerary'' requiring a PFC refund. (Italics added.)
Arguing against the application of the latter provision, you state that
it was Aloha that ceased operations, and thus the passenger did not
``fail'' to travel. As you explain, ``The ticket purchasers requested
refund of non-expired tickets on which it is not possible to travel,
due to the actions of others, and not the ticket purchaser's
inaction.'' Furthermore, you note that the tickets were ``basically
usable or refundable until one year after issuance.''
    It is important to note that the prohibition of refunds in Section
158.45(a)(3)(ii) covers only ``a nonrefundable or expired ticket.''
Section 158.45(a)(3)(ii) further provides that, ``[i]f the ticket
purchaser is not permitted any fare refund on the unused ticket, the
ticket purchaser is not permitted a refund of any PFC associated with
that ticket.'' In the matter before us, DOT understands that the ticket
purchasers were given a refund of the full fare, including PFCs, by the
credit card processor. Such refunds would be required from a credit
card processor by 12 CFR Sections 226.13(a)(3) and (e)(1), both of
which are applicable to credit card processors working with air
carriers under 14 CFR Section 374.3(b), in the event of a ``billing
error.'' The regulations define ``billing error'' as including ``a
reflection on or with a periodic statement of an extension of credit
for property or services * * * not delivered to the consumer or the
consumer's designee as agreed,'' 12 CFR Sec.  226.13(a)(3) (italics
added), in which case--at least as an initial matter pending further
investigation--the credit card processor must ``[c]orrect the billing
error and credit the consumer's account with any disputed amount and
related finance or other charges, as applicable.'' 12 CFR Sec.
226.13(e)(1). Barring a reversal of the refund following an
investigation, it is then up to the credit card processor and the
merchant to work out the matter between themselves, and in the case of
a bankruptcy, subject to the terms of any bankruptcy stay or other
bankruptcy requirements.
    If full fare refunds to the ticket purchasers by the credit card
processors were indeed required by 12 CFR Sections 226.13(a)(3) and
(e)(1), then the tickets at issue could not be considered
``nonrefundable'' under Section 158.45(a)(3)(ii). Therefore, the
prohibition of PFC refunds in 158.45(a)(3)(ii) is inapplicable, and a
refund of the PFCs would be appropriate. Moreover, if the Bankruptcy
Court should also find as a factual matter that the tickets under their
terms were refundable by Aloha as of the bankruptcy filing date, then
that would provide a further basis for a refund.
    You indicate that Aloha requests that the airports submit the
refunds to the Aloha bankruptcy estate. We do not offer an opinion on
that particular issue. As stated above, we defer to the Bankruptcy
Court on the appropriate treatment of the PFC revenues. We do note that
under 49 U.S.C. Section 40117(g) and 14 CFR Section 158.49(b), an air
carrier or its agent holds collected

PFC revenues in ``trust'' for the beneficial interest of the eligible
agency imposing the fee, and neither the carrier nor its agent holds
legal or equitable interest in the revenues (with exceptions not
relevant here). This is not to set forth a DOT position that Aloha may
not collect the refundable PFC revenues; rather, as stated above, out
of deference to the Bankruptcy Court and because we are not privy to
Aloha's arrangements with the credit card processors or the flow of
funds in this matter, we defer to the Bankruptcy Court on all such
matters, including which party may properly claim repayment of the
PFCs, how such collection should be effected, and whether the airports
have some other claim to the revenues in these circumstances based on
an accounting error or otherwise. But should refund be appropriate, any
solution must ensure that the flow of funds among Aloha, the credit
card processors, and the airports complies with 14 CFR Sections 158.45
and 158.49.
    We appreciate the importance of your work on Aloha's behalf, and we
hope that you find this letter helpful. As a courtesy, we are copying
the Bankruptcy Court Judge and airports that may be affected by this
letter. To be clear, however, this letter is not intended as a DOT
position in the bankruptcy proceeding, or any type of final agency
action; rather, we are merely providing guidance on the interpretation
of the PFC regulations, in response to your request. If you have any
further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 366-
4710.

 Sincerely,

Ronald Jackson,

Assistant General Counsel for Operations

cc: United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Hawaii Airport Managers
or PFC Contacts for the following airports:

     Sacramento International Airport (SMF)
     San Francisco International Airport (SFO)
     John Wayne-Orange County Airport (SNA)
     Oakland International Airport (OAK)
     Denver International Airport (DEN)
     Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
     Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD)
     San Diego International Airport (SAN)

[FR Doc. 2010-7887 Filed 4-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 15, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42749-42755]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0580; Product Identifier 2020-NM-052-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2019-02-03, which applies to all The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9,
and 787-10 airplanes. AD 2019-02-03 requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations. Since the FAA issued AD
2019-02-03, the manufacturer has developed a new fire handle design
that will eliminate the need for the airworthiness limitations required
by AD 2019-02-03. This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD
2019-02-03 and would require incorporation of an airworthiness
limitation which applies only to certain airplanes. This proposed AD
would also require replacing or modifying certain engine fire control
panels, which would terminate the revised airworthiness limitation when
a certain condition is met. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 31,
2020.

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 https://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: 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 NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0580.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0580; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tak Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0580;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-052-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA

specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM
because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2019-02-03, Amendment 39-19550 (84 FR 2437,
February 7, 2019) (``AD 2019-02-03''), for all The Boeing Company Model
787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes. AD 2019-02-03 requires revising the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. AD 2019-
02-03 resulted from reports of warpage of internal engine fire handle
components, which can cause binding and prevent proper operation. The
FAA issued AD 2019-02-03 to address a latent failure of the engine fire
handle, which could result in the inability to extinguish an engine
fire that, if uncontrollable, could lead to wing failure.

Actions Since AD 2019-02-03 Was Issued

    The preamble to AD 2019-02-03 explains that the FAA considered the
requirements ``interim action'' and was considering further rulemaking.
Since the FAA issued AD 2019-02-03, the manufacturer developed a new
fire handle design for the engine fire control panel. The FAA has
determined that replacement with a new or modified engine fire control
panel addresses the unsafe condition and will eliminate the need for
the airworthiness limitations required by AD 2019-02-03. Therefore, the
FAA has determined that the airworthiness limitations required by AD
2019-02-03 should be revised to limit its applicability to airplanes
equipped with the old design--an engine fire control panel having part
number (P/N) 412600-001 or an engine fire shutoff switch having P/N
417000-101 or 417000-102. The FAA has also determined that once the new
or modified engine fire control panel is installed on all affected
airplanes in an operator's fleet, the revised airworthiness limitation
may be removed.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-
00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020. The service information
describes procedures for replacing the engine fire control panel with a
new or modified panel. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency 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 actions of AD 2019-02-03. This
proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate an airworthiness
limitation that applies to airplanes equipped with an engine fire
control panel having part number (P/N) 412600-001, or an engine fire
shutoff switch having P/N 417000-101 or P/N 417000-102. This proposed
AD would also require accomplishment of the actions identified in
Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-00 RB, Issue 001,
dated March 10, 2020, described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0580.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) according to
paragraph (o) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Requirements Bulletin

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for
annotating which steps in the service information are ``required for
compliance'' (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept
into Boeing service bulletins.
    In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related
Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was
worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the
development of a new process in which the service information more
clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition
in the ``Accomplishment Instructions.'' The new process results in a
Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to
address the unsafe condition (i.e., only the RC actions).

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 122 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the retained
actions from AD 2019-02-03 to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. In the past, the agency has estimated that this action
takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance
or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has
determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-
airplane estimate.
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new proposed
maintenance or inspection program revision to be $7,650 (90 work-hours
x $85 per work-hour).

                            Estimated Costs for Required Replacement or Modification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement or modification...........  2 work-hours x $85 per            $5,000          $5,170        $630,740
                                         hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty
coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included
all known 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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA has 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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

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

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)
2019-02-03, Amendment 39-19550 (84 FR 2437, February 7, 2019), and
adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2020-0580; Product Identifier
2020-NM-052-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August 31,
2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2019-02-03, Amendment 39-19550 (84 FR 2437,
February 7, 2019) (``AD 2019-02-03'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9,
and 787-10 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26, Fire
protection.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of warpage of internal engine
fire handle components that can cause binding and prevent proper
operation, and by the development of a new fire handle design that
will prevent the unsafe condition. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address a latent failure of the engine fire handle, which could
result in the inability to extinguish an engine fire that, if
uncontrollable, could lead to wing failure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Maintenance/Inspection Program Revision, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2019-02-03, with no changes. Within 14 days after February 22, 2019
(the effective date of AD 2019-02-03), revise the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to add
airworthiness limitation 28-AWL-FIRE, by incorporating the
information specified in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD into
the Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness. The initial compliance time for
accomplishing the actions specified in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of
this AD is within 45 days after February 22, 2019.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP15JY20.000

(h) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals, With
New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2019-02-03, with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph
(k) of this AD: After accomplishment of the existing maintenance or
inspection program revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no
alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used
unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

(i) New Required Actions

    For the airplanes identified in Boeing Requirements Bulletin
B787-81205-SB260008-00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-00 RB, Issue 001, dated
March 10, 2020, except as specified by paragraph (j) of this AD, do
all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-
81205-SB260008-00 RB, Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by

paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in Boeing Service Bulletin
B787-81205-SB260008-00, Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020, which is
referred to in Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-00
RB, Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020.

(j) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-00 RB,
Issue 001, dated March 10, 2020, uses the phrase ``the issue 001
date of Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB260008-00 RB,'' this AD
requires using ``the effective date of this AD.''

(k) New Maintenance/Inspection Program Revision

    Prior to or concurrently with the actions specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD, or within 30 days after the effective date of the
AD, whichever occurs later: Revise the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating the information
specified in figure 2 to paragraph (k) of this AD into the
Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness. It is acceptable to change the limitation number from
28-AWL-FIRE to 26-AWL-FIRE, provided the rest of the information in
figure 2 to paragraph (k) of this AD remains unchanged. The initial
compliance time for accomplishing the actions specified in figure 2
to paragraph (k) of this AD is within 30 days after accomplishing
the last 28-AWL-FIRE or 26-AWL-FIRE task, as applicable.
Accomplishing the revision required by this paragraph terminates the
actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP15JY20.001

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(l) New Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After accomplishment of the existing maintenance or inspection
program revision required by paragraph (k) of this AD, no
alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used
unless the actions or intervals are approved as an AMOC in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this
AD.

(m) Terminating Action for Repetitive Inspections

    Accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (i) of this
AD on all affected airplanes in an operator's fleet terminates the
requirements of paragraph (k) of this AD.

(n) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install on
any airplane any engine fire control panel having part number (P/N)
412600-001, or any engine fire shutoff switch having P/N 417000-101
or P/N 417000-102.

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, 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 certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (p)(1) 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, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2019-02-03 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(p) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Tak Kobayashi,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-
3553; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on July 7, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-15127 Filed 7-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P