Discussion \n\n\n\tWe issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on July 1, 2014 (79 FR 37239). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on May 24, 2011 (76 FR 30043). The NPRM proposed to require, for certain airplanes, installing new relays adjacent to two of the spoiler control modules. For certain other airplanes, the NPRM proposed to require torquing the bracket assembly installation nuts and ground stud nuts, and doing bond resistance tests between the bracket assemblies and the terminal lugs on the ground studs. The NPRM was prompted by numerous reports of unintended lateral oscillations during final approach, just before landing. In addition to the actions proposed in the NPRM, the SNPRM proposed to require installing three new relays on the opposite side of the same relay bracket assembly; and for certain airplanes, doing an additional inspection to ensure that the three new relays do not contact adjacent wire bundles, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to reduce the chance of unintended lateral oscillations near touchdown, which could result in loss of lateral control of the airplane, and consequent airplane damage or injury to flightcrew and passengers. \n\nComments \n\n\n\tWe gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment. \n\nSupport for the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014) \n\n\n\tAmerican Airlines (AAL) stated that it agrees with the intent of the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014). Boeing stated that it agrees with the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). We infer that Boeing's comment refers to the SNPRM. \n\nRequest To Withdraw the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014) \n\n\n\tUnited Airlines (United Engineering) requested data to justify the release of a new AD. United Engineering stated that it has not received any reports of pilot-induced oscillations since implementation of AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 2006). United Engineering stated that AD 2006-23-15 requires, among other actions, installing a control wheel damper assembly and vortex generators (vortilons) on the leading edge of the outboard main flap. United Engineering also stated that the required work is extensive and that the impact to operations and the cost of this modification is considerable. \n\tFrom these statements, we infer that United Engineering requested we withdraw the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014). We do not agree with the commenter's request to withdraw the SNPRM. AD 2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 2006), was considered interim action. To effectively manage the risk, the FAA determined an interim action needed to be mandated to reduce the risk, while a solution that fully addresses the unsafe condition was identified and could be implemented. \n\tThe manufacturer has identified an additional modification that is needed to correct the unsafe condition identified in AD 2006-23-15. We have determined that this design change not only corrects the unsafe condition by removing excessive airplane roll authority during landing, but it will also improve safety by making the Model 757 handling characteristics more consistent with the other Boeing airplane models. Also, even though there have only been 12 reports of unintended lateral oscillations near touchdown, the FAA considers it likely that there may have been other events that have been unrecognized and/or unreported. \n\tFinally, in developing the compliance time for this AD, we did consider not only the safety implications of the identified unsafe condition, but also the practical aspects of an orderly modification of the fleet including the work required and the impact on operations. We have determined that it is necessary to proceed with this AD action. \n\nRequest To Delay Final Rule Pending Revised Service Information \n\n\n\tAAL requested that we delay this final rule until Boeing releases Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4. AAL noted that Boeing intended to release Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, which would address its concerns regarding certain procedures and figures in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 1, Dated June 30, 2010. \n\tSince the issuance of the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014), Boeing has issued Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014. We have revised this AD to incorporate Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014, as an appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the actions required by this AD. Thisservice bulletin includes a change to a footnote listed in Figures 15, 16, 17, 19, and 21; this footnote addresses AAL's concerns regarding certain procedures and figures in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010. Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014, states that no more work is necessary on airplanes changed in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2012; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013. \n\tWe have changed paragraphs (c) and (g) of this AD to reference Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014. \n\nEffect of Winglets on AD \n\n\n\tAviation Partners Boeing stated that the installation of winglets per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) \n\n((Page 21647)) \n\nST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/ rgstc.nsf/0/312bc296830a925c86257c85006d1b1f/$FILE/ST01518SE.pdf) does not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions. No change is necessary to this AD in this regard. \n\nRelated Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 \n\n\n\tWe reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, which describes procedures for installing new relays; inspecting to ensure that the new relays do not contact adjacent wire bundles, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary; torquing the bracket assembly installation nuts and ground stud nuts; and doing bond resistance tests between the bracket assemblies and the terminal lugs on the ground studs. \n\tWe have also reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014, which provides some revised text in footnotes of certain figures. \n\tThis 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 of this AD. \n\nConclusion \n\n\n\tWe 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 and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes: \n\tAre consistent with the intent that was proposed in the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; and \n\tDo not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014). \n\tWe also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD. \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tWe estimate that this AD affects 676 airplanes of U.S. registry. \n\tWe estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: \n\n\n\tEstimated Costs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tCost on U.S. \n\tAction Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Installation Group 1, 36 work-hours x $85 per $4,691 $7,751............. $372,048. \n\tConfiguration 1 (48 airplanes). hour = $3,060. Installation Group 2, 33 work-hours x $85 per 4,610 7,415.............. 4,360,020. \n\tConfiguration 1 (588 airplanes). hour = $2,805. Installation Group 3, 33 work-hours x $85 per 4,619 7,424.............. 89,088. \n\tConfiguration 1 (12 airplanes). hour = $2,805. Installation Group 4, 33 work-hours x $85 per 4,610 7,415.............. 177,960. \n\tConfiguration 1 (24 airplanes). hour = $2,805. Installation Group 5, 36 work-hours x $85 per 4,701 7,761.............. 31,044. \n\tConfiguration 1 (4 airplanes). hour = $3,060. Torque Bracket Assembly and Bond 12 work-hours x $85 per 0 Up to $1,020....... Up to $689,520. \n\tTests Groups 1-5, Configuration hour = $1,020. \n\t2 (Up to 676 airplanes). General Visual Inspection Groups 7 work-hours x $85 per 0 Up to $595......... Up to $402,220. \n\t1-5, Configuration 3 (Up to 676 hour = $595. \n\tairplanes). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\n\n\tWe estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these repairs: \n\n\n\tOn-Condition Costs ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \n\tCost per \n\tAction Labor cost Parts cost product ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Adjust Wire Bundle and Install 1 work-hour x$0 $85 \n\tSleeve, Group 1-5, $85 per hour = \n\tConfiguration 1. $85. Inspection, Repair, and 1 work-hour x 0 85 \n\tInstallation Change, Group 1- $85 per hour = \n\t5, Configuration 2. $85. Inspection, Repair, 5 work-hours x 0 425 \n\tInstallation Change, and $85 per hour = \n\tTest, Group 1-5, $425. \n\tConfiguration 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \n\n\n\tWe have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the parts needed for the on-condition actions specified in this AD. \n\nAuthority for This Rulemaking \n\n\n\tTitle 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. \n\tWe 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. \n\nRegulatory Findings \n\n\n\tThis 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 \n\n((Page 21648)) \n\nresponsibilities among the various levels of government. \n\tFor the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: \n\t(1) Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, \n\t(2) Is not a ''significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), \n\t(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and \n\t(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. \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.