Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C Series Airplanes, 16761-16764 [05-6451]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 62 / Friday, April 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
meeting was widely publicized
throughout the Washington potato
industry and all interested persons were
invited to attend and participate in the
Committee’s deliberations on all issues.
Like all Committee meetings, the
February 3, 2005, meeting was a public
meeting and all entities, both large and
small, were able to express views on
this issue. Finally, interested persons
are invited to submit information on the
regulatory and informational impacts of
this action on small businesses.
This proposed rule would impose no
additional reporting or recordkeeping
requirements on either small or large
Washington potato handlers. As with all
Federal marketing order programs,
reports and forms are periodically
reviewed to reduce information
requirements and duplication by
industry and public sector agencies.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this rule.
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: https://www.ama.usda.gov/
fv/moab.html. Any questions about the
compliance guide should be sent to Jay
Guerber at the previously mentioned
address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
A 30-day comment period is provided
to allow interested persons to respond
to this proposed rule. Thirty days is
deemed appropriate because: (1) The
2005–2006 fiscal period begins on July
1, and the marketing order requires that
the rate of assessment for each fiscal
period apply to all assessable
Washington potatoes handled during
such fiscal period; (2) the Committee
needs to have sufficient funds to pay for
expenses which are incurred on a
continuous basis; and (3) handlers are
aware of this action which was
unanimously recommended by the
Committee at a public meeting and is
similar to other assessment rate actions
issued in past years.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 946
Marketing agreements, Potatoes,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 946 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 946—IRISH POTATOES GROWN
IN WASHINGTON
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 946 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Section 946.248 is revised to read
as follows:
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Mar 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
§ 946.248
Assessment rate.
On and after July 1, 2005, an
assessment rate of $0.0035 per
hundredweight is established for
Washington potatoes.
Dated: March 28, 2005.
Kenneth C. Clayton,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 05–6417 Filed 3–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2002–NM–289–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–100, –200, and –200C Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
This document revises an
earlier NPRM, applicable to all Boeing
Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series
airplanes. The original NPRM would
have required repetitive inspections to
detect discrepancies of certain fuselage
skin panels located just aft of the wheel
well, and repair if necessary. The
original NPRM was prompted by reports
of fatigue cracking of the skins and
doublers located aft of the wing,
between body station (BS) 727 and BS
1016, and between body stringers 14
and 25. This supplemental NPRM
revises the original NPRM by adding
requirements for certain airplanes,
revising the compliance time for
inspection of modified skin areas, and
allowing alternative service information
for certain actions. The actions specified
by this new supplemental NPRM are
intended to detect and correct fatigue
cracking of the skin panels, which could
cause rapid decompression of the
airplane. This action is intended to
address the identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Comments must be received by
April 26, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in
triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002–NM–
289–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055–4056.
Comments may be inspected at this
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16761
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Comments may be submitted
via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments
may also be sent via the Internet using
the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent
via fax or the Internet must contain
‘‘Docket No. 2002–NM–289–AD’’ in the
subject line and need not be submitted
in triplicate. Comments sent via the
Internet as attached electronic files must
be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for
Windows or ASCII text.
For the service information referenced
in the proposed rule, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box
3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.
This information may be examined at
the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne Lucier, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6438; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to
participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such
written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall
identify the Rules Docket number and
be submitted in triplicate to the address
specified above. All communications
received on or before the closing date
for comments, specified above, will be
considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained
in this action may be changed in light
of the comments received.
Submit comments using the following
format:
• Organize comments issue-by-issue.
For example, discuss a request to
change the compliance time and a
request to change the service bulletin
reference as two separate issues.
• For each issue, state what specific
change to the proposed AD is being
requested.
• Include justification (e.g., reasons or
data) for each request.
Comments are specifically invited on
the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed rule. All comments
submitted will be available, both before
and after the closing date for comments,
in the Rules Docket for examination by
interested persons. A report
summarizing each FAA-public contact
concerned with the substance of this
E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM
01APP1
16762
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 62 / Friday, April 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
proposal will be filed in the Rules
Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this action
must submit a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to
Docket Number 2002–NM–289–AD.’’
The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this
NPRM by submitting a request to the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.
2002–NM–289–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.
Discussion
A proposal to amend part 39 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
part 39) to add an airworthiness
directive (AD), applicable to all Boeing
Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series
airplanes, was published as a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register on January 7, 2004 (69
FR 897). That NPRM would have
required repetitive inspections to detect
discrepancies of certain fuselage skin
panels located just aft of the wheel well,
and repair if necessary. That NPRM was
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking
of the skins and doublers located aft of
the wing, between body station (BS) 727
and BS 1016, and between body
stringers 14 and 25, on numerous
Boeing Model 737–100, –200, and
–200C series airplanes. The cracking has
been attributed to fatigue from a
combination of shear stresses due to
repeated wrinkling of the skin, and the
skin chem-milled pockets configuration.
Such fatigue cracking, if not corrected,
could cause rapid decompression of the
airplane.
Actions Since Original NPRM Was
Issued
Due consideration has been given to
the comments received in response to
the original NPRM.
Request To Revise Inspection
References
Paragraph (b) of the original NPRM
refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 737–
53–1065, Revision 2, dated April 19,
2001, for conditions associated with the
inspection requirements. One
commenter (the manufacturer) requests
that we revise that service bulletin
reference to include earlier revision
levels. The manufacturer recommends
that we require inspections of all
previously modified airplanes having
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Mar 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
stiffening angles—regardless of the
service bulletin revision used.
We agree that (stiffener) modifications
for airplanes modified in accordance
with the original issue and Revision 1
of the service bulletin should also be
inspected. Excluding these earlier
service bulletin versions was an
oversight in the development of the
original NPRM. We have revised
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly.
Request To Revise Compliance Time
The manufacturer requests that we
revise paragraph (b) of the original
NPRM (inspection of modified skin
areas) to also change the compliance
time: from 16,000 flight cycles after the
modification to 16,000 total
accumulated flight cycles. Postmodification cracks have been found in
service, which the manufacturer
believes existed when the modification
was installed but were visually
undetectable at the time. The
modification with the stiffening angles
is designed to prevent shear wrinkling
by breaking up the bay into smaller
dimensions. These angles do not reduce
the hoop stress in the areas where the
cracks typically exist. As a result, cracks
that exist when the modification is
installed will continue to propagate
under hoop loading and may grow to a
significant length before the airplane
accumulates an additional 16,000 flight
cycles after the modification. The
manufacturer concludes that the
compliance time for the initial
inspection of modified areas should be
based on the total accumulated flight
cycles, and not the flight cycles
accumulated since the modification.
We agree. We have revised the
compliance time in paragraph (b) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly.
in the original NPRM), the SRM has
been revised to include repair
procedures for skin cracks. The repairs
in Section 53–30–3, Figure 48, of the
SRM apply to most of the areas covered
by the original NPRM. The commenters
note that Figure 48 of the SRM is an
FAA-approved repair for this type of
damage; allowing this optional repair in
the original NPRM will reduce the
number of repair inquiries from
operators. Therefore, the commenters
request that crack repairs in accordance
with the SRM also be allowed in
paragraphs (d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2) of the
original NPRM.
We agree with the commenters’
request and have changed paragraphs
(d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2) accordingly in this
supplemental NPRM.
Conclusion
Since these changes expand the scope
of the original NPRM, we have
determined that it is necessary to reopen
the comment period to provide
additional opportunity for public
comment. Additional comments on the
original NPRM are addressed below.
Request To Clarify Requirement
One commenter, the manufacturer,
states that cracks underneath external
repair doublers (installed for repairs
unrelated to the requirements specified
in this proposed AD) have been found
in service. The commenter requests that
we revise paragraphs (a) and (c) of the
original NPRM to also address
inspections of chemical-milled steps
underneath external repair doublers.
Undetected cracks that are not
sufficiently spanned by a repair doubler
could propagate undetected. The
commenter suggests that an FAAapproved repair with three rows of
fasteners on each side of the chemicalmilled step would be adequate to
maintain ultimate load capability even
if undetected cracks develop
underneath the repair.
We agree with the request. External
repair doublers impede the ability to
inspect the exterior of fuselage side
skins. The commenter’s suggested
change would provide adequate
inspection procedures for the skin
under the repair doublers. We find the
commenter’s suggestion satisfactory and
have included new paragraph (g) of this
supplemental NPRM to provide
inspection procedures for those
airplanes as one method of compliance
with the requirements of paragraphs (a)
and (c) of this supplemental NPRM.
Request To Allow Additional Repair
Information
Two commenters request that we
revise the original NPRM to include the
Boeing 737 Structural Repair Manual
(SRM) as an acceptable source of service
information for compliance with the
repair requirements specified in
paragraphs (d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2). The
commenters state that, since Boeing
issued Service Bulletin 737–53–1065,
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001 (cited
Request To Limit Repetitive Inspections
This same commenter requests that
we revise the repetitive inspection
requirement specified in paragraph
(d)(1)(ii) of the original NPRM to a onetime-only inspection after the timelimited repair has been done, as
specified in the service bulletin.
We agree with the request.
Eliminating the repetitive inspections
will not compromise safety. We have
changed paragraph (d)(1)(ii) in this
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM
01APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 62 / Friday, April 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
supplemental NPRM to correspond to
the compliance times of Service Bulletin
737–53–1065.
Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on
Supplemental NPRM
On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a
new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR
47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the
FAA’s airworthiness directives system.
The regulation now includes material
that relates to altered products, special
flight permits, and alternative methods
of compliance (AMOCs). These changes
are reflected in this supplemental
NPRM.
Explanation of Additional Changes to
Supplemental NPRM
Boeing has received a Delegation
Option Authorization (DOA). We have
revised paragraph (e) of this
supplemental NPRM to allow any
discrepancy, including cracking, to be
repaired according to data that conform
to the airplane’s type certificate and that
are approved by an Authorized
Representative for the Boeing DOA
Organization (rather than the Designated
Engineering Representative (DER))
whom we have authorized to make such
findings.
We have also revised paragraph (h)(2)
of this supplemental NPRM to delegate
the authority to approve an alternative
method of compliance for any repair
required by the AD to the Authorized
Representative for the Boeing DOA
Organization rather than the DER.
Interim Action
This is considered to be interim
action. The manufacturer has advised
that it is developing an improved
preventive modification intended to
address the identified unsafe condition
for unmodified skin areas. After this
modification is developed, approved,
and available, we may consider
additional rulemaking.
Cost Impact
There are about 1,000 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The FAA estimates that 390 airplanes of
U.S. registry would be affected by this
supplemental NPRM.
The inspection would take about 47 to
88 work hours per airplane (depending
on configuration), at an average labor
rate of $65 per work hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
inspection to be $3,055 to $5,720 per
airplane, per inspection cycle.
The cost impact figure discussed
above is based on assumptions that no
operator has yet accomplished any of
the proposed requirements of this AD
action, and that no operator would
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Mar 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
16763
accomplish those actions in the future if
this AD were not adopted. The cost
impact figures discussed in AD
rulemaking actions represent only the
time necessary to perform the specific
actions actually required by the AD.
These figures typically do not include
incidental costs, such as the time
required to gain access and close up,
planning time, or time necessitated by
other administrative actions.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Authority for This Rulemaking
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
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 Impact
The regulations proposed herein
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. Therefore,
it is determined that this proposal
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that 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); and (3) if
promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft
regulatory evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it may be obtained by
contacting the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend part
39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR part 39) as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by
adding the following new airworthiness
directive:
Boeing: Docket 2002–NM–289–AD.
Applicability: All Model 737–100, –200,
and –200C series airplanes; certificated in
any category.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless
accomplished previously.
To detect and correct fatigue cracking of
the skin panels, which could cause rapid
decompression of the airplane, accomplish
the following:
Repetitive Inspections: Unmodified Skin
Areas
(a) For fuselage skin panel areas that have
not been modified with stiffening angles:
Before the airplane accumulates 16,000 total
flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later, inspect the unmodified fuselage
side skins just aft of the main wheelwell, and
perform all follow-on actions, in accordance
with Part I of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–
53–1065, Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001;
except as provided by paragraph (g) of this
AD. If no cracking, loose fasteners,
disbonding, or damage is found: Repeat the
inspection at the time specified in paragraph
1.E., Compliance, of the service bulletin, as
applicable, except as provided by paragraph
(d) of this AD.
Repetitive Inspections: Modified Skin Areas
(b) For fuselage skin panel areas that have
been modified with stiffening angles in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1065, dated January 4, 1985;
Revision 1, dated October 12, 1989; or
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001: Before the
airplane accumulates 16,000 total flight
cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later, inspect the modified areas as specified
in accordance with Part I of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1065, Revision 2, dated
April 19, 2001. Repeat the inspection at the
time specified in paragraph 1.E., of the
service bulletin, as applicable, except as
provided by paragraph (d) of this AD. If any
cracks, loose fasteners, disbonding, or
E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM
01APP1
16764
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 62 / Friday, April 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
damage is found: Repair before further flight
in accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (d) of this AD.
Terminating Action for Inspections of
Modified Skin Areas
(c) For fuselage skin panel areas that have
been modified with stiffening angles in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1065, dated January 4, 1985;
Revision 1, dated October 12, 1989; or
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001: At the later
of the times specified by paragraphs (c)(1)
and (c)(2) of this AD, perform a subsurface
eddy current or magneto optical imaging
inspection to detect subsurface skin cracks
along the edge of the bonded doubler, in
accordance with Figure 10 of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1065, Revision 2, dated
April 19, 2001; except as provided by
paragraph (g) of this AD. If any cracks are
found, repair before further flight in
accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.
Accomplishment of this inspection and all
applicable corrective actions terminates the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(b) of this AD for the modified areas.
(1) Inspect within 24,500, but not fewer
than 20,000, flight cycles after the
modification of the skin.
(2) Inspect within 4,500 flight cycles after
the effective date of this AD.
Repair: Modified and Unmodified Skin
Areas
(d) If any cracking is detected during any
inspection required by this AD: Do the
actions specified by paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2)
of this AD before further flight. Do the
actions in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1065, Revision 2, dated
April 19, 2001, except as required by
paragraph (e) of this AD.
(1) Do a time-limited repair (including a
detailed inspection of the skin in the area of
the repair to detect corrosion and doubler
disbonding) in accordance with Part III of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin.
(i) After the time-limited repair has been
accomplished: At intervals not to exceed
3,000 flight cycles, perform an external
general visual inspection of the repair to
detect loose or missing fasteners, in
accordance with Part III of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin, until the actions specified in
paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this AD have been
accomplished.
(ii) Within 4,500 flight cycles after the
time-limited repair has been accomplished:
Perform an internal inspection of the repair
to detect cracking or doubler disbonding
using general visual and high-frequency eddy
current methods, in accordance with Figure
11 of the service bulletin, unless the actions
specified in paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this AD
have been accomplished.
(iii) If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (d)(1) of
this AD: Repair before further flight in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD.
Another approved repair method is in
Section 53–30–3, Figure 48, of the Boeing
737 Structural Repair Manual (SRM).
(iv) If any disbonding is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (d)(1) of
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:35 Mar 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
this AD: Repair before further flight in
accordance with Part II of the service
bulletin.
(v) Within 10,000 flight cycles after
accomplishment of the time-limited repair:
Make the repair permanent in accordance
with Part III of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin.
Permanent repair of an area terminates the
repetitive inspections specified in this AD for
that repaired area only.
(2) Do a permanent repair (including an
inspection using external subsurface eddy
current or magneto optical imaging methods
to detect cracks at the chem-milled step in
each adjacent bay of the fuselage skin, a
detailed inspection of the skin in the area of
the repair for corrosion and doubler
disbonding, and applicable corrective action)
of the cracked area, in accordance with Part
II of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
service bulletin. Another approved repair
method is in Section 53–30–3, Figure 48, of
the Boeing 737 Structural Repair Manual
(SRM). Permanent repair of an area
terminates the repetitive inspections
specified in this AD for that repaired area
only.
Exceptions to Service Bulletin Procedures
(e) During any inspection required by this
AD, if any discrepancy (including cracking)
is detected for which the service bulletin
specifies to contact Boeing for appropriation
action: Before further flight, repair according
to a method approved by the Manager,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO); or
according to data meeting the certification
basis of the airplane approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing
Delegation Option Authorization
Organization who has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those
findings. For a repair method to be approved,
the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.
(f) Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737–
53–1065, Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001,
recommends that cracks found in Zone 2 be
reported to Boeing, this AD does not require
such a report.
(g) For airplanes subject to the
requirements of paragraphs (a) and (c) of this
AD: Inspections are not required in areas that
are spanned by an FAA-approved repair that
has a minimum of 3 rows of fasteners above
and below the chemical-milled step. If an
external doubler covers the chemical-milled
step, but does not span it by a minimum of
3 rows of fasteners above and below, one
method of compliance with the inspection
requirement of paragraphs (a) and (c) of this
AD is to inspect all chemical-milled steps
covered by the repair using internal
nondestructive test (NDT) methods in
accordance with Part 6, Subject 53–30–20, of
the Boeing 737 NDT Manual. Follow-on and
corrective actions must be done as specified
in this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the
Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, is authorized to
approve AMOCs for this AD.
(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing
Delegation Option Authorization
Organization who has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those
findings. For a repair method to be approved,
the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March
22, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–6451 Filed 3–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2003–NM–127–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Short
Brothers Model SD3–60 Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document revises an
earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD), applicable to all Short Brothers
Model SD3–60 series airplanes, that
would have required performing an
inspection of the shear attachment
fitting for the fin-to-fuselage front spar,
and of the shear cleat for the fin root rib
at the aft spar location for corrosion;
reporting inspection results; and
performing corrective action, if
necessary. This new action revises the
proposed rule by adding additional
inspection areas, a repetitive borescope
(intrascope) inspection, and applicable
corrective actions per new Short
Brothers information. This new action
also revises the proposed rule by
deleting the inspection report. The
actions specified by this new proposed
AD are intended to detect and correct
corrosion in the area of the main spar
web fittings of the vertical stabilizer,
which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the vertical stabilizer. This
action is intended to address the
identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Comments must be received by
April 26, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in
triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,
E:\FR\FM\01APP1.SGM
01APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 62 (Friday, April 1, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16761-16764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6451]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2002-NM-289-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document revises an earlier NPRM, applicable to all
Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes. The original
NPRM would have required repetitive inspections to detect discrepancies
of certain fuselage skin panels located just aft of the wheel well, and
repair if necessary. The original NPRM was prompted by reports of
fatigue cracking of the skins and doublers located aft of the wing,
between body station (BS) 727 and BS 1016, and between body stringers
14 and 25. This supplemental NPRM revises the original NPRM by adding
requirements for certain airplanes, revising the compliance time for
inspection of modified skin areas, and allowing alternative service
information for certain actions. The actions specified by this new
supplemental NPRM are intended to detect and correct fatigue cracking
of the skin panels, which could cause rapid decompression of the
airplane. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe
condition.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 26, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002-NM-289-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232.
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address:
9-anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must
contain ``Docket No. 2002-NM-289-AD'' in the subject line and need not
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or
ASCII text.
For the service information referenced in the proposed rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Lucier, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
917-6438; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments,
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Submit comments using the following format:
Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed
AD is being requested.
Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each
request.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this
[[Page 16762]]
proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 2002-NM-289-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped
and returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules
Docket No. 2002-NM-289-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion
A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR part 39) to add an airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all
Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes, was published
as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on
January 7, 2004 (69 FR 897). That NPRM would have required repetitive
inspections to detect discrepancies of certain fuselage skin panels
located just aft of the wheel well, and repair if necessary. That NPRM
was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking of the skins and doublers
located aft of the wing, between body station (BS) 727 and BS 1016, and
between body stringers 14 and 25, on numerous Boeing Model 737-100, -
200, and -200C series airplanes. The cracking has been attributed to
fatigue from a combination of shear stresses due to repeated wrinkling
of the skin, and the skin chem-milled pockets configuration. Such
fatigue cracking, if not corrected, could cause rapid decompression of
the airplane.
Actions Since Original NPRM Was Issued
Due consideration has been given to the comments received in
response to the original NPRM.
Request To Revise Inspection References
Paragraph (b) of the original NPRM refers to Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001, for conditions
associated with the inspection requirements. One commenter (the
manufacturer) requests that we revise that service bulletin reference
to include earlier revision levels. The manufacturer recommends that we
require inspections of all previously modified airplanes having
stiffening angles--regardless of the service bulletin revision used.
We agree that (stiffener) modifications for airplanes modified in
accordance with the original issue and Revision 1 of the service
bulletin should also be inspected. Excluding these earlier service
bulletin versions was an oversight in the development of the original
NPRM. We have revised paragraphs (b) and (c) of this supplemental NPRM
accordingly.
Request To Revise Compliance Time
The manufacturer requests that we revise paragraph (b) of the
original NPRM (inspection of modified skin areas) to also change the
compliance time: from 16,000 flight cycles after the modification to
16,000 total accumulated flight cycles. Post-modification cracks have
been found in service, which the manufacturer believes existed when the
modification was installed but were visually undetectable at the time.
The modification with the stiffening angles is designed to prevent
shear wrinkling by breaking up the bay into smaller dimensions. These
angles do not reduce the hoop stress in the areas where the cracks
typically exist. As a result, cracks that exist when the modification
is installed will continue to propagate under hoop loading and may grow
to a significant length before the airplane accumulates an additional
16,000 flight cycles after the modification. The manufacturer concludes
that the compliance time for the initial inspection of modified areas
should be based on the total accumulated flight cycles, and not the
flight cycles accumulated since the modification.
We agree. We have revised the compliance time in paragraph (b) of
this supplemental NPRM accordingly.
Conclusion
Since these changes expand the scope of the original NPRM, we have
determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide
additional opportunity for public comment. Additional comments on the
original NPRM are addressed below.
Request To Allow Additional Repair Information
Two commenters request that we revise the original NPRM to include
the Boeing 737 Structural Repair Manual (SRM) as an acceptable source
of service information for compliance with the repair requirements
specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2). The commenters state
that, since Boeing issued Service Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2,
dated April 19, 2001 (cited in the original NPRM), the SRM has been
revised to include repair procedures for skin cracks. The repairs in
Section 53-30-3, Figure 48, of the SRM apply to most of the areas
covered by the original NPRM. The commenters note that Figure 48 of the
SRM is an FAA-approved repair for this type of damage; allowing this
optional repair in the original NPRM will reduce the number of repair
inquiries from operators. Therefore, the commenters request that crack
repairs in accordance with the SRM also be allowed in paragraphs
(d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2) of the original NPRM.
We agree with the commenters' request and have changed paragraphs
(d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2) accordingly in this supplemental NPRM.
Request To Clarify Requirement
One commenter, the manufacturer, states that cracks underneath
external repair doublers (installed for repairs unrelated to the
requirements specified in this proposed AD) have been found in service.
The commenter requests that we revise paragraphs (a) and (c) of the
original NPRM to also address inspections of chemical-milled steps
underneath external repair doublers. Undetected cracks that are not
sufficiently spanned by a repair doubler could propagate undetected.
The commenter suggests that an FAA-approved repair with three rows of
fasteners on each side of the chemical-milled step would be adequate to
maintain ultimate load capability even if undetected cracks develop
underneath the repair.
We agree with the request. External repair doublers impede the
ability to inspect the exterior of fuselage side skins. The commenter's
suggested change would provide adequate inspection procedures for the
skin under the repair doublers. We find the commenter's suggestion
satisfactory and have included new paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM to provide inspection procedures for those airplanes as one method
of compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (c) of this
supplemental NPRM.
Request To Limit Repetitive Inspections
This same commenter requests that we revise the repetitive
inspection requirement specified in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of the
original NPRM to a one-time-only inspection after the time-limited
repair has been done, as specified in the service bulletin.
We agree with the request. Eliminating the repetitive inspections
will not compromise safety. We have changed paragraph (d)(1)(ii) in
this
[[Page 16763]]
supplemental NPRM to correspond to the compliance times of Service
Bulletin 737-53-1065.
Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on Supplemental NPRM
On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a new version of 14 CFR part 39
(67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA's airworthiness
directives system. The regulation now includes material that relates to
altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of
compliance (AMOCs). These changes are reflected in this supplemental
NPRM.
Explanation of Additional Changes to Supplemental NPRM
Boeing has received a Delegation Option Authorization (DOA). We
have revised paragraph (e) of this supplemental NPRM to allow any
discrepancy, including cracking, to be repaired according to data that
conform to the airplane's type certificate and that are approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing DOA Organization (rather than
the Designated Engineering Representative (DER)) whom we have
authorized to make such findings.
We have also revised paragraph (h)(2) of this supplemental NPRM to
delegate the authority to approve an alternative method of compliance
for any repair required by the AD to the Authorized Representative for
the Boeing DOA Organization rather than the DER.
Interim Action
This is considered to be interim action. The manufacturer has
advised that it is developing an improved preventive modification
intended to address the identified unsafe condition for unmodified skin
areas. After this modification is developed, approved, and available,
we may consider additional rulemaking.
Cost Impact
There are about 1,000 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 390 airplanes of U.S. registry
would be affected by this supplemental NPRM.
The inspection would take about 47 to 88 work hours per airplane
(depending on configuration), at an average labor rate of $65 per work
hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the inspection to
be $3,055 to $5,720 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that
no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements of
this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in
the future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures
discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to
perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other
administrative actions.
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 Impact
The regulations proposed herein 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. Therefore, it
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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);
and (3) if promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
Boeing: Docket 2002-NM-289-AD.
Applicability: All Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series
airplanes; certificated in any category.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin panels, which
could cause rapid decompression of the airplane, accomplish the
following:
Repetitive Inspections: Unmodified Skin Areas
(a) For fuselage skin panel areas that have not been modified
with stiffening angles: Before the airplane accumulates 16,000 total
flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later, inspect the unmodified
fuselage side skins just aft of the main wheelwell, and perform all
follow-on actions, in accordance with Part I of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2,
dated April 19, 2001; except as provided by paragraph (g) of this
AD. If no cracking, loose fasteners, disbonding, or damage is found:
Repeat the inspection at the time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
Compliance, of the service bulletin, as applicable, except as
provided by paragraph (d) of this AD.
Repetitive Inspections: Modified Skin Areas
(b) For fuselage skin panel areas that have been modified with
stiffening angles in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-
1065, dated January 4, 1985; Revision 1, dated October 12, 1989; or
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001: Before the airplane accumulates
16,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, inspect the
modified areas as specified in accordance with Part I of Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001.
Repeat the inspection at the time specified in paragraph 1.E., of
the service bulletin, as applicable, except as provided by paragraph
(d) of this AD. If any cracks, loose fasteners, disbonding, or
[[Page 16764]]
damage is found: Repair before further flight in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD.
Terminating Action for Inspections of Modified Skin Areas
(c) For fuselage skin panel areas that have been modified with
stiffening angles in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-
1065, dated January 4, 1985; Revision 1, dated October 12, 1989; or
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001: At the later of the times
specified by paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, perform a
subsurface eddy current or magneto optical imaging inspection to
detect subsurface skin cracks along the edge of the bonded doubler,
in accordance with Figure 10 of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1065,
Revision 2, dated April 19, 2001; except as provided by paragraph
(g) of this AD. If any cracks are found, repair before further
flight in accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. Accomplishment
of this inspection and all applicable corrective actions terminates
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (b) of this AD for
the modified areas.
(1) Inspect within 24,500, but not fewer than 20,000, flight
cycles after the modification of the skin.
(2) Inspect within 4,500 flight cycles after the effective date
of this AD.
Repair: Modified and Unmodified Skin Areas
(d) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required
by this AD: Do the actions specified by paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2)
of this AD before further flight. Do the actions in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2, dated April 19,
2001, except as required by paragraph (e) of this AD.
(1) Do a time-limited repair (including a detailed inspection of
the skin in the area of the repair to detect corrosion and doubler
disbonding) in accordance with Part III of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin.
(i) After the time-limited repair has been accomplished: At
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles, perform an external
general visual inspection of the repair to detect loose or missing
fasteners, in accordance with Part III of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin, until the actions specified in
paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this AD have been accomplished.
(ii) Within 4,500 flight cycles after the time-limited repair
has been accomplished: Perform an internal inspection of the repair
to detect cracking or doubler disbonding using general visual and
high-frequency eddy current methods, in accordance with Figure 11 of
the service bulletin, unless the actions specified in paragraph
(d)(1)(v) of this AD have been accomplished.
(iii) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (d)(1) of this AD: Repair before further flight in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD. Another approved repair
method is in Section 53-30-3, Figure 48, of the Boeing 737
Structural Repair Manual (SRM).
(iv) If any disbonding is found during any inspection required
by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD: Repair before further flight in
accordance with Part II of the service bulletin.
(v) Within 10,000 flight cycles after accomplishment of the
time-limited repair: Make the repair permanent in accordance with
Part III of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin.
Permanent repair of an area terminates the repetitive inspections
specified in this AD for that repaired area only.
(2) Do a permanent repair (including an inspection using
external subsurface eddy current or magneto optical imaging methods
to detect cracks at the chem-milled step in each adjacent bay of the
fuselage skin, a detailed inspection of the skin in the area of the
repair for corrosion and doubler disbonding, and applicable
corrective action) of the cracked area, in accordance with Part II
of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Another
approved repair method is in Section 53-30-3, Figure 48, of the
Boeing 737 Structural Repair Manual (SRM). Permanent repair of an
area terminates the repetitive inspections specified in this AD for
that repaired area only.
Exceptions to Service Bulletin Procedures
(e) During any inspection required by this AD, if any
discrepancy (including cracking) is detected for which the service
bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriation action:
Before further flight, repair according to a method approved by the
Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO); or according
to data meeting the certification basis of the airplane approved by
an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be
approved, the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(f) Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1065, Revision 2,
dated April 19, 2001, recommends that cracks found in Zone 2 be
reported to Boeing, this AD does not require such a report.
(g) For airplanes subject to the requirements of paragraphs (a)
and (c) of this AD: Inspections are not required in areas that are
spanned by an FAA-approved repair that has a minimum of 3 rows of
fasteners above and below the chemical-milled step. If an external
doubler covers the chemical-milled step, but does not span it by a
minimum of 3 rows of fasteners above and below, one method of
compliance with the inspection requirement of paragraphs (a) and (c)
of this AD is to inspect all chemical-milled steps covered by the
repair using internal nondestructive test (NDT) methods in
accordance with Part 6, Subject 53-30-20, of the Boeing 737 NDT
Manual. Follow-on and corrective actions must be done as specified
in this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(h)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Seattle
ACO, FAA, is authorized to approve AMOCs for this AD.
(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be
approved, the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 22, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-6451 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
