Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes, 17600-17603 [05-6763]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17600
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 66 / Thursday, April 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
767–21–0189, dated May 27, 2004;
certificated in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by a report of
an improperly designed component on the
in-flight entertainment (IFE) cooling card,
which may cause the IFE cooling system to
incorrectly interpret signals from airplane
system interfaces. We are issuing this AD to
prevent failure of the IFE cooling cared to
configure correctly in response to input
signals from airplane system interfaces
during a forward cargo fire, which could
result in the IFE cooling fan causing smoke
to penetrate occupied areas of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Replacement of IFE Cooling Card
(f) Within 18 months after the effective
date of this AD: Replace the IFE cooling card,
part number (P/N) 285T1198–101, located in
the P50 card file in the main equipment
center, with a new, improved cooling card,
P/N 285T1198–102. Do the replacement by
accomplishing all of the actions specified in
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767–21–
0189 (for Boeing Model 767–400ER series
airplanes); or 767–21–0189 (for Boeing Model
767–400ER series airplanes); both dated May
27, 2004; as applicable. Where the service
bulletins state that the replacement may be
done using an ‘‘operator’s equivalent
procedure,’’ the replacement must be done
according to the procedures in the chapter/
subject of the applicable Boeing 767 Airplane
Maintenance Manual specified in the service
bulletins.
Parts Installation
(g) As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install an IFE cooling card, P/N
285T1198–101, on any airplane.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this Ad, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) You must use Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 767–21–0188, dated May 27,
2004; or Boeing Special Attention Service
bulletin 767–21–0189, dated May 27, 2004;
as applicable, to perform the actions that are
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise. The Director of the Federal
Register approves the incorporation by
reference of these documents in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. For
copies of the service information, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box
3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. You
may view the AD docket at the Docket
management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW.,
room PL–401, Nassif Building, Washington,
DC. To review copies of the service
VerDate jul<14>2003
20:15 Apr 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
information, go to the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go
to: https://www.archieves.gov/federal register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March
25, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–6689 Filed 4–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2004–19003; Directorate
Identifier 2003–NM–245–AD; Amendment
39–14044; AD 2005–07–19]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–100, –200C, –300, –400, and
–500 Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –200C,
–300, –400, and –500 series airplanes.
This AD requires repetitive inspections
for cracks in the fuselage skin, doubler,
bearstrap, and frames surrounding the
main, forward, and aft cargo doors; and
repair of any cracking. This AD also
requires inspections of certain existing
repairs for cracking, and related
corrective action if cracking is found.
This AD is prompted by reports of
multiple fatigue cracks in the fuselage
skin and bonded skin doubler,
bearstrap, and doorway frames
surrounding the forward and aft cargo
doors. We are issuing this AD to find
and fix fatigue cracking in the fuselage
skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames,
which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the frames, possible loss of
a cargo door, and consequent rapid
decompression of the fuselage.
DATES: This AD becomes effective May
12, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of a
certain publication listed in the AD is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of May 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707,
Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. You
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
can examine this information at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030,
or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Docket: The AD docket contains the
proposed AD, comments, and any final
disposition. You can examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket
Management Facility office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Management Facility office
(telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building at
the U.S. Department of Transportation,
400 Seventh Street, SW., room PL–401,
Washington, DC. This docket number is
FAA–2004–19003; the directorate
identifier for this docket is 2003–NM–
245–AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Howard Hall, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6430; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA
proposed to amend 14 CFR Part 39 with
an AD for all Boeing Model 737–100,
–200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500
series airplanes. That action, published
in the Federal Register on September 7,
2004 (69 FR 54058), proposed to require
repetitive inspections for cracks in the
fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and
frames surrounding the main, forward,
and aft cargo doors; and repair of any
cracking. That action also proposed to
require inspections of certain existing
repairs for cracking, and related
corrective action if cracking is found.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments that have
been submitted on the proposed AD.
Supportive Comment
One commenter states that the
proposed AD will affect only its 737–
200C and –400 fleets, and adds that the
proposed detailed inspections and
compliance intervals will allow
compliance at heavy check maintenance
visits. The commenter stipulates that
these requirements are acceptable
provided there are adequate
replacement parts available if
discrepancies are found.
E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM
07APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 66 / Thursday, April 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
We have discussed the issue of
obtaining replacement parts with the
airplane manufacturer and we anticipate
no difficulty in getting the parts to
accomplish repairs.
Request for Credit for Accomplishing
AD 93–14–10
One commenter, the airplane
manufacturer, asks that we add a
sentence to paragraph (f) of the
proposed AD that gives credit for
accomplishing the inspections and
repairs required by AD 93–14–10,
amendment 39–8634 (58 FR 43547,
August 17, 1993). The commenter states
that the requirements of the proposed
AD are equivalent to, or more
conservative than, the requirements in
AD 93–14–10.
We agree with the commenter that
accomplishing the requirements in
paragraph (f) of the proposed AD ends
the requirements in AD 93–14–10
(referenced as related rulemaking in the
preamble of the proposed AD). As
specified in the preamble of the
proposed AD, during structural
inspections, cracks were found in the
bearstrap under the fuselage frame
flanges at the edges of the forward cargo
door. In two cases, cracks were found in
the fuselage frames of the aft cargo door
where steel repair doublers had been
installed using the requirements of AD
93–14–10; therefore, the requirements in
this AD exceed the requirements of AD
93–14–10. We have changed paragraph
(f) of this AD by adding credit for
previously accomplishing AD 93–14–10.
Request To Add Inspection Type to
Paragraph (f) of the Proposed AD
The same commenter states that the
first sentence in paragraph (f) specifies,
in part, ‘‘Do the applicable detailed,
general visual, and low and high
frequency eddy current inspections for
cracks * * *’’ The commenter asks that
a reference to the mid-frequency eddy
current (MFEC) inspection be added to
paragraph (f). The commenter notes that
this inspection is specified in the
referenced service bulletin.
We agree with the commenter that the
MFEC inspection should be added to
paragraph (f), for clarification. An
internal MFEC inspection is specified in
the referenced service bulletin as an
option to accomplishing the detailed
visual inspections, and would extend
the compliance time for the repetitive
inspections, but was not identified in
the proposed AD. Paragraph (f) of the
proposed AD specified doing the
‘‘applicable’’ inspections for cracks as
specified in the referenced tables.
However, to clarify the type of
inspection, we have changed paragraph
VerDate jul<14>2003
20:15 Apr 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
(f) of this final rule to include the MFEC
inspection.
Request for Clarification of Location of
Inspections for Existing Repairs
One commenter asks for clarification
regarding accomplishing inspections of
existing repairs around the cargo doors
in accordance with the referenced
service bulletin. The commenter states
that it is unclear which inspection is
required if repairs are of a different
configuration than those referenced in
the figures in the service bulletin. The
commenter notes, for example, that a
repair of the cargo door lower corner per
Boeing Structural Repair Manual 737–
100/200, Figure 46, Detail IV, does not
match the Figure 8 repair in the service
bulletin. The commenter adds that
verbiage needs to be added clarifying
whether the ‘‘intent’’ of the service
bulletin is to accomplish a MFEC
inspection of all outer row fasteners of
the repair doubler, no matter what the
configuration.
We agree that clarification is
necessary. The repairs shown in Figures
8, 9, and 10 of the referenced service
bulletin are conceptual illustrations of
typical doubler/tripler type repairs.
These figures are intended to indicate
that the location of the detailed visual
or MFEC inspections for cracking is the
skin or bearstrap at the outer row
fasteners common to the outer edge of
the repair. We have added a note after
paragraph (f) of the final rule for further
clarification.
Request for Certain Repair Instructions
One commenter states that repair
instructions that are similar to those
currently available for Model 737–100
and –200 series airplanes for damaged
skin, doubler, and bearstrap around the
cargo doors should also be available for
Model 737–300, –400, and –500 series
airplanes. The commenter adds that it is
crucial to limit downtime of aircraft as
much as possible, an coordinating repair
procedures with Boeing extends the outof-service time for affected airplanes.
We agree that repair instructions
should be made available for Model
737–300, –400 and –500 series
airplanes. However, until repair
instructions are published for Model
737–300, –400 and –500 series
airplanes, the repair must be
accomplished according to a method
approved by the Manager, Settle Aircraft
Certification Office or an Authorized
Representative for the Boeing Delegation
Option Authorization (DOA)
Organization. Repair procedures have
been developed for incorporation into
the next revision of the 737–300/400/
500 SRM and will be submitted to us by
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
17601
Boeing soon. As provided by paragraph
(i) of this AD, we will consider
approving these repairs as an alternative
method of compliance for paragraph (g)
of this AD. We have made no change to
the final rule in this regard.
Clarification of Applicability
One commenter asks why the
proposed AD isn’t applicable to Model
737–300C series airplanes with a main
cargo door installed by PEMCO. The
commenter notes that the proposed AD
includes Model 737–200C series
airplanes with a main cargo door, and
asks if excluding the 737–300C is
normal.
We acknowledge the commenter’s
concern and offer clarification. The
proposed AD is applicable to Model
737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, –500
series airplanes, including airplanes
modified to include a main cargo door.
We infer that the commenter’s reference
to a ‘‘Model 737–300C’’ is an informal
designation for a Model 737–300 series
airplane that has been modified to
include a main cargo door per a
supplemental type certificate. However,
no model 737–300C series airplane is
identified in the type certificate data
sheet. Thus, an airplane with that
configuration would be subject to the
AD requirements for Model 737–300
series airplanes. In comparison, the
Model 737–200C series airplane is
identified in the type certificate data
sheet.
Explanation of Changer to Proposed AD
Boeing has received a DOA. We have
revised paragraph (i)(2) of this final rule
to delegate the authority to approve an
alternative method of compliance for
any repair required by this AD to the
Authorized Representative for the
Boeing DOA Organization rather than
the Designated Engineering
Representative.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data, including the comments
that have been submitted, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
with the change described previously.
We have determined that these changes
will neither increase the economic
burden on any operator nor increase the
scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 3,132 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
We estimate that 870 airplanes of U.S.
registry will be affected by this AD. We
provide the following cost estimates to
E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM
07APR1
17602
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 66 / Thursday, April 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
comply with this AD, per inspection
cycle:
Work hours
Group
1
2
3
6
Hourly labor
rate
24
28
30
28
$65
65
65
65
.......................................................................................................................................
and 4 .............................................................................................................................
and 5 .............................................................................................................................
and 7 .............................................................................................................................
Authority for This Rulemaking
Adoption of the Amendment
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.
I
We have determined that this AD will
not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this AD. See the ADDRESSES section for
a location to examine the regulatory
evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporated by reference, Safety.
20:15 Apr 06, 2005
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
I
2005–07–19 Boeing: Amendment 39–14044.
Docket No. FAA–2004–19003;
Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–245–AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective May 12,
2005.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Regulatory Findings
VerDate jul<14>2003
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
Jkt 205001
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Model 737–100,
–200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 series
airplanes; certified in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by reports of
multiple fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin
and bonded skin doubler, bearstrap, and
doorway frames surrounding the forward and
aft cargo doors. We are issuing this AD to
find and fix fatigue cracking in the fuselage
skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of
the frames, possible loss of a cargo door, and
consequent rapid decompression of the
fuselage.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Initial and Repetitive Inspections/Corrective
Action
(f) Do the applicable detailed, general
visual, and low-, mid-, and high-frequency
eddy current inspections for cracks in the
fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames
surrounding the main, forward, and aft cargo
doors, and for cracks in existing repairs, as
specified in Tables 1, 2, and 3, as applicable,
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Parts
$0
0
0
0
Cost per
airplane
$1,560
1,820
1,950
1,820
of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1228, dated
July 10, 2003. Do the inspections at the initial
compliance times listed in Tables 1, 2, and
3, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of the service bulletin; except,
where the service bulletin specifies a
compliance time after the service bulletin
date, this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD. Do the inspections in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat
the inspections within the repetitive
inspection intervals listed in Tables 1, 2, 3
of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of the
service bulletin. Accomplishing the
requirements in this paragraph ends the
requirements in AD 93–14–10, amendment
39–8634 (58 FR 43547. August 17, 1993).
Note 1: At existing repairs around the
forward and aft cargo door cutouts: The
location for the specified detailed or midfrequency eddy current inspections for
cracking of the skin or bearstrap is at the
outer row of fasteners common to the repair,
as illustrated in Figures 8, 9, and 10 of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1228,
dated July 10, 2003.
(g) If any crack is found during any
inspection: Repair before further flight in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1228, dated July 10, 2003. Where the
service bulletin specifies contacting the
manufacturer for disposition of certain repair
conditions, repair before further flight in
accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA; or an Authorized
Representative for the Boeing Delegation
Option Authorization (DOA) Organization
who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a
repair method to be approved, the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
No Reporting Required
(h) Although the service bulletin
referenced in this AD recommends reporting
any discrepancies to the manufacturer, this
AD does not include that requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(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
E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM
07APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 66 / Thursday, April 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DOA Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those
findings.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1228, dated July 10, 2003,
to perform the actions that are required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
The Director of the Federal Register approves
the incorporation by reference of this
document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51. For copies of the service
information, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207. For information on
the availability of this material at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA), call (202) 741–6030,
or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html. You may view the AD
docket at the Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., room PL–401, Nassif
Building, Washington, DC.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March
30, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–6763 Filed 4–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2004–19986; Directorate
Identifier 2004–NM–247–AD; Amendment
39–14045; AD 2005–07–20]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–600, –700, –800, and –900
Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 737–600, –700, –800, and
–900 series airplanes. This AD requires
installing and testing an updated
version of the operational program
software of the flight control computers.
This AD is prompted by a report of an
airplane pitching up with rapidly
decreasing indicated airspeed after the
flightcrew set a new altitude into the
autopilot. We are issuing this AD to
prevent anomalous autopilot operation
that produces a hazardous combination
of airplane attitude and airspeed, which
could result in loss of control of the
airplane.
VerDate jul<14>2003
20:15 Apr 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
This AD becomes effective May
12, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of a
certain publication listed in the AD is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of May 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707,
Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.
Docket: The AD docket contains the
proposed AD, comments, and any final
disposition. You can examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket
Management Facility office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Management Facility
office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is
located on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., room PL–401, Washington, DC.
This docket number is FAA–2004–
19986; the directorate identifier for this
docket is 2004–NM–247–AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregg Nesemeier, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6479; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA
proposed to amend 14 CFR Part 39 with
an AD for certain Boeing Model 737–
600, –700, –800, and –900 series
airplanes. That action, published in the
Federal Register on January 5, 2005 (70
FR 733), proposed to require installing
and testing an updated version of the
operational program software of the
flight control computers.
DATES:
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments that have
been submitted on the proposed AD.
Support for the Proposed AD
Two commenters support the AD as
proposed. A third commenter supports
the intent of the proposed AD.
Request To Prohibit Testing in Revenue
Service
One commenter requests that we
prohibit testing of the updated software
in revenue service. The commenter
provides no justification for the request.
We infer that the commenter believes
the proposed AD would require a flight
test of the updated software installation,
and that performing a flight test during
revenue service would pose undue
hazard to airplane occupants.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
17603
We do not agree because we believe
the commenter has misunderstood the
testing requirement of this AD. The test
of the updated version of the
operational program (OPS) software is a
ground test performed by maintenance
personnel, not a flight test. This test,
which must be satisfactorily
accomplished before returning an
airplane to service, is adequate for
ensuring that the OPS software is
properly installed and updated.
Therefore, no change to this final rule is
necessary in this regard.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data, including the comments
that have been submitted, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
as proposed.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 155 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
This AD affects about 34 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The actions take about 2
work hours per airplane, at an average
labor rate of $65 per work hour.
Required parts cost about $0 per
airplane. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of this AD for U.S.
operators is $4,420, or $130 per
airplane.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
Section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701,
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will
not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM
07APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 66 (Thursday, April 7, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17600-17603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6763]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2004-19003; Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-245-AD;
Amendment 39-14044; AD 2005-07-19]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200C, -300, -
400, and -500 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracks in the
fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames surrounding the main,
forward, and aft cargo doors; and repair of any cracking. This AD also
requires inspections of certain existing repairs for cracking, and
related corrective action if cracking is found. This AD is prompted by
reports of multiple fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin and bonded skin
doubler, bearstrap, and doorway frames surrounding the forward and aft
cargo doors. We are issuing this AD to find and fix fatigue cracking in
the fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames, which could result
in reduced structural integrity of the frames, possible loss of a cargo
door, and consequent rapid decompression of the fuselage.
DATES: This AD becomes effective May 12, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in
the AD is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of May
12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207. You can examine this information at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_
locations.html.
Docket: The AD docket contains the proposed AD, comments, and any
final disposition. You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility
office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-
5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., room PL-401,
Washington, DC. This docket number is FAA-2004-19003; the directorate
identifier for this docket is 2003-NM-245-AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Hall, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
917-6430; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR Part 39
with an AD for all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -
500 series airplanes. That action, published in the Federal Register on
September 7, 2004 (69 FR 54058), proposed to require repetitive
inspections for cracks in the fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and
frames surrounding the main, forward, and aft cargo doors; and repair
of any cracking. That action also proposed to require inspections of
certain existing repairs for cracking, and related corrective action if
cracking is found.
Comments
We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments that have been
submitted on the proposed AD.
Supportive Comment
One commenter states that the proposed AD will affect only its 737-
200C and -400 fleets, and adds that the proposed detailed inspections
and compliance intervals will allow compliance at heavy check
maintenance visits. The commenter stipulates that these requirements
are acceptable provided there are adequate replacement parts available
if discrepancies are found.
[[Page 17601]]
We have discussed the issue of obtaining replacement parts with the
airplane manufacturer and we anticipate no difficulty in getting the
parts to accomplish repairs.
Request for Credit for Accomplishing AD 93-14-10
One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, asks that we add a
sentence to paragraph (f) of the proposed AD that gives credit for
accomplishing the inspections and repairs required by AD 93-14-10,
amendment 39-8634 (58 FR 43547, August 17, 1993). The commenter states
that the requirements of the proposed AD are equivalent to, or more
conservative than, the requirements in AD 93-14-10.
We agree with the commenter that accomplishing the requirements in
paragraph (f) of the proposed AD ends the requirements in AD 93-14-10
(referenced as related rulemaking in the preamble of the proposed AD).
As specified in the preamble of the proposed AD, during structural
inspections, cracks were found in the bearstrap under the fuselage
frame flanges at the edges of the forward cargo door. In two cases,
cracks were found in the fuselage frames of the aft cargo door where
steel repair doublers had been installed using the requirements of AD
93-14-10; therefore, the requirements in this AD exceed the
requirements of AD 93-14-10. We have changed paragraph (f) of this AD
by adding credit for previously accomplishing AD 93-14-10.
Request To Add Inspection Type to Paragraph (f) of the Proposed AD
The same commenter states that the first sentence in paragraph (f)
specifies, in part, ``Do the applicable detailed, general visual, and
low and high frequency eddy current inspections for cracks * * *'' The
commenter asks that a reference to the mid-frequency eddy current
(MFEC) inspection be added to paragraph (f). The commenter notes that
this inspection is specified in the referenced service bulletin.
We agree with the commenter that the MFEC inspection should be
added to paragraph (f), for clarification. An internal MFEC inspection
is specified in the referenced service bulletin as an option to
accomplishing the detailed visual inspections, and would extend the
compliance time for the repetitive inspections, but was not identified
in the proposed AD. Paragraph (f) of the proposed AD specified doing
the ``applicable'' inspections for cracks as specified in the
referenced tables. However, to clarify the type of inspection, we have
changed paragraph (f) of this final rule to include the MFEC
inspection.
Request for Clarification of Location of Inspections for Existing
Repairs
One commenter asks for clarification regarding accomplishing
inspections of existing repairs around the cargo doors in accordance
with the referenced service bulletin. The commenter states that it is
unclear which inspection is required if repairs are of a different
configuration than those referenced in the figures in the service
bulletin. The commenter notes, for example, that a repair of the cargo
door lower corner per Boeing Structural Repair Manual 737-100/200,
Figure 46, Detail IV, does not match the Figure 8 repair in the service
bulletin. The commenter adds that verbiage needs to be added clarifying
whether the ``intent'' of the service bulletin is to accomplish a MFEC
inspection of all outer row fasteners of the repair doubler, no matter
what the configuration.
We agree that clarification is necessary. The repairs shown in
Figures 8, 9, and 10 of the referenced service bulletin are conceptual
illustrations of typical doubler/tripler type repairs. These figures
are intended to indicate that the location of the detailed visual or
MFEC inspections for cracking is the skin or bearstrap at the outer row
fasteners common to the outer edge of the repair. We have added a note
after paragraph (f) of the final rule for further clarification.
Request for Certain Repair Instructions
One commenter states that repair instructions that are similar to
those currently available for Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes
for damaged skin, doubler, and bearstrap around the cargo doors should
also be available for Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes.
The commenter adds that it is crucial to limit downtime of aircraft as
much as possible, an coordinating repair procedures with Boeing extends
the out-of-service time for affected airplanes.
We agree that repair instructions should be made available for
Model 737-300, -400 and -500 series airplanes. However, until repair
instructions are published for Model 737-300, -400 and -500 series
airplanes, the repair must be accomplished according to a method
approved by the Manager, Settle Aircraft Certification Office or an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization (DOA) Organization. Repair procedures have been developed
for incorporation into the next revision of the 737-300/400/500 SRM and
will be submitted to us by Boeing soon. As provided by paragraph (i) of
this AD, we will consider approving these repairs as an alternative
method of compliance for paragraph (g) of this AD. We have made no
change to the final rule in this regard.
Clarification of Applicability
One commenter asks why the proposed AD isn't applicable to Model
737-300C series airplanes with a main cargo door installed by PEMCO.
The commenter notes that the proposed AD includes Model 737-200C series
airplanes with a main cargo door, and asks if excluding the 737-300C is
normal.
We acknowledge the commenter's concern and offer clarification. The
proposed AD is applicable to Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, -
500 series airplanes, including airplanes modified to include a main
cargo door. We infer that the commenter's reference to a ``Model 737-
300C'' is an informal designation for a Model 737-300 series airplane
that has been modified to include a main cargo door per a supplemental
type certificate. However, no model 737-300C series airplane is
identified in the type certificate data sheet. Thus, an airplane with
that configuration would be subject to the AD requirements for Model
737-300 series airplanes. In comparison, the Model 737-200C series
airplane is identified in the type certificate data sheet.
Explanation of Changer to Proposed AD
Boeing has received a DOA. We have revised paragraph (i)(2) of this
final rule to delegate the authority to approve an alternative method
of compliance for any repair required by this AD to the Authorized
Representative for the Boeing DOA Organization rather than the
Designated Engineering Representative.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comments that have been submitted, and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described
previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase
the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 3,132 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 870 airplanes of U.S. registry will
be affected by this AD. We provide the following cost estimates to
[[Page 17602]]
comply with this AD, per inspection cycle:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hourly Cost per
Group Work hours labor rate Parts airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................................... 24 $65 $0 $1,560
2 and 4.................................................... 28 65 0 1,820
3 and 5.................................................... 30 65 0 1,950
6 and 7.................................................... 28 65 0 1,820
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to
examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporated by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2005-07-19 Boeing: Amendment 39-14044. Docket No. FAA-2004-19003;
Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-245-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective May 12, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -
400, and -500 series airplanes; certified in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by reports of multiple fatigue cracks
in the fuselage skin and bonded skin doubler, bearstrap, and doorway
frames surrounding the forward and aft cargo doors. We are issuing
this AD to find and fix fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin,
doubler, bearstrap, and frames, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the frames, possible loss of a cargo door,
and consequent rapid decompression of the fuselage.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Initial and Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Action
(f) Do the applicable detailed, general visual, and low-, mid-,
and high-frequency eddy current inspections for cracks in the
fuselage skin, doubler, bearstrap, and frames surrounding the main,
forward, and aft cargo doors, and for cracks in existing repairs, as
specified in Tables 1, 2, and 3, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1228, dated
July 10, 2003. Do the inspections at the initial compliance times
listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin; except, where the service
bulletin specifies a compliance time after the service bulletin
date, this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance
time after the effective date of this AD. Do the inspections in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin. Repeat the inspections within the repetitive inspection
intervals listed in Tables 1, 2, 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin. Accomplishing the
requirements in this paragraph ends the requirements in AD 93-14-10,
amendment 39-8634 (58 FR 43547. August 17, 1993).
Note 1: At existing repairs around the forward and aft cargo
door cutouts: The location for the specified detailed or mid-
frequency eddy current inspections for cracking of the skin or
bearstrap is at the outer row of fasteners common to the repair, as
illustrated in Figures 8, 9, and 10 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1228, dated July 10, 2003.
(g) If any crack is found during any inspection: Repair before
further flight in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1228, dated July 10, 2003.
Where the service bulletin specifies contacting the manufacturer for
disposition of certain repair conditions, repair before further
flight in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or an Authorized
Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option Authorization (DOA)
Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to
make such findings. For a repair method to be approved, the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
No Reporting Required
(h) Although the service bulletin referenced in this AD
recommends reporting any discrepancies to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(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
[[Page 17603]]
DOA Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1228,
dated July 10, 2003, to perform the actions that are required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the
Federal Register approves the incorporation by reference of this
document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. For
copies of the service information, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. For
information on the availability of this material at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA), call (202) 741-6030, or
go to https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. You may view the AD docket at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., room PL-401, Nassif Building, Washington, DC.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 30, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-6763 Filed 4-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
