Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727-100, 727-100C, and 727-200 Series Airplanes, 4069-4072 [E6-903]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules Replacement of the Rod End of the Aileron Damper Assembly DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (h) For airplanes equipped with an aileron damper assembly having P/N 41012130–102, –103, or –104, and serial number 001 through 0712 inclusive: Within 400 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, replace the rod end of the aileron damper assembly, P/N 41011486–101, with an improved rod end, P/ N 41011486–102, on the left- and right-hand sides of the airplane, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–27–0108, Revision 01, dated April 28, 2005. Note 1: EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145– 27–0108, Revision 01, refers to Textron Service Bulletin 41012130–27–02, dated July 12, 2004, as an additional source of service information for replacing the rod end of the aileron damper assembly. The Textron service bulletin is included within the pages of the EMBRAER service bulletin. Federal Aviation Administration Actions Accomplished Previously (i) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145–27–0108, dated July 28, 2004, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions required by this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (j)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (k) Brazilian airworthiness directive 2005– 10–04, dated November 17, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 17, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–901 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS BILLING CODE 4910–13–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:04 Jan 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–23672; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–237–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–100C, and 727–200 Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would require determining if the terminal fittings of the spars of the wings are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material. For any positive finding, the proposed AD would require doing repetitive inspections for cracks and corrosion of all exposed surfaces of the terminal fitting bores; doing repetitive inspections for cracks, corrosion, and other surface defects, of all exposed surfaces, including the flanges, of the terminal fitting; applying corrosion inhibiting compound to the terminal fittings; and repairing or replacing any cracked, corroded, or defective part with a new part. This proposed AD also provides for an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from reports of cracking of the terminal fittings of the spars of the wings. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct stresscorrosion cracking of the terminal fittings, which could result in the failure of one of the terminal fitting connections. Such a failure, combined with a similar failure of one of the other three terminal fittings, could result in the inability of the airplane structure to carry fail-safe loads, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the wing attachment points. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 13, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to https:// dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 4069 • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel F. Kutz, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6456; fax (425) 917–6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘FAA–2006–23672; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–237–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit https:// dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may 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 E:\FR\FM\25JAP1.SGM 25JAP1 4070 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules (800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received reports of cracking of the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings. The affected terminal fittings were made from a 7079–T6 aluminum forging. This material is known to be susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in the failure of one of the terminal fitting connections. Such a failure, combined with a similar failure of one of the other three terminal fittings, could result in the inability of the airplane structure to carry fail-safe loads, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the wing attachment points. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727–57A0185, Revision 1, dated November 3, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for determining if the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material by either inspecting the forging number or doing a conductivity test. For any case where the terminal fitting is determined to be made of 7079 aluminum alloy material or where the material cannot be determined, the service bulletin describes procedures for doing repetitive fluorescent dye penetrant inspections for cracks and corrosion of all exposed surfaces of the terminal fitting bores; doing repetitive detailed inspections for cracks, corrosion, and other surface defects, of all exposed surfaces, including the flanges, of the terminal fitting; applying corrosion inhibiting compound to the terminal fittings; and repairing any cracked, corroded, or defective part or contacting Boeing if necessary. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.’’ In addition, the proposed AD would provide for an optional terminating action for the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:04 Jan 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 repetitive inspections. The proposed AD also would require sending the initial inspection results to Boeing. figures, we estimate the cost of the inspections to be $1,040 per airplane, per inspection cycle. Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways: • Using a method that we approve; or • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings. In paragraph 1.E., the service bulletins states, ‘‘Contact Boeing for replacement of the fitting with a fitting not made from 7079 aluminum alloy. Replacement of the fitting is considered terminating action for that fitting only.’’ However, the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin do not contain any procedures for accomplishing this replacement. Therefore, this proposed AD specifies that the optional replacement be done in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office. Authority for This Rulemaking Interim Action This proposed AD is considered to be interim action. The inspection reports that are required by this AD will enable the manufacturer to obtain better insight into the extent of the cracking and corrosion of the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings in the fleet, and to develop additional action if necessary to address the unsafe condition. If additional action is identified, we may consider further rulemaking. Costs of Compliance There are about 302 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 157 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed determination of forging number/material identification would take about 4 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $40,820, or $260 per airplane. Accomplishing the fluorescent dye penetrant and detailed inspections, if required, will take about 16 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. 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, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: E:\FR\FM\25JAP1.SGM 25JAP1 4071 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): to detect and correct stress-corrosion cracking of the terminal fittings, which could result in the failure of one of the terminal fitting connections. Such a failure, combined with a similar failure of one of the other three terminal fittings, could result in the inability of the airplane structure to carry fail-safe loads, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the wing attachment points. TABLE 1.—FORGING NUMBERS NOT MADE OF 7079 ALUMINUM ALLOY Forging No. of terminal fittings Location (i) 65–16214–3 .......... (ii) 65–16213–3 ......... Rear spar of left wing. Front spar of left wing. Rear spar of right wing. Front spar of right wing. Compliance (iii) 65–16214–4 ........ (iv) 65–16213–4 ........ Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2006–23672; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–237–AD. (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. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 13, 2006. Determination of Type of Terminal Fittings, Repetitive Inspections, and Corrective Actions Affected ADs (b) None. (f) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, determine if the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material by either inspecting the forging number or doing a conductivity test, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727–57A0185, Revision 1, dated November 3, 2005. (1) If the forging number is that identified in Table 1 of this AD, or if the terminal fitting material is not made of 7079 aluminum alloy: No further action is required by this AD for that terminal fitting only. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–100C, and 727–200 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727–57A0185, Revision 1, dated November 3, 2005. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports of cracking of the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings. We are issuing this AD (2) If any forging number other than those identified in Table 1 of this AD is found, or if any forging material is made of 7079 aluminum alloy, or if the material cannot be determined: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do the inspections specified in Table 2 of this AD and apply corrosion inhibiting compound (CIC) to the terminal fittings, and before further flight, repair or replace any cracked, corroded, or defective part found during the inspections. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 60 months for the first two repeat intervals, and then thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 months. Do the inspections, application of CIC, and repair in accordance with the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD. Do the replacement in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD. TABLE 2.—INSPECTIONS Do— For— Of— (i) A fluorescent dye penetrant inspection. (ii) A detailed inspection .................. Cracks and corrosion .................... All exposed surfaces of the terminal fitting bores. Cracks, corrosion, and other surface defects. All exposed surfaces, including the flanges, of the terminal fitting. Optional Terminating Action Parts Installation (g) Replacement of any terminal fitting of the front and rear spars of the wings with a new terminal fitting not made of 7079 aluminum alloy, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ends the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD for that terminal fitting only. For the replacement to be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval letter must specifically refer to this AD. (j) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any terminal fitting having forging number 65–16213–1/–2 or 65– 16214–1/–2, or install any terminal fitting material made of 7079 aluminum alloy, on any airplane. (1) If the inspection was done after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection. (2) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD. Reporting Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k) Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative) of the initial inspection required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD to Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Attention: Manager, Airline Support, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, WA 98124–2207, at the applicable time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD. The report must include the operator’s name, inspection results, a detailed description of any discrepancies found, the airplane serial number, and the number of flight cycles and flight hours on the airplane. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements contained in this AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. (l)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes 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 repair must meet the cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS Exception to Service Information (h) Where the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the cracked, corroded, or defective part using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, or replace in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD. (i) Although the note in paragraph 3.B.7. of the service bulletin specifies procedures for a fluorescent dye penetrant inspection of the body fitting bore and repair if necessary, those procedures are not required by this AD. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:04 Jan 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25JAP1.SGM 25JAP1 4072 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 17, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–903 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–23578; Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU–2B Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) MU– 2B series airplanes. This proposed AD would require you to do the following: Remove and visually inspect the wing attach barrel nuts, bolts, and retainers for cracks, corrosion, and fractures; replace any cracked, corroded, or fractured parts; inspect reusable barrel nuts and bolts for deformation and irregularities in the threads; replace any deformed or irregular parts; and install new or reusable parts and torque to the correct value. This proposed AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven approach to evaluate the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU–2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary to ensure their safe operation. Part of that evaluation was the identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and correct cracks, corrosion, fractures, and incorrect torque values in the wing attach barrel nuts, which could result in failure of the wing barrel nuts and/or associated wing attachment hardware. This failure could lead to in-flight separation of the outer wing from the center wing section and result in loss of controlled flight. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 27, 2006. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:04 Jan 24, 2006 Jkt 208001 Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD: • DOT Docket Web site: Go to https:// dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Nagoya Aerospace Systems Works, 10, OYE–CHO, Minato-Ku, Nagoya, Japan, or Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248– 3108; facsimile: (972) 248–3321, for the service information identified in this proposed AD. You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–150 (c/o MIDO–43), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; telephone: (210) 308– 3365; facsimile: (210) 308–3370. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: Comments Invited How do I comment on this proposed AD? We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include the docket number, ‘‘FAA–2006–23578; Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Using the search function of the DOT docket web site, anyone can find and read the comments received PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 into any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov. Examining the Dockets Where can I go to view the docket information? You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition on the Internet at https:// dms.dot.gov, or in person at the DOT Docket Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647–5227) is located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management Facility receives them. Discussion What events have caused this proposed AD? Recent accidents and the service history of the Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplanes prompted FAA to conduct an MU–2B Safety Evaluation. This evaluation used a data-driven approach to evaluate the design, operation, and maintenance of MU–2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary to ensure their safe operation. The safety evaluation provided an indepth review and analysis of MU–2B incidents, accidents, safety data, pilot training requirements, engine reliability, and commercial operations. In conducting this evaluation, the team employed new analysis tools that provided a much more detailed root cause analysis of the MU–2B problems than was previously possible. Part of that evaluation was to identify unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. One of these conditions is the discovery of the right wing upper forward and lower forward barrel nuts found cracked during a scheduled 7,500-hour inspection on one of the affected airplanes. The manufacturer conducted additional investigations of the barrel nuts on other affected airplanes. The result of this investigation revealed no other cracked barrel nuts. However, it was discovered that several airplanes had over-torqued barrel nuts, which could result in cracking. E:\FR\FM\25JAP1.SGM 25JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4069-4072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-903]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-23672; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-237-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727-100, 727-
100C, and 727-200 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for certain Boeing transport category airplanes. This proposed AD would 
require determining if the terminal fittings of the spars of the wings 
are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material. For any positive finding, the 
proposed AD would require doing repetitive inspections for cracks and 
corrosion of all exposed surfaces of the terminal fitting bores; doing 
repetitive inspections for cracks, corrosion, and other surface 
defects, of all exposed surfaces, including the flanges, of the 
terminal fitting; applying corrosion inhibiting compound to the 
terminal fittings; and repairing or replacing any cracked, corroded, or 
defective part with a new part. This proposed AD also provides for an 
optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This 
proposed AD results from reports of cracking of the terminal fittings 
of the spars of the wings. We are proposing this AD to detect and 
correct stress-corrosion cracking of the terminal fittings, which could 
result in the failure of one of the terminal fitting connections. Such 
a failure, combined with a similar failure of one of the other three 
terminal fittings, could result in the inability of the airplane 
structure to carry fail-safe loads, which could result in loss of 
structural integrity of the wing attachment points.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 13, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this 
proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel F. Kutz, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
917-6456; fax (425) 917-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2006-
23672; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-237-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of 
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may 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

[[Page 4070]]

(800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at 
the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 
be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management 
System receives them.

Discussion

    We have received reports of cracking of the terminal fittings of 
the front and rear spars of the wings. The affected terminal fittings 
were made from a 7079-T6 aluminum forging. This material is known to be 
susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking. This condition, if not 
detected and corrected, could result in the failure of one of the 
terminal fitting connections. Such a failure, combined with a similar 
failure of one of the other three terminal fittings, could result in 
the inability of the airplane structure to carry fail-safe loads, which 
could result in loss of structural integrity of the wing attachment 
points.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727-57A0185, 
Revision 1, dated November 3, 2005. The service bulletin describes 
procedures for determining if the terminal fittings of the front and 
rear spars of the wings are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material by 
either inspecting the forging number or doing a conductivity test. For 
any case where the terminal fitting is determined to be made of 7079 
aluminum alloy material or where the material cannot be determined, the 
service bulletin describes procedures for doing repetitive fluorescent 
dye penetrant inspections for cracks and corrosion of all exposed 
surfaces of the terminal fitting bores; doing repetitive detailed 
inspections for cracks, corrosion, and other surface defects, of all 
exposed surfaces, including the flanges, of the terminal fitting; 
applying corrosion inhibiting compound to the terminal fittings; and 
repairing any cracked, corroded, or defective part or contacting Boeing 
if necessary.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an 
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes 
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, 
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service 
information described previously, except as discussed under 
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.'' In 
addition, the proposed AD would provide for an optional terminating 
action for the repetitive inspections. The proposed AD also would 
require sending the initial inspection results to Boeing.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD 
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the 
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative 
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization 
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
    In paragraph 1.E., the service bulletins states, ``Contact Boeing 
for replacement of the fitting with a fitting not made from 7079 
aluminum alloy. Replacement of the fitting is considered terminating 
action for that fitting only.'' However, the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the service bulletin do not contain any procedures for 
accomplishing this replacement. Therefore, this proposed AD specifies 
that the optional replacement be done in accordance with a method 
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office.

Interim Action

    This proposed AD is considered to be interim action. The inspection 
reports that are required by this AD will enable the manufacturer to 
obtain better insight into the extent of the cracking and corrosion of 
the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings in the 
fleet, and to develop additional action if necessary to address the 
unsafe condition. If additional action is identified, we may consider 
further rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 302 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 157 airplanes of 
U.S. registry. The proposed determination of forging number/material 
identification would take about 4 work hours per airplane, at an 
average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $40,820, or 
$260 per airplane.
    Accomplishing the fluorescent dye penetrant and detailed 
inspections, if required, will take about 16 work hours per airplane, 
at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, 
we estimate the cost of the inspections to be $1,040 per airplane, per 
inspection cycle.

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 proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not 
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship 
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed 
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. 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, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

[[Page 4071]]

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2006-23672; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
237-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 13, 
2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727-100, 727-
100C, and 727-200 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as 
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727-57A0185, Revision 1, 
dated November 3, 2005.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracking of the terminal 
fittings of the front and rear spars of the wings. We are issuing 
this AD to detect and correct stress-corrosion cracking of the 
terminal fittings, which could result in the failure of one of the 
terminal fitting connections. Such a failure, combined with a 
similar failure of one of the other three terminal fittings, could 
result in the inability of the airplane structure to carry fail-safe 
loads, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the 
wing attachment points.

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.

Determination of Type of Terminal Fittings, Repetitive Inspections, and 
Corrective Actions

    (f) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, 
determine if the terminal fittings of the front and rear spars of 
the wings are made of 7079 aluminum alloy material by either 
inspecting the forging number or doing a conductivity test, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 727-57A0185, Revision 1, dated November 3, 2005.
    (1) If the forging number is that identified in Table 1 of this 
AD, or if the terminal fitting material is not made of 7079 aluminum 
alloy: No further action is required by this AD for that terminal 
fitting only.

        Table 1.--Forging Numbers Not Made of 7079 Aluminum Alloy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Forging No. of terminal fittings                 Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 65-16214-3............................  Rear spar of left wing.
(ii) 65-16213-3...........................  Front spar of left wing.
(iii) 65-16214-4..........................  Rear spar of right wing.
(iv) 65-16213-4...........................  Front spar of right wing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) If any forging number other than those identified in Table 1 
of this AD is found, or if any forging material is made of 7079 
aluminum alloy, or if the material cannot be determined: Within 24 
months after the effective date of this AD, do the inspections 
specified in Table 2 of this AD and apply corrosion inhibiting 
compound (CIC) to the terminal fittings, and before further flight, 
repair or replace any cracked, corroded, or defective part found 
during the inspections. Repeat the inspections thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 60 months for the first two repeat 
intervals, and then thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 months. 
Do the inspections, application of CIC, and repair in accordance 
with the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraphs (h) and 
(i) of this AD. Do the replacement in accordance with paragraph (g) 
of this AD.

                          Table 2.--Inspections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Do--                     For--                 Of--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) A fluorescent dye           Cracks and         All exposed surfaces
 penetrant inspection.           corrosion.         of the terminal
                                                    fitting bores.
(ii) A detailed inspection....  Cracks,            All exposed surfaces,
                                 corrosion, and     including the
                                 other surface      flanges, of the
                                 defects.           terminal fitting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Optional Terminating Action

    (g) Replacement of any terminal fitting of the front and rear 
spars of the wings with a new terminal fitting not made of 7079 
aluminum alloy, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, 
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ends the 
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD for 
that terminal fitting only. For the replacement to be approved by 
the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, the 
Manager's approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.

Exception to Service Information

    (h) Where the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for 
appropriate action:
    Before further flight, repair the cracked, corroded, or 
defective part using a method approved in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, or replace in 
accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (i) Although the note in paragraph 3.B.7. of the service 
bulletin specifies procedures for a fluorescent dye penetrant 
inspection of the body fitting bore and repair if necessary, those 
procedures are not required by this AD.

Parts Installation

    (j) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install 
any terminal fitting having forging number 65-16213-1/-2 or 65-
16214-1/-2, or install any terminal fitting material made of 7079 
aluminum alloy, on any airplane.

Reporting

    (k) Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative) 
of the initial inspection required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD to 
Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Attention: Manager, Airline 
Support, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, WA 98124-2207, at the applicable 
time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD. The report 
must include the operator's name, inspection results, a detailed 
description of any discrepancies found, the airplane serial number, 
and the number of flight cycles and flight hours on the airplane. 
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
approved the information collection requirements contained in this 
AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (1) If the inspection was done after the effective date of this 
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective 
date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the 
effective date of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (l)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to 
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the 
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.  
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an 
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes 
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 repair must meet the

[[Page 4072]]

certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 17, 2006.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-903 Filed 1-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.