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