Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 Airplanes, 30278-30281 [06-4844]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30278
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 777–
200 and –300 series airplanes, certificated in
any category; as identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 777–52–0033, Revision 1, dated June
12, 2003.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by intermittent
failures of the emergency power assist system
(EPAS) battery pack found during testing,
which are due to switch contamination, cam
alignment problems, and inadequate self-test
capability. We are issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the EPAS, which could result in the
inability to open the exit door during an
emergency evacuation.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Replacement
(f) For Group 1 airplanes, as identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 777–52–0033,
Revision 1, dated June 12, 2003: Within 24
months after the effective date of this AD,
replace the battery packs of the EPAS of the
left and right non-overwing exit doors with
new battery packs by doing all the actions
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 777–52–
0033, Revision 1, dated June 12, 2003.
Replacement or Modification
(g) For Group 2 airplanes, as identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 777–52–0033,
Revision 1, dated June 12, 2003: Within 24
months after the effective date of this AD,
accomplish the actions specified in either
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
(1) Replace the battery packs as required by
paragraph (f) of this AD.
(2) Modify the battery packs by doing all
the actions specified in Boeing Component
Service Bulletin 285W0955–24–01, dated
November 21, 2002.
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19 on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
the appropriate principal inspector in the
FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding
District Office.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(k) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin
777–52–0033, Revision 1, dated June 12,
2003; and Boeing Component Service
Bulletin 285W0955–24–01, dated November
21, 2002; as applicable; to perform the
actions that are required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of
the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of these
documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707,
Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, for a copy
of this service information. You may review
copies at the Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Room PL–401, Nassif
Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov; or at the National
Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741–
6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–4845 Filed 5–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously
(h) Accomplishing the applicable actions
required by paragraph (f) or (g) of this AD
before the effective date of this AD, in
accordance with Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 777–52–0033, dated
November 21, 2002, is considered acceptable
for compliance with the corresponding
actions in this AD. Part number (P/N) S906–
10207–2 (for a 9-volt alkaline battery), shown
in Paragraph 2.C.2. of that service bulletin, is
not a valid P/N; the correct P/N that must be
used is P/N S906–10135–8011.
[Docket No. FAA–2005–23213; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NM–192–AD; Amendment
39–14615; AD 2006–11–11]
Parts Installation
(i) As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install a EPAS battery pack, P/
N S283W203–1 or P/N 285W0955–101, on
any airplane.
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an
existing airworthiness directive (AD),
which applies to certain Boeing Model
757 series airplanes. That AD currently
requires revising the Airworthiness
Limitations section of the maintenance
manual (757 Airworthiness Limitations
Instructions (ALI)) to incorporate certain
inspections and compliance times to
detect fatigue cracking of principal
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:42 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 757 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
structural elements (PSEs). This new AD
requires incorporating a new revision to
the Airworthiness Limitations section of
the Instructions of Continued
Airworthiness to mandate certain
repetitive inspections for fatigue
cracking of PSEs, and adds airplanes to
the applicability in the existing AD.
This AD results from a new revision to
the ALI. We are issuing this AD to
ensure that fatigue cracking of various
PSEs is detected and corrected; such
fatigue cracking could adversely affect
the structural integrity of these
airplanes.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June
30, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of June 30, 2006.
On November 20, 2001 (66 FR 52492,
October 16, 2001), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing
757 Maintenance Planning Data
Document, Section 9, Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May 1997’’; and
Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data
Document, Section 9, Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘November
1998.’’
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street
SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401,
Washington, DC.
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for service
information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis Stremick, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6450; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness
directive (AD) docket on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov or in person at the
Docket Management Facility office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Management Facility office
(telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building at
the street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
part 39 to include an AD that
supersedes AD 2001–20–12, amendment
39–12460 (66 FR 52492, October 16,
2001). The existing AD applies to
certain Boeing Model 757 series
airplanes. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on December 8,
2005 (70 FR 72939). That NPRM
proposed to require incorporating a new
revision to the Airworthiness
Limitations section of the Instructions of
Continued Airworthiness to mandate
certain repetitive inspections for fatigue
cracking of principal structural elements
(PSEs). That NPRM also proposed to
add airplanes to the applicability in the
existing AD.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments that have
been received on the NPRM.
Support for NPRM
American Airlines states that it will
comply with the requirements in the
NPRM and has no objection or
additional comments.
United Airlines concurs with the
contents of the NPRM, and adds that it
plans to comply with the June 2005
revision of the Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data (MPD) Document and
will update its documents to
incorporate that revision.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Request To Change Applicability
Boeing asks that we add Model 757–
200CB series airplanes to the
applicability specified in the NPRM.
Boeing states that Model 757–200CB is
listed on Type Certificate Data Sheet
A2NM, Revision 24, dated May 16,
2005.
We agree with Boeing as this AD is
applicable to all Boeing Model 757
airplanes. We find that this change does
not expand the scope of the NPRM
because no additional U.S. airplanes
will be affected by this AD as a result
of this change. We have added Model
757–200CB series airplanes to the
applicability section of this AD
accordingly.
Request for Credit for Previous/Later
Approved MPD Revisions
Continental Airlines (CAL)
recommends that paragraph (h) of the
NPRM mandate incorporation of
Revision ‘‘May 2003’’ or later FAAapproved revisions of Boeing Document
D622N001–9, instead of Revision ‘‘June
2005.’’ CAL states that Revision ‘‘June
2005’’ only incorporated a minor
escalation of the time interval to a
certain MPD item. The item is related to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:42 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
the operational check of the right Engine
Indication And Crew Alerting System
(EICAS) computer and has no bearing
on any PSE. CAL adds that a review of
the Revision ‘‘July 2004’’ changes
showed minor typographical errors
being corrected on certain MPD items.
These items relate to the operational
check of the decompression panel of the
flight deck door, and have no relation to
any PSE. CAL notes that it is Revision
‘‘May 2003’’ that incorporates
significant changes to the Airworthiness
Limitations—Structural Inspections.
CAL also states that, since the release
of AD 2001–20–12, Boeing Document
D622N001–9 has been revised seven
times. Since that AD mandated the use
of Revision ‘‘May 1997’’ or Revision
‘‘November 1998’’ only, an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) to the
AD which was issued by the Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) was
required in order to incorporate a later
FAA-approved revision of the Boeing
Document. CAL adds that the AMOC
requirement did not provide any added
value, since only the Seattle ACO is
allowed to revise the Airworthiness
Limitations—Structural Inspections.
CAL also refers to approval of later
FAA-approved revisions through an
AMOC they received for AD 2001–20–
12.
We partially agree with CAL as
follows:
As policy, we do not reference ‘‘laterapproved’’ service information in ADs.
Using the phrase ‘‘or later FAAapproved revisions’’ violates Office of
the Federal Register regulations for
approving materials that are
incorporated by reference. However,
affected operators may request approval
to use a later revision of the referenced
MPD Document as an AMOC under the
provisions of paragraph (j) of this AD. In
addition, as specified in paragraph (j)(1)
of this AD, AMOCs approved previously
in accordance with AD 2001–20–12 are
approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of this AD.
We do not agree to replace Boeing 757
MPD Document, Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and CMRs,’’
Subsection B., of Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘June 2005’’
with Revision ‘‘May 2003.’’ However,
since Revision ‘‘May 2003’’ includes all
significant changes that are in Revision
‘‘June 2005,’’ we have added Revision
‘‘May 2003’’ to paragraph (h) of this AD
as an acceptable method of compliance
for revising the MPD.
Revise Paragraph (f) of the NPRM
US Airways asks that the language
specified in paragraph (f) of the NPRM
be changed to require that operators
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30279
incorporate the changes to Boeing 757
MPD Document, Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and CMRs,’’
Subsection B., of Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May 1997’’ or
Revision ‘‘November 1998.’’ U.S.
Airways states that, operators cannot
revise the MPD Document specified in
paragraph (f), only Boeing can make
such revisions with FAA approval. U.S.
Airways states that, as an operator, they
can only incorporate the changes into
their Boeing 757 maintenance program
to comply with the published
requirements of the subject MPD
Document Airworthiness Limitations.
We do not agree with U.S. Airways.
The airworthiness limitations, like the
operating limitations, are a part of the
type certificate for an airplane. Once an
airworthiness certificate is issued for an
airplane certifying that it conforms to an
approved type design, this design is
‘‘locked’’ in the sense that the
manufacturer cannot unilaterally change
it for the subject airplane. Therefore,
when the manufacturer makes any
subsequent changes to the type
certificate, including changes to the
operating or airworthiness limitations,
those changes are legally required only
for products that are submitted for
airworthiness certification based on a
showing of conformity to the later
design.
Thus, for many years, we have
imposed operating restrictions that are
necessary to address identified unsafe
conditions by requiring revisions to the
operating limitations section of the
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM).
(Revision of the AFM by the type
certificate holder would be effective
only for airplanes produced after that
revision.) Similarly, Boeing’s revision to
the ALI was effective only for airplanes
later certificated with those revisions
included in their type certificate. For
this reason, as stated in the NPRM, we
must engage in rulemaking (i.e.,
issuance of an AD), in order to make the
revisions mandatory for previously
certificated airplanes.
While the ALIs are contained in a
‘‘Boeing document’’ in the sense that
Boeing originally produced it, the
document, nevertheless, is a part of the
instructions for continued airworthiness
that operators must use to maintain the
airplane properly. As explained in the
NPRM, the effect of requiring that the
document be revised to incorporate the
current version of the ALI is that, in
accordance with 14 CFR part 91.403(c),
operators are then required to comply
with those limitations. This is analogous
to the effect of requiring a revision to
the operating limitations: In accordance
with 14 CFR part 91.9(a), operators are
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
30280
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
required to comply with the revised
operating limitations.
Of course, those operators that have
previously revised the ALI (or
incorporated the revision into their
maintenance programs) are given credit
for having previously accomplished the
requirements of this AD, as allowed by
paragraph (e) of this AD. The legal effect
is the same: The operator is required to
comply with the limitations per 14 CFR
part 91.403(c). We have made no change
to the AD in this regard.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data, including the comments
that have been received, and determined
that air safety and the public interest
require adopting the AD with the
changes described previously. These
changes will neither increase the
economic burden on any operator nor
increase the scope of the AD.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Costs of Compliance
There are about 1,038 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
This AD affects about 673 airplanes of
U.S. registry.
The actions that are required by AD
2001–20–12, and retained in this AD,
take about 1 work hour per airplane, at
an average labor rate of $65 per work
hour. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of the currently required
actions is $65 per airplane.
The new actions take about 1 work
hour per airplane, at an average labor
rate of $65 per work hour. Based on
these figures, the estimated cost of the
new actions specified in this AD for
U.S. operators is $43,745, or $65 per
airplane.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in subtitle VII,
part A, subpart III, section 44701,
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will
not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the National Government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this AD 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, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
I
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
[Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by removing amendment 39–12460 (66
FR 52492, October 16, 2001) and by
adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
I
2006–11–11 Boeing: Amendment 39–14615.
Docket No. FAA–2005–23213;
Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–192–AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective June 30,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2001–20–12.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model
757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 series
airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD requires revisions to
certain operator maintenance documents to
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a new revision to
the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
maintenance manual (757 Airworthiness
Limitations Instructions (ALI)). We are
issuing this AD to ensure that fatigue
cracking of various PSEs is detected and
corrected; such fatigue cracking could
adversely affect the structural integrity of
these airplanes.
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.
Requirements of AD 2001–20–12
Adoption of the Amendment
§ 39.13
incorporate new inspections for fatigue
cracking of principal structural elements
(PSEs). Compliance with these inspections is
required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered,
or repaired in the areas addressed by these
inspections, the operator may not be able to
incorporate the inspections described in the
revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14
CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of
compliance according to paragraph (j) of this
AD. The request should include a description
of changes to the required inspections that
will ensure the continued damage tolerance
of the affected structure. The FAA has
provided guidance for this determination in
Advisory Circular (AC) 25–1529.
Revision of Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements
(f) For Model 757 series airplanes having
line numbers 1 through 764 inclusive, and
subject to the requirements of AD 2001–20–
12: Within 3 years after November 20, 2001
(the effective date of AD 2001–20–12), revise
Section 9 of the Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data (MPD) Document entitled
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs)’’ to
incorporate Subsection B. of Boeing
Document D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May
1997’’ or Revision ‘‘November 1998.’’
Accomplishing the requirements in
paragraph (h) of this AD ends the
requirements in this paragraph.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, the
terms PSEs as used in this AD, and Structural
Significant Items (SSIs) as used in Section 9
of Boeing 757 MPD Document, are
considered to be interchangeable.
No Alternative Inspections/Inspection
Intervals
(g) Except as provided in paragraph (j) of
this AD: After the actions required by
paragraph (f) of this AD have been
accomplished, no alternative inspections or
inspection intervals shall be approved for the
PSEs contained in Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May 1997’’ or
‘‘November 1998.’’
New Actions Required by This AD
(h) For all airplanes: Within 36 months
after the effective date of this AD, revise
Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
CMRs’’ of the Boeing 757 MPD Document to
incorporate Subsection B. of Boeing
Document D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May
2003;’’ or Revision ‘‘June 2005,’’ as
applicable. Accomplishing the requirements
in this paragraph ends the requirements in
paragraph (f) of this AD.
No Alternative Inspections/Inspection
Intervals
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (j) of
this AD: After the actions required by
paragraph (h) of this AD have been
accomplished, no alternative inspections or
inspection intervals shall be approved for the
PSEs contained in Boeing 757 MPD
Document D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May
2003’’ or Revision ‘‘June 2005.’’
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(j) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(1) AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2001–20–12, are
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of this AD.
(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
certification basis of the airplane.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(k) The actions required by this AD shall
be done in accordance with Boeing 757
Maintenance Planning Data Document,
Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements,’’
Subsection B. of Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May 2003;’’ Boeing
757 Maintenance Planning Data Document,
Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements,’’
Subsection B. of Boeing Document
D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘June 2005;’’ Boeing
757 Maintenance Planning Data Document,
Section 9, Boeing Document D622N001–9,
Revision ‘‘May 1997;’’ or Boeing 757
Maintenance Planning Data Document,
Section 9, Boeing Document D622N001–9,
Revision ‘‘November 1998;’’ as applicable;
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data
Document, Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness
Limitations and Certification Maintenance
Requirements,’’ Subsection B. of Boeing
Document D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May
2003;’’ and Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data Document, Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations and Certification
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:42 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Maintenance Requirements,’’ Subsection B.
of Boeing Document D622N001–9, Revision
‘‘June 2005;’’ in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) On November 20, 2001 (66 FR 52492,
October 16, 2001), the Director of the Federal
Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data Document, Section 9, Boeing
Document D622N001–9, Revision ‘‘May
1997;’’ and Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data Document, Section 9, Boeing
Document D622N001–9, Revision
‘‘November 1998.’’
(3) Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–
2207, for a copy of this service information.
You may review copies at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW.,
Room PL–401, Nassif Building, Washington,
DC; on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or
at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at the NARA,
call (202) 741–6030, or go to https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–4844 Filed 5–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
30281
issuing this AD to prevent a potential
source of ignition near a fuel tank,
which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank
explosion and consequent loss of the
airplane.
This AD becomes effective June
30, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in the AD
as of June 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street
SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401,
Washington, DC.
Contact Empresa Brasileira de
Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box
343—CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos
Campos—SP, Brazil, for service
information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Examining the Docket
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24072; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–016–AD; Amendment
39–14614; AD 2006–11–10]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Empresa
Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120, –120ER,
–120FC, –120QC, and –120RT
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120, –120ER,
–120FC, –120QC, and –120RT airplanes.
This AD requires replacing the de-icing
system ejector flow control valves with
new, improved control valves having
hermetically sealed switches; and
rewiring applicable connectors. This AD
results from a fuel system review
conducted by the manufacturer. We are
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
You may examine the airworthiness
directive (AD) docket on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov or in person at the
Docket Management Facility office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Management Facility office
(telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building at
the street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to all Empresa Brasileira de
Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER)
EMB–120( ) airplane models in
operation. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on March 7, 2006
(71 FR 11341). That NPRM proposed to
require replacing the de-icing system
ejector flow control valves with new,
improved control valves having
hermetically sealed switches; and
rewiring applicable connectors.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments received.
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30278-30281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4844]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2005-23213; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-192-AD;
Amendment 39-14615; AD 2006-11-11]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), which applies to certain Boeing Model 757 series airplanes. That
AD currently requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of
the maintenance manual (757 Airworthiness Limitations Instructions
(ALI)) to incorporate certain inspections and compliance times to
detect fatigue cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs). This
new AD requires incorporating a new revision to the Airworthiness
Limitations section of the Instructions of Continued Airworthiness to
mandate certain repetitive inspections for fatigue cracking of PSEs,
and adds airplanes to the applicability in the existing AD. This AD
results from a new revision to the ALI. We are issuing this AD to
ensure that fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected and corrected;
such fatigue cracking could adversely affect the structural integrity
of these airplanes.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June 30, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of June 30, 2006.
On November 20, 2001 (66 FR 52492, October 16, 2001), the Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data Document, Section 9, Boeing
Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May 1997''; and Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data Document, Section 9, Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision
``November 1998.''
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL-401, Washington, DC.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Stremick, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
917-6450; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness directive (AD) docket on the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management
Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office
(telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR
[[Page 30279]]
part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2001-20-12, amendment 39-
12460 (66 FR 52492, October 16, 2001). The existing AD applies to
certain Boeing Model 757 series airplanes. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on December 8, 2005 (70 FR 72939). That NPRM
proposed to require incorporating a new revision to the Airworthiness
Limitations section of the Instructions of Continued Airworthiness to
mandate certain repetitive inspections for fatigue cracking of
principal structural elements (PSEs). That NPRM also proposed to add
airplanes to the applicability in the existing AD.
Comments
We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments that have been
received on the NPRM.
Support for NPRM
American Airlines states that it will comply with the requirements
in the NPRM and has no objection or additional comments.
United Airlines concurs with the contents of the NPRM, and adds
that it plans to comply with the June 2005 revision of the Boeing 757
Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document and will update its documents
to incorporate that revision.
Request To Change Applicability
Boeing asks that we add Model 757-200CB series airplanes to the
applicability specified in the NPRM. Boeing states that Model 757-200CB
is listed on Type Certificate Data Sheet A2NM, Revision 24, dated May
16, 2005.
We agree with Boeing as this AD is applicable to all Boeing Model
757 airplanes. We find that this change does not expand the scope of
the NPRM because no additional U.S. airplanes will be affected by this
AD as a result of this change. We have added Model 757-200CB series
airplanes to the applicability section of this AD accordingly.
Request for Credit for Previous/Later Approved MPD Revisions
Continental Airlines (CAL) recommends that paragraph (h) of the
NPRM mandate incorporation of Revision ``May 2003'' or later FAA-
approved revisions of Boeing Document D622N001-9, instead of Revision
``June 2005.'' CAL states that Revision ``June 2005'' only incorporated
a minor escalation of the time interval to a certain MPD item. The item
is related to the operational check of the right Engine Indication And
Crew Alerting System (EICAS) computer and has no bearing on any PSE.
CAL adds that a review of the Revision ``July 2004'' changes showed
minor typographical errors being corrected on certain MPD items. These
items relate to the operational check of the decompression panel of the
flight deck door, and have no relation to any PSE. CAL notes that it is
Revision ``May 2003'' that incorporates significant changes to the
Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections.
CAL also states that, since the release of AD 2001-20-12, Boeing
Document D622N001-9 has been revised seven times. Since that AD
mandated the use of Revision ``May 1997'' or Revision ``November 1998''
only, an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to the AD which was
issued by the Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) was required
in order to incorporate a later FAA-approved revision of the Boeing
Document. CAL adds that the AMOC requirement did not provide any added
value, since only the Seattle ACO is allowed to revise the
Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections. CAL also refers to
approval of later FAA-approved revisions through an AMOC they received
for AD 2001-20-12.
We partially agree with CAL as follows:
As policy, we do not reference ``later-approved'' service
information in ADs. Using the phrase ``or later FAA-approved
revisions'' violates Office of the Federal Register regulations for
approving materials that are incorporated by reference. However,
affected operators may request approval to use a later revision of the
referenced MPD Document as an AMOC under the provisions of paragraph
(j) of this AD. In addition, as specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this
AD, AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2001-20-12 are
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
We do not agree to replace Boeing 757 MPD Document, Section 9,
``Airworthiness Limitations and CMRs,'' Subsection B., of Boeing
Document D622N001-9, Revision ``June 2005'' with Revision ``May 2003.''
However, since Revision ``May 2003'' includes all significant changes
that are in Revision ``June 2005,'' we have added Revision ``May 2003''
to paragraph (h) of this AD as an acceptable method of compliance for
revising the MPD.
Revise Paragraph (f) of the NPRM
US Airways asks that the language specified in paragraph (f) of the
NPRM be changed to require that operators incorporate the changes to
Boeing 757 MPD Document, Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations and
CMRs,'' Subsection B., of Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May
1997'' or Revision ``November 1998.'' U.S. Airways states that,
operators cannot revise the MPD Document specified in paragraph (f),
only Boeing can make such revisions with FAA approval. U.S. Airways
states that, as an operator, they can only incorporate the changes into
their Boeing 757 maintenance program to comply with the published
requirements of the subject MPD Document Airworthiness Limitations.
We do not agree with U.S. Airways. The airworthiness limitations,
like the operating limitations, are a part of the type certificate for
an airplane. Once an airworthiness certificate is issued for an
airplane certifying that it conforms to an approved type design, this
design is ``locked'' in the sense that the manufacturer cannot
unilaterally change it for the subject airplane. Therefore, when the
manufacturer makes any subsequent changes to the type certificate,
including changes to the operating or airworthiness limitations, those
changes are legally required only for products that are submitted for
airworthiness certification based on a showing of conformity to the
later design.
Thus, for many years, we have imposed operating restrictions that
are necessary to address identified unsafe conditions by requiring
revisions to the operating limitations section of the Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM). (Revision of the AFM by the type certificate holder would
be effective only for airplanes produced after that revision.)
Similarly, Boeing's revision to the ALI was effective only for
airplanes later certificated with those revisions included in their
type certificate. For this reason, as stated in the NPRM, we must
engage in rulemaking (i.e., issuance of an AD), in order to make the
revisions mandatory for previously certificated airplanes.
While the ALIs are contained in a ``Boeing document'' in the sense
that Boeing originally produced it, the document, nevertheless, is a
part of the instructions for continued airworthiness that operators
must use to maintain the airplane properly. As explained in the NPRM,
the effect of requiring that the document be revised to incorporate the
current version of the ALI is that, in accordance with 14 CFR part
91.403(c), operators are then required to comply with those
limitations. This is analogous to the effect of requiring a revision to
the operating limitations: In accordance with 14 CFR part 91.9(a),
operators are
[[Page 30280]]
required to comply with the revised operating limitations.
Of course, those operators that have previously revised the ALI (or
incorporated the revision into their maintenance programs) are given
credit for having previously accomplished the requirements of this AD,
as allowed by paragraph (e) of this AD. The legal effect is the same:
The operator is required to comply with the limitations per 14 CFR part
91.403(c). We have made no change to the AD in this regard.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comments that have been received, and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described
previously. These changes will neither increase the economic burden on
any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 1,038 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This AD affects about 673 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The actions that are required by AD 2001-20-12, and retained in
this AD, take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate
of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
currently required actions is $65 per airplane.
The new actions take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated
cost of the new actions specified in this AD for U.S. operators is
$43,745, or $65 per airplane.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD 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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
removing amendment 39-12460 (66 FR 52492, October 16, 2001) and by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
2006-11-11 Boeing: Amendment 39-14615. Docket No. FAA-2005-23213;
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-192-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective June 30, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2001-20-12.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB,
and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to incorporate new inspections for fatigue
cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs). Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to incorporate the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according
to paragraph (j) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA
has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular
(AC) 25-1529.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a new revision to the Airworthiness
Limitations section of the maintenance manual (757 Airworthiness
Limitations Instructions (ALI)). We are issuing this AD to ensure
that fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected and corrected;
such fatigue cracking could adversely affect the structural
integrity of these airplanes.
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.
Requirements of AD 2001-20-12
Revision of Airworthiness Limitations and Certification Maintenance
Requirements
(f) For Model 757 series airplanes having line numbers 1 through
764 inclusive, and subject to the requirements of AD 2001-20-12:
Within 3 years after November 20, 2001 (the effective date of AD
2001-20-12), revise Section 9 of the Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning
Data (MPD) Document entitled ``Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs)'' to incorporate
Subsection B. of Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May 1997''
or Revision ``November 1998.'' Accomplishing the requirements in
paragraph (h) of this AD ends the requirements in this paragraph.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, the terms PSEs as used in
this AD, and Structural Significant Items (SSIs) as used in Section
9 of Boeing 757 MPD Document, are considered to be interchangeable.
No Alternative Inspections/Inspection Intervals
(g) Except as provided in paragraph (j) of this AD: After the
actions required by paragraph (f) of this AD have been accomplished,
no alternative inspections or inspection intervals shall be approved
for the PSEs contained in Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May
1997'' or ``November 1998.''
New Actions Required by This AD
(h) For all airplanes: Within 36 months after the effective date
of this AD, revise Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations and
[[Page 30281]]
CMRs'' of the Boeing 757 MPD Document to incorporate Subsection B.
of Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May 2003;'' or Revision
``June 2005,'' as applicable. Accomplishing the requirements in this
paragraph ends the requirements in paragraph (f) of this AD.
No Alternative Inspections/Inspection Intervals
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (j) of this AD: After the
actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD have been accomplished,
no alternative inspections or inspection intervals shall be approved
for the PSEs contained in Boeing 757 MPD Document D622N001-9,
Revision ``May 2003'' or Revision ``June 2005.''
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(j) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(1) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2001-20-12,
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(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 certification basis
of the airplane.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(k) The actions required by this AD shall be done in accordance
with Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data Document, Section 9,
``Airworthiness Limitations and Certification Maintenance
Requirements,'' Subsection B. of Boeing Document D622N001-9,
Revision ``May 2003;'' Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data
Document, Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations and Certification
Maintenance Requirements,'' Subsection B. of Boeing Document
D622N001-9, Revision ``June 2005;'' Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning
Data Document, Section 9, Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May
1997;'' or Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data Document, Section 9,
Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``November 1998;'' as
applicable; unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data
Document, Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations and Certification
Maintenance Requirements,'' Subsection B. of Boeing Document
D622N001-9, Revision ``May 2003;'' and Boeing 757 Maintenance
Planning Data Document, Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements,'' Subsection B. of Boeing
Document D622N001-9, Revision ``June 2005;'' in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) On November 20, 2001 (66 FR 52492, October 16, 2001), the
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Boeing 757 Maintenance Planning Data Document, Section
9, Boeing Document D622N001-9, Revision ``May 1997;'' and Boeing 757
Maintenance Planning Data Document, Section 9, Boeing Document
D622N001-9, Revision ``November 1998.''
(3) Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You
may review copies at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Room PL-401, Nassif
Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at the NARA, call
(202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 06-4844 Filed 5-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
