Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes, 30346-30350 [E6-8120]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30346
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Credit for Prior Accomplishment
(g) Accomplishment of actions specified in
the applicable service bulletin listed in Table
1 of this AD is also acceptable for compliance
with the corresponding requirements of this
AD.
TABLE 1.—CREDIT SERVICE BULLETINS
EMBRAER Service Bulletin
Revision
145LEG–53–0015 .......................................................................................................................................
145–53–0049 ..............................................................................................................................................
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h)(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 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.
Related Information
(i) Brazilian airworthiness directive 2004–
05–03R1, effective September 16, 2005, also
addresses the subject of this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 18,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–8121 Filed 5–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
The original NPRM resulted from a
report that the master dim and test
system circuit does not have wiring
separation of the test ground signal for
redundant equipment in the flight
compartment. This action revises the
original NPRM by adding a new
concurrent action for certain airplanes,
extending the compliance time, and
removing certain airplanes from
concurrent requirements. We are
proposing this supplemental NPRM to
prevent a single fault failure in flight
from simulating a test condition and
showing test patterns instead of the
selected radio frequencies on the
communications panels, which could
inhibit communication between the
flightcrew and the control tower,
affecting the continued safe flight of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this supplemental NPRM by June 20,
2006.
Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
supplemental NPRM.
• Docket Web site: Go to http//
dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions
for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to http//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 service
information identified in this proposed
AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Binh Tran, Aerospace Engineer, Systems
and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S,
FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
ADDRESSES:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2004–19245; Directorate
Identifier 2004–NM–108–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–300, –400, –500, –600, –700,
–700C, –800, and –900 Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier
proposed airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737–300, –400,
–500, –600, –700, –700C, –800, and
–900 series airplanes. The original
NPRM would have required modifying
the wiring for the master dim and test
system. For certain airplanes, the
original NPRM also proposed to require
related concurrent actions as necessary.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
01
01
02
Date
September 1, 2004.
September 1, 2004.
November 26, 2004.
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6485; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this supplemental NPRM.
Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include
the docket number ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2004–19245; Directorate Identifier
2004–NM–108–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this supplemental NPRM. We
will consider all comments received by
the closing date and may amend this
supplemental NPRM in light of those
comments.
We will post all comments submitted,
without change, to http//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 supplemental NPRM. 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 the DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000
(65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit
http//dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at http//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 in the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in ADDRESSES.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after the Docket
Management System receives them.
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Discussion
We proposed to amend 14 CFR part
39 with a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) for an AD (the ‘‘original
NPRM’’) for certain Boeing Model 737–
300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C,
–800 and –900 series airplanes. The
original NPRM was published in the
Federal Register on October 5, 2004 (69
FR 59559). The original NPRM proposed
to require modifying the wiring for the
master dim and test system. For certain
airplanes, the original NPRM also
proposed to require related concurrent
actions as necessary.
Relevant Service Information
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
We have reviewed Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1133, Revision 3, dated
September 8, 2005. The service bulletin
describes actions similar to those in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–33–1133,
Revision 2, dated December 4, 2003,
which was described in the original
NPRM as the applicable source of
service information for certain proposed
actions on certain airplanes. Revision 3
also reduces the number of airplanes
subject to certain actions specified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–33–1121,
Revision 1, dated December 19, 2002.
The NPRM refers to 737–33–1121 as the
applicable source of service information
for certain concurrent actions.
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737–33–1132, Revision 2, dated
September 8, 2005, describes actions
similar to Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737–33–1132, Revision
1, dated March 4, 2004, which was
described in the original NPRM as the
applicable source of service information
for certain proposed actions on certain
other airplanes. Revision 2 also adds a
concurrent action for certain airplanes.
For certain airplanes, Service Bulletin
737–33–1132, Revision 2, recommends
prior or concurrent accomplishment of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–23–1102,
dated June 3, 1999. Service Bulletin
737–23–1102 describes procedures to
replace the VHF and HF
communications panels with radio
control panels.
Accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information is intended to
adequately address the unsafe
condition.
Comments
We have considered the following
comments on the original NPRM.
Supportive Comment
One commenter, Alaska Airlines,
supports the original NPRM.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Request To Delay Release of AD
Pending Release of Revised Service
Bulletins
Boeing requests that the FAA delay
issuing the AD until the release of
Revision 3 of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–33–1133. The commenter states
that implementing Service Bulletin 737–
33–1133 at Revision 2, and
implementing the associated concurrent
service bulletin (Boeing Service Bulletin
737–33–1121, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2002), would require
operators to perform unnecessary tasks.
The commenter also points out that
revising the service bulletin would help
reduce the economic impact of the AD
by removing the unnecessary tasks. We
infer that the commenter wants the FAA
to reference Revision 3 of the service
bulletin.
We agree to reference Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1133, Revision 3, dated
September 8, 2005, for the reasons
stated by the commenter. We have
determined that this delay would have
no adverse effect on safety, and that
reference to Revision 3 would assist
operators in complying with this
supplemental NPRM. We have revised
paragraph (f) of this AD accordingly.
Requests From Operators To Delay
Release of the AD
The Air Transport Association (ATA),
on behalf of its member, Continental
Airlines, requests that certain Boeing
service bulletins be revised or
withdrawn as referenced service
bulletins. Continental states that there
are multiple open issues (such as
unnecessary steps for airplanes with
certain different control panel
configurations) and complications with
those service bulletins. Continental
further suggests that if the service
bulletins are not revised, then the AD
should be delayed until the open issues
with some of the Boeing service
bulletins are resolved.
We agree that certain service bulletins
referenced in the NPRM need revisions.
Since publication of the NPRM, some of
the affected service bulletins have been
revised to address open issues and
complications. However, we do not
agree to delay the issuance of this AD
until all the affected service bulletins
are revised. Compliance with some of
the other affected and un-revised service
bulletins may involve requesting
alternative methods of compliance
(AMOCs), since we have determined
that it could affect safety if we wait for
the remaining affected service bulletins
to be revised. Boeing has also advised
that it does not plan to revise a few of
the remaining affected service bulletins.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30347
We have revised paragraphs (f), (g) and
(h) of this supplemental NPRM to
reference these revised service bulletins
as applicable. Operators are welcome to
apply for an AMOC as specified in
paragraph (i) of this supplemental
NPRM.
Requests To Extend Compliance Time
To Modify Wiring
The ATA, on behalf of its members,
American Airlines, United Airlines
(UAL), and US Airways, requests
extending the compliance time from 30
months to better match operators’
heavy/base maintenance schedule. US
Airways suggests a 48-month
compliance time and states that the
proposed 30-month compliance time
doesn’t match maintenance cycles. UAL
also notes that the 30-month compliance
time will create an increase in the time
needed for C-check visits. American
Airlines suggests re-wording the
compliance time to ‘‘the next heavy
overhaul visit’’ to prevent unnecessary
financial hardship for the airlines.
We agree to extend the compliance
time. We have considered other similar
actions and have determined that
extending the compliance time to 48
months will not adversely affect safety.
We have revised paragraph (f) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly. We
do not agree to use ‘‘the next heavy
overhaul visit,’’ since it is an imprecise
compliance time, and the definition of
heavy overhaul visit can vary
significantly between airplane
operators.
Requests To Give Credit for Airplanes
Equipped With Aircraft
Communication and Reporting System
(ACARS)
The ATA, on behalf of UAL, requests
that we give credit for airplanes
equipped with ACARS. UAL states that
the NPRM does not give credit for those
airplanes that are equipped with other
means of ground communication. UAL
explains that ACARS transmits data to
an operator’s dispatch group through
the number 3 VHF system (VHF3),
which is dedicated solely for ACARS
usage. The frequency tuning for VHF3 is
controlled by ACARS, not the VHF
control panel. UAL concludes that
ACARS provides an equivalent level of
safety for the purposes of the NPRM
since the flightcrew is still able to
communicate with the ground, even if
the fault occurs.
We partially agree with the
commenters that ACARS provides some
level of communication with the ground
(usually the airplane operator’s dispatch
or ground support office) when the fault
occurs. However, assuming the
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
30348
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
operator’s dispatch office is able to
establish a telephone line with the
relevant air traffic control (ATC) tower
or center, the delays in relaying
information between the flightcrew and
ATC via ACARS can be substantial. This
fault also simulates a ‘‘test condition’’
that activates several flight
annunciators, switches, and displays, so
that the selected communication
frequency cannot be determined from
the displays. This increases the
workload of the flightcrew and has an
impact to the safety of the airplane
during the approach and landing phase
of flight. Therefore, the supplemental
NPRM has not been revised to allow
credit for airplanes equipped with
ACARS.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Request To Revise Cost Estimate
The ATA, on behalf of UAL, requests
that we revise the cost estimate of the
modification in the NPRM. UAL states
that Service Bulletin 737–33–1132
estimates the modification to take 21
work hours to complete, and the FAA
estimates 14 work hours for the
modification. UAL believes that the
actual cost would be $1,740 per airplane
whereas we estimate it at $910 per
airplane.
We disagree to revise the estimate of
the work hours since the cost estimate
includes only the time necessary to
perform the specific actions actually
proposed by this supplementary NPRM.
The service bulletin provides a work
hour estimate that includes time needed
to gain access to and close up the work
area. Our estimates also typically do not
include incidental costs such as
planning time, access/close-up time, or
other incidental or administrative
actions. However, since we published
the original NPRM, we have revised our
cost estimate of a work hour from $65
to $80 to account for the increased cost
of each work hour since we last revised
that cost estimate. The estimates in Cost
of Compliance have been revised
accordingly.
Request To Revise Service Bulletins To
Identify Airplanes With Enhanced
Ground Proximity Warning System
(EGPWS)
Continental Airlines requests that
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–33–1132 be
revised to identify airplanes modified
by Boeing’s EGPWS installation service
bulletins and create an additional
grouping for these EGPWS-modified
airplanes. The commenter states that
Service Bulletin 737–33–1132 has
instructions to terminate a wire (number
W149–045–22) to the navigation control
panel. Continental adds that the wire
has already been terminated at the MMR
control panel on airplanes modified by
the EGPWS service bulletins.
We agree that provisions need to be
made for airplanes that have had
EGPWS installed in accordance with the
Boeing EGPWS service bulletins. Rather
than revising Service Bulletin 737–33–
1132 to address EGPWS modifications,
Boeing has issued Service Bulletin 737–
34–1924, dated October 17, 2005, to
address wire changes and separation.
Therefore Service Bulletin 737–33–1132
does not need to be revised. We have
not changed the supplemental NPRM in
this regard. However, if the commenter
believes there is still potential for
confusion or uncertainty, it is welcome
to apply for an AMOC to use Service
Bulletin 737–34–1924 in accordance
with paragraph (i) of the supplemental
NPRM.
Revise Service Bulletin To Remove
Certain Requirements for NonIntegrated Audio Control Panels (ACPs)
Continental Airlines and Southwest
Airlines request that the Boeing Service
Bulletins 737–33–1133 and 737–33–
1121 be revised to make installing
provisional wiring for lamp test
function an optional action for airplanes
equipped with non-integrated ACPs.
Southwest states that Boeing indicated
that the wiring for the lamp test is only
for fleet commonality for airplanes
without integrated ACPs. Southwest
believes that actions should not be
mandated for the sake of fleet
commonality.
We agree that the provisional wiring
for the lamp test function should not be
required for the non-integrated ACPs.
Boeing has revised Service Bulletin
737–33–1133 so that the actions of
Service Bulletin 737–33–1121 will not
be required concurrent action on
airplanes that do not have integrated
ACPs. The supplemental NPRM refers to
this revised service bulletin.
Request To Accommodate Airplanes
With Certain Post-Delivery Wiring
Changes
Southwest Airlines requests that the
wiring installation listed within the
Boeing service bulletins for automatic
direction finder (ADF) control panels,
Selective Calling on the radio
communication system (SELCAL), and
engine instrument system (EIS), be
made optional for airplanes without
ADF, SELCAL, and EIS installed. The
airline states that it does not have
SELCAL installed in its fleet, nor does
it operate any airplanes with an EIS
system, and is currently in the process
of removing all ADF control panels from
its fleet.
We agree that such actions should be
optional for those airplanes without
those systems installed. However,
Boeing has decided not to revise the
service bulletins (Boeing Service
Bulletins 737–33–1132, 737–77–1022,
and 737–77–1023 for non-EIS
configurations and Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1133 for non-SELCAL
configurations) to address airplanes
with these post-delivery wiring
modifications. It is not feasible to
address each operator’s configuration in
this supplemental NPRM. Operators
may submit a request for an AMOC in
accordance with paragraph (i) of this
supplemental NPRM.
Clarification of AMOC Paragraph
We have revised this supplemental
NPRM to clarify the appropriate
procedure for notifying the principal
inspector before using any approved
AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies.
FAA’s Determination and Proposed
Requirements of the Supplemental
NPRM
The changes discussed above expand
the scope of the original NPRM;
therefore, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period
to provide additional opportunity for
public comment on this supplemental
NPRM.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 2,868 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
This supplemental NPRM would affect
about 1,181 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The following table provides the
estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this supplemental NPRM.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Boeing Service Bulletin
Work hours
737–33–1132, Revision 2 .................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Average labor
rate per hour
14
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
$80
26MYP1
Parts
Nominal ........
Cost per
airplane
$1,120
30349
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
ESTIMATED COSTS—Continued
Boeing Service Bulletin
Average labor
rate per hour
Work hours
737–33–1133, Revision 3 .................................................................................
3
80
Cost per
airplane
Parts
Nominal ........
240
ESTIMATED CONCURRENT SERVICE BULLETIN COSTS
Boeing service bulletin
Work hours
Average labor
rate per hour
737–26A1083, Revision 1.
737–33–1121, Revision 1.
737–77–1022, Revision 1.
737–77–1023, Revision 1.
737–23–1102 ..........
185 .........................
$80
Between 5 and 6 ...
80
72 ...........................
Parts
Cost per airplane
80
Between $30,000
and $36,400.
Between $200 and
$340.
No charge ..............
Between $44,800
and $51,200.
Between $600 and
$820.
$5,760 ....................
Between 1 and 3 ...
80
Nominal ..................
77 ...........................
80
$22,164 ..................
Between $80 and
$240.
$28,324 ..................
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.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Number of
U.S.-registered
airplanes
15:00 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
1
83
4
26
0
Fleet cost
Between $44,800
and $51,200.
Between $49,800
and $68,060.
$23,040.
Between $2,080
and $6,240.
No fleet cost unless
an affected airplane is imported
and placed on
U.S. register.
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 supplemental NPRM and placed it
in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the
regulatory evaluation.
Affected ADs
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
(d) This AD results from a report that the
master dim and test system circuit does not
have wiring separation of the test ground
signal for redundant equipment in the flight
compartment. We are issuing this AD to
prevent a single fault failure in flight from
simulating a test condition and showing test
patterns instead of the selected radio
frequencies on the communications panels,
which could inhibit communication between
the flightcrew and the control tower,
affecting the continued safe flight of the
airplane.
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:
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):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2004–19245;
Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–108–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by June 20, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737–
300, –400, and –500 series airplanes
identified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 737–33–1132, Revision 2,
dated September 8, 2005; and Model 737–
600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series
airplanes identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1133, Revision 3, dated
September 8, 2005; certificated in any
category.
Unsafe Condition
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.
Modification
(f) Within 48 months after the effective
date of this AD: Modify the wiring for the
master dim test system in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–33–
1132, Revision 2, dated September 8, 2005
(for Model 737–300, –400, and –500 series
airplanes); and Boeing Service Bulletin 737–
33–1133, Revision 3, dated September 8,
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
30350
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 102 / Friday, May 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
2005 (for Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800,
and –900 series airplanes); as applicable.
Actions Required To Be Accomplished Prior
to or Concurrently With Paragraph (f) of
This AD
(g) Prior to or concurrently with
accomplishment of paragraph (f) of this AD,
do the actions specified in Table 1 of this AD,
as applicable.
TABLE 1.—PRIOR/CONCURRENT ACTIONS
For—
Accomplish all actions associated with—
According to the Accomplishment Instructions
of—
Group 57 airplanes identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737–33–1132, Revision 2, dated September 8, 2005.
Installing an engine instrument system (EIS)
and.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–77–1022, Revision 1, dated October 26, 1989.
Modifying the advisory system for the EIS ......
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–77–1023, Revision 1, dated November 9, 1989.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–33–1121, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2002.
Group 37 and 46 airplanes identified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–33–1133, Revision 3,
dated September 8, 2005.
Group 2 airplanes identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1121, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2002.
Group 39 airplanes identified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–33–1133, Revision 3, dated
September 8, 2005.
Group 59 airplanes identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737–33–1132, Revision 2, dated September 8, 2005.
Actions Accomplished per Previous
Issue of Service Bulletins
(h) Actions accomplished before the
effective date of this AD in accordance
Installing wiring for the test system for the
audio control panel lamp.
Installing splice SP896 .....................................
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–26A1083, Revision 1, dated November 15, 2001.
Installing a smoke detection and fire extinguishing system in the cargo compartment.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–26A1083, Revision 1, dated November 15, 2001.
Replacing the VHF and HF communications
panels with radio control panels.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–23–1102, dated
June 3, 1999.
with the service bulletins identified in
Table 2 of this AD are considered
acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions specified in this
AD.
TABLE 2.—PREVIOUS ISSUES OF SERVICE BULLETINS
Service Bulletin
Revision level
Date
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–33–1133 .........................................................................................................
Original .............
Boeing
Boeing
Boeing
Boeing
Revision 1 .........
Revision 2 .........
Original .............
Revision 1 .........
December 19,
2002.
April 17, 2003.
December 4, 2003.
March 20, 2003.
March 4, 2004.
Service Bulletin 737–33–1133 .........................................................................................................
Service Bulletin 737–33–1133 .........................................................................................................
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–33–1132 .............................................................................
Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–33–1132 .............................................................................
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
(i)(1) 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.
(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.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
16 CFR Part 1115
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Dierctorate, Aircrft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–8120 Filed 5–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 May 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Substantial Product Hazard Reports
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed revision to
interpretative rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Section 15(b) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b),
requires manufacturers, distributors,
and retailers of consumer products to
report potential product hazards to the
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
The Commission publishes proposed
revisions to its interpretative rule
advising manufacturers, distributors,
and retailers how to comply with the
requirements of section 15(b). The
proposed revisions identify certain
factors the Commission and staff
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consider when assessing whether a
product is defective or not. The
proposed revisions also clarify that
compliance with voluntary or
mandatory product safety standards
may be considered by the Commission
in making certain determinations under
section 15(b).1 In addition, the
Commission may consider the adoption
of an interpretative regulation related to
the statutory factors for the assessment
of civil penalties pursuant to section 20,
CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2069(b), (c)). A
separate Federal Register notice, if
approved, will be issued for public
comment.
The Office of the Secretary must
receive written comments not later than
June 26, 2006.
DATES:
1 Commissioner Thomas H. Moore filed a
statement which is available from the Office of the
Secretary or on the Commission’s Web site at https://
www.cpsc.gov.
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30346-30350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8120]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2004-19245; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-108-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600,
-700, -700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposed airworthiness
directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -
700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes. The original NPRM would
have required modifying the wiring for the master dim and test system.
For certain airplanes, the original NPRM also proposed to require
related concurrent actions as necessary. The original NPRM resulted
from a report that the master dim and test system circuit does not have
wiring separation of the test ground signal for redundant equipment in
the flight compartment. This action revises the original NPRM by adding
a new concurrent action for certain airplanes, extending the compliance
time, and removing certain airplanes from concurrent requirements. We
are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent a single fault failure
in flight from simulating a test condition and showing test patterns
instead of the selected radio frequencies on the communications panels,
which could inhibit communication between the flightcrew and the
control tower, affecting the continued safe flight of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by June 20,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this supplemental NPRM.
Docket Web site: Go to http//dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http//
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 service information identified in this
proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Binh Tran, Aerospace Engineer, Systems
and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone
(425) 917-6485; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this supplemental NPRM. Send your comments to an
address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number
``Docket No. FAA-2004-19245; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-108-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in light of those
comments.
We will post all comments submitted, without change, to http//
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 supplemental NPRM. 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 the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit http//dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http//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 in the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in
ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
the Docket Management System receives them.
[[Page 30347]]
Discussion
We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the ``original NPRM'') for certain Boeing
Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800 and -900 series
airplanes. The original NPRM was published in the Federal Register on
October 5, 2004 (69 FR 59559). The original NPRM proposed to require
modifying the wiring for the master dim and test system. For certain
airplanes, the original NPRM also proposed to require related
concurrent actions as necessary.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133, Revision 3,
dated September 8, 2005. The service bulletin describes actions similar
to those in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133, Revision 2, dated
December 4, 2003, which was described in the original NPRM as the
applicable source of service information for certain proposed actions
on certain airplanes. Revision 3 also reduces the number of airplanes
subject to certain actions specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-
1121, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2002. The NPRM refers to 737-33-
1121 as the applicable source of service information for certain
concurrent actions.
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-33-1132, Revision 2,
dated September 8, 2005, describes actions similar to Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-33-1132, Revision 1, dated March 4,
2004, which was described in the original NPRM as the applicable source
of service information for certain proposed actions on certain other
airplanes. Revision 2 also adds a concurrent action for certain
airplanes.
For certain airplanes, Service Bulletin 737-33-1132, Revision 2,
recommends prior or concurrent accomplishment of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-23-1102, dated June 3, 1999. Service Bulletin 737-23-1102
describes procedures to replace the VHF and HF communications panels
with radio control panels.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
Comments
We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM.
Supportive Comment
One commenter, Alaska Airlines, supports the original NPRM.
Request To Delay Release of AD Pending Release of Revised Service
Bulletins
Boeing requests that the FAA delay issuing the AD until the release
of Revision 3 of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133. The commenter
states that implementing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133 at Revision 2,
and implementing the associated concurrent service bulletin (Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-33-1121, Revision 1, dated December 19, 2002),
would require operators to perform unnecessary tasks. The commenter
also points out that revising the service bulletin would help reduce
the economic impact of the AD by removing the unnecessary tasks. We
infer that the commenter wants the FAA to reference Revision 3 of the
service bulletin.
We agree to reference Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133, Revision
3, dated September 8, 2005, for the reasons stated by the commenter. We
have determined that this delay would have no adverse effect on safety,
and that reference to Revision 3 would assist operators in complying
with this supplemental NPRM. We have revised paragraph (f) of this AD
accordingly.
Requests From Operators To Delay Release of the AD
The Air Transport Association (ATA), on behalf of its member,
Continental Airlines, requests that certain Boeing service bulletins be
revised or withdrawn as referenced service bulletins. Continental
states that there are multiple open issues (such as unnecessary steps
for airplanes with certain different control panel configurations) and
complications with those service bulletins. Continental further
suggests that if the service bulletins are not revised, then the AD
should be delayed until the open issues with some of the Boeing service
bulletins are resolved.
We agree that certain service bulletins referenced in the NPRM need
revisions. Since publication of the NPRM, some of the affected service
bulletins have been revised to address open issues and complications.
However, we do not agree to delay the issuance of this AD until all the
affected service bulletins are revised. Compliance with some of the
other affected and un-revised service bulletins may involve requesting
alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs), since we have determined
that it could affect safety if we wait for the remaining affected
service bulletins to be revised. Boeing has also advised that it does
not plan to revise a few of the remaining affected service bulletins.
We have revised paragraphs (f), (g) and (h) of this supplemental NPRM
to reference these revised service bulletins as applicable. Operators
are welcome to apply for an AMOC as specified in paragraph (i) of this
supplemental NPRM.
Requests To Extend Compliance Time To Modify Wiring
The ATA, on behalf of its members, American Airlines, United
Airlines (UAL), and US Airways, requests extending the compliance time
from 30 months to better match operators' heavy/base maintenance
schedule. US Airways suggests a 48-month compliance time and states
that the proposed 30-month compliance time doesn't match maintenance
cycles. UAL also notes that the 30-month compliance time will create an
increase in the time needed for C-check visits. American Airlines
suggests re-wording the compliance time to ``the next heavy overhaul
visit'' to prevent unnecessary financial hardship for the airlines.
We agree to extend the compliance time. We have considered other
similar actions and have determined that extending the compliance time
to 48 months will not adversely affect safety. We have revised
paragraph (f) of this supplemental NPRM accordingly. We do not agree to
use ``the next heavy overhaul visit,'' since it is an imprecise
compliance time, and the definition of heavy overhaul visit can vary
significantly between airplane operators.
Requests To Give Credit for Airplanes Equipped With Aircraft
Communication and Reporting System (ACARS)
The ATA, on behalf of UAL, requests that we give credit for
airplanes equipped with ACARS. UAL states that the NPRM does not give
credit for those airplanes that are equipped with other means of ground
communication. UAL explains that ACARS transmits data to an operator's
dispatch group through the number 3 VHF system (VHF3), which is
dedicated solely for ACARS usage. The frequency tuning for VHF3 is
controlled by ACARS, not the VHF control panel. UAL concludes that
ACARS provides an equivalent level of safety for the purposes of the
NPRM since the flightcrew is still able to communicate with the ground,
even if the fault occurs.
We partially agree with the commenters that ACARS provides some
level of communication with the ground (usually the airplane operator's
dispatch or ground support office) when the fault occurs. However,
assuming the
[[Page 30348]]
operator's dispatch office is able to establish a telephone line with
the relevant air traffic control (ATC) tower or center, the delays in
relaying information between the flightcrew and ATC via ACARS can be
substantial. This fault also simulates a ``test condition'' that
activates several flight annunciators, switches, and displays, so that
the selected communication frequency cannot be determined from the
displays. This increases the workload of the flightcrew and has an
impact to the safety of the airplane during the approach and landing
phase of flight. Therefore, the supplemental NPRM has not been revised
to allow credit for airplanes equipped with ACARS.
Request To Revise Cost Estimate
The ATA, on behalf of UAL, requests that we revise the cost
estimate of the modification in the NPRM. UAL states that Service
Bulletin 737-33-1132 estimates the modification to take 21 work hours
to complete, and the FAA estimates 14 work hours for the modification.
UAL believes that the actual cost would be $1,740 per airplane whereas
we estimate it at $910 per airplane.
We disagree to revise the estimate of the work hours since the cost
estimate includes only the time necessary to perform the specific
actions actually proposed by this supplementary NPRM. The service
bulletin provides a work hour estimate that includes time needed to
gain access to and close up the work area. Our estimates also typically
do not include incidental costs such as planning time, access/close-up
time, or other incidental or administrative actions. However, since we
published the original NPRM, we have revised our cost estimate of a
work hour from $65 to $80 to account for the increased cost of each
work hour since we last revised that cost estimate. The estimates in
Cost of Compliance have been revised accordingly.
Request To Revise Service Bulletins To Identify Airplanes With Enhanced
Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS)
Continental Airlines requests that Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-
1132 be revised to identify airplanes modified by Boeing's EGPWS
installation service bulletins and create an additional grouping for
these EGPWS-modified airplanes. The commenter states that Service
Bulletin 737-33-1132 has instructions to terminate a wire (number W149-
045-22) to the navigation control panel. Continental adds that the wire
has already been terminated at the MMR control panel on airplanes
modified by the EGPWS service bulletins.
We agree that provisions need to be made for airplanes that have
had EGPWS installed in accordance with the Boeing EGPWS service
bulletins. Rather than revising Service Bulletin 737-33-1132 to address
EGPWS modifications, Boeing has issued Service Bulletin 737-34-1924,
dated October 17, 2005, to address wire changes and separation.
Therefore Service Bulletin 737-33-1132 does not need to be revised. We
have not changed the supplemental NPRM in this regard. However, if the
commenter believes there is still potential for confusion or
uncertainty, it is welcome to apply for an AMOC to use Service Bulletin
737-34-1924 in accordance with paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM.
Revise Service Bulletin To Remove Certain Requirements for Non-
Integrated Audio Control Panels (ACPs)
Continental Airlines and Southwest Airlines request that the Boeing
Service Bulletins 737-33-1133 and 737-33-1121 be revised to make
installing provisional wiring for lamp test function an optional action
for airplanes equipped with non-integrated ACPs. Southwest states that
Boeing indicated that the wiring for the lamp test is only for fleet
commonality for airplanes without integrated ACPs. Southwest believes
that actions should not be mandated for the sake of fleet commonality.
We agree that the provisional wiring for the lamp test function
should not be required for the non-integrated ACPs. Boeing has revised
Service Bulletin 737-33-1133 so that the actions of Service Bulletin
737-33-1121 will not be required concurrent action on airplanes that do
not have integrated ACPs. The supplemental NPRM refers to this revised
service bulletin.
Request To Accommodate Airplanes With Certain Post-Delivery Wiring
Changes
Southwest Airlines requests that the wiring installation listed
within the Boeing service bulletins for automatic direction finder
(ADF) control panels, Selective Calling on the radio communication
system (SELCAL), and engine instrument system (EIS), be made optional
for airplanes without ADF, SELCAL, and EIS installed. The airline
states that it does not have SELCAL installed in its fleet, nor does it
operate any airplanes with an EIS system, and is currently in the
process of removing all ADF control panels from its fleet.
We agree that such actions should be optional for those airplanes
without those systems installed. However, Boeing has decided not to
revise the service bulletins (Boeing Service Bulletins 737-33-1132,
737-77-1022, and 737-77-1023 for non-EIS configurations and Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-33-1133 for non-SELCAL configurations) to address
airplanes with these post-delivery wiring modifications. It is not
feasible to address each operator's configuration in this supplemental
NPRM. Operators may submit a request for an AMOC in accordance with
paragraph (i) of this supplemental NPRM.
Clarification of AMOC Paragraph
We have revised this supplemental NPRM to clarify the appropriate
procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any
approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies.
FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
The changes discussed above expand the scope of the original NPRM;
therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the
comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on
this supplemental NPRM.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 2,868 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This supplemental NPRM would affect about 1,181
airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated
costs for U.S. operators to comply with this supplemental NPRM.
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average labor Cost per
Boeing Service Bulletin Work hours rate per hour Parts airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
737-33-1132, Revision 2.............. 14 $80 Nominal.................. $1,120
[[Page 30349]]
737-33-1133, Revision 3.............. 3 80 Nominal.................. 240
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Concurrent Service Bulletin Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Boeing service bulletin Work hours Average labor Parts Cost per airplane registered Fleet cost
rate per hour airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
737-26A1083, Revision 1.......... 185................. $80 Between $30,000 and Between $44,800 and 1 Between $44,800 and
$36,400. $51,200. $51,200.
737-33-1121, Revision 1.......... Between 5 and 6..... 80 Between $200 and Between $600 and 83 Between $49,800 and
$340. $820. $68,060.
737-77-1022, Revision 1.......... 72.................. 80 No charge........... $5,760.............. 4 $23,040.
737-77-1023, Revision 1.......... Between 1 and 3..... 80 Nominal............. Between $80 and $240 26 Between $2,080 and
$6,240.
737-23-1102...................... 77.................. 80 $22,164............. $28,324............. 0 No fleet cost
unless an affected
airplane is
imported and
placed on U.S.
register.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 supplemental NPRM 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:
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-2004-19245; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-
108-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 20,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500
series airplanes identified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-33-1132, Revision 2, dated September 8, 2005; and Model
737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133, Revision 3, dated September 8,
2005; certificated in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report that the master dim and test
system circuit does not have wiring separation of the test ground
signal for redundant equipment in the flight compartment. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a single fault failure in flight from
simulating a test condition and showing test patterns instead of the
selected radio frequencies on the communications panels, which could
inhibit communication between the flightcrew and the control tower,
affecting the continued safe flight of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Modification
(f) Within 48 months after the effective date of this AD: Modify
the wiring for the master dim test system in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737-33-1132, Revision 2, dated September 8, 2005 (for Model
737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes); and Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-33-1133, Revision 3, dated September 8,
[[Page 30350]]
2005 (for Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes); as applicable.
Actions Required To Be Accomplished Prior to or Concurrently With
Paragraph (f) of This AD
(g) Prior to or concurrently with accomplishment of paragraph
(f) of this AD, do the actions specified in Table 1 of this AD, as
applicable.
Table 1.--Prior/Concurrent Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accomplish all According to the
For-- actions associated Accomplishment
with-- Instructions of--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 57 airplanes Installing an engine Boeing Service
identified in Boeing instrument system Bulletin 737-77-
Special Attention Service (EIS) and. 1022, Revision 1,
Bulletin 737-33-1132, dated October 26,
Revision 2, dated September 1989.
8, 2005.
Modifying the Boeing Service
advisory system for Bulletin 737-77-
the EIS. 1023, Revision 1,
dated November 9,
1989.
Group 37 and 46 airplanes Installing wiring Boeing Service
identified in Boeing for the test system Bulletin 737-33-
Service Bulletin 737-33- for the audio 1121, Revision 1,
1133, Revision 3, dated control panel lamp. dated December 19,
September 8, 2005. 2002.
Group 2 airplanes identified Installing splice Boeing Service
in Boeing Service Bulletin SP896. Bulletin 737-
737-33-1121, Revision 1, 26A1083, Revision
dated December 19, 2002. 1, dated November
15, 2001.
Group 39 airplanes Installing a smoke Boeing Service
identified in Boeing detection and fire Bulletin 737-
Service Bulletin 737-33- extinguishing 26A1083, Revision
1133, Revision 3, dated system in the cargo 1, dated November
September 8, 2005. compartment. 15, 2001.
Group 59 airplanes Replacing the VHF Boeing Service
identified in Boeing and HF Bulletin 737-23-
Special Attention Service communications 1102, dated June 3,
Bulletin 737-33-1132, panels with radio 1999.
Revision 2, dated September control panels.
8, 2005.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Accomplished per Previous Issue of Service Bulletins
(h) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins identified in Table 2 of this AD
are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions
specified in this AD.
Table 2.--Previous Issues of Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Bulletin Revision level Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133..... Original........................ December 19, 2002.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133..... Revision 1...................... April 17, 2003.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-33-1133..... Revision 2...................... December 4, 2003.
Boeing Special Attention Service Original........................ March 20, 2003.
Bulletin 737-33-1132.
Boeing Special Attention Service Revision 1...................... March 4, 2004.
Bulletin 737-33-1132.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) 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.
(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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Dierctorate, Aircrft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-8120 Filed 5-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
