Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737 Airplanes, 59368-59372 [E6-16553]

Download as PDF 59368 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations found on main spar flange in areas other than fuel tank bay. Per paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, any corrective action in this aspect or any other aspect per this AD must be FAAapproved before returning the airplane to service. Other FAA AD Provisions (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, FAA, ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4059; fax: (816) 329–4090, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Return to Airworthiness: When complying with this AD, perform FAAapproved corrective actions before returning the product to an airworthy condition. (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. Related Information (h) This AD is related to Japan Civil Aviation Bureau AD TCD–6832–2006, Date of Issue: April 10, 2006, which references Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. SB No. 200–015, dated February 28, 2006. Material Incorporated by Reference jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES (i) You must use Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. SB No. 200–015, dated February 28, 2006, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fuji Heavy Industries, Ltd., AEROSPACE COMPANY, 1–11 YOUNAN 1 CHOME UTSUNOMIYA TOCHIGI, JAPAN 320–8564; telephone: +81–28–684–7253; facsimile: +81–28–684–7260. (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ cfr/ibr-locations.html. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 27, 2006. David R. Showers, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–16354 Filed 10–6–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:57 Oct 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–23815; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–222–AD; Amendment 39–14784; AD 2006–21–01] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737 Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Boeing Model 737 airplanes. This AD requires repetitive measurement of the freeplay of both aileron balance tabs; repetitive lubrication of the aileron balance tab hinge bearings and rod end bearings; and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron balance tab. The potential for vibration of the control surface should be avoided because the point of transition from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, which could result in loss of control of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective November 14, 2006. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 14, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// 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 98057–3356; 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 http://dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management Facility office PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 Boeing Model 737 airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 8, 2006 (71 FR 6417). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive measurement of the freeplay of both aileron balance tabs; repetitive lubrication of the aileron balance tab hinge bearings and rod end bearings; and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Request To Revise Initial Compliance Times Boeing, the airplane manufacturer, requests that the initial compliance times for the freeplay measurement and the lubrication be revised. Specifically, Boeing asks that airplanes completed after release of the AD be allowed a compliance threshold of 24 months for the freeplay measurement. The commenter explains that the initial compliance time of 18 months for the measurement resulted partially from a need for a more timely inspection to address airplanes currently in service that may not have been maintained frequently enough and that consequently may have excessive freeplay. For this reason, the initial compliance time is shorter than the repetitive intervals. But the commenter notes that when airplanes leave its production line, excessive freeplay is not yet an issue. So, for the actions in paragraph (g) of the NPRM, the commenter suggests that airplanes delivered more recently or in the future should be given a compliance time of 24 months after the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness, or 18 months after the effective date of the AD, whichever is later. The commenter also states that the initial compliance time for the lubrication for all airplanes should be equal to the lowest of the repetitive intervals (9 months) specified in the NPRM because airplanes may be E:\FR\FM\10OCR1.SGM 10OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations delivered with either type of grease. The commenter suggests that the compliance time for paragraph (i) of the NPRM be revised to 9 months after the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness, or 9 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later. The commenter notes that it is planning to incorporate these changes in an upcoming revision to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27– 1273, dated September 29, 2005. (The NPRM refers to that service bulletin as the appropriate source of service information for Boeing 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes. The parallel service bulletin for Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –300, –400, and –500 series airplanes is Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27– 1272, dated September 29, 2005.) We agree with Boeing to revise the initial compliance times, for the reasons that Boeing states in its comment. We have determined that extending the initial compliance times for certain airplanes will not adversely affect safety. We have revised the compliance times in paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD accordingly. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES Request To Revise Applicability of Repetitive Intervals Boeing requests that the wording of the applicability for the repetitive intervals specified in paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of the NPRM be revised. The commenter states that the intent of the wording in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1273 was for the longer repetitive interval to be allowed only if BMS 3–33 grease is already in use at the time the lubrication task is being accomplished. Boeing recommends that paragraph (i)(2) of the NPRM be revised to read ‘‘* * * BMS 3–33 grease is not already being used * * *’’ and paragraph (i)(3) of the NPRM be revised to read ‘‘* * * BMS 3–33 grease is already being used * * *.’’ This will prevent an operator taking credit for planned future use of BMS 3–33 grease. We agree with the commenter. For clarity, we have revised paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of this AD. Request To Revise Compliance Times and Repetitive Intervals Several commenters—AirTran Airways (AirTran), British Airways (BA), and the Air Transport Association (ATA) on behalf of its member American Airlines (AA), and Ryanair— request that we revise the initial compliance times and repetitive intervals specified in the NPRM. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:57 Oct 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 AirTran and BA specifically request that we revise the compliance times to more closely match the flight-hour limits determined by Maintenance Steering Group 3 (MSG3). AirTran notes that the MSG3 flight-hour limits are based on average utilization of the fleet. AirTran states that, for an airplane with an average utilization of 8 hours/day, the calendar time element of the compliance times proposed in the NPRM is potentially 27 percent less than the limits determined by MSG3. BA notes that the repetitive interval for the freeplay measurement in the similar task in the maintenance planning document (MPD) is 8,000 flight hours, and the repetitive interval for the lubrication in the similar MPD tasks is 4,000 flight hours, without calendartime limits. These intervals were established during the MSG3 analysis, and BA questions our rationale for introducing a 24-month limit for the measurements and a 12-month limit for the lubrications. Based on its data, BA states that it agrees with the need for the freeplay measurement, but not with the 24-month calendar limit. BA states that the MPD intervals are adequate to control the wear rate of the aileron tab hinges and control rods. Also, the ATA, on behalf of AA, observes that the proposed repetitive interval for lubrications is more frequent than AA’s existing schedule of 5,000 flight hours. AA contends that the 5,000-flight-hour interval is sufficient, given that it has not measured freeplay of the aileron tab outside the required limits. (AA also states that, for scheduling convenience, it accomplishes the repetitive measurement for freeplay at a 5,000flight-hour interval.) Ryanair asks that, if we do not agree to remove 737NG airplanes from the applicability (see ‘‘Request to Remove 737NG Airplanes from Applicability,’’ below), we consider relaxing the initial compliance time and repetitive intervals. Ryanair states that the initial compliance time and repetitive intervals seem too short, particularly for a problem that has never been reported on this airplane type and for newer airplanes. We do not agree with the commenters’ requests to revise the compliance times and repetitive intervals. With regard to the requests to more closely match the intervals established by MSG3, we have determined that the limits currently specified in the MPD may not be adequate to ensure that the aileron balance tabs are properly maintained on airplanes currently in service. Also, the maintenance program documents to which BA refers can change without the PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 59369 knowledge or consent of The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, and compliance times must be based on defined intervals to ensure that the required action in an AD will be done within an appropriate timeframe for safe operation of the airplane. In developing appropriate compliance times for the actions in this AD, we considered the urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition, the manufacturer’s recommendation, and the practical aspect of accomplishing the required measurements and lubrications within a period of time that corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for most affected operators. Also, while we have taken into account the average utilization rate of the affected airplanes, it would be nearly impossible to customize the AD to take into consideration each operator’s utilization rate. In consideration of these items, as well as the reports of freeplayinduced vibration of the aileron balance tab, we have determined that the repetitive intervals as proposed are appropriate. With regard to Ryanair’s statement that the initial compliance times are too low for newer airplanes, we note that, as explained previously under ‘‘Request to Revise Initial Compliance Times,’’ we have revised paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD to extend the compliance times for airplanes delivered more recently. We have made no further changes to this AD. Request To Refer to Alternative Source of Service Information BA requests that we revise the NPRM to refer to a certain MPD task, Task 27– 022–01, or its associated task card, 27– 022–01–01, as an acceptable source of service information for the repetitive measurements of freeplay of the aileron control balance tabs. The commenter states that the measurement in the MPD task and its associated task card is the same as that specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27– 1272, for Boeing 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 series airplanes. We do not agree to allow the MPD tasks as an acceptable source of service information for accomplishing the freeplay measurement. We find that neither appropriate procedures nor applicable limits are specified in the MPD tasks that describe checking the ailerons for freeplay. Thus, the MPD tasks are not adequate to ensure that the aileron balance tab would be maintained to an acceptable level of safety. Further, an MPD task may be revised in the future without authorization by the Manager, Seattle E:\FR\FM\10OCR1.SGM 10OCR1 59370 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES ACO. Such a revision could result in differences between the MPD task and the requirements of this AD. Operators may request approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD if data are presented to substantiate that the actions provide an acceptable level of safety. Request for Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously Similarly, several commenters—BA, AirTran, and the ATA on behalf of its members Delta Airlines (DAL) and AA—request that we revise the NPRM to give credit for actions accomplished before the effective date of the AD in accordance with the MPD or the airplane maintenance manual (AMM). Specific requests are as follows: • BA asks that the most recent accomplishment of MPD Task 27–022– 01 be considered as acceptable for the initial measurement that would be required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. BA also asks that the most recent accomplishment of MPD Task 27–018– 01 be considered as acceptable for compliance with the initial lubrication that would be required by paragraph (i) of the NRPM. • AirTran asks that we revise the NPRM to give credit for doing the initial freeplay measurement in accordance with 737 Next Generation (737NG, defined as Boeing Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes) MPD Task 27–033–00, and doing the initial lubrication in accordance with 737NG MPD Tasks 27–026–01 and 27– 026–02. AirTran states that these tasks are the same as the procedures for the measurement and lubrication specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1273. • DAL asks that we revise the NPRM to give credit specifically for lubrications of the aileron balance tab accomplished previously in accordance with MPD Tasks 27–026–01 and 27– 026–02 and the AMM. The commenter notes that Boeing has advised that the existing lubrication procedures specified in the AMM are acceptable, and Boeing would support allowing operators credit for previous lubrications. (The commenter also notes that Boeing does not consider the freeplay inspection procedures in the AMM to be adequate for compliance with Service Bulletin 737–27–1273.) We do not agree to give credit for measurements and lubrications accomplished in accordance with the MPD tasks referenced by the commenters. As we explained previously, an MPD task may have been revised without the authorization of the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:57 Oct 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 Manager, Seattle ACO, potentially resulting in differences between the MPD task and the requirements of this AD. However, operators may request approval of an AMOC in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD if data are presented to substantiate that the actions provide an acceptable level of safety. We partially agree with the request to give credit for actions accomplished in accordance with the AMM. The service bulletins refer to specific chapters of the AMM as a source of an acceptable procedure for lubricating the aileron balance tab components. Lubrications accomplished according to the chapters of the AMM specified in the relevant service bulletin are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD. We find that no change to the AD is needed to give credit for these actions. Credit for actions accomplished previously is always provided through this statement included in paragraph (e) of this AD: ‘‘You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done.’’ We have not changed the AD in this regard. Request To Remove 737NG Airplanes From Applicability Ryanair requests that we review the applicability of the NPRM for 737NG airplanes. The commenter believes that the NPRM is too severe for 737NG airplanes. The commenter is not aware of any reports of freeplay-induced vibrations on 737NG airplanes. We infer that the commenter is asking us to remove Model 737NG airplanes from the applicability of this AD. We do not agree. The aileron balance tab design is the same on both Model 737 ‘‘Classic’’ airplanes (defined as Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 airplanes) and Model 737NG airplanes. Therefore, all of these airplanes are subject to the same unsafe condition. We have not changed the AD in this regard. Request To Withdraw NPRM AA, in its comment submitted through ATA, states that, ‘‘The proposed rule simply restates the existing 737NG continuous maintenance program.’’ The commenter also notes that it is accomplishing the repetitive measurement of freeplay and lubrication at intervals of 5,000 flight hours, and has not found any freeplay outside acceptable limits. BA also notes that it has had no reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron tabs and believes PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 that current MPD tasks are adequate to prevent the unsafe condition. We infer that AA and BA are asking us to withdraw the NPRM. We do not agree. We have determined that existing maintenance actions similar to those required by this AD are not sufficient to prevent freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron balance tab. Also, the current repetitive intervals for these similar actions are not adequate. Evidence of this inadequacy is the reports of freeplay-induced vibration in service. We note that the intervals AA uses are shorter than those recommended in the manufacturer’s maintenance documents, which may help to account for the fact that AA has had no reports of freeplay that is outside acceptable limits. We have not changed the AD in this regard. Request To Revise Service Documents Related to Service Bulletins The ATA, on behalf of DAL, asks the FAA to encourage Boeing to address conflicts between procedures before issuing service bulletins that conflict with procedures in the AMM and MPD. DAL notes that the relevant service bulletins do not advise whether the AMM and MPD are affected by the changes in those service bulletins. DAL believes that relevant sections of the AMM and MPD should be revised before the NPRM is issued. The commenter notes that, in this case, if Boeing had revised the AMM and MPD when it issued Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 737–27–1272 and 737–27–1273, operators might be in a position to get credit for freeplay measurements and lubrications accomplished in accordance with the AMM. We acknowledge the comment. We agree that it would be beneficial for Boeing to revise its AMM and MPD to reflect the requirements in the service bulletins. While we have encouraged them to do so, we do not have the authority to require Boeing to do so. We have not changed the AD in this regard. Request To Acknowledge Errors in Service Bulletins DAL notes a discrepancy in the Work Instructions of Part 2 in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 737–27– 1272 and 737–27–1273. The commenter points out that a note in Step 1 in Part 2 of the Work Instructions of 737–27– 1273 indicates to lubricate ‘‘ * * * as shown in Part 1, Aileron Balance Tab Freeplay Check.’’ A similar discrepancy exists in the corresponding note in Step 1 of Group 1: Part 2 and Group 2: Part 2 of the Work Instructions of 737–27– 1272. DAL states that this note should refer to Part 2, Lubrication of the E:\FR\FM\10OCR1.SGM 10OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations Aileron Balance Tab Bearings. DAL has advised Boeing of this discrepancy, and Boeing agrees that it is an error that will be corrected in future revisions to the service bulletin. DAL notes that the wording of the NPRM is sufficiently broad that the service bulletin discrepancy will not affect operators’ ability to comply with the proposed requirements. We acknowledge the discrepancy in the service bulletins to which the 59371 commenter refers, and we agree with the commenter that no change to the AD is needed in this regard. economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase the There are about 5,651 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD. No parts are necessary to accomplish either action. Costs of Compliance ESTIMATED COSTS Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Cost per airplane Freeplay measurement ............. 8 $65 $520, per measurement cycle .. 2,280 Lubrication ................................. 4 65 $260, per lubrication cycle ....... 2,280 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. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:57 Oct 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 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 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): I 2006–21–01 Boeing: Amendment 39–14784. Docket No. FAA–2006–23815; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–222–AD. Effective Date (a) This AD becomes effective November 14, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes; certificated in any category. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Fleet cost $1,185,600, per measurement cycle. $592,800, per lubrication cycle. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron balance tab. The potential for vibration of the control surface should be avoided because the point of transition from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, which could result in loss of control 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. Service Bulletin References (f) The term ‘‘service bulletin,’’ as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of the following service bulletins, as applicable: (1) For Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 series airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1272, dated September 29, 2005. (2) For Boeing Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800 and –900 series airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1273, dated September 29, 2005. Repetitive Measurements (g) Within 24 months after the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness, or 18 months after the effective date of the AD, whichever is later: Measure the freeplay of both aileron control balance tabs. Repeat the measurement thereafter at the applicable interval in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. (1) For Boeing Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series airplanes: At intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first. (2) For Boeing Model 737–300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C, –800 and –900 series E:\FR\FM\10OCR1.SGM 10OCR1 59372 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations airplanes: At intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first. be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. Related Investigative and Corrective Actions (h) If any measurement found in paragraph (g) of this AD is outside the acceptable limits specified in the service bulletin: Before further flight, do the applicable related investigative and corrective actions in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. Material Incorporated by Reference (l) You must use Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1272, dated September 29, 2005; or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–27–1273, dated September 29, 2005; 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 http://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 http://www.archives.gov/ federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ ibr_locations.html. Repetitive Lubrication (i) Within 9 months after the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness, or within 9 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later: Lubricate the aileron balance tab components specified in the applicable service bulletin. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at the applicable interval in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. (1) For Boeing Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series airplanes: At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 months, whichever occurs first. (2) For Boeing Model 737–300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes, on which BMS 3–33 grease is not already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 months, whichever occurs first. (3) For Boeing Model 737–300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes, on which BMS 3–33 grease is already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At intervals not to exceed 4,000 flight hours or 12 months, whichever occurs first. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES Concurrent Repetitive Cycles (j) If a freeplay measurement required by paragraph (g) of this AD and a lubrication cycle required by paragraph (i) of this AD are due at the same time or will be accomplished during the same maintenance visit, the freeplay measurement and applicable related investigative and corrective actions must be done before the lubrication is accomplished. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(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. (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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:57 Oct 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 28, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–16553 Filed 10–6–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA–2006–25180; Airspace Docket No. 06–AAL–19] Establishment of Class E Airspace; Kokohanok, AK Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final Rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Kokohanok, AK to provide adequate controlled airspace to contain aircraft executing new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and a new Departure Procedure (DP). This rule results in new Class E airspace established upward from 700 feet (ft) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at Kokohanok, AK. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, January 18, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Gary Rolf, AAL–538G, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587; telephone number (907) 271–5898; fax: (907) 271–2850; e-mail: gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov. Internet address: http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: History On Monday, July 17, 2006, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above the surface at Kokohanok, AK (71 FR 40444). The action was proposed in order to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft while executing two new SIAPs and one new DP for the Kokohanok Airport. The new approaches are (1) Area Navigation (Global Positioning System) (RNAV (GPS) Runway (RWY) 06, Original and (2) RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Original. The DP is unnamed and will be listed in the front of the U.S. Terminal Procedures publication for Alaska. Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above the surface in the Kokohanok Airport area is established by this action. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking airfield coordinate location was not accurate. Runway construction currently underway will result in updated location coordinates. The updated coordinates are listed in this final rule. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No public comment have been received; thus the rule is adopted as proposed. The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9P, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2006, and effective September 15, 2006, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 establishes Class E airspace at the Kokohnaok Airport, Alaska. This Class E airspace is created to accommodate aircraft executing two new SIAPs and one DP, and will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. E:\FR\FM\10OCR1.SGM 10OCR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 10, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59368-59372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16553]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-23815; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-222-AD; 
Amendment 39-14784; AD 2006-21-01]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 
Boeing Model 737 airplanes. This AD requires repetitive measurement of 
the freeplay of both aileron balance tabs; repetitive lubrication of 
the aileron balance tab hinge bearings and rod end bearings; and 
related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This AD 
results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron 
balance tab. The potential for vibration of the control surface should 
be avoided because the point of transition from vibration to divergent 
flutter is unknown. We are issuing this AD to prevent excessive 
vibration of the airframe during flight, which could result in loss of 
control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 14, 2006. The Director of the 
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain 
publications listed in the AD as of November 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
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 98057-3356; 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 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 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 Boeing Model 737 
airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 
8, 2006 (71 FR 6417). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive 
measurement of the freeplay of both aileron balance tabs; repetitive 
lubrication of the aileron balance tab hinge bearings and rod end 
bearings; and related investigative and corrective actions if 
necessary.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the 
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Request To Revise Initial Compliance Times

    Boeing, the airplane manufacturer, requests that the initial 
compliance times for the freeplay measurement and the lubrication be 
revised. Specifically, Boeing asks that airplanes completed after 
release of the AD be allowed a compliance threshold of 24 months for 
the freeplay measurement. The commenter explains that the initial 
compliance time of 18 months for the measurement resulted partially 
from a need for a more timely inspection to address airplanes currently 
in service that may not have been maintained frequently enough and that 
consequently may have excessive freeplay. For this reason, the initial 
compliance time is shorter than the repetitive intervals. But the 
commenter notes that when airplanes leave its production line, 
excessive freeplay is not yet an issue. So, for the actions in 
paragraph (g) of the NPRM, the commenter suggests that airplanes 
delivered more recently or in the future should be given a compliance 
time of 24 months after the date of issuance of the original standard 
airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of 
airworthiness, or 18 months after the effective date of the AD, 
whichever is later.
    The commenter also states that the initial compliance time for the 
lubrication for all airplanes should be equal to the lowest of the 
repetitive intervals (9 months) specified in the NPRM because airplanes 
may be

[[Page 59369]]

delivered with either type of grease. The commenter suggests that the 
compliance time for paragraph (i) of the NPRM be revised to 9 months 
after the date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness 
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness, or 9 
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later.
    The commenter notes that it is planning to incorporate these 
changes in an upcoming revision to Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletin 737-27-1273, dated September 29, 2005. (The NPRM refers to 
that service bulletin as the appropriate source of service information 
for Boeing 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes. The 
parallel service bulletin for Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -300, -400, 
and -500 series airplanes is Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 
737-27-1272, dated September 29, 2005.)
    We agree with Boeing to revise the initial compliance times, for 
the reasons that Boeing states in its comment. We have determined that 
extending the initial compliance times for certain airplanes will not 
adversely affect safety. We have revised the compliance times in 
paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Revise Applicability of Repetitive Intervals

    Boeing requests that the wording of the applicability for the 
repetitive intervals specified in paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of the 
NPRM be revised. The commenter states that the intent of the wording in 
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-27-1273 was for the 
longer repetitive interval to be allowed only if BMS 3-33 grease is 
already in use at the time the lubrication task is being accomplished. 
Boeing recommends that paragraph (i)(2) of the NPRM be revised to read 
``* * * BMS 3-33 grease is not already being used * * *'' and paragraph 
(i)(3) of the NPRM be revised to read ``* * * BMS 3-33 grease is 
already being used * * *.'' This will prevent an operator taking credit 
for planned future use of BMS 3-33 grease.
    We agree with the commenter. For clarity, we have revised 
paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of this AD.

Request To Revise Compliance Times and Repetitive Intervals

    Several commenters--AirTran Airways (AirTran), British Airways 
(BA), and the Air Transport Association (ATA) on behalf of its member 
American Airlines (AA), and Ryanair--request that we revise the initial 
compliance times and repetitive intervals specified in the NPRM.
    AirTran and BA specifically request that we revise the compliance 
times to more closely match the flight-hour limits determined by 
Maintenance Steering Group 3 (MSG3). AirTran notes that the MSG3 
flight-hour limits are based on average utilization of the fleet. 
AirTran states that, for an airplane with an average utilization of 8 
hours/day, the calendar time element of the compliance times proposed 
in the NPRM is potentially 27 percent less than the limits determined 
by MSG3. BA notes that the repetitive interval for the freeplay 
measurement in the similar task in the maintenance planning document 
(MPD) is 8,000 flight hours, and the repetitive interval for the 
lubrication in the similar MPD tasks is 4,000 flight hours, without 
calendar-time limits. These intervals were established during the MSG3 
analysis, and BA questions our rationale for introducing a 24-month 
limit for the measurements and a 12-month limit for the lubrications. 
Based on its data, BA states that it agrees with the need for the 
freeplay measurement, but not with the 24-month calendar limit. BA 
states that the MPD intervals are adequate to control the wear rate of 
the aileron tab hinges and control rods.
    Also, the ATA, on behalf of AA, observes that the proposed 
repetitive interval for lubrications is more frequent than AA's 
existing schedule of 5,000 flight hours. AA contends that the 5,000-
flight-hour interval is sufficient, given that it has not measured 
freeplay of the aileron tab outside the required limits. (AA also 
states that, for scheduling convenience, it accomplishes the repetitive 
measurement for freeplay at a 5,000-flight-hour interval.)
    Ryanair asks that, if we do not agree to remove 737NG airplanes 
from the applicability (see ``Request to Remove 737NG Airplanes from 
Applicability,'' below), we consider relaxing the initial compliance 
time and repetitive intervals. Ryanair states that the initial 
compliance time and repetitive intervals seem too short, particularly 
for a problem that has never been reported on this airplane type and 
for newer airplanes.
    We do not agree with the commenters' requests to revise the 
compliance times and repetitive intervals. With regard to the requests 
to more closely match the intervals established by MSG3, we have 
determined that the limits currently specified in the MPD may not be 
adequate to ensure that the aileron balance tabs are properly 
maintained on airplanes currently in service. Also, the maintenance 
program documents to which BA refers can change without the knowledge 
or consent of The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
FAA, and compliance times must be based on defined intervals to ensure 
that the required action in an AD will be done within an appropriate 
timeframe for safe operation of the airplane.
    In developing appropriate compliance times for the actions in this 
AD, we considered the urgency associated with the subject unsafe 
condition, the manufacturer's recommendation, and the practical aspect 
of accomplishing the required measurements and lubrications within a 
period of time that corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for 
most affected operators. Also, while we have taken into account the 
average utilization rate of the affected airplanes, it would be nearly 
impossible to customize the AD to take into consideration each 
operator's utilization rate. In consideration of these items, as well 
as the reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the aileron balance 
tab, we have determined that the repetitive intervals as proposed are 
appropriate.
    With regard to Ryanair's statement that the initial compliance 
times are too low for newer airplanes, we note that, as explained 
previously under ``Request to Revise Initial Compliance Times,'' we 
have revised paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD to extend the compliance 
times for airplanes delivered more recently.
    We have made no further changes to this AD.

Request To Refer to Alternative Source of Service Information

    BA requests that we revise the NPRM to refer to a certain MPD task, 
Task 27-022-01, or its associated task card, 27-022-01-01, as an 
acceptable source of service information for the repetitive 
measurements of freeplay of the aileron control balance tabs. The 
commenter states that the measurement in the MPD task and its 
associated task card is the same as that specified in Boeing Special 
Attention Service Bulletin 737-27-1272, for Boeing 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes.
    We do not agree to allow the MPD tasks as an acceptable source of 
service information for accomplishing the freeplay measurement. We find 
that neither appropriate procedures nor applicable limits are specified 
in the MPD tasks that describe checking the ailerons for freeplay. 
Thus, the MPD tasks are not adequate to ensure that the aileron balance 
tab would be maintained to an acceptable level of safety. Further, an 
MPD task may be revised in the future without authorization by the 
Manager, Seattle

[[Page 59370]]

ACO. Such a revision could result in differences between the MPD task 
and the requirements of this AD. Operators may request approval of an 
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with paragraph 
(k) of this AD if data are presented to substantiate that the actions 
provide an acceptable level of safety.

Request for Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously

    Similarly, several commenters--BA, AirTran, and the ATA on behalf 
of its members Delta Airlines (DAL) and AA--request that we revise the 
NPRM to give credit for actions accomplished before the effective date 
of the AD in accordance with the MPD or the airplane maintenance manual 
(AMM). Specific requests are as follows:
     BA asks that the most recent accomplishment of MPD Task 
27-022-01 be considered as acceptable for the initial measurement that 
would be required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. BA also asks that the 
most recent accomplishment of MPD Task 27-018-01 be considered as 
acceptable for compliance with the initial lubrication that would be 
required by paragraph (i) of the NRPM.
     AirTran asks that we revise the NPRM to give credit for 
doing the initial freeplay measurement in accordance with 737 Next 
Generation (737NG, defined as Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, 
and -900 series airplanes) MPD Task 27-033-00, and doing the initial 
lubrication in accordance with 737NG MPD Tasks 27-026-01 and 27-026-02. 
AirTran states that these tasks are the same as the procedures for the 
measurement and lubrication specified in Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 737-27-1273.
     DAL asks that we revise the NPRM to give credit 
specifically for lubrications of the aileron balance tab accomplished 
previously in accordance with MPD Tasks 27-026-01 and 27-026-02 and the 
AMM. The commenter notes that Boeing has advised that the existing 
lubrication procedures specified in the AMM are acceptable, and Boeing 
would support allowing operators credit for previous lubrications. (The 
commenter also notes that Boeing does not consider the freeplay 
inspection procedures in the AMM to be adequate for compliance with 
Service Bulletin 737-27-1273.)
    We do not agree to give credit for measurements and lubrications 
accomplished in accordance with the MPD tasks referenced by the 
commenters. As we explained previously, an MPD task may have been 
revised without the authorization of the Manager, Seattle ACO, 
potentially resulting in differences between the MPD task and the 
requirements of this AD. However, operators may request approval of an 
AMOC in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD if data are presented 
to substantiate that the actions provide an acceptable level of safety.
    We partially agree with the request to give credit for actions 
accomplished in accordance with the AMM. The service bulletins refer to 
specific chapters of the AMM as a source of an acceptable procedure for 
lubricating the aileron balance tab components. Lubrications 
accomplished according to the chapters of the AMM specified in the 
relevant service bulletin are acceptable for compliance with the 
corresponding requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD. We find that no 
change to the AD is needed to give credit for these actions. Credit for 
actions accomplished previously is always provided through this 
statement included in paragraph (e) of this AD: ``You are responsible 
for having the actions required by this AD performed within the 
compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been 
done.'' We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Request To Remove 737NG Airplanes From Applicability

    Ryanair requests that we review the applicability of the NPRM for 
737NG airplanes. The commenter believes that the NPRM is too severe for 
737NG airplanes. The commenter is not aware of any reports of freeplay-
induced vibrations on 737NG airplanes.
    We infer that the commenter is asking us to remove Model 737NG 
airplanes from the applicability of this AD. We do not agree. The 
aileron balance tab design is the same on both Model 737 ``Classic'' 
airplanes (defined as Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, 
and -500 airplanes) and Model 737NG airplanes. Therefore, all of these 
airplanes are subject to the same unsafe condition. We have not changed 
the AD in this regard.

Request To Withdraw NPRM

    AA, in its comment submitted through ATA, states that, ``The 
proposed rule simply restates the existing 737NG continuous maintenance 
program.'' The commenter also notes that it is accomplishing the 
repetitive measurement of freeplay and lubrication at intervals of 
5,000 flight hours, and has not found any freeplay outside acceptable 
limits. BA also notes that it has had no reports of freeplay-induced 
vibration of the aileron tabs and believes that current MPD tasks are 
adequate to prevent the unsafe condition.
    We infer that AA and BA are asking us to withdraw the NPRM. We do 
not agree. We have determined that existing maintenance actions similar 
to those required by this AD are not sufficient to prevent freeplay-
induced vibration of the aileron balance tab. Also, the current 
repetitive intervals for these similar actions are not adequate. 
Evidence of this inadequacy is the reports of freeplay-induced 
vibration in service. We note that the intervals AA uses are shorter 
than those recommended in the manufacturer's maintenance documents, 
which may help to account for the fact that AA has had no reports of 
freeplay that is outside acceptable limits. We have not changed the AD 
in this regard.

Request To Revise Service Documents Related to Service Bulletins

    The ATA, on behalf of DAL, asks the FAA to encourage Boeing to 
address conflicts between procedures before issuing service bulletins 
that conflict with procedures in the AMM and MPD. DAL notes that the 
relevant service bulletins do not advise whether the AMM and MPD are 
affected by the changes in those service bulletins. DAL believes that 
relevant sections of the AMM and MPD should be revised before the NPRM 
is issued. The commenter notes that, in this case, if Boeing had 
revised the AMM and MPD when it issued Boeing Special Attention Service 
Bulletins 737-27-1272 and 737-27-1273, operators might be in a position 
to get credit for freeplay measurements and lubrications accomplished 
in accordance with the AMM.
    We acknowledge the comment. We agree that it would be beneficial 
for Boeing to revise its AMM and MPD to reflect the requirements in the 
service bulletins. While we have encouraged them to do so, we do not 
have the authority to require Boeing to do so. We have not changed the 
AD in this regard.

Request To Acknowledge Errors in Service Bulletins

    DAL notes a discrepancy in the Work Instructions of Part 2 in 
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 737-27-1272 and 737-27-1273. 
The commenter points out that a note in Step 1 in Part 2 of the Work 
Instructions of 737-27-1273 indicates to lubricate `` * * * as shown in 
Part 1, Aileron Balance Tab Freeplay Check.'' A similar discrepancy 
exists in the corresponding note in Step 1 of Group 1: Part 2 and Group 
2: Part 2 of the Work Instructions of 737-27-1272. DAL states that this 
note should refer to Part 2, Lubrication of the

[[Page 59371]]

Aileron Balance Tab Bearings. DAL has advised Boeing of this 
discrepancy, and Boeing agrees that it is an error that will be 
corrected in future revisions to the service bulletin. DAL notes that 
the wording of the NPRM is sufficiently broad that the service bulletin 
discrepancy will not affect operators' ability to comply with the 
proposed requirements.
    We acknowledge the discrepancy in the service bulletins to which 
the commenter refers, and we agree with the commenter that no change to 
the AD is needed in this regard.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the 
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public 
interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. 
We have determined that these changes will neither increase the 
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 5,651 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for 
U.S. operators to comply with this AD. No parts are necessary to 
accomplish either action.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Number of U.S.-
             Action                Work    Average labor  Cost per  airplane    registered        Fleet cost
                                  hours    rate per hour                         airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeplay measurement...........        8             $65  $520, per                    2,280  $1,185,600, per
                                                           measurement cycle.                  measurement
                                                                                               cycle.
Lubrication....................        4              65  $260, per                    2,280  $592,800, per
                                                           lubrication cycle.                  lubrication
                                                                                               cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2006-21-01 Boeing: Amendment 39-14784. Docket No. FAA-2006-23815; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-222-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective November 14, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes; 
certificated in any category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration 
of the aileron balance tab. The potential for vibration of the 
control surface should be avoided because the point of transition 
from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this 
AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, 
which could result in loss of control 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.

Service Bulletin References

    (f) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the following service bulletins, as 
applicable:
    (1) For Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 
series airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-27-
1272, dated September 29, 2005.
    (2) For Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800 and -900 series 
airplanes: Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-27-1273, 
dated September 29, 2005.

Repetitive Measurements

    (g) Within 24 months after the date of issuance of the original 
standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the 
original export certificate of airworthiness, or 18 months after the 
effective date of the AD, whichever is later: Measure the freeplay 
of both aileron control balance tabs. Repeat the measurement 
thereafter at the applicable interval in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) 
of this AD. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance 
with the applicable service bulletin.
    (1) For Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes: 
At intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 24 months, 
whichever occurs first.
    (2) For Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -
800 and -900 series

[[Page 59372]]

airplanes: At intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight hours or 24 
months, whichever occurs first.

Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    (h) If any measurement found in paragraph (g) of this AD is 
outside the acceptable limits specified in the service bulletin: 
Before further flight, do the applicable related investigative and 
corrective actions in accordance with the applicable service 
bulletin.

Repetitive Lubrication

    (i) Within 9 months after the date of issuance of the original 
standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the 
original export certificate of airworthiness, or within 9 months 
after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later: Lubricate 
the aileron balance tab components specified in the applicable 
service bulletin. Repeat the lubrication thereafter at the 
applicable interval in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this 
AD. Do all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the 
applicable service bulletin.
    (1) For Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes: 
At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 months, whichever 
occurs first.
    (2) For Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -
800, and -900 series airplanes, on which BMS 3-33 grease is not 
already in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being 
accomplished: At intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 
months, whichever occurs first.
    (3) For Boeing Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -
800, and -900 series airplanes, on which BMS 3-33 grease is already 
in use prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: 
At intervals not to exceed 4,000 flight hours or 12 months, 
whichever occurs first.

Concurrent Repetitive Cycles

    (j) If a freeplay measurement required by paragraph (g) of this 
AD and a lubrication cycle required by paragraph (i) of this AD are 
due at the same time or will be accomplished during the same 
maintenance visit, the freeplay measurement and applicable related 
investigative and corrective actions must be done before the 
lubrication is accomplished.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(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.
    (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, and the approval must specifically refer to this 
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (l) You must use Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-
27-1272, dated September 29, 2005; or Boeing Special Attention 
Service Bulletin 737-27-1273, dated September 29, 2005; 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 http://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 http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 28, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. E6-16553 Filed 10-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P