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: https://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 https:// dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, for service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Stremick, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 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 https://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 https://dms.dot.gov; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741– 6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/ federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ ibr_locations.html. 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: https://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 https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL-401, Washington, DC.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Stremick, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 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 https://dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management
Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office
(telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.

Discussion

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all 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 https://dms.dot.gov; or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 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

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.