Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-200C Series Airplanes, 48243-48246 [E7-16656]
Download as PDF
48243
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 163
Thursday, August 23, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–29029; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–175–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on
the ground floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for the service
information identified in this proposed
AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–200C Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 737–200C series
airplanes. This proposed AD would
require revising the FAA-approved
maintenance inspection program to
include inspections that will give no
less than the required damage tolerance
rating for each structural significant
item (SSI), doing repetitive inspections
to detect cracks of all SSIs, and
repairing cracked structure. This
proposed AD results from a report of
incidents involving fatigue cracking and
corrosion in transport category airplanes
that are approaching or have exceeded
their design service objective. We are
proposing this AD to maintain the
continued structural integrity of the
entire fleet of Model 737–200C series
airplanes.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 9, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
proposed AD.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://
dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions
for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Aug 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 917–6440; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed in the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number ‘‘FAA–2007–29029; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–175–AD’’ at the
beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in
light of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD.
Using the search function of that Web
site, anyone can find and read the
comments in any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
who sent the comment (or signed the
comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in
person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Operations office (telephone
(800) 647–5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the
DOT street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
the Docket Management System receives
them.
Discussion
In the early 1980’s, as part of its
continuing work to maintain the
structural integrity of older transport
category airplanes, we concluded that
the incidence of fatigue cracking may
increase as these airplanes reach or
exceed their design service objective
(DSO). In light of this, and as a result
of increased utilization, and longer
operational lives, we determined that a
supplemental structural inspection
program (SSIP) was necessary to
maintain the continued structural
integrity for all airplanes in the
transport fleet.
Issuance of Advisory Circular (AC)
As a follow-on from that
determination, we issued AC No. 91–56,
‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection
Program for Large Transport Category
Airplanes,’’ dated May 6, 1981. That AC
provides guidance material to
manufacturers and operators for use in
developing a continuing structural
integrity program to ensure safe
operation of older airplanes throughout
their operational lives. This guidance
material applies to transport airplanes
that were certified under the fail-safe
requirements of part 4b (‘‘Airplane
Airworthiness, Transport Categories’’) of
the Civil Air Regulations or damage
tolerance structural requirements of part
25 (‘‘Airworthiness Standards:
Transport Category Airplanes’’) of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) (14
CFR part 25), and that have a maximum
gross weight greater than 75,000
pounds. The procedures set forth in that
AC are applicable to transport category
airplanes operated under subpart D
(‘‘Special Flight Operations’’) of part 91
of the FAR (14 CFR part 91); part 121
(‘‘Operating Requirements: Domestic,
Flag, and Supplemental Operations’’);
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
48244
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 163 / Thursday, August 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
part 125 (‘‘Certification and Operations:
Airplanes having a Seating Capacity of
20 or More Passengers or a Maximum
Payload of 6,000 Pounds or More’’); and
part 135 (‘‘Operating Requirements:
Commuter and On-Demand
Operations’’) of the FAR (14 CFR parts
121, 125, and 135). The objective of the
SSIP was to establish inspection
programs to ensure timely detection of
fatigue cracking.
Development of the SSIP
In order to evaluate the effect of
increased fatigue cracking with respect
to maintaining fail-safe design and
damage tolerance of the structure of
Boeing Model 737–200C series
airplanes, Boeing conducted a structural
reassessment of those airplanes, using
damage tolerance evaluation techniques.
Boeing accomplished this reassessment
using the criteria contained in AC No.
91–56, as well as Amendment 25–45 of
section 25.571 (‘‘Damage-tolerance and
fatigue evaluation of structure’’) of the
FAR (14 CFR 25.571). During the
reassessment, members of the airline
industry participated with Boeing in
working group sessions and developed
the SSIP for Model 737–200C series
airplanes. Engineers and maintenance
specialists from the FAA also supported
these sessions. Subsequently, based on
the working group’s recommendations,
Boeing developed the Supplemental
Structural Inspection Document (SSID).
Other Related Rulemaking
We previously issued AD 98–11–04
R1, amendment 39–10984 (64 FR 987,
January 7, 1999), applicable to all
Boeing Model 737–100, –200, and
–200C series airplanes (which refers to
Boeing Document No. D6–37089,
‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document’’ (SSID), Revision D, dated
June 1995, as the appropriate source of
service information for doing the
required actions). That AD requires the
FAA-approved maintenance inspection
program be revised to include
inspections that will give no less than
the required damage tolerance rating
(DTR) for each structural significant
item (SSI), and repair of cracked
structure. The affected SSIs include, but
are not limited to, the wing, fuselage,
empennage, and strut. For Model 737–
200C series airplanes, that AD requires
inspecting SSIs affected by cargo
configuration changes only. For Model
737–100 and –200 series airplanes, that
AD requires inspecting all affected SSIs.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Document
No. D6–37089, ‘‘Supplemental
Structural Inspection Document for
Model 737–100/200/200C Airplanes,’’
Revision E, dated May 2007 (hereafter
‘‘Revision E’’). Revision E describes
procedures for revising the FAAapproved maintenance inspection
program to include inspections that will
give no less than the required damage
tolerance rating (DTR) for each SSI,
doing repetitive inspections to detect
cracks of all SSIs, and repairing cracked
structure. The inspections specified in
Revision E are essentially identical to
those in Revision D. The applicability of
Revision E has been updated, among
other editorial changes, to show that for
the Model 737–200C, SSIs not affected
by cargo configuration changes are
subject to the same inspections as
Model 737–100 and –200 series
airplanes. Accomplishing the actions
specified in Revision E is intended to
adequately address the unsafe
condition.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent
information and identified an unsafe
condition that is likely to exist or
develop on other airplanes of this same
type design. For this reason, we are
proposing this AD, which would require
the following actions:
Paragraph (g) of the proposed AD
would require incorporation of a
revision into the FAA-approved
maintenance inspection program that
provides no less than the required DTR
for each SSI listed in Revision E.
Paragraph (h) of the proposed AD
would require repetitive inspections to
detect cracks of all SSIs.
Paragraph (i) of the proposed AD
would require repairing any cracked
structure in accordance with a method
approved by the FAA or an Authorized
Representative (AR) for the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Delegation
Option Authorization Organization who
has been authorized by the FAA to make
those findings.
Paragraph (j) of the proposed AD
specifies the requirements of the
inspection program for transferred
airplanes. Before any airplane that is
subject to this proposed AD can be
added to an air carrier’s operations
specifications, a program for doing the
inspections required by this proposed
AD must be established.
Accomplishing the actions required
by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD
ends the requirements of AD 98–11–04
R1 for Model 737–200C series airplanes
only. Operators of Model 737–100 and
–200 series airplanes must continue to
do the actions required by AD 98–11–
04 R1.
Differences Between the Proposed AD
and Service Information
For Model 737–200C series airplanes,
Section 3.0, ‘‘Structural Significant
Items (SSIs),’’ of Revision E specifies a
threshold of 66,000 or 46,000 flight
cycles for accomplishing the initial
inspections, depending on the airplane
configuration; however, it does not
specify a grace period for airplanes that
are near or have passed that threshold.
This proposed AD would allow a grace
period of 12 months after the effective
date of the AD to incorporate Revision
E into the FAA-approved maintenance
inspection program. This proposed AD
also would allow a grace period of 4,000
flight cycles measured from 12 months
after the effective date of the AD to
initiate the applicable inspections to
detect cracks of all SSIs.
Revision E does not specify
instructions on how to repair certain
conditions. This proposed AD would
require repairing those conditions in
one of the following ways:
• Using a method that we approve; or
• Using data that have been approved
by an AR for the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Delegation Option
Authorization Organization whom we
have authorized to make those findings.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 49 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The following table provides the
estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this proposed AD.
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Revision of maintenance
inspection program.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Work hours
Average labor
rate per hour
1,000, per operator (3
U.S. operators).
15:00 Aug 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
$80
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Cost
Number of
U.S.-registered
airplanes
$80,000 per operator ......
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
9
23AUP1
Fleet cost
$240,000.
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 163 / Thursday, August 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
48245
ESTIMATED COSTS—Continued
Average labor
rate per hour
Action
Work hours
Inspections .......................
500 per airplane .............
The number of work hours, as
indicated above, is presented as if the
accomplishment of the actions in this
proposed AD is to be conducted as
‘‘stand alone’’ actions. However, in
actual practice, these actions for the
most part will be done coincidentally or
in combination with normally
scheduled airplane inspections and
other maintenance program tasks.
Therefore, the actual number of
necessary additional work hours will be
minimal in many instances.
Additionally, any costs associated with
special airplane scheduling will be
minimal.
Further, compliance with this
proposed AD would be a means of
compliance with the aging airplane
safety final rule (AASFR) for the
baseline structure of Model 737–200C
series airplanes. The AASFR final rule
requires certain operators to incorporate
damage tolerance inspections into their
maintenance inspection programs.
These requirements are described in 14
CFR 121.370(a) and 129.16.
Accomplishment of the actions required
by this proposed AD will meet the
requirements of these CFR sections for
the baseline structure. The costs for
accomplishing the inspection portion of
this proposed AD were accounted for in
the regulatory evaluation of the AASFR
final rule.
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Aug 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
80
Cost
$40,000, per airplane,
per inspection cycle.
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this
proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the
national Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that the proposed regulation:
1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this proposed AD and placed it in the
AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section
for a location to examine the regulatory
evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2007–29029;
Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–175–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by October 9, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Number of
U.S.-registered
airplanes
Sfmt 4702
9
Fleet cost
$360,000, per inspection
cycle.
Affected ADs
(b) Accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (g) and the initial inspections
required by paragraph (h) of this AD ends the
requirements of AD 98–11–04 R1,
amendment 39–10984, for Model 737–200C
series airplanes only. Operators of Model
737–100 and –200 series airplanes must
continue to do the actions required by AD
98–11–04 R1.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model
737–200C series airplanes, certificated in any
category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report of
incidents involving fatigue cracking and
corrosion in transport category airplanes that
are approaching or have exceeded their
design service objective. We are issuing this
AD to maintain the continued structural
integrity of the entire fleet of Model 737–
200C series airplanes.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Service Information
(f) The term ‘‘Revision E,’’ as used in this
AD, means Boeing Document No. D6–37089,
‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document for Model 737–100/200/200C
Airplanes,’’ Revision E, dated May 2007.
Revision of the FAA-Approved Maintenance
Inspection Program
(g) At the applicable time specified in
Table 1 of this AD, incorporate a revision
into the FAA-approved maintenance
inspection program that provides no less
than the required damage tolerance rating
(DTR) for each structural significant item
(SSI) listed in Revision E. (The required DTR
value for each SSI is listed in Revision E.)
The revision to the maintenance inspection
program must include and must be
implemented in accordance with the
procedures in Section 5.0, ‘‘Damage
Tolerance Rating (DTR) System Application,’’
and Section 6.0, ‘‘SSI Discrepancy
Reporting’’ of Revision E. Under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection
requirements contained in this AD and has
assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
48246
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 163 / Thursday, August 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1.—COMPLIANCE TIME FOR REVISING MAINTENANCE INSPECTION
PROGRAM
For airplanes with
SSIs—
Compliance time
(1) Affected by the
cargo configuration.
Before the accumulation of 46,000 total
flight cycles, or
within 12 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever occurs
later.
Before the accumulation of 66,000 total
flight cycles, or
within 12 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever occurs
later.
(2) Not affected by
the cargo configuration.
Initial and Repetitive Inspections
(h) At the applicable time specified in
Table 2 of this AD, do the applicable initial
inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, in
accordance with Revision E. Repeat the
applicable inspections thereafter at the
intervals specified in Section 3.0,
‘‘Implementation’’ of Revision E.
TABLE 2.—COMPLIANCE TIME FOR
INITIAL INSPECTIONS
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
For airplanes with
SSIs—
Compliance time
(1) Affected by the
cargo configuration.
Before the accumulation of 46,000 total
flight cycles, or
within 4,000 flight
cycles measured
from 12 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever occurs
later.
Before the accumulation of 66,000 total
flight cycles, or
within 4,000 flight
cycles measured
from 12 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever occurs
later.
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
(2) Not affected by
the cargo configuration.
Repair
(i) If any cracked structure is found during
any inspection required by paragraph (h) of
this AD, before further flight, repair the
cracked structure using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.
Inspection Program for Transferred
Airplanes
(j) Before any airplane that is subject to this
AD and that has exceeded the applicable
compliance times specified in paragraph (h)
of this AD can be added to an air carrier’s
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Aug 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
operations specifications, a program for the
accomplishment of the inspections required
by this AD must be established in accordance
with paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as
applicable.
(1) For airplanes that have been inspected
in accordance with this AD: The inspection
of each SSI must be done by the new operator
in accordance with the previous operator’s
schedule and inspection method, or the new
operator’s schedule and inspection method,
at whichever time would result in the earlier
accomplishment for that SSI inspection. The
compliance time for accomplishment of this
inspection must be measured from the last
inspection accomplished by the previous
operator. After each inspection has been
done once, each subsequent inspection must
be performed in accordance with the new
operator’s schedule and inspection method.
(2) For airplanes that have not been
inspected in accordance with this AD: The
inspection of each SSI required by this AD
must be done either before adding the
airplane to the air carrier’s operations
specification, or in accordance with a
schedule and an inspection method approved
by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA. After each inspection has
been done once, each subsequent inspection
must be done in accordance with the new
operator’s schedule.
(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO) has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
in accordance with the procedures found in
14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of
compliance or a different compliance time
for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR
39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on
any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District
Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
12, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–16656 Filed 8–22–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–26110; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–112–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–
400F Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier
proposed airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 747–400, 747–
400D, and 747–400F series airplanes.
The original NPRM would have
required replacement of an electronic
flight instrument system/engine
indicating and crew alerting system
(EFIS/EICAS) interface unit (EIU)
located on the E2–6 shelf of the main
equipment center with a new or
modified EIU. The original NPRM
resulted from two instances where all
six integrated display units (IDUs) on
the flight deck panels went blank in
flight. This action revises the original
NPRM by reducing the compliance time
for replacing the EIU. We are proposing
this supplemental NPRM to prevent loss
of the IDUs due to failure of all three
EIUs, which could result in the inability
of the flightcrew to maintain safe flight
and landing of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this supplemental NPRM by September
17, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
supplemental NPRM.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on
the ground floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 163 (Thursday, August 23, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48243-48246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-16656]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 163 / Thursday, August 23, 2007 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 48243]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-175-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-200C Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Boeing Model 737-200C series airplanes. This proposed AD would
require revising the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program to
include inspections that will give no less than the required damage
tolerance rating for each structural significant item (SSI), doing
repetitive inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, and repairing
cracked structure. This proposed AD results from a report of incidents
involving fatigue cracking and corrosion in transport category
airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their design service
objective. We are proposing this AD to maintain the continued
structural integrity of the entire fleet of Model 737-200C series
airplanes.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 9, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this
proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6440; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-175-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.
Discussion
In the early 1980's, as part of its continuing work to maintain the
structural integrity of older transport category airplanes, we
concluded that the incidence of fatigue cracking may increase as these
airplanes reach or exceed their design service objective (DSO). In
light of this, and as a result of increased utilization, and longer
operational lives, we determined that a supplemental structural
inspection program (SSIP) was necessary to maintain the continued
structural integrity for all airplanes in the transport fleet.
Issuance of Advisory Circular (AC)
As a follow-on from that determination, we issued AC No. 91-56,
``Supplemental Structural Inspection Program for Large Transport
Category Airplanes,'' dated May 6, 1981. That AC provides guidance
material to manufacturers and operators for use in developing a
continuing structural integrity program to ensure safe operation of
older airplanes throughout their operational lives. This guidance
material applies to transport airplanes that were certified under the
fail-safe requirements of part 4b (``Airplane Airworthiness, Transport
Categories'') of the Civil Air Regulations or damage tolerance
structural requirements of part 25 (``Airworthiness Standards:
Transport Category Airplanes'') of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(FAR) (14 CFR part 25), and that have a maximum gross weight greater
than 75,000 pounds. The procedures set forth in that AC are applicable
to transport category airplanes operated under subpart D (``Special
Flight Operations'') of part 91 of the FAR (14 CFR part 91); part 121
(``Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental
Operations'');
[[Page 48244]]
part 125 (``Certification and Operations: Airplanes having a Seating
Capacity of 20 or More Passengers or a Maximum Payload of 6,000 Pounds
or More''); and part 135 (``Operating Requirements: Commuter and On-
Demand Operations'') of the FAR (14 CFR parts 121, 125, and 135). The
objective of the SSIP was to establish inspection programs to ensure
timely detection of fatigue cracking.
Development of the SSIP
In order to evaluate the effect of increased fatigue cracking with
respect to maintaining fail-safe design and damage tolerance of the
structure of Boeing Model 737-200C series airplanes, Boeing conducted a
structural reassessment of those airplanes, using damage tolerance
evaluation techniques. Boeing accomplished this reassessment using the
criteria contained in AC No. 91-56, as well as Amendment 25-45 of
section 25.571 (``Damage-tolerance and fatigue evaluation of
structure'') of the FAR (14 CFR 25.571). During the reassessment,
members of the airline industry participated with Boeing in working
group sessions and developed the SSIP for Model 737-200C series
airplanes. Engineers and maintenance specialists from the FAA also
supported these sessions. Subsequently, based on the working group's
recommendations, Boeing developed the Supplemental Structural
Inspection Document (SSID).
Other Related Rulemaking
We previously issued AD 98-11-04 R1, amendment 39-10984 (64 FR 987,
January 7, 1999), applicable to all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -
200C series airplanes (which refers to Boeing Document No. D6-37089,
``Supplemental Structural Inspection Document'' (SSID), Revision D,
dated June 1995, as the appropriate source of service information for
doing the required actions). That AD requires the FAA-approved
maintenance inspection program be revised to include inspections that
will give no less than the required damage tolerance rating (DTR) for
each structural significant item (SSI), and repair of cracked
structure. The affected SSIs include, but are not limited to, the wing,
fuselage, empennage, and strut. For Model 737-200C series airplanes,
that AD requires inspecting SSIs affected by cargo configuration
changes only. For Model 737-100 and -200 series airplanes, that AD
requires inspecting all affected SSIs.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Document No. D6-37089, ``Supplemental
Structural Inspection Document for Model 737-100/200/200C Airplanes,''
Revision E, dated May 2007 (hereafter ``Revision E''). Revision E
describes procedures for revising the FAA-approved maintenance
inspection program to include inspections that will give no less than
the required damage tolerance rating (DTR) for each SSI, doing
repetitive inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, and repairing
cracked structure. The inspections specified in Revision E are
essentially identical to those in Revision D. The applicability of
Revision E has been updated, among other editorial changes, to show
that for the Model 737-200C, SSIs not affected by cargo configuration
changes are subject to the same inspections as Model 737-100 and -200
series airplanes. Accomplishing the actions specified in Revision E is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require the following actions:
Paragraph (g) of the proposed AD would require incorporation of a
revision into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that
provides no less than the required DTR for each SSI listed in Revision
E.
Paragraph (h) of the proposed AD would require repetitive
inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs.
Paragraph (i) of the proposed AD would require repairing any
cracked structure in accordance with a method approved by the FAA or an
Authorized Representative (AR) for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by
the FAA to make those findings.
Paragraph (j) of the proposed AD specifies the requirements of the
inspection program for transferred airplanes. Before any airplane that
is subject to this proposed AD can be added to an air carrier's
operations specifications, a program for doing the inspections required
by this proposed AD must be established.
Accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this AD ends the requirements of AD 98-11-04 R1 for Model 737-200C
series airplanes only. Operators of Model 737-100 and -200 series
airplanes must continue to do the actions required by AD 98-11-04 R1.
Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information
For Model 737-200C series airplanes, Section 3.0, ``Structural
Significant Items (SSIs),'' of Revision E specifies a threshold of
66,000 or 46,000 flight cycles for accomplishing the initial
inspections, depending on the airplane configuration; however, it does
not specify a grace period for airplanes that are near or have passed
that threshold. This proposed AD would allow a grace period of 12
months after the effective date of the AD to incorporate Revision E
into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program. This proposed AD
also would allow a grace period of 4,000 flight cycles measured from 12
months after the effective date of the AD to initiate the applicable
inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs.
Revision E does not specify instructions on how to repair certain
conditions. This proposed AD would require repairing those conditions
in one of the following ways:
Using a method that we approve; or
Using data that have been approved by an AR for the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom
we have authorized to make those findings.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 49 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours Average labor Cost registered Fleet cost
rate per hour airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revision of maintenance 1,000, per $80 $80,000 per 9 $240,000.
inspection program. operator (3 operator.
U.S.
operators).
[[Page 48245]]
Inspections.................. 500 per 80 $40,000, per 9 $360,000, per
airplane. airplane, per inspection
inspection cycle.
cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of work hours, as indicated above, is presented as if
the accomplishment of the actions in this proposed AD is to be
conducted as ``stand alone'' actions. However, in actual practice,
these actions for the most part will be done coincidentally or in
combination with normally scheduled airplane inspections and other
maintenance program tasks. Therefore, the actual number of necessary
additional work hours will be minimal in many instances. Additionally,
any costs associated with special airplane scheduling will be minimal.
Further, compliance with this proposed AD would be a means of
compliance with the aging airplane safety final rule (AASFR) for the
baseline structure of Model 737-200C series airplanes. The AASFR final
rule requires certain operators to incorporate damage tolerance
inspections into their maintenance inspection programs. These
requirements are described in 14 CFR 121.370(a) and 129.16.
Accomplishment of the actions required by this proposed AD will meet
the requirements of these CFR sections for the baseline structure. The
costs for accomplishing the inspection portion of this proposed AD were
accounted for in the regulatory evaluation of the AASFR final rule.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-29029; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
175-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October
9, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) and the
initial inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD ends the
requirements of AD 98-11-04 R1, amendment 39-10984, for Model 737-
200C series airplanes only. Operators of Model 737-100 and -200
series airplanes must continue to do the actions required by AD 98-
11-04 R1.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737-200C series
airplanes, certificated in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report of incidents involving fatigue
cracking and corrosion in transport category airplanes that are
approaching or have exceeded their design service objective. We are
issuing this AD to maintain the continued structural integrity of
the entire fleet of Model 737-200C series airplanes.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Service Information
(f) The term ``Revision E,'' as used in this AD, means Boeing
Document No. D6-37089, ``Supplemental Structural Inspection Document
for Model 737-100/200/200C Airplanes,'' Revision E, dated May 2007.
Revision of the FAA-Approved Maintenance Inspection Program
(g) At the applicable time specified in Table 1 of this AD,
incorporate a revision into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection
program that provides no less than the required damage tolerance
rating (DTR) for each structural significant item (SSI) listed in
Revision E. (The required DTR value for each SSI is listed in
Revision E.) The revision to the maintenance inspection program must
include and must be implemented in accordance with the procedures in
Section 5.0, ``Damage Tolerance Rating (DTR) System Application,''
and Section 6.0, ``SSI Discrepancy Reporting'' of Revision E. Under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements contained in this
AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
[[Page 48246]]
Table 1.--Compliance Time for Revising Maintenance Inspection Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For airplanes with SSIs-- Compliance time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Affected by the cargo configuration... Before the accumulation of
46,000 total flight cycles,
or within 12 months after
the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later.
(2) Not affected by the cargo Before the accumulation of
configuration. 66,000 total flight cycles,
or within 12 months after
the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial and Repetitive Inspections
(h) At the applicable time specified in Table 2 of this AD, do
the applicable initial inspections to detect cracks of all SSIs, in
accordance with Revision E. Repeat the applicable inspections
thereafter at the intervals specified in Section 3.0,
``Implementation'' of Revision E.
Table 2.--Compliance Time for Initial Inspections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For airplanes with SSIs-- Compliance time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Affected by the cargo configuration... Before the accumulation of
46,000 total flight cycles,
or within 4,000 flight
cycles measured from 12
months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(2) Not affected by the cargo Before the accumulation of
configuration. 66,000 total flight cycles,
or within 4,000 flight
cycles measured from 12
months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair
(i) If any cracked structure is found during any inspection
required by paragraph (h) of this AD, before further flight, repair
the cracked structure using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
Inspection Program for Transferred Airplanes
(j) Before any airplane that is subject to this AD and that has
exceeded the applicable compliance times specified in paragraph (h)
of this AD can be added to an air carrier's operations
specifications, a program for the accomplishment of the inspections
required by this AD must be established in accordance with paragraph
(j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
(1) For airplanes that have been inspected in accordance with
this AD: The inspection of each SSI must be done by the new operator
in accordance with the previous operator's schedule and inspection
method, or the new operator's schedule and inspection method, at
whichever time would result in the earlier accomplishment for that
SSI inspection. The compliance time for accomplishment of this
inspection must be measured from the last inspection accomplished by
the previous operator. After each inspection has been done once,
each subsequent inspection must be performed in accordance with the
new operator's schedule and inspection method.
(2) For airplanes that have not been inspected in accordance
with this AD: The inspection of each SSI required by this AD must be
done either before adding the airplane to the air carrier's
operations specification, or in accordance with a schedule and an
inspection method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA. After each inspection has been done
once, each subsequent inspection must be done in accordance with the
new operator's schedule.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 approval must specifically refer
to this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 12, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-16656 Filed 8-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P