Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F Series Airplanes, 1155-1157 [E9-313]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
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 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 this 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.
You can find our regulatory
evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:08 Jan 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–1364;
Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–103–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by February
26, 2009.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
1155
(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.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737–
300, –400, and –500 series airplanes,
certificated in any category; as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–21A1156,
Revision 2, dated December 11, 2008.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
December 18, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9–314 Filed 1–9–09; 8:45 am]
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report of loss of
both the normal electronic flight instrument
system (EFIS) cooling supply and the
indication of EFIS cooling loss due to a single
failure of the battery bus, causing eventual
power-down of the EFIS displays; the
standby attitude indication is also powered
by this battery bus. We are issuing this AD
to prevent loss of all attitude indications
from both the standby indicator and EFIS
displays, which could decrease the ability of
the flightcrew to maintain the safe flight and
landing of the airplane.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Compliance
(e) Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
Modification
(f) Within 24 months after the effective
date of this AD: Modify the control power
wiring of the normal supply fan and the low
flow sensor for the equipment cooling system
of the EFIS, by doing all the applicable
actions specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–21A1156, Revision 2, dated December
11, 2008.
Credit for Actions Done Using Previous
Service Information
(g)(1) Actions done before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–21A1156, Revision 1,
dated October 23, 2007, are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding
requirements of this AD.
(2) For Groups 1 and 2 airplanes identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
21A1156, Revision 1, dated October 23, 2007:
Actions done before the effective date of this
AD in accordance with Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–21A1156, dated June 20, 2006,
are acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding requirements of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Suk
Jang, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and
Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle
ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425)
917–6511; fax (425) 917–6590; has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2008–1363; Directorate
Identifier 2008–NM–104–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 767–200, –300, and –300F Series
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 767–200, –300, and
–300F series airplanes. This proposed
AD would require repetitive inspections
for fatigue cracking and corrosion of the
upper link fuse pin of the nacelle struts,
and related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. This proposed AD
would also provide terminating action
for the repetitive inspections. This
proposed AD results from two reports of
cracked upper link fuse pins. We are
proposing this AD to prevent fatigue
cracking or corrosion of the upper link
fuse pin, which could result in failure
of the fuse pin and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the nacelle strut
and possible separation of the strut and
engine from the airplane during flight.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by February 26, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• 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.
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1156
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207; telephone
206–544–9990; fax 206–766–5682; email DDCS@boeing.com; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.
For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425–227–
1221 or 425–227–1152.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 917–6421; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2008–1363; Directorate Identifier
2008–NM–104–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:08 Jan 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
Other Relevant Rulemaking
On September 21, 2000, we issued AD
2000–19–09, amendment 39–11910 (65
FR 58641, October 2, 2000), applicable
to certain Boeing Model 767 series
airplanes powered by Rolls-Royce
RB211 series engines. AD 2000–19–09
requires modification of the nacelle
strut and wing structure, and addresses
fatigue cracking in primary strut
structure and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the strut.
On July 29, 2004, we issued AD 2004–
16–12, amendment 39–13768 (69 FR
51002, August 17, 2004), applicable to
certain Boeing Model 767–200, –300,
and –300F series airplanes powered by
Pratt & Whitney engines and General
Electric engines. That AD supersedes
three existing airworthiness directives
and requires modification of the nacelle
strut and wing structure. For certain
airplanes, that AD also requires
reworking the aft pitch load fitting, and
installing a new diagonal brace fuse pin;
for certain other airplanes, that AD
requires replacing the outboard pitch
load fitting of the wing front spar with
a new, improved fitting, which
terminates certain repetitive
inspections. That AD addresses fatigue
cracking in primary strut structure,
which could result in separation of the
strut and engine from the airplane.
Discussion
Since we issued AD 2000–19–09 and
AD 2004–16–12, we received two
reports of cracked upper link fuse pins.
The two airplanes had accumulated
11,573 total flight cycles and 14,780
total flight cycles and are powered by
Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines.
Boeing analysis found cracks in the
longitudinal direction of the fuse pins.
The longitudinal cracks were the result
of fatigue loads. No material anomalies
were found. Fatigue cracking or
corrosion of the upper link fuse pin
could result in failure of the fuse pin
and consequent reduced structural
integrity of the nacelle strut and
possible separation of the strut and
engine from the airplane during flight.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767–54A0074, Revision
1, dated April 24, 2008. The service
bulletin describes procedures for
repetitive detailed inspections of the
upper link fuse pin of the nacelle struts
for corrosion, and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary. The
related investigative and corrective
actions include replacing the fuse pin
with a new fuse pin if corrosion is
found; doing a high frequency eddy
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
current (HFEC) inspection for cracking
if no fuse pin corrosion is found; doing
a magnetic particle inspection of the
inside surface of the upper link fuse pin
for cracking; and replacing the fuse pin
with a new fuse pin if cracking is found,
and applying corrosion preventive
compound on the upper link fuse pin
before further flight.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of This Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all relevant information and
determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of these same
type designs. This proposed AD would
require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information
described previously. Accomplishing
the modifications required by AD 2000–
19–09 and AD 2004–16–12 would
terminate the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (f) of this
proposed AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect 354 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 4 work-hours per product to
comply with this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost of this proposed AD to the U.S.
operators to be $113,280, or $320 per
product.
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 determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD would not have a
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
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 this 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.
You can find our regulatory
evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
§ 39.13
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by Reference,
Safety.
Applicability
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
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.
1157
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from two reports of
cracked upper link fuse pins. We are issuing
this AD to prevent fatigue cracking or
corrosion of the upper link fuse pin, which
could result in failure of the fuse pin and
consequent reduced structural integrity of the
nacelle strut and possible separation of the
strut and engine from the airplane during
flight.
Compliance
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
(e) Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–1363;
Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–104–AD.
Initial and Repetitive Inspections/
Investigative and Corrective Actions
Comments Due Date
(f) Inspect the upper link fuse pin of the
nacelle struts for fatigue cracking and
corrosion at the applicable time specified in
Table 1 of this AD. Do the applicable
inspection by doing all the applicable actions
specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767–54A0074, Revision 1, dated April 24,
2008; and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before
further flight. Repeat the applicable
inspection at intervals not to exceed 3,000
flight cycles or 24 months, whichever is first,
until paragraph (g) of this AD has been done.
(a) We must receive comments by February
26, 2009.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767–
200, –300, and –300F series airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–54A0074,
Revision 1, dated April 24, 2008.
TABLE 1—COMPLIANCE TIMES
At the later of:
Initial inspection threshold
JT9D .......................
14,000 total flight cycles ........................
CF6–80A .................
24,000 total flight cycles ........................
PW4000 ..................
8,000 total flight cycles ..........................
CF6–80C2 ...............
10,000 total flight cycles ........................
RB211 .....................
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Engine
type
24,000 total flight cycles ........................
Terminating Action in AD 2000–19–09 and
AD 2004–16–12
(g) Accomplishment of the modification
specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this
AD, as applicable, terminates the inspections
required by paragraph (f) of this AD.
(1) For Model 767 series airplanes powered
by Rolls-Royce RB211 series engines, as
identified in AD 2000–19–09: Modification of
the nacelle strut and wing structure, as
required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD
2000–19–09.
(2) For Model 767–200, –300, and –300F
series airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney
and General Electric engines, as identified in
AD 2004–16–12: Modification of the nacelle
strut and wing structure, as required by
paragraphs (a), (b), (d), and (e) of AD 2004–
16–12.
Credit for Actions Done Using Previous
Service Information
(h) Replacement of the fuse pins with new
fuse pins before the effective date of this AD
in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:08 Jan 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
Grace period
Within 3,000 flight cycles
whichever is first.
Within 3,000 flight cycles
whichever is first.
Within 3,000 flight cycles
whichever is first.
Within 3,000 flight cycles
whichever is first.
Within 3,000 flight cycles
whichever is first.
or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
767–54–0074, dated March 27, 1997, is
acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding requirements of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN:
Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425)
917–6421; fax (425) 917–6590; has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
December 18, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9–313 Filed 1–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 7 (Monday, January 12, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1155-1157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-313]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2008-1363; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-104-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes. This
proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for fatigue cracking
and corrosion of the upper link fuse pin of the nacelle struts, and
related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This
proposed AD would also provide terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. This proposed AD results from two reports of cracked upper
link fuse pins. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking or
corrosion of the upper link fuse pin, which could result in failure of
the fuse pin and consequent reduced structural integrity of the nacelle
strut and possible separation of the strut and engine from the airplane
during flight.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 26,
2009.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
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.
[[Page 1156]]
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207;
telephone 206-544-9990; fax 206-766-5682; e-mail DDCS@boeing.com;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221 or
425-227-1152.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 917-6421; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-1363;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-104-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
On September 21, 2000, we issued AD 2000-19-09, amendment 39-11910
(65 FR 58641, October 2, 2000), applicable to certain Boeing Model 767
series airplanes powered by Rolls-Royce RB211 series engines. AD 2000-
19-09 requires modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure,
and addresses fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and
consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut.
On July 29, 2004, we issued AD 2004-16-12, amendment 39-13768 (69
FR 51002, August 17, 2004), applicable to certain Boeing Model 767-200,
-300, and -300F series airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney engines and
General Electric engines. That AD supersedes three existing
airworthiness directives and requires modification of the nacelle strut
and wing structure. For certain airplanes, that AD also requires
reworking the aft pitch load fitting, and installing a new diagonal
brace fuse pin; for certain other airplanes, that AD requires replacing
the outboard pitch load fitting of the wing front spar with a new,
improved fitting, which terminates certain repetitive inspections. That
AD addresses fatigue cracking in primary strut structure, which could
result in separation of the strut and engine from the airplane.
Discussion
Since we issued AD 2000-19-09 and AD 2004-16-12, we received two
reports of cracked upper link fuse pins. The two airplanes had
accumulated 11,573 total flight cycles and 14,780 total flight cycles
and are powered by Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines. Boeing analysis
found cracks in the longitudinal direction of the fuse pins. The
longitudinal cracks were the result of fatigue loads. No material
anomalies were found. Fatigue cracking or corrosion of the upper link
fuse pin could result in failure of the fuse pin and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the nacelle strut and possible separation of
the strut and engine from the airplane during flight.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-54A0074,
Revision 1, dated April 24, 2008. The service bulletin describes
procedures for repetitive detailed inspections of the upper link fuse
pin of the nacelle struts for corrosion, and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary. The related investigative and
corrective actions include replacing the fuse pin with a new fuse pin
if corrosion is found; doing a high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for cracking if no fuse pin corrosion is found; doing a
magnetic particle inspection of the inside surface of the upper link
fuse pin for cracking; and replacing the fuse pin with a new fuse pin
if cracking is found, and applying corrosion preventive compound on the
upper link fuse pin before further flight.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously.
Accomplishing the modifications required by AD 2000-19-09 and AD 2004-
16-12 would terminate the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(f) of this proposed AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 354 airplanes of
U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 4 work-hours
per product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is
$80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this
proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be $113,280, or $320 per product.
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 determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a
[[Page 1157]]
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 this 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.
You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
Reference, 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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2008-1363; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-
104-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by February 26, 2009.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F
series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-54A0074, Revision 1, dated April
24, 2008.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from two reports of cracked upper link fuse
pins. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking or
corrosion of the upper link fuse pin, which could result in failure
of the fuse pin and consequent reduced structural integrity of the
nacelle strut and possible separation of the strut and engine from
the airplane during flight.
Compliance
(e) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
Initial and Repetitive Inspections/Investigative and Corrective Actions
(f) Inspect the upper link fuse pin of the nacelle struts for
fatigue cracking and corrosion at the applicable time specified in
Table 1 of this AD. Do the applicable inspection by doing all the
applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-54A0074, Revision 1, dated April
24, 2008; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspection at
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles or 24 months, whichever
is first, until paragraph (g) of this AD has been done.
Table 1--Compliance Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the later of:
Initial
Engine type inspection Grace period
threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JT9D.......................... 14,000 total Within 3,000 flight
flight cycles. cycles or 18 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever is first.
CF6-80A....................... 24,000 total Within 3,000 flight
flight cycles. cycles or 18 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever is first.
PW4000........................ 8,000 total Within 3,000 flight
flight cycles. cycles or 18 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever is first.
CF6-80C2...................... 10,000 total Within 3,000 flight
flight cycles. cycles or 18 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever is first.
RB211......................... 24,000 total Within 3,000 flight
flight cycles. cycles or 18 months
after the effective
date of this AD,
whichever is first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terminating Action in AD 2000-19-09 and AD 2004-16-12
(g) Accomplishment of the modification specified in paragraph
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable, terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (f) of this AD.
(1) For Model 767 series airplanes powered by Rolls-Royce RB211
series engines, as identified in AD 2000-19-09: Modification of the
nacelle strut and wing structure, as required by paragraphs (a) and
(b) of AD 2000-19-09.
(2) For Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes powered
by Pratt & Whitney and General Electric engines, as identified in AD
2004-16-12: Modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure, as
required by paragraphs (a), (b), (d), and (e) of AD 2004-16-12.
Credit for Actions Done Using Previous Service Information
(h) Replacement of the fuse pins with new fuse pins before the
effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
767-54-0074, dated March 27, 1997, is acceptable for compliance with
the corresponding requirements of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, ATTN: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch,
ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-6421; fax (425) 917-6590;
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
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 must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 18, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-313 Filed 1-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
