Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER Series Airplanes, 1552-1556 [2011-367]
Download as PDF
1552
§ 304.34
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Other rights and services.
Nothing in this subpart shall be
construed to entitle any person, as of
right, to any service or to the disclosure
of any record to which such person is
not entitled under the Privacy Act.
Dated: January 4, 2011.
Shawne C. McGibbon,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011–146 Filed 1–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6110–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2008–1118; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–318–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Model 737–600, –700, –700C,
–800, –900, and –900ER Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
The FAA is revising an earlier
NPRM for an airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to all Boeing Model
737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900
series airplanes. The original NPRM
would have superseded an existing AD
that currently requires reviewing the
airplane maintenance records to
determine whether an engine has been
removed from the airplane since the
airplane was manufactured. For
airplanes on which an engine has been
removed, the existing AD also requires
an inspection of the aft engine mount to
determine if the center link assembly is
correctly installed, and follow-on
actions if necessary. The original NPRM
proposed to require the same actions for
airplanes on which the engine has not
been previously removed. The original
NPRM resulted from reports indicating
that operators found that the center link
assembly for the aft engine mount was
reversed on several airplanes that had
not had an engine removed since
delivery. This new action revises the
original NPRM by expanding the
applicability to include Model 737–
900ER airplanes. We are proposing this
supplemental NPRM to prevent
increased structural loads on the aft
engine mount, which could result in
failure of the aft engine mount and
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
consequent separation of the engine
from the airplane.
ADDRESSES: We must receive comments
on this supplemental NPRM by
February 25, 2011.
DATES: 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.
• 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 proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–
2207; telephone 206–544–5000,
extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail
me.boecom@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.
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:
Alan Pohl, 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:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to an address listed under the
section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2008–1118; Directorate Identifier
2007–NM–318–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.
ADDRESSES
Discussion
We proposed to amend part 39 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
part 39) with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the
‘‘original NPRM’’) to supersede AD
2003–03–01, Amendment 39–13025 (68
FR 4367, January 29, 2003). The original
NPRM applied to all Model 737–600,
–700, –700C, –800, and –900 series
airplanes. The original NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on
October 30, 2008 (73 FR 64568). The
original NPRM would have superseded
an existing AD that currently requires
reviewing the airplane maintenance
records to determine whether an engine
has been removed from the airplane
since the airplane was manufactured.
For airplanes on which an engine has
been removed, the existing AD also
requires an inspection of the aft engine
mount to determine if the center link
assembly is correctly installed, and
follow-on actions if necessary. The
original NPRM proposed to require the
same actions for airplanes on which the
engine has not been previously
removed.
Actions Since Original NPRM Was
Issued
Since we issued the original NPRM,
the manufacturer has informed us that
Model 737–900ER airplanes should be
included in the applicability of the
supplemental NPRM. Model 737–900ER
airplanes were not being produced in
May 2004 when Revision 3, dated May
20, 2004, of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–71A1462, was issued.
(Revision 3 was referred to as an
appropriate source of service
information for accomplishing the
proposed actions in the original NPRM.)
Following production it was determined
that the affected aft engine mount is
interchangeable with Model 737–900ER
airplanes; however, those airplanes
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Proposed Rules
were inspected in production to ensure
that the center link was properly
installed. Therefore, the requirements in
the existing AD do not apply to those
airplanes. However, since we are
including airplanes on which the
engines have been removed since
production, we have added Model 737–
900ER airplanes to the applicability
section of this supplemental NPRM.
Comments
Request To Change Paragraph (n)
We have considered the following
comments on the original NPRM.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Request for Exemption From AD
Requirements
American Airlines (AA) asks that all
operators that have performed the
actions specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004, be exempt from
repeating maintenance actions in
accordance with the original NPRM for
a maintenance program that is already
in place and proven effective. AA states
that it has exceeded the requirements of
AD 2003–03–01 by inspecting both
engine aft mount center link assemblies,
regardless of the stipulation in the
existing AD, which limited the
inspection requirement to engines
removed since the airplane date of
manufacture. AA adds that the
inspections revealed that none of its
installed or spare engines had
incorrectly installed aft mount center
link assemblies. AA notes that it is
doing Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin at
every engine shop visit, and has
implemented maintenance task
documentation to verify the proper aft
mount center link configuration at every
engine change. AA concludes that it has
not accepted delivery of any additional
Model 737 airplanes since the release of
the existing AD and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision
3, dated May 20, 2004.
We acknowledge the commenter’s
request. Actions done in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
71A1462, Revision 3, before the
effective date of this AD are acceptable
for compliance with the AD, as
indicated by the phrase ‘‘unless the
actions have already been done’’ in
paragraph (f) of this AD. We have made
no change to the supplemental NPRM in
this regard.
Request To Change Paragraph (d)
Boeing asks that paragraph (d) of the
original NPRM be changed to indicate
that the center link assembly for the aft
engine mount was reversed on one
airplane that had not had an engine
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
removed since delivery. Boeing is aware
of only one such report.
We do not agree with the commenter.
We have received another report
indicating that some airplanes were
found with the engine mounts installed
incorrectly on engines that had not been
removed since airplane delivery.
Therefore, we have not changed
paragraph (d) of the NPRM (paragraph
(e) of the supplemental NPRM).
Boeing asks that paragraph (n) of the
original NPRM be changed to clarify
parts not affected by the ‘‘Parts
Installation’’ paragraph by including the
permanent part marking on the center
link assembly, as specified in Part 2 of
the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision
3, dated May 20, 2004. Boeing states
that this change would be equivalent to
an existing alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) for AD 2003–03–
01, requiring the installation of marked
engine mounts, as specified in the
approved section of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision
3, dated May 20, 2004.
We agree with the commenter for the
reasons provided. We have changed
paragraph (n) of the supplemental
NPRM to include permanent part
marking on the center link assembly, as
specified in Part 2 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004.
Request To Clarify Requirements in
Paragraph (n)
Japan Airlines (JAL) asks for
clarification whether the requirement in
paragraph (n) of the original NPRM
applies only to airplanes affected by
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20,
2004; or to all Model 737–600, –700,
–700C, –800, and –900 series airplanes.
JAL states that if the requirement in
paragraph (n) applies to all Model
737NG (next generation) airplanes then
a change should be made to paragraph
(n) of the supplemental NPRM for
clarification.
We acknowledge the commenter’s
concern and provide the following
clarification. As noted under ‘‘Actions
Since Original NPRM Was Issued,’’ we
have added Model 737–900ER airplanes
to the applicability section of this
supplemental NPRM; therefore, the
requirement in paragraph (n) of the
supplemental NPRM applies to all
Model 737NG airplanes. No change to
paragraph (n) of the supplemental
NPRM is necessary.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1553
Request To Change Paragraphs (i) and
(o)
CFM International states that the
acronym CFMI is not accurate and
recommends using CFM International
(CFM) throughout the NPRM.
We agree that the correct acronym
should be used in the supplemental
NPRM and in future rulemaking.
However, CFMI is not referred to
anywhere in this supplemental NPRM;
therefore, no change is necessary.
CFM also asks that paragraphs (i) and
(o) of the original NPRM be changed to
include the Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Engine Certification Office
(ECO), as an approved source for
obtaining repair procedures. CFM states
that the engine mounting lugs and
adjacent engine turbine rear frame are
under the responsibility of CFM as part
of the engine type certificate. CFM notes
that it is in charge of approval of repairs
by delegation of both engine authorities,
which are the FAA and European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); CFM is
a joint certification. CFM adds that for
any part problems it contacts the ECO,
in Burlington, Massachusetts, and the
EASA Engine Certification Office, in
Cologne, Germany. In light of this, CFM
does not recommend the parts be
repaired under approval of a Boeing
Representative.
We partially agree with the
commenter for the reasons provided. We
agree that the appropriate office for
approval of certain repairs specified in
the original NPRM is the ECO.
Paragraph (i) of the original NPRM is a
restatement of the requirements in AD
2003–03–01. However, paragraph (i) of
the supplemental NPRM does refer to
paragraph (o) of the supplemental
NPRM for AMOC approval. We have
changed paragraph (o) of this
supplemental NPRM to allow for certain
AMOC approvals by the ECO.
Explanation of Additional Changes
Made to This Supplemental NPRM
We have changed this supplemental
NPRM to identify the legal name of the
manufacturer as published in the most
recent type certificate data sheet for the
affected airplane models.
We have added a new paragraph (d)
to this supplemental NPRM to provide
the Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America subject code 71: Powerplant.
This code is added to make this
supplemental NPRM parallel with other
new AD actions. We have reidentified
subsequent paragraphs accordingly.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1554
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Proposed Rules
FAA’s Determination and Proposed
Requirements of the Supplemental
NPRM
Certain changes discussed above
expand the scope of the original NPRM;
therefore, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period
to provide additional opportunity for
public comment on this supplemental
NPRM.
Explanation of Change to Costs of
Compliance
Since issuance of the original NPRM,
we have increased the labor rate in the
Costs of Compliance from $80 per work
hour to $85 per work hour. The Costs
of Compliance information, below,
reflects this increase in the specified
hourly labor rate.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 1,846 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
We estimate that 854 airplanes of U.S.
registry would be affected by this
proposed AD. There are no new
requirements in this proposed AD;
however, we have expanded the
applicability as noted under ‘‘Actions
Since Original NPRM Was Issued.’’ The
current costs for this proposed AD are
recalculated for the convenience of
affected operators, as follows:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Work hours
Maintenance records review (required by AD 2003–03–01) ..........................................
Inspection for correct installation of center link assembly (new proposed action) .........
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD 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
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this supplemental NPRM and placed it
in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the
regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, 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.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing amendment 39–13025 (68 FR
4367, January 29, 2003) and adding the
following new AD:
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2008–1118; Directorate Identifier 2007–
NM–318–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by February 25, 2011.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2003–03–01,
Amendment 39–13025.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all The Boeing
Company Model 737 –600, –700, –700C,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Cost per
airplane
Parts
1
1
$0
0
$85
85
Fleet cost
$72,590
72,590
–800, –900, and –900ER series airplanes,
certificated in any category.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 71: Powerplant.
Unsafe Condition
(e) This AD results from reports indicating
that operators found that the center link
assembly for the aft engine mount was
reversed on several airplanes that had not
had an engine removed since delivery. We
are issuing this AD to prevent increased
structural loads on the aft engine mount,
which could result in failure of the aft engine
mount and consequent separation of the
engine from the airplane.
Compliance
(f) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Restatement of the Requirements of AD
2003–03–01
Review of Maintenance Records
(g) For Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800,
and –900 series airplanes: Within 90 days
after February 13, 2003 (the effective date of
AD 2003–03–01), review the airplane
maintenance records to determine whether
either engine has been removed since the
airplane’s date of manufacture. If neither
engine has been removed since the airplane’s
date of manufacture, no further action is
required by this paragraph.
Inspection of Engines That Have Been
Removed to Determine if Center Link
Assembly is Installed Correctly
(h) For Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800,
and –900 series airplanes on which any
installed engine has been removed from the
airplane since the airplane’s date of
manufacture: Within 90 days after February
13, 2003, do a one-time general visual
inspection to determine if the center link
assembly of the aft engine mount is installed
correctly, in accordance with the
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 1,
dated November 7, 2002; or Revision 3, dated
May 20, 2004. If the center link assembly is
installed correctly, no further action is
required by paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD for
that engine. As of the effective date of this
AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–71A1462, Revision 3.
Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a
general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual
examination of an interior or exterior area,
installation, or assembly to detect obvious
damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of
inspection is made from within touching
distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror
may be necessary to ensure visual access to
all surfaces in the inspection area. This level
of inspection is made under normally
available lighting conditions such as
daylight, hanger lighting, flashlight, or
droplight and may require removal or
opening of access panels or doors. Stands,
ladders, or platforms may be required to gain
proximity to the area being checked.’’
Follow-on and Corrective Actions
(i) For airplanes on which any center link
assembly is found installed incorrectly
during any inspection required by paragraph
(h), (k), or (l) of this AD: Before further flight,
do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1),
(i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–71A1462,
Revision 1, dated November 7, 2002; or
Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004; except that
1555
New Requirements of This AD
it is not necessary to submit a report of
findings to the airplane manufacturer. As of
the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–71A1462,
Revision 3.
(1) Remove the center link assembly and
install it correctly.
(2) Perform a detailed inspection of the
engine mounting lugs and engine turbine rear
frame for cracking, yielding, buckling, or
wear damage.
(3) Perform a detailed inspection of the
hardware for the aft engine mount; including
the center link assembly, right link assembly,
aft mount hanger assembly, and link pins; for
cracking, yielding, buckling, or wear damage.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a
detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive
examination of a specific item, installation,
or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. Available lighting is normally
supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate.
Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying
lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface
cleaning and elaborate procedures may be
required.’’
Inspection of Engines That Have Not Been
Removed To Determine if Center Link
Assembly Is Installed Correctly
(k) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004, on which any installed
engine has not been removed from the
airplane since the airplane’s date of
manufacture: Within 90 days after the
effective date of this AD, do a detailed
inspection to determine if the center link
assembly of the aft engine mount is installed
correctly, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004. If the center link is
installed correctly, no further action is
required by this paragraph for that engine.
Follow-on and Corrective Actions
(l) For airplanes on which any center link
assembly is found installed incorrectly
during the inspection required by paragraph
(k) of this AD: Before further flight, do the
follow-on and corrective actions required by
paragraph (i) of this AD.
Repair
(j) If any cracking, yielding, buckling, or
wear damage is found during the inspections
required by paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of this
AD: Before further flight, replace the
discrepant part with a new or serviceable
part, or repair in accordance with a method
approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.
Credit for Actions Done Using Previous
Service Information
(m) Inspections and corrective actions
done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with a Boeing service bulletin
listed in Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding
requirements of this AD.
TABLE 1—PREVIOUS SERVICE BULLETINS
Boeing service bulletin
Revision—
Dated—
737–71A1462 ...............................................................................................................................
737–71A1462 ...............................................................................................................................
737–71A1462 ...............................................................................................................................
Original ........................
1 ..................................
2 ..................................
August 29, 2002.
November 7, 2002.
May 29, 2003.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Parts Installation
(n) As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install an engine on any airplane
identified in paragraph (c) of this AD unless
the actions required by paragraph (n)(1) or
(n)(2) of this AD are accomplished.
(1) The inspection is accomplished in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20,
2004, and the center link assembly of the aft
engine mount is found to be installed
correctly.
(2) The hanger fitting and center link
assembly are marked and part marked in
accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004.
Note 3: For hanger fittings and center link
assemblies marked and part marked in
production, as specified in Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004, the actions specified in
paragraph (n)(2) of this AD do not apply.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(o) The certification office specified in
paragraph (o)(1) or (o)(2) of this AD, as
applicable, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD,
if requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
(1) For the structure identified in
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD: The Manager,
Engine Certification Office (ECO), FAA. Send
information to ATTN: Antonio Cancelliere,
Aerospace Engineer, ANE–141, FAA, ECO,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA 01803–5299; telephone 781–238–7751;
fax 781–238–7199.
(2) For the structure identified in
paragraph (i)(3) of this AD: The Manager,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA. Send information to ATTN: Alan Pohl,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–
120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356;
telephone (425) 917–6450; fax (425) 917–
6590. Information may be e-mailed to: 9ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(3) To request a different method of
compliance or a different compliance time
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 principal maintenance inspector
(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI),
as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District
Office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
(4) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD if it
is approved by Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that 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.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1556
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
December 17, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine and
Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–367 Filed 1–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–0703; Directorate
Identifier 2009–NM–093–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier,
Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet
Series 700, 701 & 702) Airplanes,
Model CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet
Series 705) Airplanes, and Model CL–
600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900)
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
We are revising an earlier
NPRM for the products listed above.
This action revises the earlier NPRM by
expanding the scope. This proposed AD
results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:
SUMMARY:
There have been four reports of loose or
detached main landing gear torque link apex
pin locking plate and the locking plate
retainer bolt. This condition could result in
torque link apex pin disengagement, heavy
vibration during landing, damage to main
landing gear components and subsequent
main landing gear collapse.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
The proposed AD would require
actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by February 25, 2011.
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,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Bombardier,
Inc., 400 Cote-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Quebec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone
514–855–5000; fax 514–855–7401;
e-mail thd.crj@aero.bombardier.com;
Internet https://www.bombardier.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.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://www.regulations.
gov; or in person at the Docket
Operations office 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 Operations
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:
Craig Yates, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems
Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
New York 11590; telephone (516) 228–
7355; fax (516) 794–5531.
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–2009–0703; Directorate Identifier
2009–NM–093–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 based on those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We proposed to amend 14 CFR part
39 with an earlier NPRM for the
specified products, which was
published in the Federal Register on
August 5, 2009 (74 FR 38993). That
earlier NPRM proposed to require
actions intended to address the unsafe
condition for the products listed above.
Since that earlier NPRM was issued,
we have determined that main landing
gear (MLG) shock strut assemblies
having part number (P/Ns) 49000–11
through 49000–22 inclusive and serial
numbers (S/Ns) 0001 through 0284
inclusive are rotable parts. Therefore,
the possibility exists that these parts
might be installed on additional
airplanes. For this reason, we find it
necessary to require an inspection to
determine if the subject MLG shock
strut assemblies are installed for all
Model CL–600–2C10 airplanes having
S/Ns 10003 and subsequent, and Model
CL–600–2D15 and Cl–600–2D24
airplanes having S/Ns 15001 and
subsequent. Therefore, for all affected
airplanes, we are revising this
supplemental NPRM to add an
inspection to determine the part and
serial numbers of the MLG shock strut
assemblies installed.
You may obtain further information
by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.
Comments
We have considered the following
comments received on the earlier
NPRM.
Request To Revise Paragraphs (f)(1) and
(f)(2) of the Earlier NPRM
American Eagle Airlines (American
Eagle) requested that we revise
paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of the earlier
NPRM to cover Model CL–600–2C10
airplanes having serial numbers (S/Ns)
10003 and subsequent, equipped with
MLG shock strut assemblies having part
numbers (P/Ns) 49000–11 through
49000–22 inclusive and S/Ns 0001
through 0252 inclusive. The commenter
stated the following:
• If one of the affected MLG shock
strut assemblies were installed on an
airplane with a S/N of 10224 or greater,
paragraph (f)(1) of the earlier NPRM
would not require the assembly to be
inspected.
• If an MLG shock strut assembly that
is not in the affected range were
installed on an airplane with S/N 10003
through 10223 inclusive, paragraph
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1552-1556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-367]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2008-1118; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-318-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, -900, and -900ER Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier NPRM for an airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -
800, and -900 series airplanes. The original NPRM would have superseded
an existing AD that currently requires reviewing the airplane
maintenance records to determine whether an engine has been removed
from the airplane since the airplane was manufactured. For airplanes on
which an engine has been removed, the existing AD also requires an
inspection of the aft engine mount to determine if the center link
assembly is correctly installed, and follow-on actions if necessary.
The original NPRM proposed to require the same actions for airplanes on
which the engine has not been previously removed. The original NPRM
resulted from reports indicating that operators found that the center
link assembly for the aft engine mount was reversed on several
airplanes that had not had an engine removed since delivery. This new
action revises the original NPRM by expanding the applicability to
include Model 737-900ER airplanes. We are proposing this supplemental
NPRM to prevent increased structural loads on the aft engine mount,
which could result in failure of the aft engine mount and consequent
separation of the engine from the airplane.
ADDRESSES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by
February 25, 2011.
DATES: 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.
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 proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; e-mail me.boecom@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.
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: Alan Pohl, 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:
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-2008-1118;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-318-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.
Discussion
We proposed to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR part 39) with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD
(the ``original NPRM'') to supersede AD 2003-03-01, Amendment 39-13025
(68 FR 4367, January 29, 2003). The original NPRM applied to all Model
737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes. The original
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2008 (73 FR
64568). The original NPRM would have superseded an existing AD that
currently requires reviewing the airplane maintenance records to
determine whether an engine has been removed from the airplane since
the airplane was manufactured. For airplanes on which an engine has
been removed, the existing AD also requires an inspection of the aft
engine mount to determine if the center link assembly is correctly
installed, and follow-on actions if necessary. The original NPRM
proposed to require the same actions for airplanes on which the engine
has not been previously removed.
Actions Since Original NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the original NPRM, the manufacturer has informed us
that Model 737-900ER airplanes should be included in the applicability
of the supplemental NPRM. Model 737-900ER airplanes were not being
produced in May 2004 when Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004, of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, was issued. (Revision 3 was
referred to as an appropriate source of service information for
accomplishing the proposed actions in the original NPRM.) Following
production it was determined that the affected aft engine mount is
interchangeable with Model 737-900ER airplanes; however, those
airplanes
[[Page 1553]]
were inspected in production to ensure that the center link was
properly installed. Therefore, the requirements in the existing AD do
not apply to those airplanes. However, since we are including airplanes
on which the engines have been removed since production, we have added
Model 737-900ER airplanes to the applicability section of this
supplemental NPRM.
Comments
We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM.
Request for Exemption From AD Requirements
American Airlines (AA) asks that all operators that have performed
the actions specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462,
Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004, be exempt from repeating maintenance
actions in accordance with the original NPRM for a maintenance program
that is already in place and proven effective. AA states that it has
exceeded the requirements of AD 2003-03-01 by inspecting both engine
aft mount center link assemblies, regardless of the stipulation in the
existing AD, which limited the inspection requirement to engines
removed since the airplane date of manufacture. AA adds that the
inspections revealed that none of its installed or spare engines had
incorrectly installed aft mount center link assemblies. AA notes that
it is doing Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin at every engine shop visit, and has implemented maintenance
task documentation to verify the proper aft mount center link
configuration at every engine change. AA concludes that it has not
accepted delivery of any additional Model 737 airplanes since the
release of the existing AD and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004.
We acknowledge the commenter's request. Actions done in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3, before the
effective date of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the AD, as
indicated by the phrase ``unless the actions have already been done''
in paragraph (f) of this AD. We have made no change to the supplemental
NPRM in this regard.
Request To Change Paragraph (d)
Boeing asks that paragraph (d) of the original NPRM be changed to
indicate that the center link assembly for the aft engine mount was
reversed on one airplane that had not had an engine removed since
delivery. Boeing is aware of only one such report.
We do not agree with the commenter. We have received another report
indicating that some airplanes were found with the engine mounts
installed incorrectly on engines that had not been removed since
airplane delivery. Therefore, we have not changed paragraph (d) of the
NPRM (paragraph (e) of the supplemental NPRM).
Request To Change Paragraph (n)
Boeing asks that paragraph (n) of the original NPRM be changed to
clarify parts not affected by the ``Parts Installation'' paragraph by
including the permanent part marking on the center link assembly, as
specified in Part 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004. Boeing states
that this change would be equivalent to an existing alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) for AD 2003-03-01, requiring the installation of
marked engine mounts, as specified in the approved section of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004.
We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We have
changed paragraph (n) of the supplemental NPRM to include permanent
part marking on the center link assembly, as specified in Part 2 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462,
Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004.
Request To Clarify Requirements in Paragraph (n)
Japan Airlines (JAL) asks for clarification whether the requirement
in paragraph (n) of the original NPRM applies only to airplanes
affected by Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3,
dated May 20, 2004; or to all Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -
900 series airplanes. JAL states that if the requirement in paragraph
(n) applies to all Model 737NG (next generation) airplanes then a
change should be made to paragraph (n) of the supplemental NPRM for
clarification.
We acknowledge the commenter's concern and provide the following
clarification. As noted under ``Actions Since Original NPRM Was
Issued,'' we have added Model 737-900ER airplanes to the applicability
section of this supplemental NPRM; therefore, the requirement in
paragraph (n) of the supplemental NPRM applies to all Model 737NG
airplanes. No change to paragraph (n) of the supplemental NPRM is
necessary.
Request To Change Paragraphs (i) and (o)
CFM International states that the acronym CFMI is not accurate and
recommends using CFM International (CFM) throughout the NPRM.
We agree that the correct acronym should be used in the
supplemental NPRM and in future rulemaking. However, CFMI is not
referred to anywhere in this supplemental NPRM; therefore, no change is
necessary.
CFM also asks that paragraphs (i) and (o) of the original NPRM be
changed to include the Engine and Propeller Directorate, Engine
Certification Office (ECO), as an approved source for obtaining repair
procedures. CFM states that the engine mounting lugs and adjacent
engine turbine rear frame are under the responsibility of CFM as part
of the engine type certificate. CFM notes that it is in charge of
approval of repairs by delegation of both engine authorities, which are
the FAA and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); CFM is a joint
certification. CFM adds that for any part problems it contacts the ECO,
in Burlington, Massachusetts, and the EASA Engine Certification Office,
in Cologne, Germany. In light of this, CFM does not recommend the parts
be repaired under approval of a Boeing Representative.
We partially agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We
agree that the appropriate office for approval of certain repairs
specified in the original NPRM is the ECO. Paragraph (i) of the
original NPRM is a restatement of the requirements in AD 2003-03-01.
However, paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM does refer to paragraph
(o) of the supplemental NPRM for AMOC approval. We have changed
paragraph (o) of this supplemental NPRM to allow for certain AMOC
approvals by the ECO.
Explanation of Additional Changes Made to This Supplemental NPRM
We have changed this supplemental NPRM to identify the legal name
of the manufacturer as published in the most recent type certificate
data sheet for the affected airplane models.
We have added a new paragraph (d) to this supplemental NPRM to
provide the Air Transport Association (ATA) of America subject code 71:
Powerplant. This code is added to make this supplemental NPRM parallel
with other new AD actions. We have reidentified subsequent paragraphs
accordingly.
[[Page 1554]]
FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
Certain changes discussed above expand the scope of the original
NPRM; therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the
comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on
this supplemental NPRM.
Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance
Since issuance of the original NPRM, we have increased the labor
rate in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work hour to $85 per work
hour. The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this
increase in the specified hourly labor rate.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 1,846 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 854 airplanes of U.S. registry would
be affected by this proposed AD. There are no new requirements in this
proposed AD; however, we have expanded the applicability as noted under
``Actions Since Original NPRM Was Issued.'' The current costs for this
proposed AD are recalculated for the convenience of affected operators,
as follows:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per
Action Work hours Parts airplane Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance records review (required by AD 2003-03-01)...... 1 $0 $85 $72,590
Inspection for correct installation of center link assembly 1 0 85 72,590
(new proposed action)......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this supplemental NPRM and placed it in the AD docket. See
the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory
evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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 removing amendment 39-13025 (68 FR
4367, January 29, 2003) and adding the following new AD:
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2008-1118; Directorate Identifier
2007-NM-318-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February
25, 2011.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2003-03-01, Amendment 39-13025.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737 -600, -
700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, certificated in
any category.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 71:
Powerplant.
Unsafe Condition
(e) This AD results from reports indicating that operators found
that the center link assembly for the aft engine mount was reversed
on several airplanes that had not had an engine removed since
delivery. We are issuing this AD to prevent increased structural
loads on the aft engine mount, which could result in failure of the
aft engine mount and consequent separation of the engine from the
airplane.
Compliance
(f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2003-03-01
Review of Maintenance Records
(g) For Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes: Within 90 days after February 13, 2003 (the effective
date of AD 2003-03-01), review the airplane maintenance records to
determine whether either engine has been removed since the
airplane's date of manufacture. If neither engine has been removed
since the airplane's date of manufacture, no further action is
required by this paragraph.
Inspection of Engines That Have Been Removed to Determine if Center
Link Assembly is Installed Correctly
(h) For Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes on which any installed engine has been removed from the
airplane since the airplane's date of manufacture: Within 90 days
after February 13, 2003, do a one-time general visual inspection to
determine if the center link assembly of the aft engine mount is
installed correctly, in accordance with the
[[Page 1555]]
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
71A1462, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2002; or Revision 3, dated
May 20, 2004. If the center link assembly is installed correctly, no
further action is required by paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD for
that engine. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3.
Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection
is: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior area,
installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or
irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching
distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to
ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This
level of inspection is made under normally available lighting
conditions such as daylight, hanger lighting, flashlight, or
droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or
doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain
proximity to the area being checked.''
Follow-on and Corrective Actions
(i) For airplanes on which any center link assembly is found
installed incorrectly during any inspection required by paragraph
(h), (k), or (l) of this AD: Before further flight, do the actions
specified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2002; or
Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004; except that it is not necessary to
submit a report of findings to the airplane manufacturer. As of the
effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-71A1462, Revision 3.
(1) Remove the center link assembly and install it correctly.
(2) Perform a detailed inspection of the engine mounting lugs
and engine turbine rear frame for cracking, yielding, buckling, or
wear damage.
(3) Perform a detailed inspection of the hardware for the aft
engine mount; including the center link assembly, right link
assembly, aft mount hanger assembly, and link pins; for cracking,
yielding, buckling, or wear damage.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''
Repair
(j) If any cracking, yielding, buckling, or wear damage is found
during the inspections required by paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) of
this AD: Before further flight, replace the discrepant part with a
new or serviceable part, or repair in accordance with a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(o) of this AD.
New Requirements of This AD
Inspection of Engines That Have Not Been Removed To Determine if Center
Link Assembly Is Installed Correctly
(k) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004, on which any installed
engine has not been removed from the airplane since the airplane's
date of manufacture: Within 90 days after the effective date of this
AD, do a detailed inspection to determine if the center link
assembly of the aft engine mount is installed correctly, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004. If the
center link is installed correctly, no further action is required by
this paragraph for that engine.
Follow-on and Corrective Actions
(l) For airplanes on which any center link assembly is found
installed incorrectly during the inspection required by paragraph
(k) of this AD: Before further flight, do the follow-on and
corrective actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD.
Credit for Actions Done Using Previous Service Information
(m) Inspections and corrective actions done before the effective
date of this AD in accordance with a Boeing service bulletin listed
in Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding requirements of this AD.
Table 1--Previous Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing service bulletin Revision-- Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
737-71A1462......................... Original............................ August 29, 2002.
737-71A1462......................... 1................................... November 7, 2002.
737-71A1462......................... 2................................... May 29, 2003.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts Installation
(n) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install
an engine on any airplane identified in paragraph (c) of this AD
unless the actions required by paragraph (n)(1) or (n)(2) of this AD
are accomplished.
(1) The inspection is accomplished in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004, and the center link
assembly of the aft engine mount is found to be installed correctly.
(2) The hanger fitting and center link assembly are marked and
part marked in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-71A1462, Revision
3, dated May 20, 2004.
Note 3: For hanger fittings and center link assemblies marked
and part marked in production, as specified in Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
71A1462, Revision 3, dated May 20, 2004, the actions specified in
paragraph (n)(2) of this AD do not apply.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(o) The certification office specified in paragraph (o)(1) or
(o)(2) of this AD, as applicable, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(1) For the structure identified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD:
The Manager, Engine Certification Office (ECO), FAA. Send
information to ATTN: Antonio Cancelliere, Aerospace Engineer, ANE-
141, FAA, ECO, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-
5299; telephone 781-238-7751; fax 781-238-7199.
(2) For the structure identified in paragraph (i)(3) of this AD:
The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Send
information to ATTN: Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch,
ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-6450; fax (425) 917-6590.
Information may be e-mailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(3) 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 principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(4) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD if it is
approved by Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that 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.
[[Page 1556]]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 17, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-367 Filed 1-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P