Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 57541-57544 [2012-22889]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Inspections of Crown Skin Areas
At the applicable time specified in
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, dated October
21, 2011, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1312, Revision 1, dated
March 14, 2012, except as required by
paragraph (k) of this AD: Do an external
detailed inspection and an external nondestructive inspection (a medium frequency
eddy current (MFEC), magneto optic imager
(MOI), C-scan, or ultrasonic phased array
(UTPA) inspection) for cracking in the
fuselage skin along the chem-mill steps at
certain locations specified in, and in
accordance with, Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012.
Repeat the inspections thereafter at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(h) Inspections of Shear Wrinkle Areas
For Group 1 airplanes as identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, dated
October 21, 2011, as revised by Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, Revision 1,
dated March 14, 2012: At the applicable time
specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, dated
October 21, 2011, as revised by Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, Revision 1,
dated March 14, 2012, except as required by
paragraph (k) of this AD, do an external
detailed inspection and an external nondestructive inspection (MFEC, MOI, C-scan,
or UTPA) for cracking in the fuselage skin
along the chem-mill steps at certain shear
wrinkle locations specified in, and in
accordance with, Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012.
Repeat the inspections required by paragraph
(h) of this AD thereafter at the applicable
times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012.
(i) Repair
If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraphs (g) and (h)
of this AD, before further flight, repair the
cracking using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (m) of this AD. Accomplishing the
repair approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this
AD terminates the repetitive inspection
requirement for that area under the repair
only.
(j) Optional Terminating Modification
Modification of an inspection area
specified in paragraph (g) of this AD,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Sep 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
including doing an external detailed
inspection and an external non-destructive
inspection (MFEC, MOI, C-scan, or UTPA) for
cracking of the area to be modified, and a
high frequency eddy current inspection of all
existing holes for cracking, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, dated
October 21, 2011, as revised by Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, Revision 1,
dated March 14, 2012, terminates the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD for that area only. If any
cracking is found during any inspection
described by this paragraph, before further
flight, repair the cracking using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.
(k) Service Bulletin Exception
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1312,
dated October 21, 2011, as revised by Boeing
Service Bulletin 737–53–1312, Revision 1,
dated March 14, 2012, specifies compliance
times ‘‘after the original issue date of this
service bulletin.’’ However, this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance
times ‘‘after the effective date of this AD.’’
(l) Post-Modification Inspections
The post-modification inspections
specified in Tables 3 and 4 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012, are
not required by this AD.
Note 1 to paragraph (l) of this AD: The
damage tolerance inspections specified in
Tables 3 and 4 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, dated October 21, 2011, as
revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–
1312, Revision 1, dated March 14, 2012, may
be used in support of compliance with
section 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(c)(2)). The
actions specified in Part 5 of the
Accomplishment Instructions and
corresponding figures of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1312, dated October 21,
2011, as revised by Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1312, Revision 1, dated March 14,
2012, are not required by this AD.
(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57541
(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 the
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.
(n) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–
3356; phone: (425) 917–6447; fax: (425) 917–
6590; email: Wayne.Lockett@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–
544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680;
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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 4, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–22887 Filed 9–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0938; Directorate
Identifier 2011–NM–271–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 737–600
series airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by reports of early fatigue
cracks at chem-mill areas on the crown
skin panels. This proposed AD would
require repetitive inspections for
cracking of the fuselage skin at certain
locations at chem-mill areas, and repair
if necessary. We are proposing this AD
to detect and correct fatigue cracking of
the skin panel at the specified chem-
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
57542
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
NM–271–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.
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
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425)
917–6447; fax: (425) 917–6590; email:
Wayne.Lockett@faa.gov.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
mill step locations, which could result
in rapid decompression of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail
address above 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, WA 98124–2207;
telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1;
fax 206–766–5680; 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, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1309, dated October 20, 2011,
for Model 737–600 series airplanes.
That service bulletin describes, among
other things, procedures for doing
repetitive external detailed inspections
and external non-destructive
inspections (medium frequency eddy
current (MFEC), magneto optic imager
(MOI), C-scan, or ultrasonic phased
array (UTPA) inspections) of the
fuselage skin at specified locations
where chem-mill areas are adjacent to
non-chem-mill areas at antenna and
door bearstrap installations, and repairs
if necessary.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309,
dated October 20, 2011, also describes
procedures for installing modification
doublers, which involves an external
detailed inspection and an external nondestructive (MFEC, MOI, C-scan, or
UTPA) inspection for any cracking of
the area to be modified prior to the
doubler being placed on that area, a
high frequency eddy current inspection
of all existing holes for cracking, and
contacting Boeing if necessary. The
service bulletin also specifies that when
a certain modification is accomplished,
the repetitive inspection for the area
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposal. Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2012–0938; Directorate Identifier 2011–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Sep 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
Discussion
We received reports of early fatigue
cracks near chem-mill areas on the
crown skin panels of Model 737–300,
–400, and –500 series airplanes. The
cracks resulted from high stresses in the
areas where chem-mill pockets are
adjacent to non-chem-mill areas.
Although we have not received any
reports of this type of fuselage fatigue
cracks on Model 737–600, –700, –700C,
–800, –900, or –900ER series airplanes,
a full-scale fatigue test article was
inspected for skin cracks at similar
structural details and two chem-mill
cracks were found that occurred late in
the testing program. This condition, if
not detected and corrected, could result
in rapid decompression of the airplane.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
under the modification is no longer
necessary.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309,
dated October 20, 2011, specifies an
initial compliance time of 43,000 total
flight cycles, or 1,500 flight cycles after
the original issue date of that service
bulletin, whichever occurs later. That
service bulletin specifies a repetitive
interval not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles
or 2,100 flight cycles, depending on
inspection method.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information
and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of the same
type design.
Proposed AD Requirements
This proposed AD would require
accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described
previously, except as discussed under
‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the Service Information.’’
Similar Rulemaking
The crown skin panels on Model 737–
600 series airplanes are of a similar
design to those on Model 737–300,
–400, –500, –700, –700C, –800, –900,
and –900ER series airplanes. Therefore,
all these models may be subject to the
identified unsafe condition. We are
considering similar rulemaking for these
additional models.
Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the Service Information
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309,
dated October 20, 2011, specifies to
contact the manufacturer for disposition
of certain repair conditions, but this
proposed AD would require repairing
those conditions in one of the following
ways:
• In accordance with a method that
we approve; or
• Using data that meet the
certification basis of the airplane, and
that have been approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) whom
we have authorized to make those
findings.
Tables 2 and 3 in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1309, dated October
20, 2011, specify post-modification
inspections at certain chem-mill step
locations, which may be used in support
of compliance with section
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2)).
However, this NPRM does not propose
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Costs of Compliance
to require those post-modification
inspections. This difference has been
coordinated with Boeing.
57543
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 6 airplanes of U.S. registry.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Inspection of chem-mill
step locations.
37 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,145 per inspection cycle.
None ............
Cost per product
$3,145 per inspection
cycle.
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide cost
estimates for the on-condition actions
specified in this proposed AD.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Authority for This Rulemaking
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Sep 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 airworthiness
directive (AD):
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2012–0938; Directorate Identifier 2011–
NM–271–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November
2, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 737–600 series airplanes, as identified
in Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309,
dated October 20, 2011.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of early
fatigue cracks at chem-mill areas on the
crown skin panels. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin
panel at the specified chem-mill step
locations, which could result in rapid
decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Inspections
At the applicable time specified in
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Cost on U.S. operators
$18,870 per inspection
cycle.
Service Bulletin 737–53–1309, dated October
20, 2011, except as required by paragraph (j)
of this AD: Do an external detailed inspection
and an external non-destructive inspection (a
medium frequency eddy current (MFEC),
magneto optic imager (MOI), C-scan, or
ultrasonic phased array (UTPA) inspection)
for cracking in the fuselage skin along the
chem-mill steps at certain locations specified
in, and in accordance with, Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1309, dated October 20,
2011. Repeat the inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD thereafter at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1309, dated October 20, 2011.
(h) Repair
If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, before further flight, repair the cracking
using a method approved in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of
this AD. Accomplishing the repair approved
in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (l) of this AD terminates the
repetitive inspection requirement for that
area under the repair only.
(i) Optional Terminating Modification
Modification of an inspection area,
including an external detailed inspection and
an external non-destructive inspection
(MFEC, MOI, C-scan, or UTPA) for cracking
of the area to be modified and a high
frequency eddy current inspection of all
existing holes for cracking, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309, dated
October 20, 2011, terminates the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD for that area only. If any cracking is found
during any inspection described by this
paragraph, before further flight, repair the
cracking using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (l) of this AD.
(j) Service Bulletin Exception
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1309,
dated October 20, 2011, specifies compliance
times ‘‘after the original issue date of this
service bulletin.’’ However, this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance
times ‘‘after the effective date of this AD.’’
(k) Post-Modification Inspections
The post-modification inspections
specified in Tables 2 and 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1309, dated October 20, 2011, are not
required by this AD.
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
57544
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Note 1 to paragraph (k) of this AD: The
damage tolerance inspections specified in
Tables 2 and 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
737–53–1309, dated October 20, 2011, may
be used in support of compliance with
section 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(c)(2)). The
actions specified in Part 5 of the
Accomplishment Instructions and
corresponding figures of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737–53–1309, dated October 20,
2011, are not required by this AD.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
required by this AD if it is approved by the
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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–
3356; phone: (425) 917–6447; fax: (425) 917–
6590; email: Wayne.Lockett@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–
544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680;
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,
WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 4, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–22889 Filed 9–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Sep 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
of the two methods specified above. All
submissions must refer to the docket number
and title of the rule.
24 CFR Part 1000
No Facsimile Nominations. Facsimile
(FAX) nominations are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Nominations. All
properly submitted nominations and
communications submitted to HUD will
be available for public inspection and
copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
weekdays at the above address. Due to
security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, an advance
appointment to review the submissions
must be scheduled by calling the
Regulations Division at 202–708–3055
(this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals with speech or hearing
impairments may access this number
via TTY by calling the Federal
Information Relay Service at 800–877–
8339. Copies of all submissions are
available for inspection and
downloading at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rodger J. Boyd, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Native American
Programs, Office of Public and Indian
Housing, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW.,
Room 4126, Washington, DC 20410–
5000, telephone number, 202–401–7914
(this is not a toll-free number). Persons
with hearing or speech impediments
may access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Information
Relay Service at 800–877–8339 (this is
a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Docket No. FR–5650–N–02]
Native American Housing Assistance
and Self-Determination
Reauthorization Act of 1996: Request
for Nominations for Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee Membership
Office of Assistant Secretary for
Public and Indian Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of negotiated rulemaking.
AGENCY:
On July 3, 2012, HUD
published a Federal Register notice
announcing its intent to initiate
negotiated rulemaking for the purpose
of developing regulatory changes to the
funding formula for the Indian Housing
Block Grant program authorized by the
Native American Housing Assistance
and Self-Determination Act of 1996.
This document explains how persons
may be nominated to serve as members
on the negotiated rulemaking
committee.
SUMMARY:
Nominations for committee
membership are due on or before:
November 19, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit nominations for
membership on the negotiated
rulemaking committee. There are two
methods for nominations to be included
in the docket for this rule. All
submissions must refer to the above
docket number and title.
1. Submission of Nominations by
Mail. Nominations may be submitted by
mail to the Regulations Division, Office
of the General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW, Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
2. Electronic Submission of
Nominations. Interested persons may
submit nominations electronically
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages the electronic submission of
nominations. Electronic submission
allows interested persons the maximum
time to prepare and submit a
nomination, ensures timely receipt by
HUD, and enables HUD to immediately
make nominations available to the
public. Nominations submitted
electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by interested members of the
public. Individuals should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit nominations electronically.
DATES:
Note: To receive consideration,
nominations must be submitted through one
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I. Background
The Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act
of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.)
(NAHASDA) changed the way that
housing assistance is provided to Native
Americans. NAHASDA eliminated
several separate assistance programs
and replaced them with a single block
grant program, known as the Indian
Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program.
The regulations governing the IHBG
formula allocation are codified in
subpart D of part 1000 of HUD’s
regulations in title 24 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. In accordance with
section 106 of NAHASDA, HUD
developed the regulations with active
tribal participation using the procedures
of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of
1990 (5 U.S.C. 561–570).
Under the IHBG program, HUD makes
assistance available to eligible Indian
tribes for affordable housing activities.
The amount of assistance made
available to each Indian tribe is
determined using a formula that was
developed as part of the NAHASDA
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57541-57544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22889]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2012-0938; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-271-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company 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 The Boeing Company Model 737-600 series airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of early fatigue cracks at chem-
mill areas on the crown skin panels. This proposed AD would require
repetitive inspections for cracking of the fuselage skin at certain
locations at chem-mill areas, and repair if necessary. We are proposing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin panel at the
specified chem-
[[Page 57542]]
mill step locations, which could result in rapid decompression of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 2,
2012.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail address above 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, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; 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, WA. 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 (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-
6447; fax: (425) 917-6590; email: Wayne.Lockett@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0938;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-271-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 received reports of early fatigue cracks near chem-mill areas on
the crown skin panels of Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. The cracks resulted from high stresses in the areas where
chem-mill pockets are adjacent to non-chem-mill areas. Although we have
not received any reports of this type of fuselage fatigue cracks on
Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, or -900ER series airplanes, a
full-scale fatigue test article was inspected for skin cracks at
similar structural details and two chem-mill cracks were found that
occurred late in the testing program. This condition, if not detected
and corrected, could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20,
2011, for Model 737-600 series airplanes. That service bulletin
describes, among other things, procedures for doing repetitive external
detailed inspections and external non-destructive inspections (medium
frequency eddy current (MFEC), magneto optic imager (MOI), C-scan, or
ultrasonic phased array (UTPA) inspections) of the fuselage skin at
specified locations where chem-mill areas are adjacent to non-chem-mill
areas at antenna and door bearstrap installations, and repairs if
necessary.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011, also
describes procedures for installing modification doublers, which
involves an external detailed inspection and an external non-
destructive (MFEC, MOI, C-scan, or UTPA) inspection for any cracking of
the area to be modified prior to the doubler being placed on that area,
a high frequency eddy current inspection of all existing holes for
cracking, and contacting Boeing if necessary. The service bulletin also
specifies that when a certain modification is accomplished, the
repetitive inspection for the area under the modification is no longer
necessary.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011,
specifies an initial compliance time of 43,000 total flight cycles, or
1,500 flight cycles after the original issue date of that service
bulletin, whichever occurs later. That service bulletin specifies a
repetitive interval not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles or 2,100 flight
cycles, depending on inspection method.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Proposed AD Requirements
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Information.''
Similar Rulemaking
The crown skin panels on Model 737-600 series airplanes are of a
similar design to those on Model 737-300, -400, -500, -700, -700C, -
800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes. Therefore, all these models may
be subject to the identified unsafe condition. We are considering
similar rulemaking for these additional models.
Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for disposition of certain repair
conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those
conditions in one of the following ways:
In accordance with a method that we approve; or
Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.
Tables 2 and 3 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011, specify post-modification
inspections at certain chem-mill step locations, which may be used in
support of compliance with section 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or
129.109(c)(2)). However, this NPRM does not propose
[[Page 57543]]
to require those post-modification inspections. This difference has
been coordinated with Boeing.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 6 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection of chem-mill step 37 work-hours x $85 None.............. $3,145 per $18,870 per
locations. per hour = $3,145 per inspection cycle. inspection
inspection cycle. cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.
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 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),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) 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.
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
airworthiness directive (AD):
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2012-0938; Directorate Identifier
2011-NM-271-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November 2, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-600 series
airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309,
dated October 20, 2011.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of early fatigue cracks at chem-
mill areas on the crown skin panels. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin panel at the
specified chem-mill step locations, which could result in rapid
decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Inspections
At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated
October 20, 2011, except as required by paragraph (j) of this AD: Do
an external detailed inspection and an external non-destructive
inspection (a medium frequency eddy current (MFEC), magneto optic
imager (MOI), C-scan, or ultrasonic phased array (UTPA) inspection)
for cracking in the fuselage skin along the chem-mill steps at
certain locations specified in, and in accordance with, Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011. Repeat the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD thereafter at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011.
(h) Repair
If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, repair the cracking
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (l) of this AD. Accomplishing the repair approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD
terminates the repetitive inspection requirement for that area under
the repair only.
(i) Optional Terminating Modification
Modification of an inspection area, including an external
detailed inspection and an external non-destructive inspection
(MFEC, MOI, C-scan, or UTPA) for cracking of the area to be modified
and a high frequency eddy current inspection of all existing holes
for cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011,
terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of
this AD for that area only. If any cracking is found during any
inspection described by this paragraph, before further flight,
repair the cracking using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD.
(j) Service Bulletin Exception
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated October 20, 2011,
specifies compliance times ``after the original issue date of this
service bulletin.'' However, this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance times ``after the effective date of this AD.''
(k) Post-Modification Inspections
The post-modification inspections specified in Tables 2 and 3 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-
1309, dated October 20, 2011, are not required by this AD.
[[Page 57544]]
Note 1 to paragraph (k) of this AD: The damage tolerance
inspections specified in Tables 2 and 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated
October 20, 2011, may be used in support of compliance with section
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(c)(2)). The actions
specified in Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions and
corresponding figures of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1309, dated
October 20, 2011, are not required by this AD.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
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.
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-6447; fax: (425) 917-6590; email:
Wayne.Lockett@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; 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, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 4, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-22889 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P