Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 60285-60288 [2012-23790]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60285
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 192
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0424; Directorate
Identifier 2011–NM–004–AD; Amendment
39–17205; AD 2012–19–10]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
of The Boeing Company Model 777
airplanes. This AD was prompted by
heat damage and cracks at the pivot
joint location of the main landing gear
(MLG) inner cylinder/truck beam. This
AD requires repetitive lubrication of the
MLG pivot joints; repetitive detailed
inspections of the outer diameter
chrome on the center axles of the MLG
for chicken-wire cracks, corrosion, and
chrome plate distress; repetitive
magnetic particle inspections of the
outer diameter chrome on the center
axles of the MLG for cracks; and related
investigative and corrective actions if
necessary. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking in the MLG
center axle and shock strut inner
cylinder lugs (pivot joint), which could
result in fracture of the MLG pivot joint
components and consequent collapse of
the MLG.
DATES: This AD is effective November 7,
2012.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of November 7, 2012.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Oct 02, 2012
Jkt 229001
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207;
phone: 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 AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
Document Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melanie Violette, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6422;
fax: 425–917–6590; email:
Melanie.violette@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to the specified products. That
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on May 1, 2012 (77 FR 25647).
That NPRM proposed to require
repetitive lubrication of the MLG pivot
joints; repetitive detailed inspections of
the outer diameter chrome on the center
axles of the MLG for chicken-wire
cracks, corrosion, and chrome plate
distress; repetitive magnetic particle
inspections of the outer diameter
chrome on the center axles of the MLG
for cracks; and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comments
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
received on the proposal (77 FR 24647,
May 1, 2012), and the FAA’s response
to each comment.
Support for the NPRM (77 FR 25647,
May 1, 2012)
United Airlines agrees with the intent
of the NPRM (77 FR 24647, May 1,
2012).
Requests to Extend Compliance Time
FedEx and Air France requested that
we revise the compliance time for the
inspection specified in paragraph (g) of
the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012)
to coincide with the time between
overhaul (TBO) of the MLG for their
respective fleets. The applicable
compliance time specified in the NPRM
for the FedEx fleet would be 3,000 days;
the TBO for the FedEx fleet is 3,650
days. The applicable compliance time
specified in the NPRM for the Air
France fleet would be 3,750 days; the
TBO for the Air France fleet is 4,015
days. FedEx noted that, of the 28
cracked axles found during overhaul,
none was fractured.
We disagree to revise the compliance
time. In developing an appropriate
compliance time for this AD, we
considered not only the safety
implications, but the manufacturer’s
recommendations and the practical
aspect of accomplishing the required
actions within an interval of time that
corresponds to typical scheduled
maintenance for affected operators.
Under the provisions of paragraph (l) of
this final rule, however, we might
consider requests for adjustments to the
compliance time if data is submitted to
substantiate that such an adjustment
would provide an acceptable level of
safety. We have not changed the final
rule regarding this issue.
Requests for Alternative Provisions
Boeing, FedEx, and All Nippon
Airways requested that we revise
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647,
May 1, 2012) to include an additional
exception to the service information.
The commenters requested that we
allow the use of MIL–PRF–32014 grease
as an alternative to the Royco 11MS
grease for the lubrications specified in
paragraph (g) of the NPRM. Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777–32–0082, dated
December 9, 2010 (referenced in the
NPRM as the appropriate source of
service information for this lubrication),
replaces the Royco 11MS grease with
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
60286
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
MIL–PRF–32014 grease for lubricating
and installing the MLG pivot joint
components.
Boeing asserted that MIL–PRF–32014
grease provides the same lubricating
properties as Royco 11MS grease.
Boeing and FedEx noted that use of
MIL–PRF–32014 grease across the fleet
will avoid intermixing grease types and
prevent the need to track which grease
has been applied on each airplane.
FedEx reported it has already
standardized to MIL–PRF–32014 grease
to ensure that there is no intermixing of
greases. Boeing reported that Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 777–32A0082,
dated December 9, 2010, will be revised
to allow use of MIL–PRF–32014 grease
as an optional grease type, but this
revision will not be available when the
AD is issued.
We agree with the request. Both
greases have the same lubricating
properties and will work with the
original and new bushing materials. We
have added new paragraph (i)(2) in this
final rule (and redesignated paragraph
(i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1,
2012) as paragraph (i)(1) of this final
rule) to allow the use of either MIL–
PRF–32014 or Royco 11MS grease for
the lubrications required by paragraph
(g) of this AD.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
Requests To Include Terminating
Action
FedEx, Air France, United Airlines,
and All Nippon Airways requested that
we revise paragraph (j) of the NPRM (77
FR 25647, May 1, 2012) to provide
terminating action for the repetitive
inspections specified in paragraph (g) of
the NPRM. FedEx stated that airplanes
after incorporation of Boeing Service
Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated April 14,
2011, have the same configuration as
new production airplanes. Air France
stated that incorporation of Boeing
Service Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated
April 14, 2011, and the incorporation of
Item 32–CMR–01 of Section 9,
Airworthiness Limitations of the Boeing
777 Maintenance Planning Document
(MPD) into the airplane maintenance
program terminates the repetitive
inspections specified in paragraph (g) of
the NPRM by modifying the MLG and
including the repetitive lubrication in
the airplane maintenance program.
We agree that accomplishment of the
actions specified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated April 14,
2011, involves a final inspection,
modification to the MLG, and
modification of the airplane
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Oct 02, 2012
Jkt 229001
maintenance program to terminate the
repetitive inspections of paragraph (g) of
this AD. Paragraph (j)(2) of this AD
provides the optional terminating
action. It is, therefore, unnecessary to
revise that paragraph. We have made no
changes to the AD in this regard.
Request To Clarify Specific
Terminating Actions
Air France noted that the optional
terminating action specified in
paragraph (j)(2) of the NPRM (77 FR
25647, May 1, 2012) does not specify
the inner cylinder assembly upgrade
with bushing replacement, as specified
in Part 2, Option 2, of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated
April 14, 2011.
We agree to revise the AD. Instead of
identifying every action, however, we
have revised paragraph (j)(2) in this
final rule to require all applicable
actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated
April 14, 2011.
Request for Warranty Support
Air France expressed concern
regarding the cost of the inspection and
modification program, with no industry
support from Boeing. Air France noted
that an unsafe condition due to normal
operation would be considered a major
design defect. Air France requested that
Boeing propose industry support to
cover the maintenance burden of the
design defect.
Air France did not request any change
to the AD. Further, we do not control
warranty coverage for affected
individuals. We have, therefore, not
changed the AD regarding the estimated
costs.
Request To Extend Compliance Time
for On-Condition Action
Air France reported that it found the
service information instructions to be
complex, with a high risk of grounding
airplanes due to on-condition findings
and a lack of Boeing support regarding
the inner cylinder assembly. Air France
requested that Boeing add service
extension limits in case of on-condition
findings.
Air France did not specifically request
a change to the AD. We cannot allow
continued operation if cracking is
detected, due to the safety implications
and consequences of such cracking. We
have not changed the final rule
regarding this issue.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Request To Clarify On-Condition
Actions
Boeing requested that we revise the
NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) to
clarify the related investigative and
corrective actions for the inner cylinder.
Boeing noted minor differences between
the wording of the NPRM and the
wording of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777–32A0082, dated December
9, 2010. Boeing requested that we revise
the NPRM to more closely align with the
Accomplishment Instructions of that
service bulletin.
We partially agree. We agree that
Boeing’s proposed changes are
consistent with the procedures provided
in the service information specified in
the preamble of the NPRM (77 FR
24647, May 1, 2012). But this level of
detail is not provided in the regulatory
language of this AD. Instead, the AD
refers to the service information for the
required procedures. It is not necessary
to revise the final rule to account for
this request.
Request To Correct Service Bulletin
Reference
Boeing noted an incorrect reference to
service information specified in the
NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012).
Where the NPRM referred to ‘‘Boeing
Service Bulletin 777–32A0085,’’ the
correct service bulletin number is ‘‘777–
32–0085.’’ We have revised paragraph
(j)(2) of this AD accordingly.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data,
considered the comments received, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM (77 FR
25647, May 1, 2012) for correcting the
unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 25647,
May 1, 2012).
We also determined that these
changes will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the
scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 160
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this AD:
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
60287
ESTIMATED COSTS
Parts
cost
Action
Labor cost
Lubrication of MLG pivot joints .................
4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 per
lubrication cycle.
39 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,315
per inspection cycle.
6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 per
inspection cycle.
Detailed and magnetic particle inspections.
Inner cylinder lug bore inspection .............
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary repairs or replacements
that would be required based on the
results of the inspections. We have no
way of determining the number of
Cost per product
$0
0
0
Cost on U.S.
operators
$340 per lubrication
cycle.
$3,315 per inspection cycle.
$510 per inspection
cycle.
$54,400 per lubrication cycle.
$530,400 per inspection cycle.
$81,600 per inspection cycle.
aircraft that might need these repairs or
replacements.
ON-CONDITION COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Replacing center axle ..............................................
Refinishing the lug bore and faces, and installing
new bushings.
Replacing the inner cylinder assembly cylinder assembly.
25 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,125 .................
12 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,020 .................
$54,030 ..............
Up to $3,526 ......
$56,155.
Up to $4,546.
46 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,910 .................
Up to $254,847 ..
Up to $258,757.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
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
This AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Oct 02, 2012
Jkt 229001
(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.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2012–19–10 The Boeing Company:
Amendment 39–17205; Docket No.
FAA–2012–0424; Directorate Identifier
2011–NM–004–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective November 7, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 777–200, –200LR, –300, –300ER, and
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Cost per product
777F series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777–32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 32, Landing Gear.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by heat damage
and cracks at the pivot joint location of the
main landing gear (MLG) cylinder/truck
beam. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking in the MLG center axle and
shock strut inner cylinder lugs (pivot joint),
which could result in fracture of the MLG
pivot joint components and consequent
collapse of the MLG.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Repetitive Lubrication and Inspections
At the applicable compliance times
specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–32A0082,
dated December 9, 2010, except as provided
by paragraph (i) of this AD: Lubricate the
MLG pivot joints; do a detailed inspection of
the outer diameter chrome on the center
axles of the MLG for chicken-wire cracks,
corrosion, and chrome plate distress; do a
magnetic particle inspection of the outer
diameter chrome on the center axles of the
MLG for cracks; and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions; in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777–32A0082, dated December 9, 2010,
except as provided by paragraph (i)(2) of this
AD. Repeat the lubrication and inspections
thereafter at the applicable interval specified
in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
60288
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Alert Service Bulletin 777–32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before
further flight.
(h) Definition
For the purposes of this AD, chicken-wire
cracks are defined as cracks that occur when
stress created in the chrome deposit during
plating are relieved. The cracks are evident
in the deposited chrome when viewed from
a perpendicular plane as a pattern similar to
chicken wire. Crack size can vary with
plating conditions.
(i) Exceptions to Service Information
(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777–32A0082, dated December 9, 2010,
specifies a compliance time after the original
issue date of that service bulletin, this AD
requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777–32A0082, dated December 9, 2010,
specifies use of Royco 11MS grease for the
lubrication required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, this AD also allows use of MIL–PRF–
32014 grease.
(j) Optional Actions for Compliance With
Paragraph (g) of This AD
(1) Doing the detailed and magnetic
particle inspections in accordance with Part
2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
777–32–0080, dated July 10, 2008; or Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–32–
0080, Revision 1, dated April 16, 2009; is
considered acceptable for compliance with
the inspections of the center axle of the MLG
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
(2) Accomplishment of all applicable
actions specified in and in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 777–32–0085, dated April
14, 2011, is considered acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of
paragraph (g) of this AD.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
(k) Special Flight Permit
Special flight permits may be issued in
accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to
a location where the airplane can be
modified (if the operator elects to do so), if
the flight is operated as a non-revenue flight.
(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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Oct 02, 2012
Jkt 229001
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
For more information about this AD,
contact Melanie Violette, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S,
FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6422; fax: 425–
917–6590; email: Melanie.violette@faa.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use the following service
information to do the actions required by this
AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–
32A0082, dated December 9, 2010.
(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 777–32–0085,
dated April 14, 2011.
(iii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777–32–0080, dated July 10, 2008.
(iv) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 777–32–0080, Revision 1, dated
April 16, 2009.
(3) 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; phone: 206–544–
5000, extension 1; fax: 206–766–5680;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) 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.
(5) You may also review copies of the
service information that is incorporated by
reference at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/
cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 19, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–23790 Filed 10–2–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–0060; Directorate
Identifier 2012–NE–02–AD; Amendment 39–
17123; AD 2012–14–09]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pratt &
Whitney (P&W) Division Turbofan
Engines
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
P&W PW4000 series turbofan engines.
This AD was prompted by reports of 3rd
and 4th stage vane fractures in the lowpressure turbine (LPT) of certain
PW4000–94’’ and PW4000–100’’
turbofan engines. This AD requires
dimensional inspections of LPT 3rd
stage vanes and the rear turbine case,
inspection of LPT 4th stage vanes at the
next LPT overhaul and removal of vanes
with non-conforming airfoil fillet radii
and vanes with more than one strip and
recoat repair. This AD also requires
disassembly and reassembly of the 2nd
stage high-pressure turbine (HPT) rotor
and 3rd stage LPT rotor at the next HPT
and LPT overhauls. We are issuing this
AD to prevent 3rd and 4th stage vane
fractures in the LPT, damage to the LPT
rotor, uncontained engine failure, and
damage to the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective November 7,
2012.
ADDRESSES: For more information about
this AD, contact James Gray, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA; phone: 781–238–7742;
fax: 781–238–7199; email:
james.e.gray@faa.gov.
SUMMARY:
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 AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
Document Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60285-60288]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23790]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 3, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 60285]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2012-0424; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-004-AD;
Amendment 39-17205; AD 2012-19-10]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
of The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by heat
damage and cracks at the pivot joint location of the main landing gear
(MLG) inner cylinder/truck beam. This AD requires repetitive
lubrication of the MLG pivot joints; repetitive detailed inspections of
the outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-
wire cracks, corrosion, and chrome plate distress; repetitive magnetic
particle inspections of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles
of the MLG for cracks; and related investigative and corrective actions
if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in
the MLG center axle and shock strut inner cylinder lugs (pivot joint),
which could result in fracture of the MLG pivot joint components and
consequent collapse of the MLG.
DATES: This AD is effective November 7, 2012.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 7,
2012.
ADDRESSES: 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; phone: 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melanie Violette, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6422; fax: 425-917-6590; email: Melanie.violette@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 1, 2012 (77 FR
25647). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive lubrication of the MLG
pivot joints; repetitive detailed inspections of the outer diameter
chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-wire cracks,
corrosion, and chrome plate distress; repetitive magnetic particle
inspections of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG
for cracks; and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(77 FR 24647, May 1, 2012), and the FAA's response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012)
United Airlines agrees with the intent of the NPRM (77 FR 24647,
May 1, 2012).
Requests to Extend Compliance Time
FedEx and Air France requested that we revise the compliance time
for the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647,
May 1, 2012) to coincide with the time between overhaul (TBO) of the
MLG for their respective fleets. The applicable compliance time
specified in the NPRM for the FedEx fleet would be 3,000 days; the TBO
for the FedEx fleet is 3,650 days. The applicable compliance time
specified in the NPRM for the Air France fleet would be 3,750 days; the
TBO for the Air France fleet is 4,015 days. FedEx noted that, of the 28
cracked axles found during overhaul, none was fractured.
We disagree to revise the compliance time. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered not only the
safety implications, but the manufacturer's recommendations and the
practical aspect of accomplishing the required actions within an
interval of time that corresponds to typical scheduled maintenance for
affected operators. Under the provisions of paragraph (l) of this final
rule, however, we might consider requests for adjustments to the
compliance time if data is submitted to substantiate that such an
adjustment would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not
changed the final rule regarding this issue.
Requests for Alternative Provisions
Boeing, FedEx, and All Nippon Airways requested that we revise
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) to include an
additional exception to the service information. The commenters
requested that we allow the use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease as an
alternative to the Royco 11MS grease for the lubrications specified in
paragraph (g) of the NPRM. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32-0082,
dated December 9, 2010 (referenced in the NPRM as the appropriate
source of service information for this lubrication), replaces the Royco
11MS grease with
[[Page 60286]]
MIL-PRF-32014 grease for lubricating and installing the MLG pivot joint
components.
Boeing asserted that MIL-PRF-32014 grease provides the same
lubricating properties as Royco 11MS grease. Boeing and FedEx noted
that use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease across the fleet will avoid
intermixing grease types and prevent the need to track which grease has
been applied on each airplane. FedEx reported it has already
standardized to MIL-PRF-32014 grease to ensure that there is no
intermixing of greases. Boeing reported that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9, 2010, will be revised to allow
use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease as an optional grease type, but this
revision will not be available when the AD is issued.
We agree with the request. Both greases have the same lubricating
properties and will work with the original and new bushing materials.
We have added new paragraph (i)(2) in this final rule (and redesignated
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) as paragraph
(i)(1) of this final rule) to allow the use of either MIL-PRF-32014 or
Royco 11MS grease for the lubrications required by paragraph (g) of
this AD.
Requests To Include Terminating Action
FedEx, Air France, United Airlines, and All Nippon Airways
requested that we revise paragraph (j) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1,
2012) to provide terminating action for the repetitive inspections
specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM. FedEx stated that airplanes
after incorporation of Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April
14, 2011, have the same configuration as new production airplanes. Air
France stated that incorporation of Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-
0085, dated April 14, 2011, and the incorporation of Item 32-CMR-01 of
Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations of the Boeing 777 Maintenance
Planning Document (MPD) into the airplane maintenance program
terminates the repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (g) of the
NPRM by modifying the MLG and including the repetitive lubrication in
the airplane maintenance program.
We agree that accomplishment of the actions specified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011, involves a final
inspection, modification to the MLG, and modification of the airplane
maintenance program to terminate the repetitive inspections of
paragraph (g) of this AD. Paragraph (j)(2) of this AD provides the
optional terminating action. It is, therefore, unnecessary to revise
that paragraph. We have made no changes to the AD in this regard.
Request To Clarify Specific Terminating Actions
Air France noted that the optional terminating action specified in
paragraph (j)(2) of the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) does not
specify the inner cylinder assembly upgrade with bushing replacement,
as specified in Part 2, Option 2, of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.
We agree to revise the AD. Instead of identifying every action,
however, we have revised paragraph (j)(2) in this final rule to require
all applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.
Request for Warranty Support
Air France expressed concern regarding the cost of the inspection
and modification program, with no industry support from Boeing. Air
France noted that an unsafe condition due to normal operation would be
considered a major design defect. Air France requested that Boeing
propose industry support to cover the maintenance burden of the design
defect.
Air France did not request any change to the AD. Further, we do not
control warranty coverage for affected individuals. We have, therefore,
not changed the AD regarding the estimated costs.
Request To Extend Compliance Time for On-Condition Action
Air France reported that it found the service information
instructions to be complex, with a high risk of grounding airplanes due
to on-condition findings and a lack of Boeing support regarding the
inner cylinder assembly. Air France requested that Boeing add service
extension limits in case of on-condition findings.
Air France did not specifically request a change to the AD. We
cannot allow continued operation if cracking is detected, due to the
safety implications and consequences of such cracking. We have not
changed the final rule regarding this issue.
Request To Clarify On-Condition Actions
Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012)
to clarify the related investigative and corrective actions for the
inner cylinder. Boeing noted minor differences between the wording of
the NPRM and the wording of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082,
dated December 9, 2010. Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM to
more closely align with the Accomplishment Instructions of that service
bulletin.
We partially agree. We agree that Boeing's proposed changes are
consistent with the procedures provided in the service information
specified in the preamble of the NPRM (77 FR 24647, May 1, 2012). But
this level of detail is not provided in the regulatory language of this
AD. Instead, the AD refers to the service information for the required
procedures. It is not necessary to revise the final rule to account for
this request.
Request To Correct Service Bulletin Reference
Boeing noted an incorrect reference to service information
specified in the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012). Where the NPRM
referred to ``Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32A0085,'' the correct
service bulletin number is ``777-32-0085.'' We have revised paragraph
(j)(2) of this AD accordingly.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
[Agr]re consistent with the intent that was proposed in
the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 25647, May 1, 2012).
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 160 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
[[Page 60287]]
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lubrication of MLG pivot joints... 4 work-hours x $85 $0 $340 per lubrication $54,400 per
per hour = $340 per cycle. lubrication cycle.
lubrication cycle.
Detailed and magnetic particle 39 work-hours x $85 0 $3,315 per $530,400 per
inspections. per hour = $3,315 inspection cycle. inspection cycle.
per inspection cycle.
Inner cylinder lug bore inspection 6 work-hours x $85 0 $510 per inspection $81,600 per
per hour = $510 per cycle. inspection cycle.
inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs or
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these repairs or replacements.
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacing center axle............. 25 work-hours x $85 $54,030................... $56,155.
per hour = $2,125.
Refinishing the lug bore and 12 work-hours x $85 Up to $3,526.............. Up to $4,546.
faces, and installing new per hour = $1,020.
bushings.
Replacing the inner cylinder 46 work-hours x $85 Up to $254,847............ Up to $258,757.
assembly cylinder assembly. per hour = $3,910.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(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.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2012-19-10 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17205; Docket No. FAA-
2012-0424; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-004-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective November 7, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -
300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
32A0082, dated December 9, 2010.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by heat damage and cracks at the pivot
joint location of the main landing gear (MLG) cylinder/truck beam.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the MLG
center axle and shock strut inner cylinder lugs (pivot joint), which
could result in fracture of the MLG pivot joint components and
consequent collapse of the MLG.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Repetitive Lubrication and Inspections
At the applicable compliance times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD:
Lubricate the MLG pivot joints; do a detailed inspection of the
outer diameter chrome on the center axles of the MLG for chicken-
wire cracks, corrosion, and chrome plate distress; do a magnetic
particle inspection of the outer diameter chrome on the center axles
of the MLG for cracks; and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, except as provided by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
Repeat the lubrication and inspections thereafter at the applicable
interval specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
[[Page 60288]]
Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9, 2010. Do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions before
further flight.
(h) Definition
For the purposes of this AD, chicken-wire cracks are defined as
cracks that occur when stress created in the chrome deposit during
plating are relieved. The cracks are evident in the deposited chrome
when viewed from a perpendicular plane as a pattern similar to
chicken wire. Crack size can vary with plating conditions.
(i) Exceptions to Service Information
(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, specifies a compliance time after the original
issue date of that service bulletin, this AD requires compliance
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated
December 9, 2010, specifies use of Royco 11MS grease for the
lubrication required by paragraph (g) of this AD, this AD also
allows use of MIL-PRF-32014 grease.
(j) Optional Actions for Compliance With Paragraph (g) of This AD
(1) Doing the detailed and magnetic particle inspections in
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080, dated July 10, 2008;
or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080, Revision
1, dated April 16, 2009; is considered acceptable for compliance
with the inspections of the center axle of the MLG required by
paragraph (g) of this AD.
(2) Accomplishment of all applicable actions specified in and in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011, is considered acceptable
for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(k) Special Flight Permit
Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections
21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the airplane
can be modified (if the operator elects to do so), if the flight is
operated as a non-revenue flight.
(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
For more information about this AD, contact Melanie Violette,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone: 425-917-6422; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
Melanie.violette@faa.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-32A0082, dated December 9,
2010.
(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 777-32-0085, dated April 14, 2011.
(iii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080,
dated July 10, 2008.
(iv) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 777-32-0080,
Revision 1, dated April 16, 2009.
(3) 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; phone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) 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.
(5) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 19, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-23790 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
