Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 61550-61559 [2012-24805]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
61550
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a report of an
erroneous activation of the control column
shaker during takeoff. We are issuing this AD
to prevent erroneous activation of the control
column shaker during takeoff, which could
result in runway overrun, failure to clear
terrain or obstacles after takeoff, or reduced
controllability of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(g) Inspection
Within 36 months after the effective date
of this AD: Do a general visual inspection of
the left and right angle of attack (AOA)
sensor as applicable, to determine if a certain
AOA sensor with a paddle type vane is
installed, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service information specified in
paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 727–34–0245, dated June 4, 2008
(for Model 727 airplanes).
(2) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737–34–2102, dated June 5, 2008
(for Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series
airplanes).
(3) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747–34–2925, dated June 4, 2008
(for Model 747–100, –100B, –100B SUD,
–200B, –200C, –200F, –300, –400, –400D,
–400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes).
(h) Operational Test and Replacement
If, during the inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, an AOA sensor with
a paddle type vane is installed: Before further
flight, do an operational test of the stall
warning system, in accordance with Part 2 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service information specified in
paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) For group 2 airplanes identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
747–34–2925, dated June 4, 2008: If you
cannot get the values given in the table
specified in Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747–34–2925, dated June 4,
2008, before further flight, replace the AOA
sensor, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747–34–
2925, dated June 4, 2008.
(2) For all airplanes, except those
identified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD: If
the AOA sensor fails to activate the control
column shaker in the operational test, replace
the AOA sensor with a new AOA sensor, in
accordance with Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service information specified in
paragraph (h)(2)(i), (h)(2)(ii), or (h)(2)(iii) of
this AD.
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 727–34–0245, dated June 4, 2008
(for Model 727 airplanes).
(ii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 737–34–2102, dated June 5, 2008
(for Model 737–100, –200, and –200C series
airplanes).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
(iii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747–34–2925, dated June 4, 2008
(for Model 747–100, –100B, –100B SUD,
–200B, –200C, –200F, –300, –400, –400D,
–400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes).
(i) 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.
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Ray Mei, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–
3356; phone: (425) 917–6467; fax: (425) 917–
6590; email: raymont.mei@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, Washington 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 26, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–24807 Filed 10–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2011–0155; Directorate
Identifier 2009–NM–141–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
ACTION:
We are revising an earlier
proposed airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Model 737–200, –200C, –300,
–400, and –500 series airplanes. That
proposed AD would have superseded an
existing AD that applies to certain The
Boeing Company Model 737–200,
–200C, –300, –400, and –500 series
airplanes. The existing AD currently
requires repetitive inspections to find
fatigue cracking of certain upper and
lower skin panels of the fuselage, and
follow-on and corrective actions if
necessary. The existing AD also
includes a terminating action for the
repetitive inspections of certain
modified or repaired areas only. That
NPRM proposed to add new inspections
for cracking of the fuselage skin along
certain chem-milled lines, and
corrective actions if necessary. That
NPRM also proposed to reduce certain
thresholds and intervals required by the
existing AD. This action revises that
NPRM by reducing the proposed
repetitive inspection intervals. We are
proposing this supplemental NPRM to
detect and correct fatigue cracking of the
skin panels, which could result in
sudden fracture and failure of the skin
panels of the fuselage, and consequent
rapid decompression of the airplane.
Since these actions impose an
additional burden over that proposed in
the previous NPRM, we are reopening
the comment period to allow the public
the chance to comment on these
proposed changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this supplemental NPRM by November
26, 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: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 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.
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:
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2011–0155; Directorate Identifier
2009–NM–141–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 issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to certain Model 737–200, –200C,
–300, –400, and –500 series airplanes.
That NPRM published in the Federal
Register on March 8, 2011 (76 FR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
12619). That NPRM proposed to
supersede AD 2004–18–06, Amendment
39–13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8,
2004), to continue to require repetitive
inspections to find fatigue cracking of
certain upper and lower skin panels of
the fuselage, and follow-on and
corrective actions if necessary. That
NPRM also included a terminating
action for the repetitive inspections of
certain modified or repaired areas only.
That NPRM proposed to add new
inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin along certain chem-milled lines,
and corrective actions if necessary. That
NPRM also proposed to reduce certain
thresholds and intervals required by the
existing AD. That NPRM resulted from
reports indicating new findings of
cracks were found along the edges of the
chem-milled pockets in the upper skin
at certain stringers.
Actions Since Previous NPRM Was
Issued
Since we issued the previous NPRM
(76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011), extensive
continued evaluation of the chem-mill
step cracking has been done, which
resulted in a determination that the
repetitive inspection intervals and the
compliance time for the inspections of
the crown area and other known areas
of fuselage skin cracking must be
reduced in order to adequately address
the identified unsafe condition.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
comment on the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011). The following
presents the comments received on the
previous NPRM and the FAA’s response
to each comment.
Supportive Comments
The National Transportation Safety
Board and Jonathan W. Ketron support
the content of the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011).
Request To Supersede AD 2003–14–06,
Amendment 39–13225 (68 FR 42956,
July 21, 2003)
Alaska Airlines (ASA) asked that we
change the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) to also supersede
AD 2003–14–06, Amendment 39–13225
(68 FR 42956, July 21, 2003). ASA
explained that paragraph (g) of AD
2004–18–06, Amendment 39–13784 (69
FR 54206, September 8, 2004), allows
accomplishing one-time internal
inspections in accordance with
paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of AD
2003–14–06 in order to terminate the
repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (a) of AD 2004–18–06
(paragraph (g) of the previous NPRM).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61551
ASA added that the previous NPRM
restates these required external
inspections. ASA noted that AD 2003–
14–06 was initially released to address
inadequate phosphoric anodizing of the
skin panels, leading to disbonding of
internal doublers. ASA stated further
that subsequent events showed that
fatigue cracking of chem-milled skins
cannot be solely attributed to improper
anodizing or disbonded doublers. ASA
added that the previous NPRM does not
clearly address the requirements in AD
2003–14–06, which will remain in effect
until after the final rule is released.
We do not agree to supersede AD
2003–14–06, Amendment 39–13255 (68
FR 42956, July 21, 2003). The one-time
internal inspection in that AD is
required for safety and is not related to
the chem-milled step cracking
addressed by this supplemental NPRM.
In addition, the one-time inspection
required by AD 2003–14–06 only
terminates the external eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (a) of
AD 2004–18–06, Amendment 39–13784
(69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004),
which is restated in paragraph (g) of this
supplemental NPRM. All external
detailed inspections are still required by
paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM. We have made no change to this
supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request for Clarification of Language in
Paragraphs (g) and (h) of the Previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011)
Boeing requested that paragraphs (g)
and (h) of the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) be revised to
better distinguish between existing and
new requirements. Specifically, Boeing
stated that the language used in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of the previous
NPRM could be interpreted to mean that
using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, is optional for accomplishing the
required actions at the inspection
thresholds and intervals required by AD
2004–18–06, Amendment 39–13784 (69
FR 54206, September 8, 2004). Boeing
requested clarification of the wording to
indicate that the inspection, methods,
thresholds, and ‘‘repeats’’ in accordance
with Revision 3 of this service bulletin
are now required.
We agree that clarification is
necessary. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, can be used for accomplishing the
required actions in AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004). However, it is not
required to use Revision 3 of this service
bulletin to accomplish the requirements
of the existing AD; rather, it is required
to use that revision for the new actions
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
61552
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
required by paragraphs (p), (q), and (s)
of this supplemental NPRM.
Consequently, we have revised
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this
supplemental NPRM to remove the
sentence beginning ‘‘As of the effective
date of this AD * * *’’ to clarify that
using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, is not required for accomplishing
the requirements of the existing AD.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Request To Change ‘‘Internal’’ Detailed
Inspection to ‘‘External’’ Detailed
Inspection
Boeing asked that we change the
‘‘internal’’ detailed inspection specified
in paragraph (h)(1) of the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) to
an ‘‘external’’ detailed inspection.
Boeing stated that this is a typographical
error because it is a restatement of the
requirements of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004).
We agree that the reference to an
‘‘internal’’ detailed inspection is a
typographical error. We have changed
paragraph (h)(1) of this supplemental
NPRM to specify an ‘‘external’’ detailed
inspection.
Request To Remove a Paragraph
Reference
Boeing asked that we remove the
reference to ‘‘paragraph (m)’’ in the
third sentence of paragraph (g) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011). Boeing stated that paragraph (m)
of the previous NPRM addresses
disbond inspections, which should not
terminate the detailed or eddy current
inspection, as specified.
We find that clarification is necessary.
Paragraph (m) of this supplemental
NPRM states that accomplishing the
optional terminating action ‘‘before the
effective date of this AD’’ terminates the
eddy current inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM. In addition, paragraph (m) of
this supplemental NPRM states that the
detailed inspections specified in
paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM are not terminated. Paragraph
(m) of this supplemental NPRM states
further that, ‘‘as of the effective date of
this AD,’’ the optional terminating
action does not terminate the repetitive
eddy current inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM.
We find it necessary to retain the
reference to paragraph (m) of this
supplemental NPRM in paragraph (g) to
indicate that accomplishing the
terminating action in paragraph (m) of
this supplemental NPRM ‘‘before the
effective date of this AD’’ terminates the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
eddy current inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM. However, we have revised
paragraph (m) of this supplemental
NPRM to indicate that neither detailed
nor eddy current inspections can be
terminated by accomplishing the
optional terminating action ‘‘on or after
the effective date of this AD.’’
Request To Clarify Terminating Action
Boeing asked that the preventative
modification language specified in
paragraph (w) of the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be clarified to
specify that doing the modification
terminates only the repetitive
inspections of the chem-milled steps
common to stringer 12. Boeing stated
that Note (c) of Table 2, paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, specifies that
accomplishing the preventative
modification only terminates the
inspections at stringer 12. Boeing added
that there have been post-modification
cracks reported at the chem-milled steps
common to stringer 10, even though the
modification doubler covers the area.
Boeing noted that the internal
modification doubler does not span the
stringer 10 or stringer 13 chem-milled
steps by three rows of fasteners;
therefore, inspections should continue
at those locations even though the
modification doubler is common to
them.
We agree that clarification is
necessary. Doing the preventive
modification of the chem-milled areas
in the skin at stringer 12, as specified in
Part 7 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, ends the repetitive
inspections for the modified areas
common to stringer 12 only. Cracking of
the chem-milled steps has been found at
locations where doublers do not extend
a minimum of three fastener rows
beyond the chem-milled step. We have
changed paragraph (w) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly.
Requests To Revise Certain Compliance
Times
Boeing asked that the compliance
time specified in paragraph (p)(1) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) be changed. Boeing stated that it
is unclear why airplanes that have
accomplished paragraphs (i), (j)(1)(ii),
(k), (l), or (m) of the previous NPRM
(which are repairs and disbond
inspections) must be inspected within
1,800 flight cycles after the effective
date of the AD. Boeing added that
airplanes identified in paragraph (p)(2)
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of the previous NPRM that have not
accomplished those paragraphs are
allowed to wait until 4,500 flight cycles
after the last inspection, or 1,800 flight
cycles after the effective date of the AD,
whichever is later. Boeing questioned
why the airplanes on which repairs
have not been installed or a disbond
inspection has not been accomplished
have a different compliance time than
airplanes that do have these repairs and
inspections. Boeing noted that by using
‘‘whichever occurs later’’ in paragraph
(p)(2) of the previous NPRM, an
operator may accumulate up to 6,299
flight cycles (4,499 + 1,800) between
inspections that were previously
required at 4,500-flight-cycle intervals
in accordance with AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004).
We agree that the compliance times
required by paragraph (p) of this
supplemental NPRM should be
clarified. After further review of the new
inspection requirements in paragraph
(p) of this supplemental NPRM, we have
determined that those inspections are
not related to existing installed repairs
or the disbond inspection. The
compliance times should not be based
on local repairs that may be installed on
the airplanes. For areas that have repairs
installed in accordance with paragraphs
(i), (j)(1)(ii), (k), (l), and (m) of this AD,
the inspection is already terminated for
these areas only. Therefore, we have
deleted paragraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) of
the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619,
March 8, 2011), and included the
following reduced compliance time in
paragraph (p) of this supplemental
NPRM: ‘‘Within 4,500 flight cycles after
doing the most recent inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or
within 1,800 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever is
earlier.’’
Boeing also asked that the compliance
time specified in paragraph (s) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) be changed. Boeing stated that the
repetitive interval should be changed to
1,800 flight cycles for inspections in
areas of known cracking in the lower
lobe and Section 41, and when both
eddy current and detailed inspections
are required, in accordance with Part 4
of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009.
Boeing also noted that for inspections
in areas with no known cracking, the
threshold should be at the latest of
35,000 total flight cycles, or at the
earliest of 4,500 flight cycles from the
release of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2009, or 9,000 flight cycles after the
previous inspection. Boeing stated that,
based on additional crack growth data,
the repetitive inspections in areas of
known cracking should be reduced to
1,800 flight cycles. Boeing added that
the inspection threshold should be at
the latest of 35,000 total flight cycles, or
at the earliest of 1,800 flight cycles from
the release of that service bulletin or
4,500 flight cycles after the previous
inspection. Boeing concluded that in
areas of no known cracking, the
inspections are in place to monitor for
new cracking; therefore, the repetitive
inspection intervals can be extended.
We agree that the compliance times
should be changed based on the data
provided by the manufacturer. We have
moved the compliance times for the
initial and repetitive inspections
identified in paragraph (s) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) to paragraphs (s)(1) and (s)(2) of
this supplemental NPRM. We also
reduced the repetitive inspection
interval for known cracking in
paragraph (s)(2) of this supplemental
NPRM to 1,800 flight cycles.
Boeing also asked that the compliance
times and repetitive intervals specified
in paragraphs (t), (u)(1), and (u)(2) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) be changed. Boeing requested that
all compliance times (initial and
repetitive) that specify 4,500 flight
cycles be changed to 1,800 flight cycles.
Boeing stated that the window belt skin
area is equivalent to the crown skin
area, and the initial threshold and
repetitive interval should be the same as
required for the crown area.
We agree that the compliance times
should be changed based on the
information provided. We have changed
the compliance times and repetitive
intervals in paragraphs (t), (u)(1), and
(u)(2) of this supplemental NPRM
accordingly.
Request To Provide Certain
Clarifications
Southwest Airlines (SWA) asked that
we change paragraph (h) of the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) to
provide clarification whether the
inspections identified in Figures 26, 27,
and 31 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, are required. SWA asked whether
an eddy current or external detailed
inspection is necessary for certain
locations if those inspection figures are
required. SWA stated that paragraph (h)
of the previous NPRM specifies an
external detailed inspection of the lower
lobe area and Section 41 of the fuselage,
in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
service bulletin. SWA added that Part 4
also specifies eddy current inspections
every 1,800 flight cycles.
We agree that clarification is
necessary. The subject inspections
identified in Figures 26, 27, and 31 of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, are specified in this supplemental
NPRM; however, the inspections in
those figures are required by paragraph
(s), not paragraph (h), of this
supplemental NPRM. No change to
either paragraph (h) or (s) of this
supplemental NPRM is necessary.
SWA also asked how paragraphs (s)
and (u) of the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) are related, and
if paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM
applies to airplane groups 4, 11, and 16.
SWA noted that the inspections
identified in paragraph (s) of the
previous NPRM are applicable to
Groups 1 through 21 and are done in
accordance with Part 4 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009; except as
required by paragraph (u) of the
previous NPRM. SWA also noted that
the inspections identified in paragraph
(u) of the previous NPRM are applicable
to Groups 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18,
19, 20, and 21, and are done in
accordance with Part 2 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009. SWA stated that
it is unsure how Part 2 and Part 4 are
related. SWA added that Part 2
addresses Groups 4, 11, and 16;
however, those groups are not specified
in paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM.
We agree that clarification is
necessary because the exception in
paragraph (s) of the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011) is a
typographical error and should have
identified paragraph (x) instead of
paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM. We
have changed paragraph (s) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly, which
also addresses the commenter’s concern
about Groups 4, 11, and 16.
Request To Exclude Certain Inspection
Areas
SWA asked that, to avoid mandating
additional inspections in the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011), we
exclude the inspection areas identified
in AD 2009–21–01, Amendment 39–
16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009).
SWA stated that the inspection
threshold and repetitive intervals
required by AD 2009–21–01 are more
restrictive for certain areas of the lower
lobe skins than those in the previous
NPRM.
We agree that the inspection
threshold and repetitive intervals
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61553
required by AD 2009–21–01,
Amendment 39–16038 (74 FR 52395,
October 13, 2009), are more restrictive
for certain areas. Therefore, we have
added a new paragraph (y)(5) to this
supplemental NPRM (and reidentified
subsequent paragraphs) to specify that
inspections and corrective actions
required by paragraph (g) of AD 2009–
21–01 meet the corresponding
provisions of paragraph (s) of this
supplemental NPRM.
Request To Require Eddy Current
Inspections Only
SWA asked that only nondestructive
inspections (NDI) be used in areas
where the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) requires both
external detailed and eddy current
inspections every 1,800 flight cycles.
SWA stated that paragraph (f) of AD
2008–19–03, Amendment 39–15670 (73
FR 56958, October 1, 2008), requires
repetitive inspections along the chemmilled steps at stringers S–1 and S–2R,
between STA 400 and STA 460. SWA
added that for line numbers 1001
through 2552, the operator has the
option of accomplishing repetitive
external detailed inspections every
2,300 flight cycles, or NDI every 4,500
flight cycles. SWA noted that the
previous NPRM reduces the repetitive
inspection interval specified in Tables 1
through 5 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, from 4,500 flight
cycles to 1,800 flight cycles. SWA made
its request due to this reduced
inspection interval.
We do not agree that only NDI can be
used where both external detailed and
eddy current inspections are required.
The overall safety concern related to
Model 737 fuselage skin panels
addressed in this supplemental NPRM
is mitigated by using detailed
inspections in conjunction with eddy
current inspections. We have made no
change to the supplemental NPRM in
this regard.
Request To Use Ultrasonic Phased
Array (UTPA) Inspection
SWA asked that it be allowed to use
a UTPA inspection to inspect areas
where the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) requires external
NDI methods. SWA stated Boeing
confirmed that it is satisfactory to
inspect areas covered by the dorsal fin
by internally using the UTPA inspection
in lieu of the NDI methods, using
information in the nondestructive test
manual, in lieu of the external NDI
methods.
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
61554
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
We agree that a UTPA inspection
might be able to be used instead of the
external NDI method. However, we do
not agree to include the UTPA
inspection in this supplemental NPRM
because we cannot include individual
operators’ methods of compliance.
Under the provisions of paragraph (y) of
this supplemental NPRM, we will
consider requests for approval of a
change to the inspection type if
sufficient data are submitted to
substantiate that the inspection would
provide an acceptable level of safety.
We have made no change to the
supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request To Allow a General Visual
Inspection (GVI) Instead of Detailed
Inspection
SWA and British Airways asked that
we allow a GVI in lieu of the detailed
inspection specified in paragraphs (p)
and (q) of the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011). SWA stated that
both paragraphs specify doing external
detailed and eddy current inspections of
the crown area and other known areas
of fuselage skin cracking in accordance
with Part 1 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009. SWA noted that
Part 1 provides doing a GVI with a
reduced inspection interval of 1,000
flight cycles in non-lap splice areas as
an alternative to the detailed inspection.
SWA and British Airways stated that the
previous NPRM does not identify the
reference in Note (b) of Table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of that
service bulletin, which allows
performing a GVI at a reduced
inspection interval in lieu of the
detailed inspection in areas away from
the lapjoints. SWA also asked if the GVI
applies to Figures 32 through 37 of this
service bulletin.
We agree with the commenters’
requests because we have determined
that doing the GVI at a reduced
inspection interval provides an
acceptable level of safety. In addition,
the GVI does apply to Figures 32
through 37 of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, because the figures
are part of the Accomplishment
Instructions, which is the part of the
service bulletin referred to in the
requirements. We have revised
paragraphs (p), (q), and (s) of this
supplemental NPRM to allow this
option.
Request To Allow Use of Corrosion
Inhibiting Compound
US Airways asked that we allow the
use of an alternative corrosion
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
inhibiting compound (CIC) during
repairs. US Airways stated that
paragraphs (u) and (w) of the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011)
refer to Parts 7 and 8 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; Parts 7
and 8 refer to Figures 10 and 24,
respectively. US Airways added that the
figures specify applying CIC BMS 3–23,
Type 2, when completing repairs. US
Airways noted that Boeing has approved
newer CIC BMS 3–35, which is
compatible with CIC BMS 3–23, and is
identified in the applicable corrosion
prevention manual. US Airways added
that Boeing does not plan to add CIC
BMS 3–35 to its FAA-approved repair
documents. US Airways stated that
adding this to the previous NPRM
would avoid requests for approval of
AMOCs.
We agree that CIC BMS 3–35 can be
used as an alternative to CIC BMS 3–23.
CIC BMS 3–35 has been qualified and
approved as an AMOC for other repair
situations that specify CIC BMS 3–23.
We have added a new statement to
paragraphs (u) and (w) of this
supplemental NPRM to include the
option of using CIC BMS 3–35 as an
equivalent CIC.
Changes to Supplemental NPRM
The exception in paragraph (o) of this
supplemental NPRM was included in
the requirements of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004); however, it was
inadvertently removed from the
proposed requirements in the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011).
We have included the exception in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this
supplemental NPRM.
We have removed the reference to the
Boeing 737 Non-Destructive Test
Manual specified in paragraph (o) of
this supplemental NPRM; the inspection
identified in that paragraph may be
done using Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009.
We have removed the definition of a
‘‘detailed inspection’’ in Note 1 of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) from this supplemental NPRM.
That definition is provided in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
Due to a typographical error in
paragraph (w) of the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011), we have
changed the reference in paragraph (w)
of this supplemental NPRM to
paragraph (u), instead of paragraph (p)
or (q), respectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
We have revised the optional repair
method specified in paragraph (k) of
this supplemental NPRM to remove the
reference to repairing any cracking per
the applicable structural repair manual
(SRM) identified in Table 1 of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011). Instead, we have added a
statement to paragraph (k) of this
supplemental NPRM to specify that
guidance on repairing any cracking can
be found in the applicable SRM
identified in paragraphs (k)(1) through
(k)(4) of this supplemental NPRM.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this supplemental
NPRM 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. Certain changes described above
expand the scope of the previous NPRM
(76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). As a
result, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period
to provide additional opportunity for
the public to comment on this
supplemental NPRM.
Proposed Requirements of the
Supplemental NPRM
This supplemental NPRM would
require the actions proposed in the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011). However, this supplemental
NPRM reduces the proposed repetitive
inspection intervals and the compliance
time for the inspections of the crown
area and other known areas of fuselage
skin cracking in the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011).
Costs of Compliance
There are about 903 airplanes of U.S.
registry affected by AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004).
The inspections of the crown area that
are required by AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004), take about 94 work
hours per airplane to accomplish, at an
average labor rate of $85 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the estimated
cost of the currently required
inspections is $7,990 per airplane, per
inspection cycle.
The inspections of the lower lobe area
that are required by AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004), take about 96 work
hours per airplane to accomplish, at an
average labor rate of $85 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the estimated
cost of the currently required
inspections is $8,160 per airplane, per
inspection cycle.
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Should an operator elect to install the
preventive modification specified in AD
2004–18–06, Amendment 39–13784 (69
FR 54206, September 8, 2004), it will
take about 108 work hours per airplane
to accomplish, at an average labor rate
of $85 per work hour. Based on these
figures, the estimated cost of the
modification is $9,180 per airplane.
The new proposed inspections would
affect about 701 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
The new proposed inspections would
take about 27 work hours per airplane,
at an average labor rate of $85 per work
hour. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of the new actions
specified in this proposed AD for U.S.
operators is $1,608,795, or $2,295 per
airplane, per inspection cycle.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII:
Aviation Programs’’ describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701:
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that the proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
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.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing AD 2004–18–06, Amendment
39–13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8,
2004), and adding the following new
AD:
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2011–0155; Directorate Identifier 2009–
NM–141–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November
26, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
(1) This AD supersedes AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004).
(2) AD 2002–07–08, Amendment 39–12702
(67 FR 17917, April 12, 2002); and AD 2003–
14–06, Amendment 39–13225 (68 FR 42956,
July 21, 2003); and AD 2009–21–01,
Amendment 39–16038 (74 FR 52395, October
13, 2009); affect this AD.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 737–200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500
series airplanes, certificated in any category,
as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by new findings of
vertical cracks along chem-milled steps
adjacent to the butt joints. We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of
the skin panels, which could result in
sudden fracture and failure of the skin panels
of the fuselage, and consequent rapid
decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61555
(g) Retained External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (a) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004) with revised service
information. For Groups 1 through 5
airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 2001: Before the accumulation of
35,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,500
flight cycles after October 13, 2004 (the
effective date of AD 2004–18–06), whichever
is later, do external detailed and eddy current
inspections of the crown area and other
known areas of fuselage skin cracking, in
accordance with Part 1 and Figure 1 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 2001; or in accordance with Part
1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; except as
provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat
the external detailed and eddy current
inspections at intervals not to exceed 4,500
flight cycles until paragraph (i), (j)(1)(ii), (k),
(l), or (m) of this AD has been done, as
applicable. Although paragraph 1.D. of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001,
references a reporting requirement, such
reporting is not required by this AD.
Accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (p) or (q) of this AD ends the
repetitive requirements in this paragraph.
(h) Retained External Detailed Inspection
With Reduced Compliance Time
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (b) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004) with revised service
information. For all airplanes identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001, do an
external detailed inspection of the lower lobe
area and section 41 of the fuselage for
cracking, in accordance with Part 2 and
Figure 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009; except as provided by
paragraph (o) of this AD. At the earlier of the
times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and
(h)(2) of this AD, do the inspection specified
in this paragraph, and repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,500
flight cycles until paragraph (j)(2) or
paragraph (k), as applicable, of this AD has
been done. Accomplishing the actions
required by paragraph (s) of this AD ends the
requirements in this paragraph.
(1) Within 9,000 flight cycles after doing
the most recent external detailed inspection.
(2) Within 4,500 flight cycles after October
13, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004–18–
06, Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004)), or before the
accumulation of 40,000 total flight cycles,
whichever occurs later.
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
61556
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(i) Retained Preventive Modification at
Stringer 12
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (c) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004) with revised service
information. For Groups 3 and 5 airplanes
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001: If no cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, doing the preventive modification of the
chem-milled pockets in the upper skin as
specified in Part 5 of the Work Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001;
or as specified in Part 7 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, except as required by paragraph (x) of
this AD; ends the repetitive external detailed
and eddy current inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD for the modified area
only. As of the effective date of this AD, use
only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
(j) Retained Corrective Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (d) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004), with revised service
information. If any cracking is found during
any inspection required by paragraph (g), (h),
(p), (q), or (s) of this AD, before further flight,
do the actions specified in paragraphs (j)(1)
and (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable, in
accordance with the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. As of the
effective date of this AD, use only Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Where
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; specify to
contact Boeing for repair instructions, before
further flight, repair in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or
in accordance with data meeting the type
certification basis of the airplane if it is
approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) or any other person
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.
(1) Except as provided by paragraph (k) of
this AD, for cracking of the crown area, do
the repair specified in either paragraph
(j)(1)(i) or (j)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Do a time-limited repair in accordance
with Part 4 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with Part 6 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, except as required by paragraph (x) of
this AD, then do the actions required by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
paragraph (l) of this AD at the times specified
in that paragraph.
(ii) Do a permanent repair in accordance
with Part 3 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with Part 5 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009. Installation of a permanent repair ends
the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD for the repaired area
only. Installation of the lap joint repair
specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2002–07–08,
Amendment 39–12702 (67 FR 17917, April
12, 2002), is considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding
permanent repair specified in this paragraph
for the repaired areas only.
(2) Except as provided by paragraph (k) of
this AD, for cracking of the lower lobe area
and Section 41, repair in accordance with
Part 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with paragraph (j)(2)(i) or (j)(2)(ii)
of this AD. Accomplishment of this repair
ends the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (h) of this AD for the repaired area
only. As of the effective date of this, do the
repair specified in paragraph (j)(2)(i) or
(j)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Do a time-limited repair in accordance
with Part 6 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as
required by paragraph (x) of this AD, then do
the actions required by paragraph (l) of this
AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
(ii) Do a permanent repair in accordance
with Part 5 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009.
(k) Retained Optional Repair Method
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (e) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004) with revised service
information. For cracking in any area
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this
AD within the limitations of the applicable
structural repair manual (SRM) specified in
paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4) of this AD,
repair any cracks, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle
ACO; or in accordance with data meeting the
type certification basis of the airplane if it is
approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes ODA or any other person
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.
Accomplishment of the applicable repair
terminates the repetitive inspections required
by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD for the
repaired area only. Guidance on repairing the
cracking can be found in the applicable SRM
specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4)
of this AD.
(1) For Model 737–100, –200 series
airplanes, Subject 53–30–3, Figure 48, of
Boeing 737–100/–200 SRM D6–15565,
Revision 102, dated September 10, 2010.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(2) For Model 737–300 series airplanes,
Subject 53–00–01, Figure 229, of Boeing 737–
300 SRM D6–37635, Revision 92, dated
November 10, 2010.
(3) For Model 737–400 series airplanes,
Subject 53–00–01, Figure 231, of Boeing 737–
400 SRM, D6–38246, Revision 75, dated
November 10, 2010.
(4) For Model 737–500 series airplanes,
Subject 53–00–01, Figure 229, of Boeing 737–
500 SRM, D6–38441, Revision 70, dated
November 10, 2010.
(l) Retained Follow-on and Corrective
Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (f) of AD 2004–18–06, Amendment
39–13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004)
with revised service information. If a timelimited repair is done, as specified in
paragraph (j)(1)(i) or (j)(2)(i) of this AD: Do
the actions specified in paragraphs (l)(1),
(l)(2), and (l)(3) of this AD, at the times
specified in paragraphs (l)(1), (l)(2), and (l)(3)
of this AD, in accordance with the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001; or in accordance with the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009.
(1) Within 3,000 flight cycles after doing
the repair: Do the actions specified in
paragraph (l)(1)(i) or (l)(1)(ii) of this AD.
Then repeat the applicable inspection
specified in paragraph (l)(1)(i) or (l)(1)(ii) of
this AD at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight
cycles until permanent rivets are installed in
the repaired area, which ends the repetitive
inspections for this paragraph. As of the
effective date of this AD, do only the
inspections specified in paragraph (l)(1)(ii) of
this AD.
(i) For repairs done before the effective
date of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of
the repaired area for loose fasteners in
accordance with Part 4 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001, or do the actions specified in paragraph
(l)(1)(ii) of this AD. If any loose fastener is
found, before further flight, replace with a
new fastener, in accordance with the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001.
(ii) For repairs done after the effective date
of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of the
repaired area for loose, damaged, and missing
fasteners, in accordance with Part 6 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009. If any loose, missing, or damaged
fastener is found, before further flight,
replace with a new fastener, in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
(2) At the applicable time specified in
paragraph (l)(2)(i) and (l)(2)(ii) of this AD: Do
inspections of the repaired area for cracking
in accordance with Part 4 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001; or in accordance with Part 6 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16, 2009. If any cracking is found, before
further flight, repair in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, or in accordance with data meeting the
type certification basis of the airplane if it is
approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes ODA or any other person
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.
(i) For repairs done before the effective
date of this AD: Within 4,000 flight cycles
after doing the repair, do the inspections.
(ii) For repairs done on or after the
effective date of this AD: Within 3,000 flight
cycles after doing the repair, do the
inspections.
(3) At the earlier of the times specified in
paragraphs (l)(3)(i) and (l)(3)(ii) of this AD:
Make the repair permanent in accordance
with Part 4 and Figure 20 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001, or do the permanent repair, in
accordance with Part 5 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, which ends the repetitive inspections
for the repaired area only. As of the effective
date of this AD, only Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009, can be used to make the repair
permanent.
(i) Within 10,000 flight cycles after doing
the repair in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 1,
dated October 25, 2001.
(ii) At the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (l)(3)(ii)(A) and (l)(3)(ii)(B) of this
AD.
(A) Within 6,000 flight cycles after doing
the repair.
(B) Within 1,000 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD.
2004–18–06), in accordance with Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, dated
December 14, 2000, are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions
required by paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), (k), and
(l) of this AD.
(o) Retained Exception to Service Bulletin
Procedures
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (i) of AD 2004–18–06, Amendment
39–13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004)
with revised service information. For
airplanes subject to the requirements of
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD: Inspections
are not required in areas that are spanned by
an FAA-approved repair that has a minimum
of 3 rows of fasteners above and below the
chem-milled step. If an external doubler
covers the chem-milled step, but does not
span it by a minimum of 3 rows of fasteners
above and below, in lieu of requesting
approval for an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC), one option to comply
with the inspection requirement of
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD is to inspect
all chem-milled steps covered by the repair
in accordance with the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
(m) Retained Optional Terminating Action
for Repetitive Eddy Current Inspections
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (g) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004) with revised service
information. Accomplishment of paragraph
(b) or (c), as applicable, of AD 2003–14–06,
Amendment 39–13225 (68 FR 42956, July 21,
2003), before the effective date of this AD
ends the repetitive eddy current inspections
required by paragraph (g) of this AD for that
skin panel only; however, the repetitive
external detailed inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD are still required for
all areas. Accomplishing paragraph (b) or (c),
as applicable, of AD 2003–14–06, on or after
the effective date of this AD, does not end
either the repetitive detailed or eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD.
(p) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
External Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections of the Crown Area and Other
Known Areas of Fuselage Skin Cracking,
and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 5 and Groups 9
through 21 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, on which the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD have been done before the effective date
of this AD: Within 4,500 flight cycles after
doing the most recent inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 1,800
flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD, whichever is earlier; do external detailed
and eddy current inspections of the crown
area and other known areas of the fuselage
skin cracking, in accordance with Part 1 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; except as
provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat
the external detailed and eddy current
inspections thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 1,800 flight cycles. Accomplishing
the inspections required by this paragraph
ends the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD. Before further flight,
do all applicable corrective actions as
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. For the
locations specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009; in lieu of doing detailed
inspections, operators may do general visual
inspections, provided that the general visual
inspections are done at intervals not to
exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
(n) Retained Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (h) of AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004). Inspections, repairs, and
preventive modifications done before
October 13, 2004 (the effective date of AD
(q) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
External Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections of the Crown Area and Other
Known Areas of Fuselage Skin Cracking,
and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 5 and 9 through 21
airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61557
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009; on which the inspections required
by paragraph (g) of this AD have not been
done before the effective date of this AD:
Before the accumulation of 28,000 total flight
cycles, or within 1,800 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever is later,
do external detailed and eddy current
inspections of the crown area and other
known areas of fuselage skin cracking, in
accordance with Part 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, except as provided by
paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the external
detailed and eddy current inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800
flight cycles. Accomplishing the inspections
required by this paragraph ends the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD. Before further flight, do all applicable
corrective actions as specified in paragraph
(j) of this AD. For the locations specified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; in lieu of
doing detailed inspections, operators may do
general visual inspections, provided that the
general visual inspections are done at
intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
(r) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
External Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections of the Fuselage Skin Along the
Chem-Milled Steps of the Butt Joints, and
Corrective Actions
For Group 1 through 5, and 9 through 21
airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009: At the later of the times specified
in paragraphs (r)(1) and (r)(2) of this AD, do
external detailed and eddy current
inspections for vertical cracks in the fuselage
skin along the chem-milled steps of the butt
joints, in accordance with Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800
flight cycles or 1,800 flight hours, whichever
occurs first. If any cracking is found, before
further flight, repair in accordance with Part
5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Doing the
repair terminates the repetitive inspections
specified in this paragraph for the repaired
area only.
(1) Before the accumulation of 55,000 total
flight cycles or 55,000 total flight hours,
whichever occurs first.
(2) Within 1,800 flight cycles or 1,800
flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first.
(s) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
Detailed and Eddy Current Inspections
Along the Chem-Milled Lines of the Fuselage
Skin of the Lower Lobe Area and Section 41,
and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 21 airplanes
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009: At the applicable time specified in
paragraph (s)(1) or (s)(2) of this AD, do
external detailed and eddy current
inspections, as applicable, for horizontal
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
61558
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
cracks along the chem-milled lines of the
fuselage skin of the lower lobe area and
section 41, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009; except as required by
paragraph (x) of this AD. Repeat the
inspections thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 1,800 flight cycles. Accomplishing
the inspections required by this paragraph
ends the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (h) of this AD. Before further
flight, do all applicable corrective actions as
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. For the
locations specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009; in lieu of doing detailed
inspections, operators may do general visual
inspections, provided that the general visual
inspections are done at intervals not to
exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
(1) In areas of no known cracking where
only a detailed inspection is accomplished:
Do the inspection at the later of the times
specified in paragraphs (s)(1)(i) and (s)(1)(ii)
of this AD.
(i) Before the accumulation of 35,000 total
flight cycles.
(ii) Within 9,000 flight cycles after the most
recent inspection required by paragraph (h)
of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles after
the effective date of this AD, whichever is
earlier.
(2) In areas of known cracking where both
a detailed and eddy current inspection is
accomplished: Do the inspection at the latest
of the times specified in paragraphs (s)(2)(i)
and (s)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Before the accumulation of 35,000 total
flight cycles.
(ii) Within 4,500 flight cycles after the most
recent inspection required by paragraph (h)
of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles after
the effective date of this AD, whichever is
earlier.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(t) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
External Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections Along the Chem-Milled Lines of
the Fuselage Skin of the Window Belt Area,
and Corrective Actions
For Groups 4, 11, and 16 airplanes
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009: Before the accumulation of 25,000 total
flight cycles or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever
is later, do external detailed and eddy current
inspections for horizontal cracks along the
chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin of the
fuselage window belt area, in accordance
with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009. Repeat the inspections thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. If
any cracking is found, before further flight,
repair using a method approved in
accordance with paragraph (y) of this AD.
Doing the repair terminates the repetitive
inspections specified in this paragraph for
the repaired area only.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
(u) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive
External Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections Along the Chem-Milled Lines of
the Fuselage Skin of the Fuselage Window
Belt Area, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18,
19, 20, and 21 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009: Do the
actions specified in paragraph (u)(1) or (u)(2)
of this AD, as applicable. Part 7 (Figure 10)
of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, specifies
applying corrosion inhibiting compound
(CIC) BMS 3–23 to the surfaces of the
repaired area. As an option to using CIC BMS
3–23, operators may use CIC BMS 3–35,
which is equivalent to CIC BMS 3–23.
(1) For airplanes on which the inspections
required by paragraph (g) of this AD have
been done before the effective date of this
AD: Within 4,500 flight cycles after doing the
most recent inspection required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever
is earlier, do external detailed and eddy
current inspections for horizontal cracks
along the chem-milled lines of the fuselage
skin of the fuselage window belt area, in
accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800
flight cycles. If any cracking is found, before
further flight, repair in accordance with Part
8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as
required by paragraph (x) of this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which the inspections
required by paragraph (g) of this AD have not
been done before the effective date of this
AD: Before the accumulation of 25,000 total
flight cycles or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever
is later, do external detailed and eddy current
inspections for horizontal cracks along the
chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin of the
fuselage window belt area, in accordance
with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009. Repeat the inspections thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. If
any cracking is found, before further flight,
repair in accordance with Part 8 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737–53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, except as required by
paragraph (x) of this AD.
(v) New Optional Repair
For airplanes on which cracking is found
during any inspection required by paragraph
(p), (q), (r), or (s) of this AD, as applicable,
doing the repair of the chem-milled area in
the skin, as specified in Part 5 or Part 6 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, ends the
repetitive external detailed and eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (p), (q), (r),
or (s) of this AD, as applicable, for the
repaired area only.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOTE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (V) OF THIS AD: Part
8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, specifies a
post-repair inspection of the skin chemmilled crack repair at stringer 12; that
inspection is not required by this AD. The
damage tolerance inspections specified in
Table 7 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, may be used
in support of compliance with section
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2)
or 14 CFR 129.109(c)(2)).
(w) New Optional Preventive Modification at
Stringer 12
For airplanes on which no cracking is
found during any inspection required by
paragraph (u) of this AD, doing the
preventive modification of the chem-milled
areas in the skin at stringer 12, as specified
in Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009,
except as required by paragraph (x) of this
AD, ends the repetitive external detailed and
eddy current inspections required by
paragraph (u) of this AD, for the modified
areas common to stringer 12 only. Part 7
(Figure 10) of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737–53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009, specifies applying CIC BMS 3–23 to the
surfaces of the repaired area. As an option to
using CIC BMS 3–23, operators may use CIC
BMS 3–35, which is equivalent to CIC BMS
3–23.
(x) Exception to Service Information
Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009,
specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, before further flight, repair
using a method approved in accordance with
paragraph (y) of this AD.
(y) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle 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 ODA that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(4) AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2004–18–06,
Amendment 39–13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004), are approved as AMOCs
for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(5) Inspections and corrective actions
required by paragraph (g) of AD 2009–21–01,
Amendment 39–16038 (74 FR 52395, October
13, 2009), are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of paragraph (s) of
this AD; but only for the areas of the lower
lobe skin identified in AD 2009–21–01.
(z) 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, Washington 98124–2207; telephone
206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–
5680; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com.
(3) 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 28, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–24805 Filed 10–9–12; 8:45 am]
This withdrawal is effective on
October 10, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket Nos. FEMA–B–
1069 and B–1122, to Luis Rodriguez,
Chief, Engineering Management Branch,
Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064,
or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
DATES:
Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
On
September 15, 2009 and May 25, 2010,
FEMA published a proposed rulemaking
at 74 FR 47169 and 75 FR 29296,
proposing flood elevation
determinations along one or more
flooding sources in Fairbanks North Star
Borough, Alaska. FEMA is withdrawing
the proposed rulemaking and intends to
publish a Notice of Proposed Flood
Hazard Determinations in the Federal
Register and a notice in the affected
community’s local newspaper following
issuance of a revised preliminary Flood
Insurance Rate Map and Flood
Insurance Study report.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Dated: September 14, 2012.
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Associate Administrator for
Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
[FR Doc. 2012–24855 Filed 10–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
44 CFR Part 67
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[Docket ID FEMA–2008–0020 and FEMA–
2010–0003; Internal Agency Docket Nos.
FEMA–B–1069 and B–1122]
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations for Fairbanks North
Star Borough, Alaska, and
Incorporated Areas
50 CFR Parts 223 and 224
[Docket No. 1206013326–2490–01]
RIN 0648–XA984
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) is
withdrawing its proposed rule
concerning proposed flood elevation
determinations for Fairbanks North Star
Borough, Alaska, and Incorporated
Areas.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Oct 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife;
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List
Nassau Grouper as Threatened or
Endangered Under the Endangered
Species Act
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61559
Notice of 90-day petition
finding, request for information.
ACTION:
We (NMFS) announce a 90day finding on a petition to list Nassau
grouper (Epinephelus striatus) as
threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). We find
that the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned action
may be warranted. Accordingly, we will
conduct a review of the status of this
species to determine if the petitioned
action is warranted. To ensure that the
status review is comprehensive, we
solicit information pertaining to this
species from any interested party.
DATES: Information and comments on
the subject action must be received by
December 10, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information, identified by the code
0648–XA984, addressed to: Jason
Rueter, Fisheries Biologist, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic information via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal https://www.
regulations.gov.
• Facsimile (fax): 727–824–5309.
• Mail: NMFS, Southeast Regional
Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St.
Petersburg, FL 33701.
• Hand delivery: You may hand
deliver written information to our office
during normal business hours at the
street address given above.
Instructions: All information received
is a part of the public record and may
be posted to https://www.regulations.gov
without change. All personally
identifiable information (for example,
name, address, etc.) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. We will accept anonymous
submissions. Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, Corel WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jason Rueter, NMFS Southeast Region,
727–824–5350; or Lisa Manning, NMFS
Office of Protected Resources, 301–427–
8466.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
On September 3, 2010, we received a
petition from the WildEarth Guardians
to list goliath grouper (Epinephelus
itajara), Nassau grouper (Epinephelus
striatus), and speckled hind
(Epinephelus drummondhayi) as
threatened or endangered under the
E:\FR\FM\10OCP1.SGM
10OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61550-61559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24805]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2011-0155; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-141-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for certain Model 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes. That proposed AD would have superseded an existing AD that
applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 737-200, -200C, -300, -400,
and -500 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires
repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking of certain upper and
lower skin panels of the fuselage, and follow-on and corrective actions
if necessary. The existing AD also includes a terminating action for
the repetitive inspections of certain modified or repaired areas only.
That NPRM proposed to add new inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin along certain chem-milled lines, and corrective actions if
necessary. That NPRM also proposed to reduce certain thresholds and
intervals required by the existing AD. This action revises that NPRM by
reducing the proposed repetitive inspection intervals. We are proposing
this supplemental NPRM to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the
skin panels, which could result in sudden fracture and failure of the
skin panels of the fuselage, and consequent rapid decompression of the
airplane. Since these actions impose an additional burden over that
proposed in the previous NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to
allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by November
26, 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707,
[[Page 61551]]
MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 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.
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 proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0155;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-141-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 issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
would apply to certain Model 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500
series airplanes. That NPRM published in the Federal Register on March
8, 2011 (76 FR 12619). That NPRM proposed to supersede AD 2004-18-06,
Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), to continue to
require repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking of certain
upper and lower skin panels of the fuselage, and follow-on and
corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also included a terminating
action for the repetitive inspections of certain modified or repaired
areas only. That NPRM proposed to add new inspections for cracking of
the fuselage skin along certain chem-milled lines, and corrective
actions if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to reduce certain
thresholds and intervals required by the existing AD. That NPRM
resulted from reports indicating new findings of cracks were found
along the edges of the chem-milled pockets in the upper skin at certain
stringers.
Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011),
extensive continued evaluation of the chem-mill step cracking has been
done, which resulted in a determination that the repetitive inspection
intervals and the compliance time for the inspections of the crown area
and other known areas of fuselage skin cracking must be reduced in
order to adequately address the identified unsafe condition.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the previous NPRM
(76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). The following presents the comments
received on the previous NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
Supportive Comments
The National Transportation Safety Board and Jonathan W. Ketron
support the content of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011).
Request To Supersede AD 2003-14-06, Amendment 39-13225 (68 FR 42956,
July 21, 2003)
Alaska Airlines (ASA) asked that we change the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011) to also supersede AD 2003-14-06, Amendment 39-
13225 (68 FR 42956, July 21, 2003). ASA explained that paragraph (g) of
AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004),
allows accomplishing one-time internal inspections in accordance with
paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of AD 2003-14-06 in order to terminate
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (a) of AD 2004-18-06
(paragraph (g) of the previous NPRM). ASA added that the previous NPRM
restates these required external inspections. ASA noted that AD 2003-
14-06 was initially released to address inadequate phosphoric anodizing
of the skin panels, leading to disbonding of internal doublers. ASA
stated further that subsequent events showed that fatigue cracking of
chem-milled skins cannot be solely attributed to improper anodizing or
disbonded doublers. ASA added that the previous NPRM does not clearly
address the requirements in AD 2003-14-06, which will remain in effect
until after the final rule is released.
We do not agree to supersede AD 2003-14-06, Amendment 39-13255 (68
FR 42956, July 21, 2003). The one-time internal inspection in that AD
is required for safety and is not related to the chem-milled step
cracking addressed by this supplemental NPRM. In addition, the one-time
inspection required by AD 2003-14-06 only terminates the external eddy
current inspections required by paragraph (a) of AD 2004-18-06,
Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), which is restated
in paragraph (g) of this supplemental NPRM. All external detailed
inspections are still required by paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM. We have made no change to this supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request for Clarification of Language in Paragraphs (g) and (h) of the
Previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011)
Boeing requested that paragraphs (g) and (h) of the previous NPRM
(76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be revised to better distinguish between
existing and new requirements. Specifically, Boeing stated that the
language used in paragraphs (g) and (h) of the previous NPRM could be
interpreted to mean that using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, is optional for accomplishing
the required actions at the inspection thresholds and intervals
required by AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September
8, 2004). Boeing requested clarification of the wording to indicate
that the inspection, methods, thresholds, and ``repeats'' in accordance
with Revision 3 of this service bulletin are now required.
We agree that clarification is necessary. Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, can be used for
accomplishing the required actions in AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784
(69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004). However, it is not required to use
Revision 3 of this service bulletin to accomplish the requirements of
the existing AD; rather, it is required to use that revision for the
new actions
[[Page 61552]]
required by paragraphs (p), (q), and (s) of this supplemental NPRM.
Consequently, we have revised paragraphs (g) and (h) of this
supplemental NPRM to remove the sentence beginning ``As of the
effective date of this AD * * *'' to clarify that using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, is not
required for accomplishing the requirements of the existing AD.
Request To Change ``Internal'' Detailed Inspection to ``External''
Detailed Inspection
Boeing asked that we change the ``internal'' detailed inspection
specified in paragraph (h)(1) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March
8, 2011) to an ``external'' detailed inspection. Boeing stated that
this is a typographical error because it is a restatement of the
requirements of AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004).
We agree that the reference to an ``internal'' detailed inspection
is a typographical error. We have changed paragraph (h)(1) of this
supplemental NPRM to specify an ``external'' detailed inspection.
Request To Remove a Paragraph Reference
Boeing asked that we remove the reference to ``paragraph (m)'' in
the third sentence of paragraph (g) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619,
March 8, 2011). Boeing stated that paragraph (m) of the previous NPRM
addresses disbond inspections, which should not terminate the detailed
or eddy current inspection, as specified.
We find that clarification is necessary. Paragraph (m) of this
supplemental NPRM states that accomplishing the optional terminating
action ``before the effective date of this AD'' terminates the eddy
current inspections required by paragraph (g) of this supplemental
NPRM. In addition, paragraph (m) of this supplemental NPRM states that
the detailed inspections specified in paragraph (g) of this
supplemental NPRM are not terminated. Paragraph (m) of this
supplemental NPRM states further that, ``as of the effective date of
this AD,'' the optional terminating action does not terminate the
repetitive eddy current inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
supplemental NPRM.
We find it necessary to retain the reference to paragraph (m) of
this supplemental NPRM in paragraph (g) to indicate that accomplishing
the terminating action in paragraph (m) of this supplemental NPRM
``before the effective date of this AD'' terminates the eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this supplemental NPRM.
However, we have revised paragraph (m) of this supplemental NPRM to
indicate that neither detailed nor eddy current inspections can be
terminated by accomplishing the optional terminating action ``on or
after the effective date of this AD.''
Request To Clarify Terminating Action
Boeing asked that the preventative modification language specified
in paragraph (w) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be
clarified to specify that doing the modification terminates only the
repetitive inspections of the chem-milled steps common to stringer 12.
Boeing stated that Note (c) of Table 2, paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009, specifies that accomplishing the preventative modification
only terminates the inspections at stringer 12. Boeing added that there
have been post-modification cracks reported at the chem-milled steps
common to stringer 10, even though the modification doubler covers the
area. Boeing noted that the internal modification doubler does not span
the stringer 10 or stringer 13 chem-milled steps by three rows of
fasteners; therefore, inspections should continue at those locations
even though the modification doubler is common to them.
We agree that clarification is necessary. Doing the preventive
modification of the chem-milled areas in the skin at stringer 12, as
specified in Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, ends the
repetitive inspections for the modified areas common to stringer 12
only. Cracking of the chem-milled steps has been found at locations
where doublers do not extend a minimum of three fastener rows beyond
the chem-milled step. We have changed paragraph (w) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly.
Requests To Revise Certain Compliance Times
Boeing asked that the compliance time specified in paragraph (p)(1)
of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be changed. Boeing
stated that it is unclear why airplanes that have accomplished
paragraphs (i), (j)(1)(ii), (k), (l), or (m) of the previous NPRM
(which are repairs and disbond inspections) must be inspected within
1,800 flight cycles after the effective date of the AD. Boeing added
that airplanes identified in paragraph (p)(2) of the previous NPRM that
have not accomplished those paragraphs are allowed to wait until 4,500
flight cycles after the last inspection, or 1,800 flight cycles after
the effective date of the AD, whichever is later. Boeing questioned why
the airplanes on which repairs have not been installed or a disbond
inspection has not been accomplished have a different compliance time
than airplanes that do have these repairs and inspections. Boeing noted
that by using ``whichever occurs later'' in paragraph (p)(2) of the
previous NPRM, an operator may accumulate up to 6,299 flight cycles
(4,499 + 1,800) between inspections that were previously required at
4,500-flight-cycle intervals in accordance with AD 2004-18-06,
Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004).
We agree that the compliance times required by paragraph (p) of
this supplemental NPRM should be clarified. After further review of the
new inspection requirements in paragraph (p) of this supplemental NPRM,
we have determined that those inspections are not related to existing
installed repairs or the disbond inspection. The compliance times
should not be based on local repairs that may be installed on the
airplanes. For areas that have repairs installed in accordance with
paragraphs (i), (j)(1)(ii), (k), (l), and (m) of this AD, the
inspection is already terminated for these areas only. Therefore, we
have deleted paragraphs (p)(1) and (p)(2) of the previous NPRM (76 FR
12619, March 8, 2011), and included the following reduced compliance
time in paragraph (p) of this supplemental NPRM: ``Within 4,500 flight
cycles after doing the most recent inspection required by paragraph (g)
of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles after the effective date of
this AD, whichever is earlier.''
Boeing also asked that the compliance time specified in paragraph
(s) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be changed.
Boeing stated that the repetitive interval should be changed to 1,800
flight cycles for inspections in areas of known cracking in the lower
lobe and Section 41, and when both eddy current and detailed
inspections are required, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
Boeing also noted that for inspections in areas with no known
cracking, the threshold should be at the latest of 35,000 total flight
cycles, or at the earliest of 4,500 flight cycles from the release of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
[[Page 61553]]
2009, or 9,000 flight cycles after the previous inspection. Boeing
stated that, based on additional crack growth data, the repetitive
inspections in areas of known cracking should be reduced to 1,800
flight cycles. Boeing added that the inspection threshold should be at
the latest of 35,000 total flight cycles, or at the earliest of 1,800
flight cycles from the release of that service bulletin or 4,500 flight
cycles after the previous inspection. Boeing concluded that in areas of
no known cracking, the inspections are in place to monitor for new
cracking; therefore, the repetitive inspection intervals can be
extended.
We agree that the compliance times should be changed based on the
data provided by the manufacturer. We have moved the compliance times
for the initial and repetitive inspections identified in paragraph (s)
of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) to paragraphs (s)(1)
and (s)(2) of this supplemental NPRM. We also reduced the repetitive
inspection interval for known cracking in paragraph (s)(2) of this
supplemental NPRM to 1,800 flight cycles.
Boeing also asked that the compliance times and repetitive
intervals specified in paragraphs (t), (u)(1), and (u)(2) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) be changed. Boeing requested
that all compliance times (initial and repetitive) that specify 4,500
flight cycles be changed to 1,800 flight cycles. Boeing stated that the
window belt skin area is equivalent to the crown skin area, and the
initial threshold and repetitive interval should be the same as
required for the crown area.
We agree that the compliance times should be changed based on the
information provided. We have changed the compliance times and
repetitive intervals in paragraphs (t), (u)(1), and (u)(2) of this
supplemental NPRM accordingly.
Request To Provide Certain Clarifications
Southwest Airlines (SWA) asked that we change paragraph (h) of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) to provide clarification
whether the inspections identified in Figures 26, 27, and 31 of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009,
are required. SWA asked whether an eddy current or external detailed
inspection is necessary for certain locations if those inspection
figures are required. SWA stated that paragraph (h) of the previous
NPRM specifies an external detailed inspection of the lower lobe area
and Section 41 of the fuselage, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of that service bulletin. SWA added that
Part 4 also specifies eddy current inspections every 1,800 flight
cycles.
We agree that clarification is necessary. The subject inspections
identified in Figures 26, 27, and 31 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, are specified in this
supplemental NPRM; however, the inspections in those figures are
required by paragraph (s), not paragraph (h), of this supplemental
NPRM. No change to either paragraph (h) or (s) of this supplemental
NPRM is necessary.
SWA also asked how paragraphs (s) and (u) of the previous NPRM (76
FR 12619, March 8, 2011) are related, and if paragraph (u) of the
previous NPRM applies to airplane groups 4, 11, and 16. SWA noted that
the inspections identified in paragraph (s) of the previous NPRM are
applicable to Groups 1 through 21 and are done in accordance with Part
4 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009; except as required by paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM. SWA
also noted that the inspections identified in paragraph (u) of the
previous NPRM are applicable to Groups 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18,
19, 20, and 21, and are done in accordance with Part 2 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. SWA
stated that it is unsure how Part 2 and Part 4 are related. SWA added
that Part 2 addresses Groups 4, 11, and 16; however, those groups are
not specified in paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM.
We agree that clarification is necessary because the exception in
paragraph (s) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) is a
typographical error and should have identified paragraph (x) instead of
paragraph (u) of the previous NPRM. We have changed paragraph (s) of
this supplemental NPRM accordingly, which also addresses the
commenter's concern about Groups 4, 11, and 16.
Request To Exclude Certain Inspection Areas
SWA asked that, to avoid mandating additional inspections in the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011), we exclude the inspection
areas identified in AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395,
October 13, 2009). SWA stated that the inspection threshold and
repetitive intervals required by AD 2009-21-01 are more restrictive for
certain areas of the lower lobe skins than those in the previous NPRM.
We agree that the inspection threshold and repetitive intervals
required by AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13,
2009), are more restrictive for certain areas. Therefore, we have added
a new paragraph (y)(5) to this supplemental NPRM (and reidentified
subsequent paragraphs) to specify that inspections and corrective
actions required by paragraph (g) of AD 2009-21-01 meet the
corresponding provisions of paragraph (s) of this supplemental NPRM.
Request To Require Eddy Current Inspections Only
SWA asked that only nondestructive inspections (NDI) be used in
areas where the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) requires
both external detailed and eddy current inspections every 1,800 flight
cycles. SWA stated that paragraph (f) of AD 2008-19-03, Amendment 39-
15670 (73 FR 56958, October 1, 2008), requires repetitive inspections
along the chem-milled steps at stringers S-1 and S-2R, between STA 400
and STA 460. SWA added that for line numbers 1001 through 2552, the
operator has the option of accomplishing repetitive external detailed
inspections every 2,300 flight cycles, or NDI every 4,500 flight
cycles. SWA noted that the previous NPRM reduces the repetitive
inspection interval specified in Tables 1 through 5 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009, from 4,500 flight cycles to 1,800 flight
cycles. SWA made its request due to this reduced inspection interval.
We do not agree that only NDI can be used where both external
detailed and eddy current inspections are required. The overall safety
concern related to Model 737 fuselage skin panels addressed in this
supplemental NPRM is mitigated by using detailed inspections in
conjunction with eddy current inspections. We have made no change to
the supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request To Use Ultrasonic Phased Array (UTPA) Inspection
SWA asked that it be allowed to use a UTPA inspection to inspect
areas where the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) requires
external NDI methods. SWA stated Boeing confirmed that it is
satisfactory to inspect areas covered by the dorsal fin by internally
using the UTPA inspection in lieu of the NDI methods, using information
in the nondestructive test manual, in lieu of the external NDI methods.
[[Page 61554]]
We agree that a UTPA inspection might be able to be used instead of
the external NDI method. However, we do not agree to include the UTPA
inspection in this supplemental NPRM because we cannot include
individual operators' methods of compliance. Under the provisions of
paragraph (y) of this supplemental NPRM, we will consider requests for
approval of a change to the inspection type if sufficient data are
submitted to substantiate that the inspection would provide an
acceptable level of safety. We have made no change to the supplemental
NPRM in this regard.
Request To Allow a General Visual Inspection (GVI) Instead of Detailed
Inspection
SWA and British Airways asked that we allow a GVI in lieu of the
detailed inspection specified in paragraphs (p) and (q) of the previous
NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). SWA stated that both paragraphs
specify doing external detailed and eddy current inspections of the
crown area and other known areas of fuselage skin cracking in
accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
SWA noted that Part 1 provides doing a GVI with a reduced inspection
interval of 1,000 flight cycles in non-lap splice areas as an
alternative to the detailed inspection. SWA and British Airways stated
that the previous NPRM does not identify the reference in Note (b) of
Table 1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of that service bulletin,
which allows performing a GVI at a reduced inspection interval in lieu
of the detailed inspection in areas away from the lapjoints. SWA also
asked if the GVI applies to Figures 32 through 37 of this service
bulletin.
We agree with the commenters' requests because we have determined
that doing the GVI at a reduced inspection interval provides an
acceptable level of safety. In addition, the GVI does apply to Figures
32 through 37 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, because the figures are part of the Accomplishment
Instructions, which is the part of the service bulletin referred to in
the requirements. We have revised paragraphs (p), (q), and (s) of this
supplemental NPRM to allow this option.
Request To Allow Use of Corrosion Inhibiting Compound
US Airways asked that we allow the use of an alternative corrosion
inhibiting compound (CIC) during repairs. US Airways stated that
paragraphs (u) and (w) of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8,
2011) refer to Parts 7 and 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16,
2009; Parts 7 and 8 refer to Figures 10 and 24, respectively. US
Airways added that the figures specify applying CIC BMS 3-23, Type 2,
when completing repairs. US Airways noted that Boeing has approved
newer CIC BMS 3-35, which is compatible with CIC BMS 3-23, and is
identified in the applicable corrosion prevention manual. US Airways
added that Boeing does not plan to add CIC BMS 3-35 to its FAA-approved
repair documents. US Airways stated that adding this to the previous
NPRM would avoid requests for approval of AMOCs.
We agree that CIC BMS 3-35 can be used as an alternative to CIC BMS
3-23. CIC BMS 3-35 has been qualified and approved as an AMOC for other
repair situations that specify CIC BMS 3-23. We have added a new
statement to paragraphs (u) and (w) of this supplemental NPRM to
include the option of using CIC BMS 3-35 as an equivalent CIC.
Changes to Supplemental NPRM
The exception in paragraph (o) of this supplemental NPRM was
included in the requirements of AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69
FR 54206, September 8, 2004); however, it was inadvertently removed
from the proposed requirements in the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March
8, 2011). We have included the exception in paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this supplemental NPRM.
We have removed the reference to the Boeing 737 Non-Destructive
Test Manual specified in paragraph (o) of this supplemental NPRM; the
inspection identified in that paragraph may be done using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
We have removed the definition of a ``detailed inspection'' in Note
1 of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011) from this
supplemental NPRM. That definition is provided in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
Due to a typographical error in paragraph (w) of the previous NPRM
(76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011), we have changed the reference in
paragraph (w) of this supplemental NPRM to paragraph (u), instead of
paragraph (p) or (q), respectively.
We have revised the optional repair method specified in paragraph
(k) of this supplemental NPRM to remove the reference to repairing any
cracking per the applicable structural repair manual (SRM) identified
in Table 1 of the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). Instead,
we have added a statement to paragraph (k) of this supplemental NPRM to
specify that guidance on repairing any cracking can be found in the
applicable SRM identified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4) of this
supplemental NPRM.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this supplemental NPRM 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. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). As a result, we have
determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide
additional opportunity for the public to comment on this supplemental
NPRM.
Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
This supplemental NPRM would require the actions proposed in the
previous NPRM (76 FR 12619, March 8, 2011). However, this supplemental
NPRM reduces the proposed repetitive inspection intervals and the
compliance time for the inspections of the crown area and other known
areas of fuselage skin cracking in the previous NPRM (76 FR 12619,
March 8, 2011).
Costs of Compliance
There are about 903 airplanes of U.S. registry affected by AD 2004-
18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004).
The inspections of the crown area that are required by AD 2004-18-
06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), take about 94
work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $85
per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
currently required inspections is $7,990 per airplane, per inspection
cycle.
The inspections of the lower lobe area that are required by AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), take
about 96 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor
rate of $85 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost
of the currently required inspections is $8,160 per airplane, per
inspection cycle.
[[Page 61555]]
Should an operator elect to install the preventive modification
specified in AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September
8, 2004), it will take about 108 work hours per airplane to accomplish,
at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Based on these figures,
the estimated cost of the modification is $9,180 per airplane.
The new proposed inspections would affect about 701 airplanes of
U.S. registry.
The new proposed inspections would take about 27 work hours per
airplane, at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Based on these
figures, the estimated cost of the new actions specified in this
proposed AD for U.S. operators is $1,608,795, or $2,295 per airplane,
per inspection cycle.
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 that the proposed
regulation:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(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 removing AD 2004-18-06, Amendment
39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), and adding the following new
AD:
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2011-0155; Directorate Identifier
2009-NM-141-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November 26, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
(1) This AD supersedes AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR
54206, September 8, 2004).
(2) AD 2002-07-08, Amendment 39-12702 (67 FR 17917, April 12,
2002); and AD 2003-14-06, Amendment 39-13225 (68 FR 42956, July 21,
2003); and AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October
13, 2009); affect this AD.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category,
as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by new findings of vertical cracks along
chem-milled steps adjacent to the butt joints. We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin panels, which
could result in sudden fracture and failure of the skin panels of
the fuselage, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Retained External Detailed and Eddy Current Inspections
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. For Groups 1 through 5 airplanes
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1,
dated October 25, 2001: Before the accumulation of 35,000 total
flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after October 13, 2004
(the effective date of AD 2004-18-06), whichever is later, do
external detailed and eddy current inspections of the crown area and
other known areas of fuselage skin cracking, in accordance with Part
1 and Figure 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009;
except as provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the external
detailed and eddy current inspections at intervals not to exceed
4,500 flight cycles until paragraph (i), (j)(1)(ii), (k), (l), or
(m) of this AD has been done, as applicable. Although paragraph 1.D.
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 2001, references a reporting requirement, such reporting
is not required by this AD. Accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (p) or (q) of this AD ends the repetitive requirements in
this paragraph.
(h) Retained External Detailed Inspection With Reduced Compliance Time
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (b) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. For all airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25,
2001, do an external detailed inspection of the lower lobe area and
section 41 of the fuselage for cracking, in accordance with Part 2
and Figure 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009;
except as provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. At the earlier of
the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, do
the inspection specified in this paragraph, and repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles
until paragraph (j)(2) or paragraph (k), as applicable, of this AD
has been done. Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (s)
of this AD ends the requirements in this paragraph.
(1) Within 9,000 flight cycles after doing the most recent
external detailed inspection.
(2) Within 4,500 flight cycles after October 13, 2004 (the
effective date of AD 2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206,
September 8, 2004)), or before the accumulation of 40,000 total
flight cycles, whichever occurs later.
[[Page 61556]]
(i) Retained Preventive Modification at Stringer 12
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. For Groups 3 and 5 airplanes identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated
October 25, 2001: If no cracking is found during any inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, doing the preventive
modification of the chem-milled pockets in the upper skin as
specified in Part 5 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or as
specified in Part 7 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as
required by paragraph (x) of this AD; ends the repetitive external
detailed and eddy current inspections required by paragraph (g) of
this AD for the modified area only. As of the effective date of this
AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009.
(j) Retained Corrective Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (d) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004),
with revised service information. If any cracking is found during
any inspection required by paragraph (g), (h), (p), (q), or (s) of
this AD, before further flight, do the actions specified in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable, in
accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in
accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. As of the
effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Where Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; specify to contact Boeing for
repair instructions, before further flight, repair in accordance
with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or in accordance with data meeting
the type certification basis of the airplane if it is approved by
the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) or any other person 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.
(1) Except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD, for cracking
of the crown area, do the repair specified in either paragraph
(j)(1)(i) or (j)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Do a time-limited repair in accordance with Part 4 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in accordance with Part 6 of
the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as required by paragraph (x)
of this AD, then do the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD
at the times specified in that paragraph.
(ii) Do a permanent repair in accordance with Part 3 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
1, dated October 25, 2001; or in accordance with Part 5 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009. Installation of a permanent repair ends the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD for the
repaired area only. Installation of the lap joint repair specified
in paragraph (g) of AD 2002-07-08, Amendment 39-12702 (67 FR 17917,
April 12, 2002), is considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding permanent repair specified in this paragraph for the
repaired areas only.
(2) Except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD, for cracking
of the lower lobe area and Section 41, repair in accordance with
Part 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or in accordance
with paragraph (j)(2)(i) or (j)(2)(ii) of this AD. Accomplishment of
this repair ends the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(h) of this AD for the repaired area only. As of the effective date
of this, do the repair specified in paragraph (j)(2)(i) or
(j)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Do a time-limited repair in accordance with Part 6 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as required by paragraph (x)
of this AD, then do the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD
at the times specified in that paragraph.
(ii) Do a permanent repair in accordance with Part 5 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
(k) Retained Optional Repair Method
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (e) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. For cracking in any area specified in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD within the limitations of
the applicable structural repair manual (SRM) specified in
paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4) of this AD, repair any cracks, in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO; or in
accordance with data meeting the type certification basis of the
airplane if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA or
any other person 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. Accomplishment of the applicable
repair terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraphs
(g) and (h) of this AD for the repaired area only. Guidance on
repairing the cracking can be found in the applicable SRM specified
in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4) of this AD.
(1) For Model 737-100, -200 series airplanes, Subject 53-30-3,
Figure 48, of Boeing 737-100/-200 SRM D6-15565, Revision 102, dated
September 10, 2010.
(2) For Model 737-300 series airplanes, Subject 53-00-01, Figure
229, of Boeing 737-300 SRM D6-37635, Revision 92, dated November 10,
2010.
(3) For Model 737-400 series airplanes, Subject 53-00-01, Figure
231, of Boeing 737-400 SRM, D6-38246, Revision 75, dated November
10, 2010.
(4) For Model 737-500 series airplanes, Subject 53-00-01, Figure
229, of Boeing 737-500 SRM, D6-38441, Revision 70, dated November
10, 2010.
(l) Retained Follow-on and Corrective Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. If a time-limited repair is done, as
specified in paragraph (j)(1)(i) or (j)(2)(i) of this AD: Do the
actions specified in paragraphs (l)(1), (l)(2), and (l)(3) of this
AD, at the times specified in paragraphs (l)(1), (l)(2), and (l)(3)
of this AD, in accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001; or
in accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009.
(1) Within 3,000 flight cycles after doing the repair: Do the
actions specified in paragraph (l)(1)(i) or (l)(1)(ii) of this AD.
Then repeat the applicable inspection specified in paragraph
(l)(1)(i) or (l)(1)(ii) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 3,000
flight cycles until permanent rivets are installed in the repaired
area, which ends the repetitive inspections for this paragraph. As
of the effective date of this AD, do only the inspections specified
in paragraph (l)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) For repairs done before the effective date of this AD: Do a
detailed inspection of the repaired area for loose fasteners in
accordance with Part 4 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001, or
do the actions specified in paragraph (l)(1)(ii) of this AD. If any
loose fastener is found, before further flight, replace with a new
fastener, in accordance with the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October 25, 2001.
(ii) For repairs done after the effective date of this AD: Do a
detailed inspection of the repaired area for loose, damaged, and
missing fasteners, in accordance with Part 6 of the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009. If any loose, missing, or damaged fastener
is found, before further flight, replace with a new fastener, in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009.
(2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (l)(2)(i) and
(l)(2)(ii) of this AD: Do inspections of the repaired area for
cracking in accordance with Part 4 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October
25, 2001; or in accordance with Part 6 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
[[Page 61557]]
16, 2009. If any cracking is found, before further flight, repair in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, or in
accordance with data meeting the type certification basis of the
airplane if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA or
any other person 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.
(i) For repairs done before the effective date of this AD:
Within 4,000 flight cycles after doing the repair, do the
inspections.
(ii) For repairs done on or after the effective date of this AD:
Within 3,000 flight cycles after doing the repair, do the
inspections.
(3) At the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(l)(3)(i) and (l)(3)(ii) of this AD: Make the repair permanent in
accordance with Part 4 and Figure 20 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 1, dated October
25, 2001, or do the permanent repair, in accordance with Part 5 of
the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, which ends the repetitive
inspections for the repaired area only. As of the effective date of
this AD, only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, can be used to make the repair permanent.
(i) Within 10,000 flight cycles after doing the repair in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
1, dated October 25, 2001.
(ii) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(l)(3)(ii)(A) and (l)(3)(ii)(B) of this AD.
(A) Within 6,000 flight cycles after doing the repair.
(B) Within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.
(m) Retained Optional Terminating Action for Repetitive Eddy Current
Inspections
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. Accomplishment of paragraph (b) or (c),
as applicable, of AD 2003-14-06, Amendment 39-13225 (68 FR 42956,
July 21, 2003), before the effective date of this AD ends the
repetitive eddy current inspections required by paragraph (g) of
this AD for that skin panel only; however, the repetitive external
detailed inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD are still
required for all areas. Accomplishing paragraph (b) or (c), as
applicable, of AD 2003-14-06, on or after the effective date of this
AD, does not end either the repetitive detailed or eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
(n) Retained Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004).
Inspections, repairs, and preventive modifications done before
October 13, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-18-06), in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, dated
December 14, 2000, are acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j),
(k), and (l) of this AD.
(o) Retained Exception to Service Bulletin Procedures
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2004-18-06, Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004) with
revised service information. For airplanes subject to the
requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD: Inspections are
not required in areas that are spanned by an FAA-approved repair
that has a minimum of 3 rows of fasteners above and below the chem-
milled step. If an external doubler covers the chem-milled step, but
does not span it by a minimum of 3 rows of fasteners above and
below, in lieu of requesting approval for an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC), one option to comply with the inspection
requirement of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD is to inspect all
chem-milled steps covered by the repair in accordance with the Work
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009.
(p) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections of the Crown Area and Other Known Areas of Fuselage
Skin Cracking, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 5 and Groups 9 through 21 airplanes
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, on which the inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD have been done before the effective date of this AD:
Within 4,500 flight cycles after doing the most recent inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever is earlier; do
external detailed and eddy current inspections of the crown area and
other known areas of the fuselage skin cracking, in accordance with
Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; except as
provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the external detailed
and eddy current inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed
1,800 flight cycles. Accomplishing the inspections required by this
paragraph ends the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)
of this AD. Before further flight, do all applicable corrective
actions as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. For the locations
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009; in lieu of doing detailed inspections,
operators may do general visual inspections, provided that the
general visual inspections are done at intervals not to exceed 1,000
flight cycles.
(q) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections of the Crown Area and Other Known Areas of Fuselage
Skin Cracking, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 5 and 9 through 21 airplanes identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009; on which the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD have not been done before the effective date of this AD: Before
the accumulation of 28,000 total flight cycles, or within 1,800
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever is
later, do external detailed and eddy current inspections of the
crown area and other known areas of fuselage skin cracking, in
accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009,
except as provided by paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the external
detailed and eddy current inspections thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 1,800 flight cycles. Accomplishing the inspections required
by this paragraph ends the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD. Before further flight, do all applicable
corrective actions as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. For the
locations specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; in lieu of doing detailed
inspections, operators may do general visual inspections, provided
that the general visual inspections are done at intervals not to
exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
(r) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections of the Fuselage Skin Along the Chem-Milled Steps of
the Butt Joints, and Corrective Actions
For Group 1 through 5, and 9 through 21 airplanes identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (r)(1)
and (r)(2) of this AD, do external detailed and eddy current
inspections for vertical cracks in the fuselage skin along the chem-
milled steps of the butt joints, in accordance with Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles or 1,800
flight hours, whichever occurs first. If any cracking is found,
before further flight, repair in accordance with Part 5 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Doing the repair
terminates the repetitive inspections specified in this paragraph
for the repaired area only.
(1) Before the accumulation of 55,000 total flight cycles or
55,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
(2) Within 1,800 flight cycles or 1,800 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
(s) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive Detailed and Eddy Current
Inspections Along the Chem-Milled Lines of the Fuselage Skin of the
Lower Lobe Area and Section 41, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 1 through 21 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009: At
the applicable time specified in paragraph (s)(1) or (s)(2) of this
AD, do external detailed and eddy current inspections, as
applicable, for horizontal
[[Page 61558]]
cracks along the chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin of the lower
lobe area and section 41, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009; except as required by
paragraph (x) of this AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. Accomplishing the
inspections required by this paragraph ends the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Before further
flight, do all applicable corrective actions as specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD. For the locations specified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009;
in lieu of doing detailed inspections, operators may do general
visual inspections, provided that the general visual inspections are
done at intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles.
(1) In areas of no known cracking where only a detailed
inspection is accomplished: Do the inspection at the later of the
times specified in paragraphs (s)(1)(i) and (s)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Before the accumulation of 35,000 total flight cycles.
(ii) Within 9,000 flight cycles after the most recent inspection
required by paragraph (h) of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever is earlier.
(2) In areas of known cracking where both a detailed and eddy
current inspection is accomplished: Do the inspection at the latest
of the times specified in paragraphs (s)(2)(i) and (s)(2)(ii) of
this AD.
(i) Before the accumulation of 35,000 total flight cycles.
(ii) Within 4,500 flight cycles after the most recent inspection
required by paragraph (h) of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever is earlier.
(t) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections Along the Chem-Milled Lines of the Fuselage Skin of
the Window Belt Area, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 4, 11, and 16 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009:
Before the accumulation of 25,000 total flight cycles or within
1,800 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
is later, do external detailed and eddy current inspections for
horizontal cracks along the chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin
of the fuselage window belt area, in accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. If any
cracking is found, before further flight, repair using a method
approved in accordance with paragraph (y) of this AD. Doing the
repair terminates the repetitive inspections specified in this
paragraph for the repaired area only.
(u) New Requirements of This AD: Repetitive External Detailed and Eddy
Current Inspections Along the Chem-Milled Lines of the Fuselage Skin of
the Fuselage Window Belt Area, and Corrective Actions
For Groups 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21
airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210,
Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009: Do the actions specified in
paragraph (u)(1) or (u)(2) of this AD, as applicable. Part 7 (Figure
10) of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, specifies
applying corrosion inhibiting compound (CIC) BMS 3-23 to the
surfaces of the repaired area. As an option to using CIC BMS 3-23,
operators may use CIC BMS 3-35, which is equivalent to CIC BMS 3-23.
(1) For airplanes on which the inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD have been done before the effective date of this AD:
Within 4,500 flight cycles after doing the most recent inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 1,800 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever is earlier, do
external detailed and eddy current inspections for horizontal cracks
along the chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin of the fuselage
window belt area, in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. If any cracking is
found, before further flight, repair in accordance with Part 8 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as required by
paragraph (x) of this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which the inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD have not been done before the effective date of this
AD: Before the accumulation of 25,000 total flight cycles or within
1,800 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
is later, do external detailed and eddy current inspections for
horizontal cracks along the chem-milled lines of the fuselage skin
of the fuselage window belt area, in accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800 flight cycles. If any
cracking is found, before further flight, repair in accordance with
Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, except as
required by paragraph (x) of this AD.
(v) New Optional Repair
For airplanes on which cracking is found during any inspection
required by paragraph (p), (q), (r), or (s) of this AD, as
applicable, doing the repair of the chem-milled area in the skin, as
specified in Part 5 or Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July
16, 2009, ends the repetitive external detailed and eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (p), (q), (r), or (s) of this AD,
as applicable, for the repaired area only.
Note 1 to paragraph (v) of this AD: Part 8 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009, specifies a post-repair inspection of the
skin chem-milled crack repair at stringer 12; that inspection is not
required by this AD. The damage tolerance inspections specified in
Table 7 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, may be used
in support of compliance with section 121.1109(c)(2) or
129.109(c)(2) of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR
121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(c)(2)).
(w) New Optional Preventive Modification at Stringer 12
For airplanes on which no cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (u) of this AD, doing the
preventive modification of the chem-milled areas in the skin at
stringer 12, as specified in Part 7 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision
3, dated July 16, 2009, except as required by paragraph (x) of this
AD, ends the repetitive external detailed and eddy current
inspections required by paragraph (u) of this AD, for the modified
areas common to stringer 12 only. Part 7 (Figure 10) of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1210, Revision 3, dated July 16, 2009, specifies applying CIC BMS
3-23 to the surfaces of the repaired area. As an option to using CIC
BMS 3-23, operators may use CIC BMS 3-35, which is equivalent to CIC
BMS 3-23.
(x) Exception to Service Information
Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1210, Revision 3,
dated July 16, 2009, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, before further flight, repair using a method approved
in accordance with paragraph (y) of this AD.
(y) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle 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 ODA that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to
be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
[[Page 61559]]
(4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2004-18-06,
Amendment 39-13784 (69 FR 54206, September 8, 2004), are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(5) Inspections and corrective actions required by paragraph (g)
of AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13,
2009), are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of
paragraph (s) of this AD; but only for the areas of the lower lobe
skin identified in AD 2009-21-01.
(z) 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, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(3) 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 28, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-24805 Filed 10-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
