Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 21569-21571 [2013-08454]
Download as PDF
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
category 3 or lower. The petitioner has
not provided sufficient reason to
readdress this decision. Additionally,
the Radiation Source Protection and
Security Task Force, an interagency task
force established by the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, concluded in its report to
Congress and the President, ‘‘Radiation
Source Protection and Security Task
Force Report’’ (ADAMS Accession No.
ML062190349), dated August 2006, that
the appropriate radioactive sources
(category 1 and category 2 sources) were
being protected. The Task Force also
concluded that the IAEA Code of
Conduct serves as an appropriate
framework for considering which
sources warrant additional protection.
For its 2010 report to Congress and the
President (ADAMS Accession No.
ML102230141), the Task Force
conducted a reevaluation of the
radionuclides that warrant additional
security and protection. The Task Force
found ‘‘that the Category 1 and 2
quantities remain valid for sealed and
unsealed sources as the list and
threshold levels of radionuclides that
could result in a significant radiological
exposure device (RED) or radiological
dispersal device (RDD) event and
therefore warrant enhanced security and
protection.’’ The Task Force
periodically reevaluates the list of
radionuclides that warrant additional
security and protection. If the
radionuclides and/or thresholds change
in the future, then the NRC would
consider making changes in a future
rulemaking.
For byproduct material below the
category 2 thresholds, the security of
radioactive material is covered by 10
CFR 20.1801 and 20.1802. The
requirement to ‘‘secure, from
unauthorized removal or access’’ and to
‘‘control and maintain constant
surveillance’’ are considered
performance-based requirements.
Licensees are allowed to select methods
that work best for their facility to ensure
that there is no unauthorized removal of
the category 3 and lower neutron
sources. These requirements provide
adequate protection for the neutron
sources, without the need to require a
specific measure.
In conclusion, no new information
has been provided by the petitioner that
calls into question the established
thresholds (category 2) that warrant
additional security measures or the
performance based approach (nonprescriptive) for ensuring source
security. This view has been validated
by the Radiation Source Protection and
Security Task Force’s conclusions.
Existing NRC regulations provide the
basis for reasonable assurance that the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:45 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
common defense and security and
public health and safety are adequately
protected. Additional rulemaking would
impose unnecessary regulatory burden
and is not warranted for the adequate
protection of the public health and
safety and the common defense and
security.
The NRC appreciates the views of the
petitioner and encourages feedback from
the public on any of the NRC processes.
For the reasons cited in this
document, the NRC is denying PRM–
73–15.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day
of April, 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew L. Bates,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–08511 Filed 4–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2013–0299; Directorate
Identifier 2012–NM–072–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 727 airplanes.
This proposed AD was prompted by
reports of cracks on the elevator rear
spar stiffener assembly. This proposed
AD would require repetitive detailed
inspections for cracking of the elevator
rear spar stiffener assembly, and
corrective actions if necessary. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct
cracking of the elevator rear spar
stiffener assembly, which could
adversely affect elevator structural
stiffness, that could lead to elevator
vibration and possible interference with
the tab control rod and which could
result in flutter and consequent loss of
control of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by May 28, 2013.
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.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21569
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207;
telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1;
fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave.
SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6577; fax:
425–917–6590; email:
berhane.alazar@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposal. Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2013–0299; Directorate Identifier 2012–
NM–072–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://
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
21570
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We received reports of cracks on the
elevator rear spar stiffener assembly. An
operator reported finding a crack on the
rear spar stiffener assembly while
accomplishing Boeing Service Bulletin
727–55–0089 to address cracking of the
elevator rear spar web at the elevator tab
hinge fittings. A cracked elevator rear
spar stiffener assembly, if not detected
and corrected, could adversely affect
elevator structural stiffness, which
could result in elevator vibration and
possible interference with the tab
control rod and could lead to flutter and
consequent loss of control of the
airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 727–55–
0094, dated March 21, 2012. For
information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service
information at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
Docket No. FAA–2013–0299.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information
and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of the same
type design.
Proposed AD Requirements
This proposed AD would require
accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described
previously.
The phrase ‘‘related investigative
actions’’ might be used in this proposed
AD. ‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are
follow-on actions that: (1) Are related to
the primary actions, and (2) are actions
that further investigate the nature of any
condition found. Related investigative
actions in an AD could include, for
example, inspections.
In addition, the phrase ‘‘corrective
actions’’ might be used in this proposed
AD. ‘‘Corrective actions’’ are actions
that correct or address any condition
found. Corrective actions in an AD
could include, for example, repairs.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 98 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply
with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Inspection .....
5 work-hours × $85 per hour = $425 per inspection cycle..
None .............................
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary replacements that would
Cost per product
$425 per inspection
cycle.
be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. We have no way of
Cost on U.S. operators
$41,650 per inspection
cycle
determining the number of aircraft that
might need this replacement:
ON-CONDITION COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Replacement .............................
7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 .........................................
Cost per
product
Unknown ..................................
$595
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority for This Rulemaking
Regulatory Findings
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
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.
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:45 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2013–0299; Directorate Identifier 2012–
NM–072–AD.
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(j) Post-Replacement Inspection Compliance
Time
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by May 28,
2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing
Company Model 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–
100C, 727–200, and 727–200F series
airplanes, certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 55, Stabilizers.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks
on the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracking of the elevator rear spar stiffener
assembly, which could adversely affect
elevator structural stiffness, that could lead
to elevator vibration and possible
interference with the tab control rod and
which could result in elevator flutter and
consequent loss of control of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective
Actions
Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this
AD, at the applicable time specified in table
1 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 727–55–
0094, dated March 21, 2012, do a detailed
inspection for any cracking of the elevator
rear spar stiffener assembly, and all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
727–55–0094, dated March 21, 2012. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further
flight. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable time specified in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 727–55–
0094, dated March 21, 2012, except as
provided by paragraph (j) of this AD.
(h) Exception
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Where Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 727–55–0094, dated March 21, 2012,
specifies a compliance time ‘‘from the
original issue date of this service bulletin,’’
this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
(i) Optional Replacement
Replacing the elevator rear spar stiffener
assembly with a new assembly in accordance
with Part 4 or 5, as applicable, of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 727–55–
0094, dated March 21, 2012, terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this
AD for that assembly, except as required by
paragraph (j) of this AD.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:45 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
21571
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
For any elevator rear spar stiffener
assembly replaced as required by paragraph
(g) of the AD or as specified in paragraph (i)
of this AD: Do the next inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD for that assembly
within 96 months after accomplishing the
replacement and repeat thereafter at the
times specified in paragraph (g) of this AD.
Federal Aviation Administration
(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(l) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
phone: 425–917–6577; fax: 425–917–6590;
email: berhane.alazar@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–
544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March
28, 2013.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–08454 Filed 4–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2013–0304; Directorate
Identifier 2013–NM–005–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 747–400,
–400D, and –400F series airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by a report
of water leakage into the main deck
cargo wire integration unit (WIU). The
water flowed from the drip shield
through disbonded floor seams into the
aft main equipment center (MEC) drip
shield gutter, then onto the WIU. This
proposed AD would require removing
the cargo liner support; cleaning the aft
MEC drip shield gutter; and doing a
one-time general visual inspection for
disbonded seams, and repair if
necessary. This proposed AD would
also require installing a fiberglass
reinforcement overcoat to the top
surface of the aft MEC drip shield
gutters and installing the cargo liner
support. We are proposing this AD to
prevent water penetration into the MEC,
which could result in the loss of flight
critical systems.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by May 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–
2207; telephone 206–544–5000,
extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; Internet
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM
11APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21569-21571]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08454]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2013-0299; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-072-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 727 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted
by reports of cracks on the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly. This
proposed AD would require repetitive detailed inspections for cracking
of the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly, and corrective actions if
necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking of
the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly, which could adversely affect
elevator structural stiffness, that could lead to elevator vibration
and possible interference with the tab control rod and which could
result in flutter and consequent loss of control of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave.
SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6577; fax:
425-917-6590; email: berhane.alazar@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-0299;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-072-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://
[[Page 21570]]
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We received reports of cracks on the elevator rear spar stiffener
assembly. An operator reported finding a crack on the rear spar
stiffener assembly while accomplishing Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-
0089 to address cracking of the elevator rear spar web at the elevator
tab hinge fittings. A cracked elevator rear spar stiffener assembly, if
not detected and corrected, could adversely affect elevator structural
stiffness, which could result in elevator vibration and possible
interference with the tab control rod and could lead to flutter and
consequent loss of control of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0094,
dated March 21, 2012. For information on the procedures and compliance
times, see this service information at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for Docket No. FAA-2013-0299.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Proposed AD Requirements
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously.
The phrase ``related investigative actions'' might be used in this
proposed AD. ``Related investigative actions'' are follow-on actions
that: (1) Are related to the primary actions, and (2) are actions that
further investigate the nature of any condition found. Related
investigative actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.
In addition, the phrase ``corrective actions'' might be used in
this proposed AD. ``Corrective actions'' are actions that correct or
address any condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include,
for example, repairs.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 98 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection........... 5 work-hours x $85 per None................ $425 per inspection $41,650 per
hour = $425 per cycle. inspection cycle
inspection cycle..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need
this replacement:
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per
Action Labor cost Parts cost product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement............................ 7 work-hours x $85 per hour = Unknown.................. $595
$595.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2013-0299; Directorate Identifier
2012-NM-072-AD.
[[Page 21571]]
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by May 28, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 727, 727C, 727-
100, 727-100C, 727-200, and 727-200F series airplanes, certificated
in any category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks on the elevator rear
spar stiffener assembly. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking of the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly, which
could adversely affect elevator structural stiffness, that could
lead to elevator vibration and possible interference with the tab
control rod and which could result in elevator flutter and
consequent loss of control of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions
Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the
applicable time specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-
0094, dated March 21, 2012, do a detailed inspection for any
cracking of the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly, and all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-
0094, dated March 21, 2012. Do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable time specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-
0094, dated March 21, 2012, except as provided by paragraph (j) of
this AD.
(h) Exception
Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0094,
dated March 21, 2012, specifies a compliance time ``from the
original issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
(i) Optional Replacement
Replacing the elevator rear spar stiffener assembly with a new
assembly in accordance with Part 4 or 5, as applicable, of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 727-55-0094, dated March 21, 2012, terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD for that assembly,
except as required by paragraph (j) of this AD.
(j) Post-Replacement Inspection Compliance Time
For any elevator rear spar stiffener assembly replaced as
required by paragraph (g) of the AD or as specified in paragraph (i)
of this AD: Do the next inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD for that assembly within 96 months after accomplishing the
replacement and repeat thereafter at the times specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD.
(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
(l) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Berhane Alazar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
phone: 425-917-6577; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
berhane.alazar@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 28, 2013.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-08454 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P