Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing Company Airplanes, 55662-55664 [2013-22147]
Download as PDF
55662
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
´
Vertu Road West, Dorval, Quebec H4S 1Y9,
Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514–
855–7401; email thd.crj@
aero.bombardier.com; Internet https://
www.bombardier.com. You may review
copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
30, 2013.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–22145 Filed 9–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Examining the AD Docket
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2013–0706; Directorate
Identifier 2013–NM–067–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 DC–9–10,
DC–9–30, and DC–9–40 series airplanes.
This proposed AD was prompted by an
evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that the aft
pressure bulkhead web area is subject to
widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This
proposed AD would require modifying
the aft pressure bulkhead. The
modification includes inspecting for
cracks around the rivet holes, and repair
of any cracking. We are proposing this
AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the aft
pressure bulkhead, which could result
in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
• 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 AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, 3855 Lakewood
Boulevard, MC D800–0019, Long Beach,
CA 90846–0001; telephone 206–544–
5000, extension 2; fax 206–766–5683;
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.
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: Eric
Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
CA 90712–4137; phone: (562) 627–5348;
fax: (562) 627–5210; email:
eric.schrieber@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–
2013–0706; Directorate Identifier 2013–
NM–067–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.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Discussion
Structural fatigue damage is
progressive. It begins as minute cracks,
and those cracks grow under the action
of repeated stresses. This can happen
because of normal operational
conditions and design attributes, or
because of isolated situations or
incidents such as material defects, poor
fabrication quality, or corrosion pits,
dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can
occur locally, in small areas or
structural design details, or globally.
Global fatigue damage is general
degradation of large areas of structure
with similar structural details and stress
levels. Multiple-site damage is global
damage that occurs in a large structural
element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels.
Global damage can also occur in
multiple elements such as adjacent
frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage
cracks are typically too small initially to
be reliably detected with normal
inspection methods. Without
intervention, these cracks will grow,
and eventually compromise the
structural integrity of the airplane, in a
condition known as widespread fatigue
damage (WFD). As an airplane ages,
WFD will likely occur, and will
certainly occur if the airplane is
operated long enough without any
intervention.
The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR
69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD
rule requires certain actions to prevent
structural failure due to WFD
throughout the operational life of
certain existing transport category
airplanes and all of these airplanes that
will be certificated in the future. For
existing and future airplanes subject to
the WFD rule, the rule requires that
DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV)
of the engineering data that support the
structural maintenance program.
Operators affected by the WFD rule may
not fly an airplane beyond its LOV,
unless an extended LOV is approved.
The WFD rule (75 FR 69746,
November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance
actions if the DAHs can show that such
actions are not necessary to prevent
WFD before the airplane reaches the
LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend
on accomplishment of future
maintenance actions. As stated in the
WFD rule, any maintenance actions
necessary to reach the LOV will be
mandated by airworthiness directives
through separate rulemaking actions.
In the context of WFD, this action is
necessary to enable DAHs to propose
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
LOVs that allow operators the longest
operational lives for their airplanes, and
still ensure that WFD will not occur.
This approach allows for an
implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the
timing of service information
development (with FAA approval),
while providing operators with certainty
regarding the LOV applicable to their
airplanes.
Explanation of Applicability
For The Boeing Company Model
DC–9 series airplanes, AD 85–01–02 R1,
Amendment 39–5241 (51 FR 6101,
dated February 20, 1988), was issued to
supersede an AD that required visual,
eddy current, and x-ray inspections of
the aft pressure bulkhead for cracking.
AD 85–01–02 R1 required
accomplishing the modification
specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin DC9–A53–144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984, within 18
months after March 31, 1986 (the
effective date of AD 85–01–02 R1).
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9–A53–
144, Revision 2, dated February 23,
1984, specifies that the modification
must be done for Groups I and II
airplanes with more than 40,000 total
flight cycles.
We are proposing this AD to address
Group I or Group II airplanes that have
not accomplished the modification
specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin DC9–A53–144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984. This proposed
AD is not a supersedure because the
required actions apply only to those
airplanes. AD 85–01–02 R1,
Amendment 39–5241 (51 FR 6101,
dated February 20, 1988), also contained
additional actions that are not included
in this proposed AD.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin DC9–A53–144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984. For
information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service
information at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
Docket No. FAA–2013–0706.
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 identified
previously, except as discussed under
‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the Service Information.’’
Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the Service Information
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9–
A53–144, Revision 2, dated February 23,
1984, specifies that the original ventral
bulkhead was tested by McDonnell
Douglas for up to 76,550 flight cycles,
and cracking was detected at 72,000
flight cycles. It was determined that the
initial inspection threshold of 40,000
flight cycles, as specified in the service
information, was based on half the test
life, which was adjusted for the current
fleet distribution at that time. Testing
also showed an onset of cracking at
72,000 flight cycles was not widespread
fatigue type cracking. Therefore, we
have determined that a compliance time
of ‘‘before the accumulation of 72,000
flight cycles or with 18 months after the
effective date of the AD, whichever is
later’’ adequately addresses the unsafe
condition identified in this proposed
AD.
Sheet 1 of Service Sketch 3109, and
Sheet 7 of Service Sketch 3110B of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9–A53–
55663
144, Revision 2, dated February 23,
1984; specify reporting the details of
any cracks found; however, this
proposed AD does not require reporting.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9–
A53–144, Revision 2, dated February 23,
1984, specifies to contact the
manufacturer for instructions on how to
repair certain conditions, but this
proposed AD would require repairing
those conditions in one of the following
ways:
• In accordance with a method that
we approve; or
• Using data that meet the
certification basis of the airplane, and
that have been approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) whom
we have authorized to make those
findings.
These differences have been
coordinated with the manufacturer.
Explanation of Compliance Time
The compliance time for the
modification specified in this proposed
AD for addressing WFD was established
to ensure that discrepant structure is
modified before WFD develops in
airplanes. Standard inspection
techniques cannot be relied on to detect
WFD before it becomes a hazard to
flight. We will not grant any extensions
of the compliance time to complete any
AD-mandated service bulletin related to
WFD without extensive new data that
would substantiate and clearly warrant
such an extension.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 6 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Labor cost
Parts cost
Cost per product
Cost on U.S.
operators
542 work-hours × $85 per hour = $46,070 ....................
$4,680
$50,750
$304,500
Action
Modification (includes inspection).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
55664
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2013–0706; Directorate Identifier 2013–
NM–067–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by October 28,
2013.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model DC–9–10, DC–9–30, and DC–9–40
series airplanes, certificated in any category,
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
DC9–A53–144, Revision 2, dated February
23, 1984.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 5312, Fuselage Main Bulkhead.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:39 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an evaluation by
the design approval holder (DAH) indicating
that the fuselage bulkhead web area is subject
to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are
issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of
the bulkhead, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Modification
For airplanes on which the modification
(AD4 rivets replaced with AD5 rivets)
required by AD 85–01–02 R1, Amendment
39–5241 (51 FR 6101, dated February 20,
1988) has not been done: Before the
accumulation of 72,000 total flight cycles, or
within 18 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later, modify the
aft pressure bulkhead by removing all
affected AD4 rivets and doing either a
fluorescent penetrant or eddy current
inspection around the rivet holes for cracks,
repairing any cracking, and installing fiveleaf doublers with AD5 rivets, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9–A53–144,
Revision 2, dated February 23, 1984; except
as required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:
Information on additional procedures for the
modification can be found in Notes 4, 5, and
6, as applicable, of paragraph 1.D.,
‘Compliance’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
DC9–A53–144, Revision 2, dated February
23, 1984.
(h) Exception to Service Information
If any crack is found during any inspection
required by this AD, and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC9–A53–144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984, specifies to contact
Boeing for appropriate action: Before further
flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD.
(i) No Reporting Required
Sheet 1 of Service Sketch 3109, and Sheet
7 of Service Sketch 3110B of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC9–A53–144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984; specify reporting
the details of any cracks found; however, this
AD does not require reporting.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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 Los Angeles ACO, send
it to the attention of the person identified in
the Related Information section of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(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
Structures Authorized Representative for the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation
Option Authorization Organization who has
been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and 14
CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(k) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–
4137; phone: (562) 627–5348; fax: (562) 627–
5210; email: eric.schrieber@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC
D800–0019, Long Beach, CA 90846–0001;
telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; fax
206–766–5683; 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 August
30, 2013.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–22147 Filed 9–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 730, 740, 744, 756, 758,
and 762
[Docket No. 120524116–2116–01]
RIN 0694–AF70
Revisions to the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR): Unverified List
(UVL)
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS) proposes to amend the
Export Administration Regulations
(EAR) by: requiring exporters to file an
Automated Export System (AES) record
for all exports subject to the EAR
involving a party or parties to the
transaction who are listed on the
Unverified List (the ‘‘Unverified List’’ or
UVL); suspending the availability of
license exceptions for exports,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM
11SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 11, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55662-55664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22147]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2013-0706; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-067-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain the Boeing Company Model DC-9-10, DC-9-30, and DC-9-40 series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design
approval holder (DAH) indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead web
area is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD
would require modifying the aft pressure bulkhead. The modification
includes inspecting for cracks around the rivet holes, and repair of
any cracking. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of
the aft pressure bulkhead, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 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 AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 2; fax 206-766-5683; 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: Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: (562)
627-5348; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: eric.schrieber@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-2013-0706;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-067-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
Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute
cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses.
This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design
attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as
material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings,
or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or
structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural
details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that
occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur
in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-
site-damage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small
initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods.
Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise
the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as
widespread fatigue damage (WFD). As an airplane ages, WFD will likely
occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough
without any intervention.
The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV
is approved.
The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose
[[Page 55663]]
LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their
airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach
allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs
in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA
approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV
applicable to their airplanes.
Explanation of Applicability
For The Boeing Company Model DC-9 series airplanes, AD 85-01-02 R1,
Amendment 39-5241 (51 FR 6101, dated February 20, 1988), was issued to
supersede an AD that required visual, eddy current, and x-ray
inspections of the aft pressure bulkhead for cracking. AD 85-01-02 R1
required accomplishing the modification specified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated February 23, 1984,
within 18 months after March 31, 1986 (the effective date of AD 85-01-
02 R1). Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated
February 23, 1984, specifies that the modification must be done for
Groups I and II airplanes with more than 40,000 total flight cycles.
We are proposing this AD to address Group I or Group II airplanes
that have not accomplished the modification specified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated February 23, 1984. This
proposed AD is not a supersedure because the required actions apply
only to those airplanes. AD 85-01-02 R1, Amendment 39-5241 (51 FR 6101,
dated February 20, 1988), also contained additional actions that are
not included in this proposed AD.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984. For information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2013-0706.
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 identified previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Information.''
Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated
February 23, 1984, specifies that the original ventral bulkhead was
tested by McDonnell Douglas for up to 76,550 flight cycles, and
cracking was detected at 72,000 flight cycles. It was determined that
the initial inspection threshold of 40,000 flight cycles, as specified
in the service information, was based on half the test life, which was
adjusted for the current fleet distribution at that time. Testing also
showed an onset of cracking at 72,000 flight cycles was not widespread
fatigue type cracking. Therefore, we have determined that a compliance
time of ``before the accumulation of 72,000 flight cycles or with 18
months after the effective date of the AD, whichever is later''
adequately addresses the unsafe condition identified in this proposed
AD.
Sheet 1 of Service Sketch 3109, and Sheet 7 of Service Sketch 3110B
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated
February 23, 1984; specify reporting the details of any cracks found;
however, this proposed AD does not require reporting.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated
February 23, 1984, specifies to contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
In accordance with a method that we approve; or
Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.
These differences have been coordinated with the manufacturer.
Explanation of Compliance Time
The compliance time for the modification specified in this proposed
AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant
structure is modified before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard
inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it
becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the
compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to
WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly
warrant such an extension.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 6 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification (includes 542 work-hours x $85 $4,680 $50,750 $304,500
inspection). per hour = $46,070.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
[[Page 55664]]
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-2013-0706; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-067-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by October 28, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model DC-9-10, DC-9-30,
and DC-9-40 series airplanes, certificated in any category,
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 5312, Fuselage Main Bulkhead.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage bulkhead web area is
subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD
to prevent fatigue cracking of the bulkhead, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Modification
For airplanes on which the modification (AD4 rivets replaced
with AD5 rivets) required by AD 85-01-02 R1, Amendment 39-5241 (51
FR 6101, dated February 20, 1988) has not been done: Before the
accumulation of 72,000 total flight cycles, or within 18 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, modify
the aft pressure bulkhead by removing all affected AD4 rivets and
doing either a fluorescent penetrant or eddy current inspection
around the rivet holes for cracks, repairing any cracking, and
installing five-leaf doublers with AD5 rivets, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated February 23, 1984; except as required
by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: Information on additional
procedures for the modification can be found in Notes 4, 5, and 6,
as applicable, of paragraph 1.D., `Compliance' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated February 23, 1984.
(h) Exception to Service Information
If any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD,
and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2, dated
February 23, 1984, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this
AD.
(i) No Reporting Required
Sheet 1 of Service Sketch 3109, and Sheet 7 of Service Sketch
3110B of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC9-A53-144, Revision 2,
dated February 23, 1984; specify reporting the details of any cracks
found; however, this AD does not require reporting.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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 Los Angeles ACO, send it
to the attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
(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
Structures Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been
authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings.
For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the
certification basis of the airplane, and 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment
45, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(k) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Eric Schrieber,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
CA 90712-4137; phone: (562) 627-5348; fax: (562) 627-5210; email:
eric.schrieber@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001;
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 2; fax 206-766-5683; 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 August 30, 2013.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-22147 Filed 9-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P