Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 66553-66555 [2016-23082]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules end of the six-month period beginning on the date of the request sent pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, certifying that the applicant did not receive from its appropriate State regulator within that six-month period either a response as described in paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) or a response stating that that the applicant did not meet all of the eligibility requirements for Federal share insurance as of the date of the request sent pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section. (b) Members canceling Federal share insurance. A Bank member that is a federally insured credit union and that subsequently cancels its Federal share insurance may remain a member of the Bank, subject to all regulatory provisions applicable to insured depository institution members, provided that the Bank has determined that the institution has canceled its Federal share insurance voluntarily. Subpart E—Withdrawal, Termination, and Readmission 7. Revise the heading of subpart E to read as set out above. ■ 8. Amend § 1263.31 by revising paragraphs (b) and (e) to read as follows: ■ § 1263.31 Reports and examinations. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * (b) Agrees that reports of examination by local, State, or Federal agencies or institutions, or by any private entity providing share insurance to a member that is a non-federally-insured credit union or a CDFI credit union, may be furnished by such authorities or entities to the Bank or FHFA upon request; * * * * * (e) To the extent applicable, agrees to provide to the Bank, within 20 days of filing, copies of reports of condition and operations required to be filed with: (1) The member’s appropriate Federal banking agency; (2) The member’s appropriate State regulator; or (3) Any private entity providing share insurance to a member that is a nonfederally-insured credit union or a CDFI credit union. Dated: September 22, 2016. Melvin L. Watt, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency. [FR Doc. 2016–23289 Filed 9–27–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8070–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Sep 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2016–9116; Directorate Identifier 2016–NM–068–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 767–200, –300, and –400ER series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage skin lap splices are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections to detect any crack in the fuselage skin at the skin lap splices. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracks at the fuselage skin lap splice, which can rapidly link up, possibly resulting in rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 14, 2016. SUMMARY: 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 http://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 NPRM, 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 view this 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, ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 66553 call 425–227–1221. It is also available on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 9116. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 9116; 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 (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425–917–6590; email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2016–9116; Directorate Identifier 2016– NM–068–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 http:// 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 Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage (MSD) is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple- E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM 28SEP1 66554 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules 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. This condition is known as WFD. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. 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 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. We determined that the existing Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Document (MPD) Section 9 Airworthiness Limitation Instructions inspection program is not sufficient to preclude the occurrence of WFD in the fuselage skin lap splice as the airplane ages. The fuselage skin lap splice has multiple similar adjacent details that have the potential for MSD and the potential for WFD. 14 CFR 26.21 requires evaluation of such designs for the potential for WFD and implementation of the appropriate service actions to ensure that WFD is precluded before the airplane’s LOV. We have received no reports of cracks in the fuselage skin lap splices. WFD cracking at the fuselage skin lap splice, if not corrected, could rapidly link up, possibly resulting in rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. The service information describes procedures for repetitive inspections and repair for any crack in the fuselage skin at the skin lap splices. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section. 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. For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 9116. Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information Paragraph 1.B., ‘‘Concurrent Requirements,’’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016, identifies Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0260 as a concurrent service bulletin. However, this proposed AD would not require Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 53A0260, as a concurrent service bulletin. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD affects 332 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD: ESTIMATED COSTS Labor cost Parts cost Inspections ............................. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Action 168 work-hours × $85 per hour = $14,280 per inspection cycle. $0 The size of the area that requires repair must be determined before material and work-hour costs can be estimated. Additionally, materials for repairs are operator supplied. Therefore, we cannot provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Sep 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 Cost per product $14,280 per inspection cycle 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 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Cost on U.S. operators $4,740,960 per inspection cycle. 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 E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM 28SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules 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– 2016–9116; Directorate Identifier 2016– NM–068–AD. (a) Comments Due Date We must receive comments by November 14, 2016. (b) Affected ADs None. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS (c) Applicability This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767–200, –300, and –400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. (d) Subject Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage. (e) Unsafe Condition This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage skin lap splices are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks at the fuselage skin lap splice, which can rapidly link up, possibly resulting in rapid VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Sep 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 decompression and loss of structural integrity 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 specified by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016: Do external surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC), internal surface HFEC, and external surface low frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspections, as applicable, to detect cracks in the fuselage skin lap splices, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. If any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD, before further flight, repair in accordance with Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the times specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016, as applicable. (h) Service Information Exception Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after 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) Credit for Previous Actions This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, dated May 12, 2015. (j) 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 paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@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, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 66555 been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply. (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures. (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator’s maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. (k) Related Information (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425– 917–6590; email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov. (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone: 206– 544–5000, extension 1; fax: 206–766–5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 16, 2016. Suzanne Masterson, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2016–23082 Filed 9–27–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 40 [Docket No. RM16–13–000] Balancing Authority Control, Inadvertent Interchange, and Facility Interconnection Reliability Standards Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: The Commission proposes to approve Reliability Standards BAL– 005–1 (Balancing Authority Control) SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM 28SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 28, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66553-66555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23082]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9116; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-068-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 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. 
This proposed AD was prompted an evaluation by the design approval 
holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage skin lap splices are subject 
to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require 
repetitive inspections to detect any crack in the fuselage skin at the 
skin lap splices. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracks 
at the fuselage skin lap splice, which can rapidly link up, possibly 
resulting in rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of 
the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 14, 
2016.

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 http://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 NPRM, 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 view this 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. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9116.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9116; 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 
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6447; fax: 425-917-6590; email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed 
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-9116; 
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-068-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 http://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

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural 
design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage 
(MSD) is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element 
such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin 
panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as 
adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-

[[Page 66554]]

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. This condition is known as WFD. It is associated with 
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural 
details and stress levels. 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 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.
    We determined that the existing Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning 
Document (MPD) Section 9 Airworthiness Limitation Instructions 
inspection program is not sufficient to preclude the occurrence of WFD 
in the fuselage skin lap splice as the airplane ages. The fuselage skin 
lap splice has multiple similar adjacent details that have the 
potential for MSD and the potential for WFD. 14 CFR 26.21 requires 
evaluation of such designs for the potential for WFD and implementation 
of the appropriate service actions to ensure that WFD is precluded 
before the airplane's LOV. We have received no reports of cracks in the 
fuselage skin lap splices. WFD cracking at the fuselage skin lap 
splice, if not corrected, could rapidly link up, possibly resulting in 
rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, 
dated April 25, 2016. The service information describes procedures for 
repetitive inspections and repair for any crack in the fuselage skin at 
the skin lap splices. This service information is reasonably available 
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal 
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

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. For information on the 
procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9116.

Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Paragraph 1.B., ``Concurrent Requirements,'' of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016, 
identifies Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260 as a concurrent 
service bulletin. However, this proposed AD would not require Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, as a concurrent service bulletin.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 332 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections.....................  168 work-hours x                 $0   $14,280 per          $4,740,960 per
                                   $85 per hour =                        inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                   $14,280 per
                                   inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The size of the area that requires repair must be determined before 
material and work-hour costs can be estimated. Additionally, materials 
for repairs are operator supplied. Therefore, we cannot provide cost 
estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not 
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship 
between the national Government and the States, or on the

[[Page 66555]]

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-2016-9116; Directorate Identifier 
2016-NM-068-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 14, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -
400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified 
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, dated 
April 25, 2016.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval 
holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage skin lap splices are 
subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD 
to detect and correct cracks at the fuselage skin lap splice, which 
can rapidly link up, possibly resulting in rapid decompression and 
loss of structural integrity 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 specified by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the 
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 
25, 2016: Do external surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC), 
internal surface HFEC, and external surface low frequency eddy 
current (LFEC) inspections, as applicable, to detect cracks in the 
fuselage skin lap splices, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 
1, dated April 25, 2016. If any crack is found during any inspection 
required by this AD, before further flight, repair in accordance 
with Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. 
Repeat the inspections thereafter at the times specified in 
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
767-53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016, as applicable.

(h) Service Information Exception

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0264, Revision 1, 
dated April 25, 2016, specifies a compliance time ``after 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) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the 
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
53A0264, dated May 12, 2015.

(j) 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 paragraph (k)(1) 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, modification, or alteration 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. To be approved, the 
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must 
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled 
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs 
(j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step 
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply 
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, 
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted 
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection 
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC 
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done 
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy 
condition.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett, 
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6447; 
fax: 425-917-6590; email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service 
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this 
material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 16, 2016.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-23082 Filed 9-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P