Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 85113-85116 [2016-27640]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
concurrence before applying for a loan.
NCUA will obtain the concurrence
directly from the state supervisory
authority rather than through the
qualifying state-chartered credit union.
Additionally, before NCUA will provide
a loan to a qualifying state-charted
credit union the credit union must make
copies of its state examination reports
available to NCUA and agree to
examination by NCUA.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Notice of Award. NCUA will
determine whether an application meets
NCUA’s standards established by this
part and the related Notice of Funding
Opportunity. NCUA will provide
written notice to a Qualifying Credit
Union as to whether or not it has
qualified for a loan or technical
assistance grant under this part. A
Qualifying Credit Union whose
application has been denied for failure
of a qualification may appeal that
decision in accordance with § 705.10 of
this part.
(g) Disbursement—(1) Loans. Before
NCUA will disburse a loan, the
Participating Credit Union must sign the
loan agreement, promissory note, and
any other loan related documents.
NCUA may, in its discretion, choose not
to disburse the entire amount of the loan
at once.
(2) Technical Assistance Grants.
NCUA will disburse technical assistance
grants in such amounts, and in
accordance with such terms and
conditions, as NCUA may establish. In
general, technical assistance grants are
provided on a reimbursement basis, to
cover expenditures approved in advance
by NCUA and supported by receipts
evidencing payment by the Participating
Credit Union.
■ 9. Revise § 705.9(b) to read as follows:
§ 705.9
Reporting and monitoring.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Reporting—(1) Reporting to NCUA.
A Participating Credit Union must
complete and submit to NCUA all
required reports, at such times and in
such formats as NCUA will direct. Such
reports must describe how the
Participating Credit Union has used the
loan or technical assistance grant
proceeds and the results it has obtained,
in relation to the programs, policies, or
initiatives identified by the Participating
Credit Union in its application. NCUA
may request additional information as it
determines appropriate.
(2) Reporting to Members—(i) Loans.
A Participating Credit Union that
receives a loan under this part must
report on the progress of providing
needed community services to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
Participating Credit Union’s members
once a year, either at the annual meeting
or in a written report sent to all
members. The Participating Credit
Union must also submit to NCUA the
written report or a summary of the
report provided to members.
(ii) Technical Assistance Grants. A
Participating Credit Union that receives
a technical assistance grant under this
part should report on the progress of
providing needed community services
to the Participating Credit Union’s
members once a year, either at the
annual meeting or in a written report
sent to all members.
*
*
*
*
*
■
10. Revise § 705.10 to read as follows:
§ 705.10
Appeals.
(a) Appeals of non-qualification. A
Qualifying Credit Union whose
application for a loan or technical
assistance grant has been denied, under
§ 705.7(f), for failure of a qualification
may appeal that decision to the NCUA
Board in accordance with the following:
(1) Within thirty days of its receipt of
a notice of non-qualification, a credit
union may appeal the decision to the
NCUA Board. The scope of the NCUA
Board’s review is limited to the
threshold question of qualification and
not the issue of whether, among
qualified applicants, a particular loan or
technical assistance grant is funded.
(2) The foregoing procedure shall
apply only with respect to Applications
received by NCUA during an open
period in which funds are available and
NCUA has called for Applications. Any
Application submitted by an applicant
during a period in which NCUA has not
called for Applications will be rejected,
except for those Applications submitted
under § 705.8. Any such rejection shall
not be subject to appeal or review by the
NCUA Board.
(b) Appeals of technical assistance
grant reimbursement denials. Pursuant
to NCUA Interpretative Ruling and
Policy Statement 11–1, any Participating
Credit Union may appeal a denial of a
technical assistance grant
reimbursement to NCUA’s Supervisory
Review Committee. All appeals of
technical assistance grant
reimbursements must be submitted to
the Supervisory Review Committee
within 30 days from the date of the
denial. The decisions of the Supervisory
Review Committee are final and may
not be appealed to the NCUA Board.
[FR Doc. 2016–28229 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
85113
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–5597; Directorate
Identifier 2016–NM–009–AD; Amendment
39–18715; AD 2016–23–08]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 737–400 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracks in the upper chord of
the overwing stub beams at body station
(STA) 578 emanating from the rivet
location common to the crease beam
inner chord and the overwing stub beam
upper chord. This AD requires
repetitive inspections for cracking, and
related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. We are issuing this
AD to prevent the unsafe condition on
these products.
DATES: This AD is effective December
30, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of December 30, 2016.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC
110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. 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 https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA–2016–5597.
SUMMARY:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
5597; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
E:\FR\FM\25NOR1.SGM
25NOR1
85114
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone:
562–627–5324; fax: 562–627–5210;
email: galib.abumeri@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would
apply to all The Boeing Company Model
737–400 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on
April 28, 2016 (81 FR 25360) (‘‘the
NPRM’’). The NPRM was prompted by
reports of cracks in the upper chord of
the overwing stub beams at STA 578
emanating from the rivet location
common to the crease beam inner chord
and the overwing stub beam upper
chord. The NPRM proposed to require
repetitive inspections for cracking, and
related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. Replacement of the
overwing stub beam terminates the
repetitive inspections for cracking at the
replacement location only, and postreplacement inspections are required if
the replacement is done. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracking in
the upper chord of the overwing stub
beam caused by high flight-cycle fatigue
stresses from both pressurization and
maneuver loads. Cracking of the
overwing stub beam could adversely
affect the fuselage structural integrity
and result in possible decompression of
the airplane.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA’s
response to each comment.
Request To Clarify Unsafe Condition
Statement in the ‘‘Discussion’’ Section
Boeing requested that, in the
‘‘Discussion’’ section of the NPRM, that
we clarify the cause of cracking in the
overwing stub beams is from high flightcycle fatigue stresses. Boeing submitted
suggested wording.
We agree to clarify the unsafe
condition. The unsafe condition
statement in the SUMMARY section of the
NPRM and paragraph (e) of the
proposed AD already specified that the
cracking in the upper chord of the
overwing stub beam is caused by high
flight-cycle fatigue stresses from both
pressurization and maneuver loads.
However, the ‘‘Discussion’’ section of
the NPRM is not restated in this final
rule. Therefore, we have not revised this
final rule in this regard.
Request To Revise Paragraph (i) of the
NPRM
Boeing requested that we revise
paragraph (i) of the proposed AD to
specify that the actions in that
paragraph are required on airplanes that
have had an overwing stub beam
replaced at STA 578 as specified in Part
4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1347, Original Issue, dated
December 9, 2015 (‘‘ASB 737–53A1347
Original Issue’’), and not replaced with
any other method. Boeing stated that the
post-replacement inspection
requirements specified in table 2 of
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of ASB
737–53A1347 Original Issue are
applicable only to a STA 578 stub beam
replacement accomplished as specified
in Part 4 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of ASB 737–53A1347
Original Issue.
We agree with Boeing’s request. We
have revised paragraph (i) of this AD
accordingly.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data,
considered the comments received, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting this AD
with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM or correcting
the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these
changes will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the
scope of this AD.
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
We reviewed ASB 737–53A1347
Original Issue. The service information
describes procedures for doing a surface
high frequency eddy current inspection
for cracking in the overwing stub beam
upper chord at STA 559, STA 578, and
STA 601, and repairs and replacement.
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.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 93
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Inspection .................
24 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,040 per
inspection cycle.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary inspections/replacements
that would be required based on the
Parts cost
Cost per product
$0
$2,040 per inspection
cycle.
results of the inspection. We have no
way of determining the number of
Cost on U.S. operators
$189,720 per inspection cycle.
aircraft that might need these
inspections/replacements:
ON-CONDITION COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Related investigative inspection .......................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
Parts cost
9 work-hours × $85 per hour = $765 per side
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
$0 ..............................
E:\FR\FM\25NOR1.SGM
25NOR1
Cost per product
$765 per side.
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
85115
ON-CONDITION COSTS—Continued
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
STA 578 Replacement .....................................
41 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,485 per
side.
1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 per side .....
$41,500 per side .......
$44,985 per side.
$0 ..............................
$85 per side.
STA 578 Post-replacement inspection .............
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide cost
estimates for the remaining oncondition actions specified in this 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.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Findings
This AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2016–23–08 The Boeing Company:
Amendment 39–18715; Docket No.
FAA–2016–5597; Directorate Identifier
2016–NM–009–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective December 30, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all the Boeing Company
Model 737–400 series airplanes, certificated
in any category.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks
in the upper chord of the overwing stub
beams at body station (STA) 578 emanating
from the rivet location common to the crease
beam inner chord and the overwing stub
beam upper chord. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking in the upper
chord of the overwing stub beam caused by
high flight-cycle fatigue stresses from both
pressurization and maneuver loads. Cracking
of the overwing stub beam could adversely
affect the fuselage structural integrity and
result in possible decompression of the
airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Inspections, Related Investigative
Actions, and Corrective Actions
At the applicable time specified in table 1
in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1347, Original
Issue, dated December 9, 2015 (‘‘ASB 737–
53A1347 Original Issue’’), except as required
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Cost per product
by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD: Do
a surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for any cracking in the overwing
stub beam upper chord at STA 559, STA 578,
and STA 601; and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions; in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of ASB 737–53A1347 Original
Issue, except as specified in paragraph (j)(3)
of this AD. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before
further flight. Repeat the HFEC inspection
thereafter at the applicable intervals specified
in ASB 737–53A1347 Original Issue.
Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:
Deviation from the actions specified in ASB
737–53A1347 Original Issue may affect
compliance with the fuel tank ignition
prevention requirements specified in Critical
Design Configuration Control Limitation 28–
AWL–11 of Document D6–38278–CMR.
(h) Terminating Action
Replacement of the overwing stub beam, in
accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 737–
53A1347 Original Issue, terminates the
repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD at the STA 578 replacement
location only. The post-replacement
inspections required by paragraph (i) of this
AD are still required at the STA 578
replacement location.
(i) Post-Replacement Inspections and
Corrective Action
For airplanes on which an overwing stub
beam has been replaced at STA 578, in
accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 737–
53A1347 Original Issue: At the applicable
time specified in table 2 in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of ASB 737–53A1347
Original Issue, do a surface HFEC inspection
for any cracking in the overwing stub beam
upper chord at STA 578, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB
737–53A1347 Original Issue. Repeat the
HFEC inspection thereafter at the applicable
intervals specified in ASB 737–53A1347
Original Issue. If any cracking is found
during any inspection required by this
paragraph, before further flight, repair the
cracking using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j)(3) of this AD.
(j) Exceptions to Service Information
(1) Where ASB 737–53A1347 Original
Issue, 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.
(2) The Condition column of paragraph
1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of ASB 737–53A1347
E:\FR\FM\25NOR1.SGM
25NOR1
85116
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Original Issue, refers to airplanes with
specified total flight-cycles ‘‘at the original
issue date of this service bulletin.’’ This AD,
however, applies to the airplanes with the
specified total flight-cycles as of the effective
date of this AD.
(3) If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by this AD, and ASB
737–53A1347 Original Issue specifies to
contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before
further flight, repair the cracking or replace
the stub beam, using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (l) of this AD.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
(k) No Economic Inspection Required
This AD does not require the
‘‘Recommended Economic Inspection’’
specified in paragraph 3.B.3. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 737–
53A1347 Original Issue.
(l) 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (m) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-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
been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles
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) Except as required by paragraph (j)(3)
of this AD: For service information that
contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of
paragraphs (l)(4)(i) and (l)(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. If a step or substep is
labeled ‘‘RC Exempt,’’ then the RC
requirement is removed from that step or
substep. 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
(m) Related Information
For more information about this AD,
contact Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA
90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5324; fax: 562–
627–5210; email: galib.abumeri@faa.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–
53A1347, Original Issue, dated December 9,
2015.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For Boeing service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention:
Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600
Westminster Blvd., MC 110–SK57, Seal
Beach, CA 90740–5600; telephone 562–797–
1717; Internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 8, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–27640 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–5044; Directorate
Identifier 2014–NM–166–AD; Amendment
39–18718; AD 2016–24–01]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier,
Inc. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC–8–102,
–103, and –106 airplanes; and Model
DHC–8–200 and –300 series airplanes.
This AD was prompted by a report of
heat damage found on a nacelle firewall
after an unsuccessful engine ground
start and several events of heat damage
found on direct current starter/generator
terminal block assemblies. This AD
requires an inspection to detect damage
on the nacelle firewalls and the terminal
block assemblies and to make sure the
insulating sleeves are installed and have
no damage, and corrective action if
necessary. We are issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these
products.
DATES: This AD is effective December
30, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of December 30, 2016.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical
Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard,
Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada;
telephone 416–375–4000; fax 416–375–
4539; email thd.qseries@
aero.bombardier.com; Internet https://
www.bombardier.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 https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
5044.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
5044; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–
5527) is Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Flight Test Branch, ANE–
172, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
E:\FR\FM\25NOR1.SGM
25NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 85113-85116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27640]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2016-5597; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-009-AD;
Amendment 39-18715; AD 2016-23-08]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 737-400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracks in the upper chord of the overwing stub beams at body
station (STA) 578 emanating from the rivet location common to the
crease beam inner chord and the overwing stub beam upper chord. This AD
requires repetitive inspections for cracking, and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent
the unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective December 30, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 30,
2016.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. 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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5597.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5597; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
[[Page 85114]]
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address
for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:
562-627-5324; fax: 562-627-5210; email: galib.abumeri@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on April 28, 2016 (81 FR 25360) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was
prompted by reports of cracks in the upper chord of the overwing stub
beams at STA 578 emanating from the rivet location common to the crease
beam inner chord and the overwing stub beam upper chord. The NPRM
proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracking, and related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Replacement of the
overwing stub beam terminates the repetitive inspections for cracking
at the replacement location only, and post-replacement inspections are
required if the replacement is done. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracking in the upper chord of the overwing stub beam
caused by high flight-cycle fatigue stresses from both pressurization
and maneuver loads. Cracking of the overwing stub beam could adversely
affect the fuselage structural integrity and result in possible
decompression of the airplane.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.
Request To Clarify Unsafe Condition Statement in the ``Discussion''
Section
Boeing requested that, in the ``Discussion'' section of the NPRM,
that we clarify the cause of cracking in the overwing stub beams is
from high flight-cycle fatigue stresses. Boeing submitted suggested
wording.
We agree to clarify the unsafe condition. The unsafe condition
statement in the SUMMARY section of the NPRM and paragraph (e) of the
proposed AD already specified that the cracking in the upper chord of
the overwing stub beam is caused by high flight-cycle fatigue stresses
from both pressurization and maneuver loads. However, the
``Discussion'' section of the NPRM is not restated in this final rule.
Therefore, we have not revised this final rule in this regard.
Request To Revise Paragraph (i) of the NPRM
Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (i) of the proposed AD to
specify that the actions in that paragraph are required on airplanes
that have had an overwing stub beam replaced at STA 578 as specified in
Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1347, Original Issue, dated December 9, 2015 (``ASB
737-53A1347 Original Issue''), and not replaced with any other method.
Boeing stated that the post-replacement inspection requirements
specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of ASB 737-
53A1347 Original Issue are applicable only to a STA 578 stub beam
replacement accomplished as specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue.
We agree with Boeing's request. We have revised paragraph (i) of
this AD accordingly.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM or correcting the unsafe condition; and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
We reviewed ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue. The service information
describes procedures for doing a surface high frequency eddy current
inspection for cracking in the overwing stub beam upper chord at STA
559, STA 578, and STA 601, and repairs and replacement. 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.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 93 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection......................... 24 work-hours x $85 per $0 $2,040 per inspection $189,720 per inspection cycle.
hour = $2,040 per cycle.
inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary inspections/
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these inspections/replacements:
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related investigative 9 work-hours x $85 $0........................... $765 per side.
inspection. per hour = $765
per side.
[[Page 85115]]
STA 578 Replacement............ 41 work-hours x $41,500 per side............. $44,985 per side.
$85 per hour =
$3,485 per side.
STA 578 Post[dash]replacement 1 work-hour x $85 $0........................... $85 per side.
inspection. per hour = $85
per side.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the remaining on-condition actions specified in this
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
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2016-23-08 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18715; Docket No. FAA-
2016-5597; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-009-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective December 30, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all the Boeing Company Model 737-400 series
airplanes, certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the upper chord of
the overwing stub beams at body station (STA) 578 emanating from the
rivet location common to the crease beam inner chord and the
overwing stub beam upper chord. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking in the upper chord of the overwing stub beam caused
by high flight-cycle fatigue stresses from both pressurization and
maneuver loads. Cracking of the overwing stub beam could adversely
affect the fuselage structural integrity and result in possible
decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Inspections, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective Actions
At the applicable time specified in table 1 in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1347,
Original Issue, dated December 9, 2015 (``ASB 737-53A1347 Original
Issue''), except as required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this
AD: Do a surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for
any cracking in the overwing stub beam upper chord at STA 559, STA
578, and STA 601; and do all applicable related investigative and
corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue, except as specified
in paragraph (j)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat
the HFEC inspection thereafter at the applicable intervals specified
in ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue.
Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: Deviation from the actions
specified in ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue may affect compliance
with the fuel tank ignition prevention requirements specified in
Critical Design Configuration Control Limitation 28-AWL-11 of
Document D6-38278-CMR.
(h) Terminating Action
Replacement of the overwing stub beam, in accordance with Part 4
of the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 737-53A1347 Original
Issue, terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD at the STA 578 replacement location only. The post-
replacement inspections required by paragraph (i) of this AD are
still required at the STA 578 replacement location.
(i) Post-Replacement Inspections and Corrective Action
For airplanes on which an overwing stub beam has been replaced
at STA 578, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue: At the applicable
time specified in table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of ASB
737-53A1347 Original Issue, do a surface HFEC inspection for any
cracking in the overwing stub beam upper chord at STA 578, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 737-53A1347
Original Issue. Repeat the HFEC inspection thereafter at the
applicable intervals specified in ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue. If
any cracking is found during any inspection required by this
paragraph, before further flight, repair the cracking using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(j)(3) of this AD.
(j) Exceptions to Service Information
(1) Where ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue, 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.
(2) The Condition column of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
ASB 737-53A1347
[[Page 85116]]
Original Issue, refers to airplanes with specified total flight-
cycles ``at the original issue date of this service bulletin.'' This
AD, however, applies to the airplanes with the specified total
flight-cycles as of the effective date of this AD.
(3) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
this AD, and ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue specifies to contact
Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the
cracking or replace the stub beam, using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.
(k) No Economic Inspection Required
This AD does not require the ``Recommended Economic Inspection''
specified in paragraph 3.B.3. of the Accomplishment Instructions of
ASB 737-53A1347 Original Issue.
(l) 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (m) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-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, Los Angeles 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) Except as required by paragraph (j)(3) of this AD: For
service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (l)(4)(i) and
(l)(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. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. 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.
(m) Related Information
For more information about this AD, contact Galib Abumeri,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5324; fax: 562-627-5210;
email: galib.abumeri@faa.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1347, Original Issue,
dated December 9, 2015.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 8, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-27640 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P