Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes, 21146-21153 [2017-07938]
Download as PDF
21146
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
FIGURE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c) OF THIS AD—GEARBOX S/NS
00095
00107
00139
00160
00171
00172
00179
00189
00224
00327
00396
00432
00459
00481
00564
00688
00697
00884
00923
00957
01019
01048
01081
01082
01106
01125
01236
01237
01241
01245
01288
01311
01314
01351
01357
01361
01388
01418
01427
01487
01529
01534
01561
01598
01634
01655
01704
01711
01755
01762
01786
01844
01881
01883
01884
01887
01891
01893
01904
01928
01933
01935
01951
01977
01978
01986
02026
02040
02041
02127
02141
02167
02189
02228
02289
02298
02304
02314
02316
02354
02432
(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)
Code 8510, Reciprocating Engine Front
Section.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by a loss of engine
power in flight caused by oil leaking from the
gearbox radial shaft sealing ring that
contaminated the clutch. We are proposing
this AD to prevent failure of the clutch, loss
of engine power in flight, and reduced
control of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
(1) Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(2) Within 55 flight hours after the effective
date of this AD:
(i) Replace the clutch with a dual mass
flywheel. Use Technify Motors Service
Bulletin (SB) No. SB TMG 125–1020 P1,
Initial Issue, dated January 27, 2016, to do
the replacement.
(ii) Install a start phase monitoring system
and software mapping in accordance with the
requirements of FAA AD 2015–21–01 (80 FR
64314, October 23, 2015); and
(iii) Inspect the rear radial shaft sealing
ring on the gearbox for oil leakage in
accordance with Figures 2 and 3 of Technify
Motors SB No. SB TMG 125–1020 P1, Initial
Issue, dated January 27, 2016. If an oil leak
is detected, replace the gearbox with a part
eligible for installation before the next flight.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(g) Installation Prohibition
After the effective date of this AD:
(1) Do not install an engine that is
equipped with a clutch and has an affected
gearbox listed in Figure 1 to paragraph (c) of
this AD;
(2) Do not install an affected gearbox on an
engine unless it has passed the inspection
required by paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this AD;
and
(3) Do not install a clutch on an engine
previously modified in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (f)(2) of this AD or
already incorporating a dual mass flywheel.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The Manager, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to
make your request. You may email your
request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov.
Federal Aviation Administration
(i) Related Information
RIN 2120–AA64
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238–
7754; fax: 781–238–7199; email:
robert.green@faa.gov.
(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency AD 2017–0034, dated
February 20, 2017, for more information. You
may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on
the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating it in Docket No.
FAA–2017–0241.
(3) Technify Motors GmbH Service Bulletin
SB No. SB TMG 125–1020 P1, Initial Issue,
dated January 27, 2016, can be obtained from
Technify Motors GmbH using the contact
information in paragraph (i)(4) of this AD.
(4) For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Technify Motors
GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14, D–09356 Sankt
Egidien, Germany; phone: +49 37204 696 0;
fax: +49 37204 696 29125; email: info@
centurion-engines.com.
(5) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
April 28, 2017.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–09040 Filed 5–4–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–3697; Directorate
Identifier 2015–NM–143–AD]
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
We are revising an earlier
proposed airworthiness directive (AD)
that proposed to supersede AD 2011–
01–15, which applies to certain The
Boeing Company Model 757–200,
–200CB, and –300 series airplanes. AD
2011–01–15 requires repetitive
inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin of the crown skin panel along the
chem-milled step at certain stringers,
and repair, if necessary. This action
revises the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) by reducing the
compliance time for certain inspections.
We are proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.
Since these actions impose an
additional burden over that proposed in
the NPRM, we are reopening the
comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed
changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this SNPRM by June 19, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this SNPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention:
Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110–SK57,
Seal Beach, CA 90740; 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. 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–
3697.
Examining the AD Docket
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
3697; 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
(ACO), 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 proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2016–3697; Directorate Identifier
2015–NM–143–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2011–01–15,
Amendment 39–16572 (76 FR 1351,
January 10, 2011) (‘‘AD 2011–01–15’’).
AD 2011–01–15 applies to certain The
Boeing Company Model 757–200,
–200CB, and –300 series airplanes. AD
2011–01–15 requires repetitive
inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin of the crown skin panel along the
chem-milled step at stringers S–4L and
S–4R, from station (STA) 297 through
STA 439, and repair if necessary. AD
2011–01–15 also includes terminating
action for the repetitive inspections of
the repaired areas only. AD 2011–01–15
resulted from reports of cracking in the
fuselage skin of the crown skin panel.
The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 18, 2016 (81 FR
8157) (‘‘The NPRM’’). The NPRM was
prompted by reports of the initiation of
new fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin
of the crown skin panel along locally
thinned channels adjacent to the chemmilled steps. The NPRM proposed to
add repetitive inspections for cracking
in additional areas and repair if
necessary. The NPRM also proposed to
remove airplanes from the applicability
in AD 2011–01–15. The NPRM also
proposed to add an optional skin panel
replacement which would terminate all
inspections and an optional
preventative modification that would
terminate certain inspections.
Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the NPRM, we have
received a report that cracking was
found earlier than the compliance time
specified for the Zone 1 inspections
identified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision
2, dated July 28, 2015 (referenced in the
NPRM as the appropriate source of
service information for accomplishing
the specified actions). Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, has been issued to reduce the
compliance time for the Zone 1
inspections.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21147
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
We reviewed Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016. The service information describes
procedures for repetitive external
sliding probe eddy current (EC) and
external spot-probe-medium-frequency
EC inspections for cracking of the crown
skin panel, repair, a preventive
modification, and replacement of the
crown skin panel. 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.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
comment on the NPRM. The following
presents the comments received on the
NPRM and the FAA’s response to each
comment.
Support for the NPRM
FedEx provided comments that
support the intent of the NPRM. FedEx
also stated that the inspection area is
within the affected area of its passengerto-freighter modification per
supplemental type certificate (STC)
ST03562AT. FedEx noted that ST
Aerospace will apply for an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC).
Request To Reduce the Compliance
Threshold for Zone 1 Inspections
Boeing asked that we change
paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD to
reduce the compliance threshold for the
Zone 1 inspections from 18,000 to
15,000 total flight cycles. Boeing stated
that a grace period could be provided
for airplanes that have exceeded 15,000
total flight cycles. Boeing noted that an
operator reported a crack finding in
Zone 1 that occurred on an airplane
with 15,722 total flight cycles. Boeing
added that previous data supported the
threshold of 18,000 flight cycles, but
this new finding supports the 15,000
total flight cycle threshold. Boeing
stated that since FAA letter 120S14–
181, dated March 26, 2014 (which
extends the compliance times specified
in AD 2011–01–15), and Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015
(which specifies the 18,000 flight-cycle
compliance time), were released, some
operators may have suspended or
delayed inspections beyond 15,000 total
flight cycles and up to 18,000 total flight
cycles. Boeing added that a short grace
period of 200 flight cycles or 90 days
(which is similar to the grace period in
AD 2011–01–15) should be applied for
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
21148
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
the initial inspection for airplanes on
which the 15,000 total flight cycle
threshold has been exceeded.
We agree with the commenter’s
request to reduce the compliance
threshold for the Zone 1 inspections
from 18,000 to 15,000 total flight cycles,
for the reasons provided. Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, has been issued to reduce the
compliance time for the Zone 1
inspections. We have changed the
compliance time specified in paragraph
(g)(1) of this proposed AD and added a
new paragraph (h) to this proposed AD
to specify the reduced compliance
times.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment
of the Proposed Actions
Aviation Partners Boeing stated that
accomplishing the STC ST01518SE does
not affect compliance with the actions
specified in the NPRM.
We agree with the commenter. We
have redesignated paragraph (c) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM) as (c)(1)
and added a new paragraph (c)(2) to this
proposed AD to state that installation of
STC ST01518SE does not affect the
ability to accomplish the proposed
actions. Therefore, for airplanes on
which STC ST01518SE is installed, a
‘‘change in product’’ AMOC approval
request is not necessary to comply with
the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Request To Remove Certain Duplicate
Language
European Air Transport Leipzig
GmbH and DHL Air Ltd. asked that we
remove all duplicated data from the
NPRM, and only refer to the compliance
tables specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
The commenters stated that the
compliance information is contained in
detail in the referenced service
information, and is repeated in the
NPRM without benefit of clarification.
The commenters added that the
stringers identified for inspection in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the
proposed AD are incorrect, and should
refer to inspection Zone 3 containing
stringers S–3L, S–2L, S–1, S–2R, and
S–3R.
We partially agree with the
commenters’ request. We agree to revise
this proposed AD for clarity but we do
not agree to remove all of the details for
the required actions in this proposed
AD. The stringers identified for
inspection in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and
(g)(3)(ii) of the proposed AD are correct,
as specified in the referenced service
information. However, paragraphs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
(g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM) should have specified
between stringers S–3L to S–3R instead
of ‘‘at stringers S–3L and S–3R.’’ Since
the stringer location is clear in the
service information, we have removed
the reference to the stringers in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of this
proposed AD. Instead, we have added a
reference to the Zone 3 areas of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
referred to as paragraph (j)(2) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM)) to add
replacing the crown skin panel in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision
3, dated December 2, 2016, or using a
method approved in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph
(n) of this proposed AD (which was
referred to as paragraph (m) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM)), terminates
the inspections.
Request To Clarify Zone 1 Inspection
Language
Boeing and United Airlines (UA)
asked that we clarify the inspection
language specified in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of the proposed
AD. Boeing asked that we include
‘‘Zone 1 areas’’ and ‘‘as applicable’’ in
the description. UA stated that it
appears that the inspections are for
‘‘Zone 1 areas.’’ Boeing stated that the
Zone 1 areas are clearly delineated in
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 2, dated
July 28, 2015.
We agree with the commenters’
request for the reason provided. As
stated previously, this proposed AD
cites Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated
December 2, 2016. We have clarified the
inspection language in paragraph (g)(1)
of this proposed AD. We have also
clarified similar inspection language in
paragraph (g)(2) of this proposed AD.
Request To Address the Possibility That
Cracking May Have Been Found During
Inspections Required by AD 2011–01–
15
Request To Clarify Optional
Terminating Action
UA asked that we clarify the optional
terminating action in paragraph (j)(2) of
the proposed AD, to eliminate the need
for a new AMOC as terminating action
for the inspections after replacing the
crown skin panel using a method
approved in accordance with paragraph
(m) of the proposed AD. UA noted that
Note (c) of Table 1, Note (b) of Table 2,
and Note (b) of Table 3 of paragraph
1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015,
stipulate that the skin replacement itself
is considered terminating action to all
inspections done in accordance with the
referenced service information. UA
added that this is based on the fact that
the skin chem-mill process defect
should not be present in the new skin.
UA noted that this method of skin
replacement is not part of the safety
consideration, and should not require a
new AMOC.
We agree with the commenter’s
request. We have clarified paragraph
(k)(2) of this proposed AD (which was
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Boeing asked that we include the
possibility that cracking may have been
found during the inspections required
by paragraph (g) of AD 2011–01–15 in
the provisional requirements of
paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM). Boeing
recommended including a reference to
paragraph (g) of AD 2011–01–15 as
follows: ‘‘For airplanes on which any
crack is found during any inspections
required by Paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
or previously per AD 2011–01–15,
Paragraph (g); or any repair . . . .’’
Boeing added that to exclude this
language could lead operators to infer
that it precludes previous findings from
inclusion in the provisional statement.
We acknowledge the commenter’s
concerns. As of the effective date of the
final rule following this SNPRM, AD
2011–01–15 will no longer exist since it
will be superseded by the new AD. For
this reason, we do not typically refer to
a superseded AD in a new AD
requirement. However, paragraphs (g)(2)
and (g)(3) of this proposed AD do
include findings from paragraph (g) of
AD 2011–01–15. Paragraph (h) of AD
2011–01–15 states that a repair must be
done before further flight if any crack is
found. Therefore, for any crack found
before the effective date of the final rule,
the crack should already have been
repaired. Paragraph (g)(2) of this
proposed AD states ‘‘. . . or any repair
is installed that covers any portion of
the Zone 1 inspection area . . .’’ and
that statement covers the crack findings
in AD 2011–01–15.
In addition, paragraph (m) of this
proposed AD provides credit for Zone 1
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1)
of this proposed AD, if those actions
were performed before the effective date
of the final rule using Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, dated November 22, 2010;
Revision 1, dated January 6, 2011; or
Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. We
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
have not changed this proposed AD in
this regard.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Request To Include Credit for Previous
Inspections
Boeing and UA asked that a new
paragraph (l)(3) be added to the
proposed AD to provide credit for
previous inspections done using
previous revisions of the referenced
service information to accomplish the
inspections in paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD. Those inspections were approved
as an AMOC to AD 2011–01–15.
We do not agree with the commenter’s
request. It is not necessary to include
credit for inspections that were done
using previous revisions of the
referenced service information, because
credit for those inspections is already
provided in paragraph (m) of this
proposed AD. Therefore, we have not
changed this proposed AD in this
regard.
Request To Include Credit for
Previously Approved Repairs
UA asked that we include credit
language in this proposed AD for
inspecting previously approved repairs,
as specified in Note (a) of Table 1, Note
(c) of Table 2, and Note (c) of Table 3
of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 2, dated
July 28, 2015. UA stated that including
this credit would avoid unnecessary
work stoppage and minimize future
AMOC requests for repairs which meet
these criteria.
We agree that operators are allowed
credit for inspecting previously
approved repairs, as specified in the
notes in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph
1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
However, we do not agree that the
language in those notes should be added
to this proposed AD because Parts 1, 2,
and 3 of the Work Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, also include those credit notes.
This proposed AD requires
accomplishing the specified actions in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, which includes those notes
in the Work Instructions; therefore,
operators are given credit. We have not
changed this proposed AD in this
regard.
Request To Clarify Certain Inspection
Areas
Boeing and UA asked that we clarify
the inspection area in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD
to include the Zone 2 areas, and also
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
that we clarify the inspection area in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the
proposed AD to include the Zone 3
areas. Boeing and UA stated that the
zones are identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
We agree with the commenters’
requests for the reason provided. As
stated previously, this proposed AD
cites Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated
December 2, 2016. We have clarified the
inspection language in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii), and (g)(3)(i) and
(g)(3)(ii), of this proposed AD to include
the Zone 2 and Zone 3 areas,
respectively.
Request To Clarify Sections in Service
Information With Inspection
Instructions
Boeing asked that we change
paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the inspections should be
done using the instructions specified in
Part 1 or Part 2 of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
Boeing stated that this clarification
would avoid confusion.
We agree with the commenter’s
request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(1)(i),
and (g)(1)(ii) of this proposed AD to
include doing the inspection as
specified in Part 1 or Part 2 of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
Boeing and UA asked that we change
paragraph (g)(2) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the Zone 2 inspections
should be done using the instructions
specified in Part 4 or Part 5 of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015. Boeing stated that those areas are
clearly identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015,
and should be included for clarity.
We agree with the commenter’s
request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2), (g)(2)(i),
and (g)(2)(ii) of this proposed AD to
include doing the Zone 2 inspections as
specified in Part 4 or Part 5 of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
Boeing and UA asked that we change
paragraph (g)(3) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the Zone 3 inspections
should be done using the instructions
specified in Part 6 or Part 7 of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015. Boeing and UA stated that those
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21149
areas are clearly identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015, and should be included for
clarity.
We agree with the commenters’
request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(3), (g)(3)(i),
and (g)(3)(ii) of this proposed AD to
include doing the Zone 3 inspections as
specified in Part 6 or Part 7 of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016. The reference to Part 6 and Part
7 also applies to the repetitive
inspections.
Request To Clarify Inspection Language
Boeing asked that we clarify the
inspection language in paragraph (j)(1)
of the proposed AD to better describe
the inspections required when doing the
preventative modification. Boeing stated
that it should specify doing high
frequency eddy current open-hole
inspections for cracking in existing
fastener holes. Boeing noted that Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–
53–0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015, clearly specifies using an openhole inspection, and added that if this
inspection is not defined it would
permit operators to do a surface
inspection around the fasteners, which
is not sufficient to ensure there is no
cracking in the fastener holes.
Boeing also asked that we change the
paragraph identifier at the end of
paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD
from (g) to (g)(1) since the referenced
inspection is actually required by
paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD.
Boeing also asked that we change that
paragraph identifier in paragraphs (l)(1)
and (l)(2) of the proposed AD. Boeing
stated that paragraph (g) of the proposed
AD merely refers to the inspection
paragraphs.
We agree with the commenter’s
requests for the reasons provided. We
have clarified the inspection language in
paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed AD
(which was referred to as paragraph
(j)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM))
to include ‘‘. . . open-hole inspections
for cracking in existing fastener holes.’’
We have also changed the paragraph
identifiers in paragraphs (k)(1) and (m)
of this proposed AD (which were
referred to as paragraphs (j)(1), (l)(1),
and (l)(2) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM)) to specify paragraph (g)(1) of
this proposed AD accordingly.
Request To Clarify the Repair Area
Boeing asked that we change
paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the
proposed AD to clarify that the repair
can cover ‘‘any portion’’ of the Zone 1
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
21150
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
area, and asked that the description be
changed to include those words. Boeing
stated that currently the inspection area
specified in those paragraphs could be
interpreted as a repair that would need
to cover the entire Zone 1 inspection
area; however, operators typically
install local repairs in areas where
cracks are found.
We agree with the commenter’s
request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2) and
(g)(3) of this proposed AD to include the
words ‘‘any portion’’ of the Zone 1
repair area to be inspected.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Request To Clarify the Description of
the Preventative Modification
Boeing asked that we change
paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the
proposed AD to clarify that ‘‘any
preventative modification’’ is actually
‘‘the optional Zone 1 preventative
modification specified in paragraph
(j)(1) of the NPRM.’’ Boeing stated that
there is only one specific preventative
modification specified in the referenced
service information that necessitates the
inspections in paragraphs (g)(2) and
(g)(3) of the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenter’s
request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2) and
(g)(3) of this proposed AD to include the
language provided by the commenter.
Request To Clarify Exceptions
Boeing asked that we change
paragraph (k)(3) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the exception covers
cracking found during any inspection
required by paragraph (h) or (j)(1) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM). Boeing
stated repairing any crack found during
the inspection before installation of the
preventative modification in paragraph
(h) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
should also be an exception.
We do not agree with the commenter’s
request. Paragraph (j) of this proposed
AD (which was referred to as paragraph
(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM))
already specifies repairing any cracking
found during any inspection required by
paragraph (i) of this proposed AD
(which was referred to as paragraph (h)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)), as
well as inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of
this proposed AD. Paragraph (k)(3) of
the proposed AD (in the NPRM) was
intended to address cracking found
during the preventative modification
specified in paragraph (j)(1) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM). For clarity
in this proposed AD, we have added the
corrective action for cracking found
during the inspection specified in
paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed AD
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
(which was referred to as paragraph
(j)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM))
into paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed
AD. We have also removed paragraph
(k)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
from this proposed AD.
Request To Clarify Certain AMOC
Language
Two commenters requested that we
clarify whether existing AMOCs are
approved. UA asked that paragraph
(m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) be changed to clarify that repairs
approved previously as AMOCs to AD
2011–01–15 require no further
evaluation or approval. UA stated that
operators were required to repair any
finding with a repair that included an
AMOC to AD 2011–01–15. UA stated
that the current language in paragraph
(m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) would invalidate all such
AMOCs, forcing operators to submit
new requests for approval for each
previously approved repair. In addition,
UA asked that we include a new
paragraph (l)(3) to provide credit for
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) that
were approved as an AMOC to AD
2011–01–15.
Boeing asked if paragraph (m)(4) of
the proposed AD (in the NPRM) meant
that new AMOCs are needed for all
AMOCs to AD 2011–01–15. Boeing
asked that credit be given for
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) that
were approved as an AMOC to AD
2011–01–15 in Boeing Alternative
Method of Compliance Notice 757–53–
0097–AMOC–01, dated March 28, 2011,
and stated in FAA letter 120S–11–13,
dated January 19, 2011. Boeing stated
that the AMOC allowed a longer interval
for the inspections that are now
incorporated in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
Boeing also noted that Boeing
Alternative Method of Compliance
Notice 757–53–0097 AMOC 03, dated
March 28, 2014, should be rescinded
since new data shows that a 15,000 total
flight cycle threshold is appropriate
instead of 18,000 total flight cycles.
We agree that clarification is
necessary. Although paragraph (m)(4) of
the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
specified that AMOCs approved for AD
2011–01–15, are not approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of paragraph (g) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM); after
further review we have determined
those AMOCs should continue to be
approved, except as of the effective date
of this proposed AD, AMOCs that
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
extend the initial compliance times
specified in AD 2011–01–15 are no
longer approved for the compliance
time extension and instead, the
compliance times required by this
proposed AD must be complied with.
Boeing Alternative Method of
Compliance Notice 757–53–0097 AMOC
03, dated March 28, 2014, extended the
initial compliance times specified in AD
2011–01–15, and as stated previously,
we have received new data that does not
justify the extended compliance times.
We have changed paragraph (n)(4) of
this proposed AD (which was referred to
as paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM)) accordingly.
Boeing asked that paragraph (m)(3) of
the proposed AD (in the NPRM) be
changed from ‘‘For a repair method 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’’ to
‘‘For a repair method, modification
deviation, or alteration deviation 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.’’
Boeing stated that this approval needs to
specify not only for a repair method to
be approved, but also for modification
and alteration deviations to be
approved, they must meet type
certification.
We agree that some clarification is
necessary. We have clarified paragraph
(n)(3) of this proposed AD (which was
referred to as paragraph (m)(3) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM)) as follows:
‘‘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.’’
Request To Correct Typographical
Error
Boeing asked that we change the
punctuation following the word
‘‘repair’’ in the first sentence of
paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM) from a period to a comma.
Boeing noted that this is a punctuation
error.
We agree with the commenter’s
request and have corrected the
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
21151
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
punctuation in paragraph (n)(3) of this
proposed AD (which was referred to as
paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM)) accordingly.
Concerns About Correcting Unsafe
Condition
A commenter, Jonathan Fortune,
stated that it is imperative that any
potentially catastrophic structural issues
identified in any airplanes be promptly
corrected. Mr. Fortune added that repair
costs are greatly outweighed by the
potential marketing and industry
disaster that would occur if these
airplanes crashed. Mr. Fortune noted
that Boeing should not be able to
operate these airplanes without
addressing these issues. Mr. Fortune
stated that he is willing to pay for
increased air travel costs in order to get
the sense of safety established through
compliance with this regulation.
We acknowledge and appreciate the
commenter’s concerns. The FAA works
to ensure that all unsafe conditions are
addressed in a timely manner in
accordance with FAA risk management
policies that are designed to promote
aviation safety.
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. Certain changes described
above expand the scope of the NPRM.
As a result, we have determined that it
is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional
opportunity for the public to comment
on this SNPRM.
Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM
This SNPRM 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 https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
3697.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 652 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Cost per
product
Cost on U.S.
operators
Action
Labor cost
Parts cost
Inspections (Zone 1)
[Retained actions
from AD 2011–01–
15].
Inspections (Zones 2
and 3) [new proposed action].
Optional modification
2 work-hour × $85 per hour = $170 per inspection cycle.
$0 ..........................
$170 per inspection
cycle.
$110,840 per inspection
cycle.
Up to 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up to
$340 per inspection cycle.
$0 ..........................
Up to $340 per inspection cycle.
Up to $221,680 per inspection cycle.
Up to 615 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up
to $52,275.
Up to $26,496 .......
Up to $78,771 ...........
Up to $51,358,692.
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide a cost
estimate for the on-condition actions
specified in this proposed AD.
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide a cost
estimate for the optional replacement
specified in this proposed AD.
Regulatory Findings
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII:
Aviation Programs’’ describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701:
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011–01–15, Amendment 39–16572 (76
FR 1351, January 10, 2011), and adding
the following new AD.
■
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2016–3697; Directorate Identifier 2015–
NM–143–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by June 19,
2017.
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
21152
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2011–01–15,
Amendment 39–16572 (76 FR 1351, January
10, 2011) (‘‘AD 2011–01–15’’).
(c) Applicability
(1) This AD applies to The Boeing
Company Model 757–200 and –300 series
airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016.
(2) Installation of Supplemental Type
Certificate (STC) ST01518SE (https://
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_
Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/
38B606833BBD98B386257FAA00602538?
OpenDocument&Highlight=st01518se) does
not affect the ability to accomplish the
actions required by this AD. Therefore, for
airplanes on which STC ST01518SE is
installed, a ‘‘change in product’’ alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) approval
request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of the
initiation of fatigue cracking in the fuselage
skin of the crown skin panel along locally
thinned channels adjacent to the chemmilled steps. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct fatigue cracking of the fuselage
skin of the crown skin panel, which could
result in pressure venting and consequent
rapid decompression of the airplane.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections
Do the applicable inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) For all airplanes: Within the
compliance time specified in paragraph (h) of
this AD, do the Zone 1 inspection specified
in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
Repeat the applicable Part 1 or Part 2
inspection thereafter at the applicable times
specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the
preventative modification specified in
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD or the
replacement specified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD terminates the inspections required
by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe eddy
current (EC) inspection for cracking of the
crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 1
areas specified in, and in accordance with,
Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-mediumfrequency EC inspection for cracking of the
crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 1
areas specified in, and in accordance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(2) For airplanes on which any crack is
found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD; or any repair is
installed that covers any portion of the Zone
1 inspection area specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016; or the
optional Zone 1 preventative modification
specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD is
installed: At the applicable time specified in
table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, except as required by paragraph (l)(1)
of this AD: Do the Zone 2 inspection
specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(ii) of
this AD. Repeat the applicable Part 4 or Part
5 inspection thereafter at the applicable times
specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the
replacement specified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD terminates the inspections required
by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe EC
inspection for cracking of the crown skin
panel in the applicable Zone 2 areas
specified in, and in accordance with, Part 4
of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-mediumfrequency EC inspection for cracking of the
crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 2
areas specified in, and in accordance with,
Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(3) For airplanes on which any crack is
found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD; or any repair is
installed that covers any portion of the Zone
1 inspection area specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016; or the
optional Zone 1 preventative modification
specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD is
installed: At the applicable time specified in
table 3 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, except as required by paragraph (l)(1)
of this AD, do the Zone 3 inspection
specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or (g)(3)(ii) of
this AD. Repeat the applicable Part 6 or Part
7 inspection thereafter at the applicable times
specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the
replacement specified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD terminates the inspections required
by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe EC
inspection for cracking of the crown skin
panel in the applicable Zone 3 areas
specified in, and in accordance with, Part 6
of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-mediumfrequency EC inspection for cracking of the
crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 3
areas, specified in, and in accordance with,
Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016.
(h) Initial Compliance Time for Inspection
Required by Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD
Within the applicable compliance times
specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3),
and (h)(4) of this AD, whichever occurs
latest: Do the initial inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
(1) For all airplanes: Before the
accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles.
(2) For airplanes on which an external
sliding probe EC inspection for Zone 1, as
specified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, has been done as of
the effective date of this AD: Within 620
flight cycles after accomplishing the most
recent external sliding probe EC inspection
for Zone 1.
(3) For airplanes on which an external
spot-probe-medium-frequency EC inspection
for Zone 1, as specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, has
been done as of the effective date of this AD:
Within 200 flight cycles after accomplishing
the most recent external spot-probe-mediumfrequency EC inspection for Zone 1.
(4) For all airplanes: Within 200 flight
cycles or 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first.
(i) Post-Preventive Modification
Supplemental Inspections
For airplanes on which a preventive
modification has been installed as specified
in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016: At the applicable time specified in
table 4 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016; do eddy current and detailed
inspections for cracking of the applicable
areas of the fuselage skin of the doublers,
triplers, and fillers of the preventive
modification, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable times specified in table 4 of
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(j) Repair
If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g)(1),
(g)(2), (g)(3), or (i) of this AD, repair before
further flight using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (n) of this AD. Doing the repair
ends the repetitive inspections for the
repaired area only.
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 86 / Friday, May 5, 2017 / Proposed Rules
(k) Optional Terminating Actions
(1) Accomplishing the preventative
modification, including doing high frequency
EC open-hole inspections for cracking in the
existing fastener holes, in accordance with
Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, except as required by paragraph (l)(2)
of this AD, terminates the inspections
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD,
provided the preventative modification is
done before further flight after accomplishing
an inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD. If any cracking is found during any
high frequency EC open-hole inspection,
before further flight, repair using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
(2) Replacing the crown skin panel
between station (STA) 297 and STA 439, and
stringers S–4L and S–4R, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, or
using a method approved in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of
this AD, terminates the inspections required
by paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this
AD.
(l) Exceptions to Service Information
Specifications and Preventative Modification
(1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated
December 2, 2016, specifies a compliance
time ‘‘after the Revision 2 date of this service
bulletin,’’ or ‘‘after the Revision 3 date of this
service bulletin,’’ this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance
time after the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 3, dated
December 2, 2016, specifies to contact Boeing
for repair instructions: Before further flight,
repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (n) of this AD.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(m) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for Zone 1
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757–53–0097, dated November 22, 2010
(which was incorporated by reference in AD
2011–01–15); Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757–53–0097, Revision 1,
dated January 6, 2011; or Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757–53–0097,
Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
(n) 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 (o)(1) of this AD. Information may
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 May 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-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) AMOCs approved for AD 2011–01–15
are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of
this AD; except, as of the effective date of this
AD, AMOCs that extend the initial
compliance times specified in AD 2011–01–
15 are no longer approved for the compliance
time extension and the compliance times
required by this AD must be complied with.
(5) For service information that contains
steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of
paragraphs (n)(5)(i) and (n)(5)(ii) 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.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
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. For information
on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
21153
I. Table of Abbreviations
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2017–0357]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Potomac River, Newburg,
MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Potomac River.
This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life on navigable waters
during a fireworks display in Charles
County near Newburg, MD, on June 17,
2017. This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit persons and vessels from
entering the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Maryland-National Capital Region or a
designated representative. We invite
your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 5, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2017–0357 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
(o) Related Information
comments.
(1) For more information about this AD,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
contact Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer,
you have questions about this proposed
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ronald
Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– Houck, Sector Maryland-National
Capital Region Waterways Management
5348; fax: 562–627–5210; email:
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
Eric.Schrieber@faa.gov.
410–576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
uscg.mil.
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd.,
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 7,
2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–07938 Filed 5–4–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUMMARY:
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On April 11, 2017, Gilligan’s Pier of
Newburg, MD, notified the Coast Guard
that it will be conducting a shortduration aerial fireworks display at 9
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 86 (Friday, May 5, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21146-21153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07938]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2016-3697; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-143-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) that proposed to supersede AD 2011-01-15, which applies to certain
The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes. AD
2011-01-15 requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin of the crown skin panel along the chem-milled step at certain
stringers, and repair, if necessary. This action revises the notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by reducing the compliance time for certain
inspections. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products. Since these actions impose an additional burden over
that proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow
the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.
DATES: We must receive comments on this SNPRM by June 19, 2017.
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.
[[Page 21147]]
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740; 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. 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-2016-3697.
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-
3697; 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 (ACO), 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 proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-3697;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-143-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2011-01-
15, Amendment 39-16572 (76 FR 1351, January 10, 2011) (``AD 2011-01-
15''). AD 2011-01-15 applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 757-
200, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes. AD 2011-01-15 requires
repetitive inspections for cracking of the fuselage skin of the crown
skin panel along the chem-milled step at stringers S-4L and S-4R, from
station (STA) 297 through STA 439, and repair if necessary. AD 2011-01-
15 also includes terminating action for the repetitive inspections of
the repaired areas only. AD 2011-01-15 resulted from reports of
cracking in the fuselage skin of the crown skin panel. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2016 (81 FR 8157)
(``The NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of the initiation of
new fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin of the crown skin panel along
locally thinned channels adjacent to the chem-milled steps. The NPRM
proposed to add repetitive inspections for cracking in additional areas
and repair if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to remove airplanes
from the applicability in AD 2011-01-15. The NPRM also proposed to add
an optional skin panel replacement which would terminate all
inspections and an optional preventative modification that would
terminate certain inspections.
Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the NPRM, we have received a report that cracking
was found earlier than the compliance time specified for the Zone 1
inspections identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015 (referenced in the NPRM as
the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
specified actions). Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, has been issued to reduce the
compliance time for the Zone 1 inspections.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. The service information describes
procedures for repetitive external sliding probe eddy current (EC) and
external spot-probe-medium-frequency EC inspections for cracking of the
crown skin panel, repair, a preventive modification, and replacement of
the crown skin panel. 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.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM
FedEx provided comments that support the intent of the NPRM. FedEx
also stated that the inspection area is within the affected area of its
passenger-to-freighter modification per supplemental type certificate
(STC) ST03562AT. FedEx noted that ST Aerospace will apply for an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC).
Request To Reduce the Compliance Threshold for Zone 1 Inspections
Boeing asked that we change paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD to
reduce the compliance threshold for the Zone 1 inspections from 18,000
to 15,000 total flight cycles. Boeing stated that a grace period could
be provided for airplanes that have exceeded 15,000 total flight
cycles. Boeing noted that an operator reported a crack finding in Zone
1 that occurred on an airplane with 15,722 total flight cycles. Boeing
added that previous data supported the threshold of 18,000 flight
cycles, but this new finding supports the 15,000 total flight cycle
threshold. Boeing stated that since FAA letter 120S14-181, dated March
26, 2014 (which extends the compliance times specified in AD 2011-01-
15), and Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015 (which specifies the 18,000 flight-
cycle compliance time), were released, some operators may have
suspended or delayed inspections beyond 15,000 total flight cycles and
up to 18,000 total flight cycles. Boeing added that a short grace
period of 200 flight cycles or 90 days (which is similar to the grace
period in AD 2011-01-15) should be applied for
[[Page 21148]]
the initial inspection for airplanes on which the 15,000 total flight
cycle threshold has been exceeded.
We agree with the commenter's request to reduce the compliance
threshold for the Zone 1 inspections from 18,000 to 15,000 total flight
cycles, for the reasons provided. Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, has been
issued to reduce the compliance time for the Zone 1 inspections. We
have changed the compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this
proposed AD and added a new paragraph (h) to this proposed AD to
specify the reduced compliance times.
Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions
Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the STC
ST01518SE does not affect compliance with the actions specified in the
NPRM.
We agree with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the proposed AD (in the NPRM) as (c)(1) and added a new paragraph
(c)(2) to this proposed AD to state that installation of STC ST01518SE
does not affect the ability to accomplish the proposed actions.
Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01518SE is installed, a
``change in product'' AMOC approval request is not necessary to comply
with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Request To Remove Certain Duplicate Language
European Air Transport Leipzig GmbH and DHL Air Ltd. asked that we
remove all duplicated data from the NPRM, and only refer to the
compliance tables specified in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. The commenters
stated that the compliance information is contained in detail in the
referenced service information, and is repeated in the NPRM without
benefit of clarification. The commenters added that the stringers
identified for inspection in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the
proposed AD are incorrect, and should refer to inspection Zone 3
containing stringers S-3L, S-2L, S-1, S-2R, and S-3R.
We partially agree with the commenters' request. We agree to revise
this proposed AD for clarity but we do not agree to remove all of the
details for the required actions in this proposed AD. The stringers
identified for inspection in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the
proposed AD are correct, as specified in the referenced service
information. However, paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM) should have specified between stringers S-3L
to S-3R instead of ``at stringers S-3L and S-3R.'' Since the stringer
location is clear in the service information, we have removed the
reference to the stringers in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of
this proposed AD. Instead, we have added a reference to the Zone 3
areas of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
Request To Clarify Zone 1 Inspection Language
Boeing and United Airlines (UA) asked that we clarify the
inspection language specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of
the proposed AD. Boeing asked that we include ``Zone 1 areas'' and ``as
applicable'' in the description. UA stated that it appears that the
inspections are for ``Zone 1 areas.'' Boeing stated that the Zone 1
areas are clearly delineated in Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
We agree with the commenters' request for the reason provided. As
stated previously, this proposed AD cites Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. We
have clarified the inspection language in paragraph (g)(1) of this
proposed AD. We have also clarified similar inspection language in
paragraph (g)(2) of this proposed AD.
Request To Clarify Optional Terminating Action
UA asked that we clarify the optional terminating action in
paragraph (j)(2) of the proposed AD, to eliminate the need for a new
AMOC as terminating action for the inspections after replacing the
crown skin panel using a method approved in accordance with paragraph
(m) of the proposed AD. UA noted that Note (c) of Table 1, Note (b) of
Table 2, and Note (b) of Table 3 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2,
dated July 28, 2015, stipulate that the skin replacement itself is
considered terminating action to all inspections done in accordance
with the referenced service information. UA added that this is based on
the fact that the skin chem-mill process defect should not be present
in the new skin. UA noted that this method of skin replacement is not
part of the safety consideration, and should not require a new AMOC.
We agree with the commenter's request. We have clarified paragraph
(k)(2) of this proposed AD (which was referred to as paragraph (j)(2)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)) to add replacing the crown skin panel
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2,
2016, or using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (n) of this proposed AD (which was referred to
as paragraph (m) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)), terminates the
inspections.
Request To Address the Possibility That Cracking May Have Been Found
During Inspections Required by AD 2011-01-15
Boeing asked that we include the possibility that cracking may have
been found during the inspections required by paragraph (g) of AD 2011-
01-15 in the provisional requirements of paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM). Boeing recommended including a
reference to paragraph (g) of AD 2011-01-15 as follows: ``For airplanes
on which any crack is found during any inspections required by
Paragraph (g)(1) of this AD or previously per AD 2011-01-15, Paragraph
(g); or any repair . . . .'' Boeing added that to exclude this language
could lead operators to infer that it precludes previous findings from
inclusion in the provisional statement.
We acknowledge the commenter's concerns. As of the effective date
of the final rule following this SNPRM, AD 2011-01-15 will no longer
exist since it will be superseded by the new AD. For this reason, we do
not typically refer to a superseded AD in a new AD requirement.
However, paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of this proposed AD do include
findings from paragraph (g) of AD 2011-01-15. Paragraph (h) of AD 2011-
01-15 states that a repair must be done before further flight if any
crack is found. Therefore, for any crack found before the effective
date of the final rule, the crack should already have been repaired.
Paragraph (g)(2) of this proposed AD states ``. . . or any repair is
installed that covers any portion of the Zone 1 inspection area . . .''
and that statement covers the crack findings in AD 2011-01-15.
In addition, paragraph (m) of this proposed AD provides credit for
Zone 1 inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD, if
those actions were performed before the effective date of the final
rule using Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, dated
November 22, 2010; Revision 1, dated January 6, 2011; or Revision 2,
dated July 28, 2015. We
[[Page 21149]]
have not changed this proposed AD in this regard.
Request To Include Credit for Previous Inspections
Boeing and UA asked that a new paragraph (l)(3) be added to the
proposed AD to provide credit for previous inspections done using
previous revisions of the referenced service information to accomplish
the inspections in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. Those inspections were
approved as an AMOC to AD 2011-01-15.
We do not agree with the commenter's request. It is not necessary
to include credit for inspections that were done using previous
revisions of the referenced service information, because credit for
those inspections is already provided in paragraph (m) of this proposed
AD. Therefore, we have not changed this proposed AD in this regard.
Request To Include Credit for Previously Approved Repairs
UA asked that we include credit language in this proposed AD for
inspecting previously approved repairs, as specified in Note (a) of
Table 1, Note (c) of Table 2, and Note (c) of Table 3 of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-
53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. UA stated that including this
credit would avoid unnecessary work stoppage and minimize future AMOC
requests for repairs which meet these criteria.
We agree that operators are allowed credit for inspecting
previously approved repairs, as specified in the notes in Tables 1, 2,
and 3 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. However,
we do not agree that the language in those notes should be added to
this proposed AD because Parts 1, 2, and 3 of the Work Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016, also include those credit notes. This proposed
AD requires accomplishing the specified actions in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions, which includes those notes in the Work
Instructions; therefore, operators are given credit. We have not
changed this proposed AD in this regard.
Request To Clarify Certain Inspection Areas
Boeing and UA asked that we clarify the inspection area in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD to include the
Zone 2 areas, and also that we clarify the inspection area in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the proposed AD to include the
Zone 3 areas. Boeing and UA stated that the zones are identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2,
dated July 28, 2015.
We agree with the commenters' requests for the reason provided. As
stated previously, this proposed AD cites Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. We
have clarified the inspection language in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii), and (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii), of this proposed AD to
include the Zone 2 and Zone 3 areas, respectively.
Request To Clarify Sections in Service Information With Inspection
Instructions
Boeing asked that we change paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the inspections should be done using the instructions
specified in Part 1 or Part 2 of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. Boeing stated
that this clarification would avoid confusion.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(1)(i), and (g)(1)(ii) of this
proposed AD to include doing the inspection as specified in Part 1 or
Part 2 of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
Boeing and UA asked that we change paragraph (g)(2) of the proposed
AD to clarify that the Zone 2 inspections should be done using the
instructions specified in Part 4 or Part 5 of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. Boeing
stated that those areas are clearly identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015, and should be included for clarity.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2), (g)(2)(i), and (g)(2)(ii) of this
proposed AD to include doing the Zone 2 inspections as specified in
Part 4 or Part 5 of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
Boeing and UA asked that we change paragraph (g)(3) of the proposed
AD to clarify that the Zone 3 inspections should be done using the
instructions specified in Part 6 or Part 7 of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015. Boeing
and UA stated that those areas are clearly identified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015, and should be included for clarity.
We agree with the commenters' request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(3), (g)(3)(i), and (g)(3)(ii) of this
proposed AD to include doing the Zone 3 inspections as specified in
Part 6 or Part 7 of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. The reference to Part 6 and
Part 7 also applies to the repetitive inspections.
Request To Clarify Inspection Language
Boeing asked that we clarify the inspection language in paragraph
(j)(1) of the proposed AD to better describe the inspections required
when doing the preventative modification. Boeing stated that it should
specify doing high frequency eddy current open-hole inspections for
cracking in existing fastener holes. Boeing noted that Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July 28,
2015, clearly specifies using an open-hole inspection, and added that
if this inspection is not defined it would permit operators to do a
surface inspection around the fasteners, which is not sufficient to
ensure there is no cracking in the fastener holes.
Boeing also asked that we change the paragraph identifier at the
end of paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD from (g) to (g)(1) since the
referenced inspection is actually required by paragraph (g)(1) of the
proposed AD. Boeing also asked that we change that paragraph identifier
in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of the proposed AD. Boeing stated that
paragraph (g) of the proposed AD merely refers to the inspection
paragraphs.
We agree with the commenter's requests for the reasons provided. We
have clarified the inspection language in paragraph (k)(1) of this
proposed AD (which was referred to as paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed
AD (in the NPRM)) to include ``. . . open-hole inspections for cracking
in existing fastener holes.''
We have also changed the paragraph identifiers in paragraphs (k)(1)
and (m) of this proposed AD (which were referred to as paragraphs
(j)(1), (l)(1), and (l)(2) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)) to specify
paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD accordingly.
Request To Clarify the Repair Area
Boeing asked that we change paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the
proposed AD to clarify that the repair can cover ``any portion'' of the
Zone 1
[[Page 21150]]
area, and asked that the description be changed to include those words.
Boeing stated that currently the inspection area specified in those
paragraphs could be interpreted as a repair that would need to cover
the entire Zone 1 inspection area; however, operators typically install
local repairs in areas where cracks are found.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of this proposed AD to
include the words ``any portion'' of the Zone 1 repair area to be
inspected.
Request To Clarify the Description of the Preventative Modification
Boeing asked that we change paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of the
proposed AD to clarify that ``any preventative modification'' is
actually ``the optional Zone 1 preventative modification specified in
paragraph (j)(1) of the NPRM.'' Boeing stated that there is only one
specific preventative modification specified in the referenced service
information that necessitates the inspections in paragraphs (g)(2) and
(g)(3) of the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We
have clarified paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of this proposed AD to
include the language provided by the commenter.
Request To Clarify Exceptions
Boeing asked that we change paragraph (k)(3) of the proposed AD to
clarify that the exception covers cracking found during any inspection
required by paragraph (h) or (j)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM).
Boeing stated repairing any crack found during the inspection before
installation of the preventative modification in paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM) should also be an exception.
We do not agree with the commenter's request. Paragraph (j) of this
proposed AD (which was referred to as paragraph (i) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM)) already specifies repairing any cracking found during
any inspection required by paragraph (i) of this proposed AD (which was
referred to as paragraph (h) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)), as well
as inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of
this proposed AD. Paragraph (k)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) was
intended to address cracking found during the preventative modification
specified in paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM). For
clarity in this proposed AD, we have added the corrective action for
cracking found during the inspection specified in paragraph (k)(1) of
this proposed AD (which was referred to as paragraph (j)(1) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM)) into paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed AD.
We have also removed paragraph (k)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
from this proposed AD.
Request To Clarify Certain AMOC Language
Two commenters requested that we clarify whether existing AMOCs are
approved. UA asked that paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) be changed to clarify that repairs approved previously as AMOCs
to AD 2011-01-15 require no further evaluation or approval. UA stated
that operators were required to repair any finding with a repair that
included an AMOC to AD 2011-01-15. UA stated that the current language
in paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) would invalidate
all such AMOCs, forcing operators to submit new requests for approval
for each previously approved repair. In addition, UA asked that we
include a new paragraph (l)(3) to provide credit for inspections
required by paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) that were
approved as an AMOC to AD 2011-01-15.
Boeing asked if paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
meant that new AMOCs are needed for all AMOCs to AD 2011-01-15. Boeing
asked that credit be given for inspections required by paragraph (g)(1)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) that were approved as an AMOC to AD
2011-01-15 in Boeing Alternative Method of Compliance Notice 757-53-
0097-AMOC-01, dated March 28, 2011, and stated in FAA letter 120S-11-
13, dated January 19, 2011. Boeing stated that the AMOC allowed a
longer interval for the inspections that are now incorporated in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 2, dated July
28, 2015. Boeing also noted that Boeing Alternative Method of
Compliance Notice 757-53-0097 AMOC 03, dated March 28, 2014, should be
rescinded since new data shows that a 15,000 total flight cycle
threshold is appropriate instead of 18,000 total flight cycles.
We agree that clarification is necessary. Although paragraph (m)(4)
of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) specified that AMOCs approved for AD
2011-01-15, are not approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions
of paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM); after further review
we have determined those AMOCs should continue to be approved, except
as of the effective date of this proposed AD, AMOCs that extend the
initial compliance times specified in AD 2011-01-15 are no longer
approved for the compliance time extension and instead, the compliance
times required by this proposed AD must be complied with. Boeing
Alternative Method of Compliance Notice 757-53-0097 AMOC 03, dated
March 28, 2014, extended the initial compliance times specified in AD
2011-01-15, and as stated previously, we have received new data that
does not justify the extended compliance times. We have changed
paragraph (n)(4) of this proposed AD (which was referred to as
paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)) accordingly.
Boeing asked that paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
be changed from ``For a repair method 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'' to ``For a repair method, modification deviation, or
alteration deviation 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.''
Boeing stated that this approval needs to specify not only for a repair
method to be approved, but also for modification and alteration
deviations to be approved, they must meet type certification.
We agree that some clarification is necessary. We have clarified
paragraph (n)(3) of this proposed AD (which was referred to as
paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)) as follows: ``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.''
Request To Correct Typographical Error
Boeing asked that we change the punctuation following the word
``repair'' in the first sentence of paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM) from a period to a comma. Boeing noted that this is a
punctuation error.
We agree with the commenter's request and have corrected the
[[Page 21151]]
punctuation in paragraph (n)(3) of this proposed AD (which was referred
to as paragraph (m)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)) accordingly.
Concerns About Correcting Unsafe Condition
A commenter, Jonathan Fortune, stated that it is imperative that
any potentially catastrophic structural issues identified in any
airplanes be promptly corrected. Mr. Fortune added that repair costs
are greatly outweighed by the potential marketing and industry disaster
that would occur if these airplanes crashed. Mr. Fortune noted that
Boeing should not be able to operate these airplanes without addressing
these issues. Mr. Fortune stated that he is willing to pay for
increased air travel costs in order to get the sense of safety
established through compliance with this regulation.
We acknowledge and appreciate the commenter's concerns. The FAA
works to ensure that all unsafe conditions are addressed in a timely
manner in accordance with FAA risk management policies that are
designed to promote aviation safety.
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.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.
Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM
This SNPRM 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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3697.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 652 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections (Zone 1) 2 work-hour x $85 per $0...................... $170 per $110,840 per
[Retained actions from AD hour = $170 per inspection inspection
2011-01-15]. inspection cycle. cycle. cycle.
Inspections (Zones 2 and 3) Up to 4 work-hours x $0...................... Up to $340 per Up to $221,680
[new proposed action]. $85 per hour = Up to inspection per inspection
$340 per inspection cycle. cycle.
cycle.
Optional modification........ Up to 615 work-hours Up to $26,496........... Up to $78,771.. Up to
x $85 per hour = Up $51,358,692.
to $52,275.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the optional replacement 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 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011-01-15, Amendment 39-16572 (76 FR 1351, January 10, 2011), and
adding the following new AD.
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-3697; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-143-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by June 19, 2017.
[[Page 21152]]
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2011-01-15, Amendment 39-16572 (76 FR 1351,
January 10, 2011) (``AD 2011-01-15'').
(c) Applicability
(1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200 and -300
series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016.
(2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01518SE (https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/38B606833BBD98B386257FAA00602538?OpenDocument&Highlight=st01518se)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01518SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of the initiation of fatigue
cracking in the fuselage skin of the crown skin panel along locally
thinned channels adjacent to the chem-milled steps. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the fuselage skin
of the crown skin panel, which could result in pressure venting and
consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections
Do the applicable inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1),
(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) For all airplanes: Within the compliance time specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD, do the Zone 1 inspection specified in
paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD. Repeat the applicable
Part 1 or Part 2 inspection thereafter at the applicable times
specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated
December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the preventative modification
specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD or the replacement
specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD terminates the inspections
required by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe eddy current (EC) inspection
for cracking of the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 1 areas
specified in, and in accordance with, Part 1 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-medium-frequency EC inspection
for cracking of the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 1 areas
specified in, and in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(2) For airplanes on which any crack is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD; or any repair is
installed that covers any portion of the Zone 1 inspection area
specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016; or the optional Zone 1
preventative modification specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD
is installed: At the applicable time specified in table 2 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (l)(1) of this AD: Do the Zone 2 inspection
specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(ii) of this AD. Repeat
the applicable Part 4 or Part 5 inspection thereafter at the
applicable times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the
replacement specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD terminates the
inspections required by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe EC inspection for cracking of
the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 2 areas specified in,
and in accordance with, Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-medium-frequency EC inspection
for cracking of the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 2 areas
specified in, and in accordance with, Part 5 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(3) For airplanes on which any crack is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD; or any repair is
installed that covers any portion of the Zone 1 inspection area
specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016; or the optional Zone 1
preventative modification specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD
is installed: At the applicable time specified in table 3 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (l)(1) of this AD, do the Zone 3 inspection
specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or (g)(3)(ii) of this AD. Repeat
the applicable Part 6 or Part 7 inspection thereafter at the
applicable times specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. Accomplishing the
replacement specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD terminates the
inspections required by this paragraph.
(i) Do an external sliding probe EC inspection for cracking of
the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 3 areas specified in,
and in accordance with, Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3,
dated December 2, 2016.
(ii) Do an external spot-probe-medium-frequency EC inspection
for cracking of the crown skin panel in the applicable Zone 3 areas,
specified in, and in accordance with, Part 7 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(h) Initial Compliance Time for Inspection Required by Paragraph (g)(1)
of This AD
Within the applicable compliance times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(4) of this AD, whichever occurs
latest: Do the initial inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD.
(1) For all airplanes: Before the accumulation of 15,000 total
flight cycles.
(2) For airplanes on which an external sliding probe EC
inspection for Zone 1, as specified in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, has been done as of the effective date
of this AD: Within 620 flight cycles after accomplishing the most
recent external sliding probe EC inspection for Zone 1.
(3) For airplanes on which an external spot-probe-medium-
frequency EC inspection for Zone 1, as specified in Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, has been done as of the
effective date of this AD: Within 200 flight cycles after
accomplishing the most recent external spot-probe-medium-frequency
EC inspection for Zone 1.
(4) For all airplanes: Within 200 flight cycles or 90 days after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
(i) Post-Preventive Modification Supplemental Inspections
For airplanes on which a preventive modification has been
installed as specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision
3, dated December 2, 2016: At the applicable time specified in table
4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016; do
eddy current and detailed inspections for cracking of the applicable
areas of the fuselage skin of the doublers, triplers, and fillers of
the preventive modification, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at the applicable times specified in table 4 of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016.
(j) Repair
If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), or (i) of this AD, repair before
further flight using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD. Doing the repair
ends the repetitive inspections for the repaired area only.
[[Page 21153]]
(k) Optional Terminating Actions
(1) Accomplishing the preventative modification, including doing
high frequency EC open-hole inspections for cracking in the existing
fastener holes, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-
0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, except as required by
paragraph (l)(2) of this AD, terminates the inspections required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, provided the preventative modification
is done before further flight after accomplishing an inspection
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. If any cracking is found
during any high frequency EC open-hole inspection, before further
flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
(2) Replacing the crown skin panel between station (STA) 297 and
STA 439, and stringers S-4L and S-4R, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, or using a
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (n) of this AD, terminates the inspections required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.
(l) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications and Preventative
Modification
(1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, specifies a compliance time
``after the Revision 2 date of this service bulletin,'' or ``after
the Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 3, dated December 2, 2016, specifies to contact Boeing for
repair instructions: Before further flight, repair using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(n) of this AD.
(m) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for Zone 1 inspections required
by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, dated November 22, 2010 (which was
incorporated by reference in AD 2011-01-15); Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097, Revision 1, dated January 6,
2011; or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-53-0097,
Revision 2, dated July 28, 2015.
(n) 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 (o)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-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) AMOCs approved for AD 2011-01-15 are approved as AMOCs for
the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD; except, as
of the effective date of this AD, AMOCs that extend the initial
compliance times specified in AD 2011-01-15 are no longer approved
for the compliance time extension and the compliance times required
by this AD must be complied with.
(5) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(n)(5)(i) and (n)(5)(ii) 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.
(o) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Eric Schrieber,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO,
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: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
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. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 7, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-07938 Filed 5-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P