[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14982-14987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04826]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2013-0326; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-089-AD;
Amendment 39-17786; AD 2014-05-13]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-12-07 for
certain The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes equipped with
Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. AD 2004-12-07 required modification of the
nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive
detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or
missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain
other airplanes, AD 2004-12-07 required a one-time detailed inspection
of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper
alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current
inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if
necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or
missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary.
This new AD specifies a maximum compliance time limit. This AD was
prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational loads
applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that were
used during the initial design. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the strut.
DATES: This AD is effective April 22, 2014.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of April 22,
2014.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of July
21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004).
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999).
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0326; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6440;
fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561,
June 16, 2004). AD 2004-12-07 applied to certain The Boeing Company
Model 757 series airplanes equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2013 (78 FR 22215).
The NPRM was prompted by reports indicating that the actual operational
loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the analytical loads that
were used during the initial design. The NPRM proposed to retain the
requirements of AD 2004-12-07, which required modification of the
nacelle strut and wing structure; and for certain airplanes, repetitive
detailed inspections of certain aft bulkhead fasteners for loose or
missing fasteners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain
other airplanes, AD 2004-12-07 required a one-time detailed inspection
of the middle gusset of the inboard side load fitting for proper
alignment, and realignment if necessary; a one-time eddy current
inspection of certain fastener holes for cracking, and repair if
necessary; and a detailed inspection of certain fasteners for loose or
missing fasteners, and replacement with new fasteners if necessary. The
NPRM proposed to specify a maximum compliance time limit to modify the
nacelle strut and wing structure. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the strut.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013)
Boeing stated that it concurs with the contents of the NPRM (78 FR
22215, April 15, 2013).
[[Page 14983]]
Clarification of Effect of Winglet Installation
Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental
type certificate (STC) ST01518SE does not affect the actions specified
in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013).
We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) as (c)(1) and added new
paragraph (c)(2) to this final rule to state that installation of STC
ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/Body/0.48A!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) does not affect the ability to
accomplish the actions required by this final rule. 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.
Request To Clarify Concurrent Requirements
FedEx requested that we clarify the requirements of paragraph (j)
of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which specified concurrent
actions. FedEx explained that the NPRM requirement and paragraph 1.B.,
of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2,
2011, conflict with the information in paragraph D., of Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. FedEx stated
that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6,
dated December 2, 2011, states that Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin
757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994 (the concurrent actions
required by paragraph (j) of the NPRM); no longer need to be
accomplished.
We agree to clarify the concurrent actions. Table I of paragraph D.
in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2,
2011, is in error. We have added Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this final
rule, which states that paragraph D. of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, incorrectly states that the
actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1,
dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028,
Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no longer need to be accomplished.
Request To Change When Concurrent Actions Are To Be Done
American Airlines (AAL) requested that we change paragraph (j)
(concurrent actions) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013), which
specifies doing the actions at the same time as paragraph (i) of the
NPRM, to specify that the concurrent actions are to be done at the same
time as the actions required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. AAL stated
that the pylon modification action is mandated by paragraph (g) of the
NPRM, and paragraph (i) of the NPRM mandates only the time at which the
modification must be accomplished.
We do not agree with the commenter's request because, although the
requirement for the modification is first specified in paragraph (g) of
this final rule, which is a restatement from AD 2004-12-07, Amendment
39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), the new requirement is in
paragraph (i) of this final rule. Paragraph (i) of this final rule
correctly references paragraph (g) of this final rule. If the
concurrent actions specified in paragraph (j) of this final rule are to
be accomplished at the same time as paragraph (g) of this final rule,
as the commenter suggests, that would make the requirement retroactive,
and would potentially put operators out of compliance. We have not
changed this final rule in this regard.
Request for Repair Credit
AAL requested that we allow credit for repairs specified in
paragraph (k) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) that are made
``before the effective date of this AD'' using Boeing Service Bulletin
757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994.
We do not agree with the commenter's request. Paragraph (k)(1) of
this final rule requires that cracking be repaired using a method
approved by the FAA as specified in paragraph (n) of the final rule.
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994; and Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; do not
contain procedures for repairing cracking, and only specify to contact
Boeing if cracking is found. We infer that the commenter is requesting
credit for any repair done in accordance with procedures provided by
Boeing or with the operator's own methods. The commenter has not
provided any details about any such repairs, and therefore we cannot
give credit for these repairs. However, under the provisions of
paragraph (n) of this final rule, repairs may be approved if
substantiating data are provided showing that the repair provides an
acceptable level of safety.
For paragraph (k)(2) of this final rule, Boeing Service Bulletin
757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994, is already specified as
the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing repair
of the holes. In addition, since Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028,
dated March 31, 1994, does not contain procedures for repairing holes,
we cannot give credit for Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated
March 31, 1994. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n) of this
final rule, repairs may be approved if substantiating data are provided
showing that the repair provides an acceptable level of safety. We have
not changed this final rule in this regard.
Request To Clarify Inspections
AAL requested that we not require the paragraph following the
compliance table in paragraph l.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. AAL stated
that the interim inspections specified in the paragraph following the
compliance table in paragraph l.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, are unclear
and that, if required, the inspections should be specified in a new
(additional) paragraph.
We agree to clarify. Paragraphs (g) and (i) of this final rule
specifically require accomplishment of the modification of the strut as
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated
December 2, 2011, and do not require any interim inspections. Although
there are certain inspections specifically required in paragraphs (h)
and (j) of this final rule, there are no interim inspections specified
in any paragraph of this final rule. Therefore, the interim inspections
defined in the paragraph following the table in paragraph l.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6,
dated December 2, 2011, are not required by this final rule. We have
not changed this final rule in this regard.
Request To Do Work Out of Sequence
AAL requested that we allow instructions to be worked out of
sequence. AAL stated that by requiring operators to adhere to the
sequence of steps as organized in the service information, based on the
strictest interpretation, it can place an undue burden on operators and
drive longer aircraft out-of-service time. AAL asserted that not
allowing instructions to be worked out of sequence prevents operators
from working on the wing
[[Page 14984]]
structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously. AAL also
stated that without the leeway to work steps out of sequence, if damage
is encountered during a particular step, maintenance must wait for a
disposition and corrective action for that damage before continuing to
the next step.
We partially agree with the commenter's request. We agree with
revising the final rule to allow work to be accomplished on the wing
structure and the removed pylon structure simultaneously, and for work
to be accomplished on both pylons simultaneously, because no
detrimental effect on the airplane results from accomplishing the
service information in this way.
We disagree with allowing all service information steps to be
worked out of sequence. This allowance could be interpreted as allowing
service information steps at one pylon, or at one wing location, to be
performed out of sequence, which could detrimentally affect the result
of the modification.
We also disagree with stating that opposite sides of the strut can
be worked at different rates, as some tasks are necessary to be
performed in sequence. For further clarification of strut task
sequencing, operators may request approval of an AMOC by providing
additional details defining the tasks using the procedures defined in
paragraph (n) of this final rule.
We have added new paragraph (l) to this final rule, which states
that although Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated
December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the
strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut modifications
to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both struts to be
modified simultaneously. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs
accordingly. We have also referenced paragraph (l) in paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this final rule.
Request To Require Only Certain Service Information Steps
AAL requested that we require only the steps in the service
information that are critical for safety of flight. AAL suggested that
only Part II, Steps 6, 7, and 9-12; Part III, Steps 4-24; Part IV,
Steps 3-7; and Part VI, Steps 3-16 and 19; of Boeing Service Bulletin
757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, should be required.
AAL stated that preparation and open-up and close-up instructions are
not necessary to mandate and can be left to operator discretion on the
best methods without affecting the ability to address the safety issue
that exists.
We do not agree with AAL's request. Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, already allows operator's
discretion for certain actions. Note 8 of paragraph 3.B.A., ``General
Information,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6,
dated December 2, 2011, specifies that when the words ``refer to'' are
used for a procedure, operators may use an accepted alternative
procedure. Note 11 of paragraph 3.B.A., ``General Information,'' of
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2,
2011, specifies that for access, all the identified parts do not need
to be removed if you can get access without removing the identified
parts and that additional parts may be removed if needed.
However, due to the complexity of the modification to the strut,
certain preparation and installation steps are needed to prevent damage
to the strut structure, systems components, and the engine. In
addition, a fuel leak check is specified in Boeing Service Bulletin
757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, to ensure that the
modification and reassembly were completed and that no hidden damage
exists. Therefore, no changes have been made to this final rule in this
regard.
Although we have not revised this final rule, we do agree with the
concept of minimizing AD requirements when appropriate. The FAA worked
in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives
Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to enhance the AD
system. One enhancement is a new process for annotating which steps in
the service information are ``required for compliance'' (RC) with an
AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks in the service
information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding
of AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD
compliance. In response to the AD Implementation ARC, the FAA released
AC 20-176, dated December 19, 2011 (http://rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
a78cc91a47b192278625796b0075f419/$FILE/AC%2020-176.pdf); and Order
8110.117, dated September 12, 2012 (http://rgl.avs.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgOrders.nsf/0/984bb9eb07cdd86986257a7f0070744c/
$FILE/Order%208110.117.pdf), which include the concept of RC. The FAA
has begun implementing this concept in ADs when we receive service
information containing RC steps. While some design approval holders
have implemented the RC concept, the implementation is voluntary. The
FAA does not intend to develop or revise AD requirements to incorporate
the RC concept if it is not included in the service information.
Contrary to AAL's statement that ADs should mandate only those
service bulletin provisions that are necessary to ensure safety of
flight, ADs generally contain requirements that are reasonably related
to addressing the unsafe condition, as determined by the FAA and the
design approval holder that developed the service bulletin. Typically,
operators' maintenance programs were not developed in recognition of
the unsafe condition that is being addressed by an AD. Whenever we
issue an AD, those programs had failed to prevent the unsafe condition
in the first place. Therefore, many provisions of ADs address aspects
of accomplishing the required maintenance that are necessary to prevent
operators from inadvertently aggravating the unsafe condition or
introducing new unsafe conditions.
For many years, the Air Transport Association (now Airlines for
America, A4A) has sponsored the ``Lead Airline'' program through which
individual airlines are provided an opportunity to prototype
manufacturers' draft service instructions before they are finalized.
One objective of this activity is to minimize the procedures included
in the instructions that are considered unnecessary. Therefore, when
the FAA receives a manufacturer's service bulletin, we recognize that
the procedures specified have been determined to be necessary by both
the manufacturer and affected operators. As in this case, the
instructions provided in service bulletins referenced in ADs are
reasonably related to addressing the unsafe condition.
As always, if AAL or any other operator prefers to address the
unsafe condition by means other than those specified in the referenced
service information, they may request approval for an alternative
method of compliance using the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of
this final rule, and, if approved, may use it instead of the procedures
specified in the service information.
Request To Correct Typographical Error
AAL requested that we revise paragraph (j)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR
22215, April 15, 2013) to remove the extra word ``dated'' from the
service information citation.
[[Page 14985]]
We agree to correct the typographical error and have removed the
extra word ``dated.''
Additional Change Made to This Final Rule
The information in paragraph (l)(3) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April
15, 2013) has been separated into two paragraphs in this final rule
(paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this final rule). In addition, we
changed the reference in paragraph (m)(3) of this final rule to refer
to the actions required by paragraph (j)(1) of this final rule. We also
changed the reference in paragraph (m)(4) to this final rule to refer
to the actions required by paragraph (j)(2) of this final rule. The
content has not been changed.
The information in paragraph (m)(4) of the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April
15, 2013) has been added to new paragraph (n)(4) of this final rule.
The content has not been changed.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 22215, April 15, 2013).
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 176 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification............................ Up to 1,188 work-hours x $85 $0 Up to $100,980........... Up to $17,772,480.
[retained from AD 2004-12-07, Amendment per hour = $100,980.
39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004)].
One-time Inspection [retained from AD 1 work-hour x $85 per hour = 0 $85...................... $14,960.
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR $85.
33561, June 16, 2004)].
Concurrent modification [new action, 30 142 work-hours x $85 per hour 0 $12,070.................. $362,100.
airplanes]. = $12,070.
Concurrent inspection and fastener 104 work-hours x $85 per hour 0 $8,840................... $106,080.
installation [new action, 12 airplanes]. = $8,840.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.
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 have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), and adding
the following new AD:
2014-05-13 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17786; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0326; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-089-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective April 22, 2014.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD supersedes AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR
33561, June 16, 2004).
(c) Applicability
(1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF,
and
[[Page 14986]]
-200CB series airplanes, certificated in any category, line numbers
1 through 735 inclusive, equipped with Rolls-Royce RB211 engines.
(2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/48e13cdfbbc32cf4862576a4005d308b/Body/0.48A!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) 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 54, Nacelles/
Pylons.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports indicating that the actual
operational loads applied to the nacelle are higher than the
analytical loads that were used during the initial design. We are
issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut
structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Retained Modification
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with
new service information: Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure
according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17,
1997; Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; Revision 2, dated June 13,
2002; or Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified in
paragraph (l) of this AD; at the later of the times specified in
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, except as required by
paragraph (i) of this AD. All of the terminating actions described
in paragraph I.C., Table I, ``Strut Improvement Bulletins,'' on page
6 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997; page
7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April
15, 1999; and on page 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035,
Revision 2, dated June 13, 2002; as applicable; must be accomplished
prior to, or concurrently with, the accomplishment of the
modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure required by
this paragraph. After July 21, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-
12-07), use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 2,
dated June 13, 2002; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035,
Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. After the effective date of this
AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated
December 2, 2011. Accomplishment of the actions required by
paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this
paragraph.
(1) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total flight cycles, or
prior to 20 years since the date of manufacture of the airplane,
whichever occurs first.
(2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the
effective date of AD 99-24-07, Amendment 39-11431 (64 FR 66370,
November 26, 1999)).
(h) Retained Inspection and Repair
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD
2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004), with
new service information. For airplanes on which the modification
required by paragraph (g) of this AD has been done according to
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997: Within
15,000 flight cycles after doing the modification required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 3 years after July 21, 2004 (the
effective date of AD 2004-12-07), whichever is later; do a one-time
detailed inspection of the middle gusset of the inboard side load
fitting for proper alignment, according to Part II of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035,
Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision 2, dated June 13,
2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011; except as specified by
paragraph (l) of this AD. If the gusset is not aligned properly:
Before further flight, machine the gusset to the specified angle
according to the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April 15, 1999; or Revision
2, dated June 13, 2002, excluding Evaluation Form; or Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011. As of the
effective date of this AD, use only Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011, for accomplishing the
actions required by this paragraph.
(i) New Compliance Time Limitation
For airplanes on which the modification of the nacelle strut and
wing structure required by paragraph (g) of this AD has not been
done as of the effective date of this AD: Do the modification
required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the later of the times
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD.
(1) At the time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2,
2011, except that where this service bulletin specifies a compliance
time ``from the date on Revision 4 of this service bulletin,'' this
AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after
the effective date of this AD.
(2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after January 3, 2000 (the
effective date of AD 99-24-07, Amendment 39-11431 (64 FR 66370,
November 26, 1999)).
(j) New Concurrent Actions
Concurrently with or prior to the accomplishment of the actions
required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do the actions specified in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985: Modify the nacelle strut
upper spar, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated August 30,
1985.
(2) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994: Do a detailed inspection
and non-destructive test inspection for cracking of the lower chord,
mid-chord, and holes (for cracking, galling, corrosion, or damage
due to fastener removal), in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1,
dated August 25, 1994.
Note 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD: Paragraph D. of Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated December 2, 2011,
incorrectly states that the actions described in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated August 30, 1985; and Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994; no
longer need to be accomplished.
(k) Repair
(1) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the
cracking using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.
(2) If any holes with galling, corrosion, or damage due to
fastener removal are found during any inspection required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the
holes, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated August 25, 1994.
(l) Work Sequence Requirement
Although Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated
December 2, 2011, specifies to work the wing modification before the
strut modification, this AD allows for the wing and strut
modifications to occur simultaneously. This AD also allows for both
struts to be modified simultaneously.
(m) Credit for Previous Actions
(1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035,
Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011;
which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.
(2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035,
Revision 4, dated June 18, 2009; or Revision 5, dated June 9, 2011;
which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.
(3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-
0003, dated December 14, 1984, which is not incorporated by
reference in this AD.
(4) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Boeing
[[Page 14987]]
Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, dated March 31, 1994, which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD.
(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle 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: [email protected].
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
(4) AMOCs approved for AD 2004-12-07, Amendment 39-13666 (69 FR
33561, June 16, 2004), are approved as AMOCs for paragraphs (g) and
(h) of this AD, except for AMOCs that approved a revised compliance
time.
(o) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6440; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
[email protected].
(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified
in paragraphs (p)(6) and (p)(7) of this AD.
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
April 22, 2014.
(i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0003, Revision 1, dated
August 30, 1985.
(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0028, Revision 1, dated
August 25, 1994.
(iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 6, dated
December 2, 2011.
(4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
July 21, 2004 (69 FR 33561, June 16, 2004).
(i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 1, dated April
15, 1999.
(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, Revision 2, dated June
13, 2002.
(5) The following service information was approved for IBR on
January 3, 2000 (64 FR 66370, November 26, 1999).
(i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-54-0035, dated July 17, 1997.
(ii) Reserved.
(6) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; phone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(7) You may view copies of this service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call 425-227-1221.
(8) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 19, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-04826 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P