[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 http://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 http://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 http://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: [email protected].
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 http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
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 http://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 (http://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: [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, 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: [email protected].
(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