[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81412-81417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31899]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0913; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-101-AD;
Amendment 39-16545; AD 2010-26-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes. This AD
requires inspections for scribe lines in the fuselage skin at lap
joints, the splice strap at certain butt joints, the skin or doubler at
certain approved repair doublers, and the skin at decal locations; and
related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This AD
results from reports of scribe line damage found adjacent to the skin
lap joints, decals, and wing-to-body fairings. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct scribe lines, which can develop into fatigue
cracks in the skin. Undetected fatigue cracks can grow and cause sudden
decompression of the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective February 1, 2011.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of February 1,
2011.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; e-mail [email protected];
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; 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 (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
[[Page 81413]]
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6447; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 19, 2009 (74
FR 53442). That NPRM proposed to require inspections for scribe lines
in the fuselage skin at lap joints, the splice strap at certain butt
joints, the skin or doubler at certain approved repair doublers, and
the skin at decal locations; and related investigative and corrective
actions, if necessary.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received from the commenters.
Support for the NPRM
The National Safety Transportation Board (NTSB) and Air Transport
Association (ATA), on behalf of its member AirTran, support the intent
of the NPRM.
Request To Refer to Latest Revision of Service Bulletin
The Boeing Company requests that we revise the NPRM to refer to the
latest version of the appropriate service information, Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009.
We agree to refer to the latest version of the service information.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18,
2009, shows changes of airplane operators in Paragraph 1.A.,
Effectivity, and clarifies requirements for inspections of areas of the
fuselage having decals. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision
1, dated November 18, 2009, does not require additional work beyond the
original version of that service bulletin, which was cited as the
appropriate source of service information in the NPRM. We have revised
the AD requirements to refer to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289,
Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009, as the appropriate source of
service information, and we have added paragraph (h) to this final rule
to provide credit for actions performed in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009.
Request To Update Exception in Note 1 of the NPRM
The Boeing Company requests that we revise the NPRM to update the
exception referenced in Note 1 of the NPRM because Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009, adds an
exception to the inspections. The additional exception is described in
subparagraph 1.f. in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of that service
bulletin. Southwest Airlines also requests that we add the same
provision. Southwest notes that the additional provision states, ``If
the operator's records show that decal installation and removal
procedures were used, at all times since delivery, which included pre-
cutting decals prior to installation on the airplane and no use of
metallic tooling of any kind during the installation or removal of
decals on the airplane, then the [decal] inspections [per Tables 5
through 9] are not required.''
We agree. The specified decal installation and removal procedures
have been shown to not result in scribe damage to the fuselage. We have
updated Note 1 in this AD to include the additional exception specified
in subparagraph 1.f. in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009.
Request To Include Training About Scribe Lines and Scratches
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is concerned that
the NPRM does not address the underlying condition that mechanics and
technicians do not have the knowledge, training, and awareness to
recognize that minor damage to pressurized airplane skin can result in
fatigue cracking, which can result in depressurization events. The NTSB
requests that the FAA reexamine existing maintenance practices and
training techniques to educate personnel about the serious consequences
of minor scratches and scribe lines on pressurized fuselage skin
panels.
We acknowledge the NTSB's concerns. However, such training is
outside the scope of the AD requirements as defined in 14 CFR part 39.
(Part 12 provides inspection procedures for scribe marks found before
the initial inspection.) We have worked with industry groups and
manufacturers to increase awareness of scribe lines and their effects
on skin panels. This topic has also been addressed at Industry Steering
Committee (ISC), Maintenance Steering Group (MSG), and Structures Task
Group (STG) meetings. We have not changed the AD in regard to this
issue.
Request To Remove Hard Time Date
Continental Airlines (Continental) requests that we review the hard
time date of July 1, 2007, that is stated in ``Compliance,'' paragraph
1.E.1(a) through 1.E.1(e) of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289,
dated January 14, 2009. Continental states that a hard time date should
not matter if the operator can provide documents that show sealant and
decals were removed using an approved method after the operator
received the airplane.
We have reviewed the hard time date, as requested by the commenter.
The date of July 1, 2007, was selected because all the Boeing
documentation was revised as of this date to detail the proper method
for removing paint, sealant, and decals. Not all operators may have
used methods equivalent to the methods stated in this documentation,
but they may have used methods detailed in documentation published
before this date. As a result, the date of July 1, 2007, is included
appropriately in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009. Operators may submit a request for approval of an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) if their methods for removing
paint, sealant, and decals were implemented before July 1, 2007, and
provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed the AD in
regard to this issue.
Request To Incorporate Instructions into Structural Repair Manual (SRM)
Continental requests that the instructions given in Part 12 of the
work instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated
January 14, 2009, be incorporated into the structural repair manual
(SRM) before the release of the AD because the SRM is for non-routine
or non-scheduled events. (Part 12 provides inspection procedures for
scribe marks found before the initial inspection.) Continental states
that the current instructions make it difficult to comply with the NPRM
by the operators' mechanics because they would use the SRM only for
repair to damages that are discovered or that occurred during a non-
routine event.
[[Page 81414]]
We disagree with the request. Significant effort has been made to
educate operators about the effects of scribe lines on the fuselage
structure. Therefore, all mechanics should be aware of scribe lines.
Also, the service bulletins pertaining to scribe lines for all Boeing
models contain instructions for repairing scribe line damage found
before the inspection threshold. We have not changed the AD in regard
to this issue.
Request To Allow All Repairs Using the SRM
Continental requests that we revise the NPRM to allow all repairs
using the SRM. Continental states that it does not agree that all
repairs need to be approved by Boeing or the FAA Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, and in paragraphs (i) and (k) of
the NPRM. Continental proposes that we add an exception to Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, to allow all
repairs other than repairs done for the Limited Return to Service
(LTRS) program to be accomplished in accordance with the SRM or to be
FAA-approved.
Continental states because the scribe lines do not result from a
design deficiency, no differences exist between these repairs and any
other repairs on the airplanes. Continental states that if such an
exception is not allowed, operators are unfairly penalized by being
forced to use Boeing's repair services. While Continental acknowledges
that paragraph (k)(2) of the NPRM (now paragraph (p)(2) of the final
rule) allows requests for AMOC approvals, it states that the FAA's
response time to approve AMOCs does not allow airplanes to return to
service in a timely manner that supports operational requirements.
Continental states that this is why the designee program exists as
given in section 183.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
183.29) and FAA Order 8100.15, which should not be overridden by the
proposed AD.
We agree to revise the final rule to add an exception to the
accomplishment instructions specified by Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009. We agree that repairs to
the fuselage where the scribe line is removed are not different from
other repairs to the airplane. Also, Boeing has revised the Allowable
Damage section of the SRM to address scribe line damage. We have added
a new paragraph (k) to the final rule to allow for repair in accordance
with an FAA-approved method. We have also added Note 2 to the final
rule that provides guidance for repairing scribe damage.
Request To Correct ``Relevant Service Information'' in NPRM
Continental requests that we correct the ``Relevant Service
Information'' section in the NPRM because Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, does not specify final repairs by
using the SRM. Instead, Continental states that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, specifies to contact
Boeing for final repairs.
We agree. However, this section does not appear in this final rule.
We have not changed the AD in regard to this issue.
Request To Revise Exceptions for Airplanes That Have Been Scuff Sanded
Air Transport Association (ATA), on behalf of its member American
Airlines (American), states that the list of exceptions in section 1.E,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated
January 14, 2009, should be revised to specify that airplanes that have
been scuff sanded and repainted do not require inspections in areas
where they have been repainted. American states that it does not use
complete paint on the external surfaces and leaves most of the fuselage
in natural metal finish. American states that it rarely accomplishes a
chemical strip of the painted stripes and that the sealant can be
damaged by chemical strippers. This process does not require removal
and reapplication, which might cause scribe marks.
We partially agree. The operator's unique finish on the fuselage
limits the potential for the development of scribe lines. However, we
do not agree that changing this AD is necessary because operators may
interpret such an exception to allow sanding after paint and sealant
are removed, and these methods might eliminate any evidence of scribe
marks. Operators may submit requests for approval of an AMOC for their
particular finish configuration. We have not changed the AD in regard
to this issue.
Request To Revise Costs of Compliance
ATA, on behalf of its members Air Tran Airlines (Air Tran) and
American, requests that we revise the costs of compliance. AirTran
states that complying with the NPRM would cost $2,500 per airplane and
that it would have to procure special tooling for each site performing
the inspection. American Airlines states that complying with the NPRM
without any changes would cost it $1,004,080 for labor and $3,458,455
for additional out-of-service time.
We have revised the costs of compliance to increase the labor rate
from $80 to $85. However, we have not changed the costs of compliance
otherwise. The cost information below describes only the direct costs
of the specific actions required by this AD. Based on the best data
available, the manufacturer provided the number of work hours necessary
to do the required actions. This number represents the time necessary
to perform only the actions actually required by this AD. We recognize
that, in doing the actions required by an AD, operators might incur
incidental costs in addition to the direct costs. The cost analysis in
AD rulemaking actions, however, typically does not include incidental
costs such as the time required to gain access and close up, time
necessary for planning, or time necessitated by other administrative
actions. Those incidental costs, which might vary significantly among
operators, are almost impossible to calculate.
Request To Require Reporting of Only Positive Findings of Cracks
Southwest Airlines (Southwest) and Qantas request that we revise
the AD to require reporting of only crack findings. Southwest notes
that AD 2006-07-12, Amendment 39-14539 (71 FR 16211, March 31, 2006), a
similar AD that requires inspection for scribe lines on Model 737
airplanes, requires the reporting of cracks found only during LRTS
inspections, not scribe lines found as a result of the initial scribe
inspections. Qantas asks why a report for a one-time inspection is
required.
We agree to provide clarification of the rationale for reporting
requirements and to revise the reporting requirements. The data will be
used to determine if the existing inspection thresholds and the repeat
inspection intervals provided in the LRTS program may be increased,
which may result in less work for operators in the future. We have
revised paragraph (o) of this final rule to require reporting only
positive findings of cracks found during any inspections required by
this AD.
Request To Add Instructions for Addressing Scribe Lines Outside Zones
Southwest requests that we revise the AD to either state how to
address scribe lines found in zones outside of those zones specified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, or
add a statement that ``no
[[Page 81415]]
zone'' scribes do not require repetitive inspections or terminating
actions. Southwest did not provide justification for its request.
We disagree that revising the NPRM is necessary. This AD requires
inspections and a terminating action in only the zones identified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18,
2009. Any zone that is not identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009, is not subject to
inspection or repair requirements of this rule. (See paragraph 3.A.
Note 13 of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009.) We have not changed the AD in regard to this issue.
Request To Address Scribe Lines Less than 0.001 Inch Deep
Southwest requests that we revise the AD to address scribe lines
that are less than 0.001 inch deep. Southwest states that Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, states that no
further inspections are required for such scribe lines, but Southwest
requests that the AD specifically state that such lines do not require
terminating action. Southwest asks why the compliance time is ``before
further flight'' if no inspections are required. Southwest asks if that
means no additional NDT inspections are required at the time of finding
such lines.
We partially agree with the commenter's request. The compliance
table in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin
requires clarification as it shows the compliance time of ``before
further flight'' for inspecting scribe lines that are less than 0.001
inch deep. We have clarified this issue by stating in paragraph (m) of
this AD that no further inspections are required provided that correct
sealant removal procedures are used.
Request To Allow the Blending of Scribe Lines
Southwest requests that we revise the AD to allow operators to
blend scribe lines in accordance with the SRM by treating the scribe
line as a gouge or scratch. Southwest states that the 737-700 SRM does
not address scribe lines in the Allowable Damage section. Southwest
states that Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1262 (the appropriate source
of service information for a one-time inspection for scribe lines and
cracks in the fuselage skin at certain lap joints, butt joints,
external repair doublers, and other areas in AD 2006-07-12, Amendment
39-14539 (71 FR 16211, March 31, 2006)) allows the blending of scribe
lines in accordance with the SRM by treating the scribe line as a gouge
or scratch. However, Southwest notes, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, does not allow for the same
treatment, but recommends that operators contact Boeing for repair
instructions.
We agree. All Boeing Model 737 SRMs were revised as a result of the
scribe issue to address scribe damage in butt joints and within 1.0
inch of lap splice lower edges and external repair edges. This
information is found in the Allowable Damage sections of the SRMs. We
have added Note 2 to this final rule, as noted previously.
Request To Include Terminating Action for Repairing Scribe Lines
Southwest requests that accomplishing repairs or modifications in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1232 be an approved
method for terminating scribe line inspections. Southwest did not
provide any justification for its request.
We disagree. The repair and modification specified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53-1232 are specifically designed for chem mill
step cracking, not scribe lines. The modification specified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53-1232 would not meet the requirements of this
AD. The modification provided in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289,
Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009, does not extend a minimum of three
fastener rows below any scribe line damage at a lap joint, and the
doubler and tripler used on the repair specified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009, do not
extend a minimum of three fastener rows below any scribe damage at a
lap joint. We have not changed the AD in regard to this issue.
Request To Include an Exception for Inspections of Areas Covered by
Certain Repairs
Southwest requests that we revise the NPRM to contain a provision
excluding inspections of areas that are covered by repairs that span a
minimum of three rows above and below the inspection area.
We agree with the commenter. This exception is provided in other
scribe line ADs for other Boeing airplane models and should apply in
this AD as well. We have added paragraph (l) to this AD to provide this
exception to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009. In addition, we have also added an exception to not
require removal of a repair even if it does not span a potential scribe
by 3 or more fastener rows and there is no evidence of scribe lines
within 10 inches of the repair.
Request To Include Exception for Inspections of Areas Under the Dorsal
Fin Fairing
Southwest requests that we include an exception for inspections of
areas under the dorsal fin fairing. Southwest requests that this area
be treated the same as the wing-to-body fairing, i.e., if the area
under the dorsal fin fairing has never been stripped or repainted since
delivery, then the scribe line inspection should not be required in
that area.
We agree. We have added paragraph (n) of this final rule to provide
an exception for this area.
Request for Clarification of the Compliance Time
Qantas states since a scribe line can occur at any time during the
service life of an airplane and at many locations, this program uses
both total flight cycles and structural criticality of location to
determine the inspection requirements. Qantas asks if the compliance
time takes into account scribe lines induced before the first
repainting of the airplane.
We agree to provide clarification. The compliance times specified
in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18,
2009, do not account for scribe lines induced before the first
repainting. All analysis was accomplished using the assumption that
scribe lines might be induced during repainting only when the sealant
is removed from lap and butt joints and around external doublers. The
FAA has received no prior reports of scribe line damage on Model 737NG
airplanes before the first repainting. We will investigate the reports
provided by the commenter and all operators, and will take action as
necessary. We have not changed the AD in regard to this issue.
Request To Omit Instructions for Restoring the Surface Finish
ATA, on behalf of its member American, requests that we do not
consider as part of the AD the methodology in Part 11--``Surface Finish
Restoration'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated
January 14, 2009. American states that it has internal processes that
meet the intent of the requirement for the reapplication of removed
finishes, although those processes may not be identical in material,
workflow, or processes.
We partially agree with the commenter. While the unique finishes on
the fuselage may warrant using different processes than those used on a
[[Page 81416]]
typical fuselage, we disagree with the request because the commenter
did not provide details on the processes that meet the intent of the
AD. We will consider requests for an approval of an AMOC if data
demonstrate that it meets an acceptable level of safety. We did not
change the AD in regard to this issue.
Explanation of Changes Made to This AD
We have revised the ``Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)''
paragraph in this AD to clarify the delegation authority for the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization. We have
also revised paragraph (k) of this final rule to clarify that repairs
must be made in accordance with an FAA-approved method.
Explanation of Change to Applicability
We have revised the applicability of the existing AD to identify
model designations as published in the most recent type certificate
data sheet for the affected models.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.
Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance
Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour.
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in
the specified hourly labor rate.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 782 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this AD.
Table--Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours Average labor rate Parts Cost per product registered Fleet cost
per hour airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...................... 53 $85 $0 $4,505 per 782 $3,522,910 per
inspection cycle. inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
(3) 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.
You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
2010-26-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16545. Docket No. FAA-
2009-0913; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-101-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective February 1,
2011.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes, certificated in any category,
as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1,
dated November 18, 2009.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53:
Fuselage.
Unsafe Condition
(e) This AD results from reports of scribe line damage found
adjacent to the skin lap joints, decals, and wing-to-body fairings.
The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to detect and
correct scribe lines, which can develop into fatigue cracks in the
skin. Undetected fatigue cracks can grow and cause sudden
decompression of the airplane.
Compliance
(f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Inspection
(g) At the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1,
dated November 18, 2009 (``the service bulletin''), except as
provided in paragraph (i) of this AD, do detailed external
inspections for scribe lines in the fuselage skin at lap joints, the
splice strap at certain butt joints, the skin or doubler at certain
approved repair doublers, and the skin at decals; and do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions, by
accomplishing all
[[Page 81417]]
actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin, except as provided by paragraphs (j), (k), (l), (m), and
(n) of this AD.
Note 1: The inspection exceptions described in subparagraphs
1.a. through 1.f. in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009,
apply to this AD.
Credit for Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issue of Service
Bulletin
(h) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD
according to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, dated
January 14, 2009, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions specified in this AD.
Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications
(i) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009, specifies a compliance time after the date on the
service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
(j) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action, accomplish applicable actions using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p) of this
AD.
(k) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009, specifies to contact Boeing for instructions to
repair scribe lines: Remove the scribe line damage and install a
reinforcing repair using an FAA-approved method.
Note 2: Guidance for repairing scribe damage (e.g., nicks,
gouges, scratches, and corrosion) may be found in the Allowable
Damage section of the appropriate Boeing 737 Structural Repair
Manual (SRM).
Note 3: Operators must obtain an approved damage tolerance
evaluation for any repair installed to comply with Section
121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2)).
(l) Inspections are not required in areas where an existing
repair covers a potential scribe line or where the scribe line is
within 10 inches of the repair, provided the repair spans a minimum
of three fastener rows beyond each side of the potential scribe line
location (perpendicular to the scribe line direction). If a repair
doubler does not span the potential scribe line location by 3 or
more fastener rows, but there is no evidence of scribe lines within
10 inches of the repair, then inspections under the repair are not
required.
(m) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision 1, dated
November 18, 2009, specifies a compliance time of ``before further
flight'' for inspecting scribe lines less than 0.001 inch deep for
cracks, no further inspections are required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, provided that correct sealant removal procedures are used for
future work at those locations.
(n) If records show that the airplane has never been stripped
and repainted under the dorsal fin fairing since delivery from
Boeing, then this AD does not require inspections specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD for the butt joint, lap joint, and repairs
in the areas under the dorsal fin fairing.
Report
(o) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (o)(1) or
(o)(2) of this AD: Submit a report of positive findings of cracks
found during the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
You may use Appendix B of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289,
Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009. Send the report to Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.
The report must contain, at a minimum, the inspection results, a
description of any discrepancies found, the airplane serial number,
and the number of flight cycles and flight hours on the airplane.
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the
information collection requirements contained in this AD and has
assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(p)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-6447; fax (425)
917-6590. Or, e-mail information to [email protected].
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(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 an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization who 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.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(q) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1289, Revision
1, dated November 18, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; e-mail
[email protected]; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
(4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 10, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-31899 Filed 12-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P