[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 125 (Wednesday, June 30, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34979-34980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-16324]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 98-NM-243-AD; Amendment 39-11214; AD 99-14-05]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 777-200 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 777-200 series airplanes, that
requires inspections to verify correct installation of certain
fasteners located on the trailing edges of the horizontal and vertical
stabilizer; replacement of the existing fasteners with new fasteners
installed with wet sealant; and follow-on actions, if necessary. This
amendment is prompted by reports indicating that, during manufacture of
the horizontal and vertical stabilizers, certain fasteners attaching
the aluminum ribs and brackets to the trailing edges on the empennage
were not correctly installed with wet sealant. The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent corrosion and possible cracking of
those aluminum parts, which could result in loss of the attachment of
the elevator and rudder to the empennage and consequent reduced
controllability of the airplane.
DATES: Effective August 4, 1999.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of August 4, 1999.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules
Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan Wood, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2772; fax (425) 227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 777-200
series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on October 14,
1998 (63 FR 55065). That action proposed to require inspections to
verify correct installation of certain fasteners located on the
trailing edges of the horizontal and vertical stabilizer; replacement
of the existing fasteners with new fasteners installed with wet
sealant; and follow-on actions, if necessary.
Comments
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
One commenter supports the proposed rule; another commenter
indicates that it is not affected by the proposed rule.
Request To Extend Compliance Time
One commenter (an operator) requests that the FAA extend the
proposed compliance time for accomplishment of the actions from five
years to six years since the date of manufacture of the airplane. The
commenter indicates that its airplanes were delivered in February and
March 1996, which would require the inspections to be accomplished
within 2.2 years. In support of the request for extension, if approved
by the FAA, the commenter states that it will immediately apply
corrosion inhibiting compound to the area, inspect the fastener holes
for corrosion after oversizing, and remove any detected corrosion.
The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request and proposal.
If the fasteners were not correctly installed with wet sealant in
production, the application of corrosion inhibiting compound prior to
further flight would have limited effectiveness for corrosion
prevention. In light of the fact that there is continued degradation of
the structure due to corrosion, the FAA has determined that a one year
extension is not warranted. No change to the final rule is necessary in
this regard.
Request To Revise Cost Impact Information
One commenter requests that the cost impact information for
accomplishment of the inspections of the horizontal and vertical
stabilizer as stated in the proposed rule be revised to reflect the
work hours and associated costs specified in the service bulletin. The
commenter also states that the work hours and cost for replacement of
any incorrectly installed fasteners, in addition to the cost for the
fastener repair kit, should be included in the economic analysis.
The FAA does not concur that a change to the cost impact
information is necessary. The inspections of the horizontal and
vertical stabilizer that the commenter refers to are inspections that
must be accomplished to detect incorrect installation of any fasteners.
The cost impact information, restated below, describes only the
``direct'' costs of the specific actions required by this AD. The
number of work hours represents the time necessary to perform only the
inspections actually required by this AD. The FAA recognizes that, in
accomplishing the requirements of any AD, operators may 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; planning time; or time necessitated by other administrative
actions.
In addition, the economic analysis of the AD is limited to the cost
of actions actually required by the rule. It does not consider the
costs of ``on condition'' actions such as replacement of an incorrectly
installed fastener if one is detected during a required inspection
(``replace, if necessary''). Such ``on-condition'' replacement would be
required to be accomplished regardless of AD direction, in order to
correct an unsafe condition identified in an airplane and to ensure
operation of that airplane in an airworthy condition, as required by
the Federal Aviation Regulations.
[[Page 34980]]
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 18 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 2 airplanes of U.S. registry
will be affected by this AD.
It will take approximately 331 work hours per airplane to
accomplish the required inspection of the horizontal stabilizer, at an
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of this inspection, as required by this AD, on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $39,720, or $19,860 per airplane.
It will take approximately 206 work hours per airplane to
accomplish the required inspection of the vertical stabilizer, at an
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of this inspection, as required by this AD, on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $24,720, or $12,360 per airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects 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. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
99-14-05 Boeing: Amendment 39-11214. Docket 98-NM-243-AD.
Applicability: Model 777-200 series airplanes, line numbers 15
through 33, excluding line number 18; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent corrosion and possible cracking of the aluminum ribs
and brackets of the trailing edges on the empennage, which could
result in loss of the attachment of the elevator and rudder to the
empennage and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within five years since the date of manufacture of the
airplane, perform visual inspections of the specified number of
fasteners installed in each zone on the aluminum ribs and brackets
located on the trailing edges of the horizontal and vertical
stabilizer to verify correct installation of fasteners with wet
sealant, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
55A0005, Revision 1, dated June 4, 1998. Following the inspection,
oversize the holes for all removed fasteners, apply primer, and
install new, oversize fasteners with wet sealant, in accordance with
the alert service bulletin.
(1) If the fasteners are correctly installed with wet sealant,
no further action is required for that zone.
(2) If the fasteners are not correctly installed with wet
sealant in any zone, remove the remaining fasteners in that zone,
oversize the holes, apply primer, and install new, oversize
fasteners with wet sealant, in accordance with the alert service
bulletin.
(3) If it cannot be determined that the fasteners are correctly
installed with wet sealant, remove and inspect the specified number
of additional fasteners in that zone, oversize the holes, apply
primer, and install new, oversize fasteners with wet sealant, in
accordance with the alert service bulletin.
(i) If, after removal, all additional fasteners inspected in
that zone are found to be correctly installed with wet sealant, no
further action is required for that zone.
(ii) If, after removal, the fasteners in that zone are found to
be incorrectly installed, remove all other fasteners in the zone,
oversize the holes, apply primer, and install new, oversize
fasteners with wet sealant, in accordance with the alert service
bulletin.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
Special Flight Permits
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
Incorporation by Reference
(d) The actions shall be done in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777-55A0005, Revision 1, dated June 4, 1998. This
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,
P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Copies may be
inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(e) This amendment becomes effective on August 4, 1999.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 22, 1999.
D.L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-16324 Filed 6-29-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U