[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 19 (Monday, January 29, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8085-8089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1947]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-365-AD; Amendment 39-12091; AD 2001-02-07]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes 
Powered by Pratt & Whitney Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series airplanes powered by 
Pratt & Whitney engines, that requires modification of the nacelle 
strut and wing structure. The actions specified by this AD are intended 
to prevent fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and consequent 
reduced structural integrity of the strut.

DATES: Effective March 5, 2001.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of March 5, 2001.

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: James Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2783; 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 767 series 
airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney engines was published in the 
Federal Register on July 10, 2000 (65 FR 42306). That action proposed 
to require modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure.

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.

[[Page 8086]]

Change the Word ``Damage'' Used in Paragraph (c)

    One commenter requests that the word ``damage'' specified in 
paragraph (c) of the proposed rule be changed to ``cracking or 
corrosion,'' to avoid unnecessary work and delays. The commenter states 
that, during accomplishment of the repair specified in paragraph (c) of 
the proposal, it encountered several conditions when approval was 
required for using oversized fasteners, tooling damage, tolerance 
changes, and minor trimming of parts.
    The FAA concurs with the commenter's request. The definition of 
``damage,'' as described in this AD, is cracking or corrosion. But, 
with respect to the deviations specified, only the deviations that 
exceed currently published limits (Structural Repair Manual, process 
specifications defined in the service bulletin) would need an 
alternative method of compliance (AMOC). Paragraph (c) of this AD has 
been revised to add the words ``cracking or corrosion'' in parenthesis 
after the word ``damage''.

Approval of Repairs by Designated Engineering Representative (DER)

    One commenter requests that the proposal include a provision for 
approval of AMOC's by a Boeing DER, instead of by the Manager of the 
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO). The commenter states that 
this provision will result in a more efficient and timely repair 
approval process. The FAA partially concurs with the commenter's 
request. Accomplishment of the repair in accordance with a method 
approved by the Manager is still acceptable, but paragraph (c) of this 
AD has been revised to add the DER approval as an option for 
accomplishment of the repair.

Clarify Certain Wording in Paragraph (a)

    One commenter notes that certain wording in paragraph (a) of the 
proposal which states, in part, ``* * * the conditions described in 
paragraphs 1 and 2 (interim inspection requirements) of page 67 have 
been met.'' The commenter recommends that the additional interim 
inspection requirements referred to in this paragraph be more apparent 
in the proposed AD. The FAA infers that the commenter is questioning 
what is meant by the term ``conditions'' as specified in paragraph (a) 
of the final rule. For that reason, paragraph (a) of this AD has been 
revised to define the word ``conditions'' as, ``* * * the corrosion 
prevention and control program inspections as described in paragraphs 1 
and 2 of Figure 1 have been met.''

Revise Paragraph (a) to Reference Figure 1

    One commenter requests paragraph (a) of the proposal be revised to 
reference Figure 1 of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, dated 
October 7, 1999, instead of page 67. The commenter states that this 
change would prevent confusion if the service bulletin is revised in 
the future. The FAA concurs, because Figure 1 is on page 67 and 
includes the flight cycle threshold formula, paragraph (a) of the final 
rule has been revised to specify Figure 1.

Revise Service Information References

    One commenter indicates the following:
    (1) There is a typographical error in one of the service bulletin 
numbers shown in the cost impact section and in paragraph (b) of the 
proposal. The proposal refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 767-53-0069; 
however, the number should be 767-54-0069;
    (2) Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0069, Revision 2, dated August 
31, 2000, is the latest revision of the service bulletin specified in 
paragraph (b) of the proposal and should be referenced in the final 
rule;
    (3) Information notice (IN) 02, dated November 22, 1999, should be 
included for Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, specified 
in paragraph (b) of the proposal;
    (4) Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0070, dated March 2, 2000, 
should be added to the list of prior or concurrent service bulletins 
referenced in paragraph (b) of the proposal. The commenter notes that 
this service bulletin corrects a potential fatigue problem on certain 
early-production airplanes by removing and replacing the wing front 
spar outboard pitch load fitting with an improved design.
    The FAA partially concurs with the commenter as follows:
    (1) The FAA has verified that there is a typographical error in the 
service bulletin number referenced in the proposal, as noted by the 
commenter, and the number has been corrected in the final rule.
    (2) Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0069, Revision 2, dated August 
31, 2000, has been added to the final rule as an additional source of 
service information for accomplishment of the applicable actions as 
specified in the final rule. The actions described in Revision 2 are 
essentially the same as those in Revision 1, which was referenced in 
the proposal as the appropriate source of service information for 
accomplishment of certain prior or concurrent actions.
    (3) The FAA does not have a copy of IN 02, dated November 22, 1999, 
to Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2. The commenter can 
provide this notice to the FAA with a request for an approval of an 
alternative method of compliance per paragraph (d) of this final rule.
    (4) The FAA has reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0070, 
dated March 2, 2000, and has determined that, although that service 
bulletin specifies replacing the outboard pitch load fitting of the 
wing front spar with an improved design, it is not directly related to 
this final rule and will be addressed at a later time by a separate 
rulemaking action.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

    One commenter requests that the compliance time required by 
paragraph (a) of the proposed AD be revised to allow for compliance at 
the later of the times specified. The commenter states that there is a 
concern with the threshold based on 20 years since the date of 
manufacture or ``as defined by the flight cycle threshold formula'' in 
paragraph (a) of the proposal, because the compliance time is 
``whichever occurs first.'' The commenter adds that it has met the 
requirements originally agreed upon and has planned accomplishment of 
the Strut Improvement Program (SIP) based on the optional flight cycle 
formula at the next (20C) maintenance check.
    The FAA does not concur. In developing an appropriate compliance 
time for the modification specified in paragraph (a) of this AD, the 
FAA considered not only the degree of urgency associated with 
addressing the subject unsafe condition, but accomplishment of the 
required modification within an interval of time (the earlier of the 
times specified) that parallels normal scheduled maintenance for the 
majority of affected operators. However, under the provisions of 
paragraph (d) of the final rule, the FAA may approve requests for 
adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted to 
substantiate that such an adjustment would provide an acceptable level 
of safety. No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Recommendation To Add a Note

    One commenter requests that the initial time of accomplishment for 
the additional interim inspection service bulletins referred to in 
paragraph (b) of the proposed rule be clarified. The commenter states 
that, at the all-

[[Page 8087]]

operators' SIP meeting, held in November 1999, the manufacturer stated 
that the interim inspection service bulletins were only required prior 
to 20 years of age in-service, or within the individual service 
bulletin limits, whichever occurs later, if the flight cycle formula 
was used to exceed the 20-year calendar limit. The commenter further 
states that this is acceptable since these inspections would not be 
required on airplanes being modified at 20 years of age, and 
accomplishment of these inspections after 20 years of age would ensure 
continued safety. The commenter recommends a note be added after 
paragraph (a) of the proposed rule, as follows: ``Note: If the flight 
cycle formula is used to defer modification accomplishment of service 
bulletin 767-54-0080 beyond 20 years of age, initial accomplishment of 
the inspections per the service bulletins listed in paragraph 2 of 
service bulletin 767-54-0080, Figure 1, must begin prior to 20 years of 
age, or within the individual service bulletin limits, whichever occurs 
later.''
    The FAA does not concur with the commenter's recommendation. 
Operators that want to use the flight cycle threshold formula must 
accomplish the referenced service bulletins prior to reaching 20 years 
since date of manufacture of the airplane. This means that by 20 years, 
the operator must have done either the terminating action in the 
service bulletin, or it must have performed at least the first 
recommended service bulletin inspection and the follow-on actions 
described in the service bulletin. No change to the final rule is 
necessary in this regard.

Request To Revise Cost Impact Information

    Two commenters request the cost impact information in the proposal 
be revised. One commenter states that the prior and concurrent service 
bulletin requirements referenced in the proposal do not match the hours 
specified in the cost impact section. The commenter adds that the cost 
impact is significantly more than the cost estimate in the proposal or 
the work hours in the service bulletins, which will be allocated for 
warranty reimbursement given by the manufacturer. The commenter gave 
cost estimate comparisons of the additional work hours for access and 
close-up as specified in the service bulletins, and the costs it 
incurred accomplishing the actions.
    A second commenter states that the actual labor for accomplishment 
of the actions specified in the proposal is significantly higher than 
the estimate in the service bulletins. The commenter notes that it will 
require a minimum of 2,978 work hours for its accomplishment of the 
actions, and the estimate does not include non-routine labor.
    The FAA does not concur with the commenters' request. The economic 
analysis of the AD is limited only to the cost of actions actually 
required by the rule. It does not consider the costs of ``on 
condition'' actions, such as repairing damage to the airplane structure 
detected during a required inspection (``repair, if necessary''). Such 
``on-condition'' repair actions 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. In addition, 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. Because incidental costs 
may vary significantly from operator to operator, they are almost 
impossible to calculate. No change to the final rule is necessary in 
this regard.

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 with the changes previously 
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 233 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 76 airplanes of U.S. registry 
will be affected by this AD. It will take approximately 708 work hours 
per airplane to accomplish the modification of the nacelle strut and 
wing structure described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, at an 
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will be 
provided at no cost by the airplane manufacturer. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of the modification required by this AD on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $3,228,480, or $42,480 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 106 work hours per airplane to 
accomplish the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-
0069, Revision 1 or Revision 2, at an average labor rate of $60 per 
work hour. Required parts will be provided at no cost by the airplane 
manufacturer. Based on these figures, the cost impact of these required 
actions on U.S. operators is estimated to be $483,360, or $6,360 per 
airplane.
    It will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish 
the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0083, at an 
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will be 
provided at no cost by the airplane manufacturer. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of these required actions on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $4,560, or $60 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 2 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0088, Revision 
1, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will 
be provided at no cost by the airplane manufacturer. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of these required actions on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $9,120, or $120 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 20 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54A0094, Revision 
1, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will 
be provided at no cost by the airplane manufacturer. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of these required actions on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $91,200, or $1,200 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 5 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 
2, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of these required actions on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $22,800, or $300 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 16 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the actions described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-29-0057, at an 
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will be 
provided at no cost by the airplane manufacturer. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of these required actions on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $72,960, or $960 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of

[[Page 8088]]

the requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would 
accomplish those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted. The 
cost impact figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only 
the time necessary to perform the specific actions actually required by 
the AD. These figures typically do not include incidental costs, such 
as the time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or 
time necessitated by other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    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:

2001-02-07  Boeing:  Amendment 39-12091. Docket 99-NM-365-AD.

    Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes powered by Pratt & 
Whitney engines, line numbers 1 through 663 inclusive, 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 (d) 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 fatigue cracking in primary strut structure and 
consequent reduced structural integrity of the strut, accomplish the 
following:

Modifications

    (a) When the airplane has reached the flight cycle threshold as 
defined by the flight cycle threshold formula described in Figure 1 
of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, dated October 7, 1999, or 
within 20 years since the date of manufacture, whichever occurs 
first: Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure on both the left 
and right sides of the airplane, in accordance with the service 
bulletin. Use of the flight cycle threshold formula described in 
Figure 1 of the service bulletin is an acceptable alternative to the 
20-year threshold, provided the corrosion prevention and control 
program inspections, as described in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Figure 1, 
have been met.
    (b) Prior to or concurrently with the accomplishment of the 
modification of the nacelle strut and wing structure required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD; as specified in paragraph 1.D., Table 2, 
on page 8 of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, dated October 7, 
1999; accomplish the actions specified in Boeing Service Bulletins 
767-54-0069, Revision 1, dated January 29, 1998, or Revision 2, 
dated August 31, 2000; 767-54-0083, dated September 17, 1998; 767-
54-0088, Revision 1, dated July 29, 1999; 767-54A0094, Revision 1, 
dated September 16, 1999; 767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 
23, 1999; and 767-29-0057, dated December 16, 1993, including Notice 
of Status Change NSC 1, dated November 23, 1994; as applicable; in 
accordance with those service bulletins. Accomplishment of this 
paragraph constitutes terminating action for the repetitive 
inspections required by AD 94-11-02, amendment 39-8918, and AD 99-
07-06, amendment 39-11091.

    Note 2: Paragraph (b) of this AD specifies prior or concurrent 
accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, 
dated September 23, 1999; however, Table 2, on page 8 of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, dated October 7, 1999, specifies prior 
or concurrent accomplishment of the original issue of the service 
bulletin. Therefore, accomplishment of the applicable actions 
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, dated June 27, 
1996, or Revision 1, dated October 31, 1996, prior to the effective 
date of this AD, is considered acceptable for compliance with the 
actions required by paragraph (b) of this AD.

Repair

    (c) If any damage (corrosion or cracking) to airplane structure 
is found during the accomplishment of the modification required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD; and the service bulletin specifies to 
contact Boeing for appropriate action: Prior to further flight, 
repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle 
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or in accordance with data 
meeting the type certification basis of the airplane approved by a 
Boeing Company Designated Engineering Representative who has been 
authorized by the FAA to make such findings. For a repair method to 
be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this 
paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference 
this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d) 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 ACO. 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 3: 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

    (e) 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

    (f) Except as provided by paragraph (c) of this AD, the actions 
shall be done in accordance with the following Boeing service 
bulletins, as applicable:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Service bulletin No.                   Revision level                           Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
767-54-0080..............................  Original....................  October 7, 1999.
767-54-0069..............................  1...........................  January 29, 1998.

[[Page 8089]]

 
767-54-0069..............................  2...........................  August 31, 2000.
767-54-0083..............................  Original....................  September 17, 1998.
767-54-0088..............................  1...........................  July 29, 1999.
767-54A0094..............................  1...........................  September 16, 1999.
767-57-0053..............................  2...........................  September 23, 1999.
767-29-0057..............................  Original....................  December 16, 1993.
767-29-0057 NSC 1........................  Original....................  November 23, 1994.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

Effective Date

    (g) This amendment becomes effective on March 5, 2001.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 17, 2001.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-1947 Filed 1-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U