[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40162-40166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-19261]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-21-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of 
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This document revises an earlier proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD); applicable to certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -
200C series airplanes; which would have required inspections for 
corrosion and cracking of the inboard track of each outboard flap, and 
repair, if necessary, and would have provided an optional terminating 
action. This new action expands the applicability and removes the 
optional terminating action of the proposed AD. For certain airplanes, 
this action would require new repetitive inspections for discrepancies 
of the rear spar attachments and cracks in the upper flange of the 
inboard track at the rear spar attachment of each outboard flap, and 
eventual rework of the flap track assembly and rear spar attachments, 
including replacement of the flap track with a new track, if necessary. 
For all airplanes, this action would require repetitive inspections for 
cracks in the upper flange of the inboard flap tracks at the rear spar 
attachments, and corrective action, if necessary. These actions are 
necessary to find and fix discrepancies of the inboard tracks of the 
outboard flaps, which could result in loss of the outboard trailing 
edge flaps and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. 
These actions are intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by September 6, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-21-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location 
between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. Comments 
may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: [email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must contain 
``Docket No. 99-NM-21-AD'' in the subject line and need not be 
submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Blilie, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2131; fax (425) 227-1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this document may be changed 
in light of the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report

[[Page 40163]]

summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of 
this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this proposal must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 99-NM-21-AD.'' The postcard will be date-stamped and 
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 99-NM-21-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR part 39) to add an airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to 
certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes, was 
published as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 
Register on April 26, 1999 (64 FR 20224). That NPRM would have required 
inspections to detect corrosion and cracking of the inboard track of 
each outboard flap where the track attaches to the rear spar, and 
repair, if necessary. For certain airplanes, that proposal also would 
have provided optional terminating action for the proposed repetitive 
inspections for those airplanes. That NPRM was prompted by several 
reports of cracking of the inboard track of the outboard flap. That 
condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of the outboard 
trailing edge flap and consequent reduced controllability of the 
airplane.

Explanation of New Service Information

    Since the issuance of that NPRM, the FAA has reviewed and approved 
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, including Appendix A, 
dated June 1, 2000. That service bulletin describes procedures for 
repetitive detailed visual inspections to find discrepancies (including 
corrosion, or missing, damaged, or migrated anti-fret strips and 
tapered shims) of the rear spar attachments of the flap tracks. That 
service bulletin also describes procedures for repetitive detailed 
visual, high frequency eddy current (HFEC), and ultrasonic inspections 
to find cracking in the upper flange of the inboard track of each 
outboard flap at the rear spar attachment. The service bulletin also 
describes procedures for rework of the flap track assembly and rear 
spar attachments. The rework procedures include the following:
     Removal of the flap track.
     A detailed visual inspection for a missing, damaged, or 
migrated anti-fret strip and tapered shim of the rear spar attachments 
of the flap tracks; replacement of the anti-fret strip with a new 
aluminum anti-fret strip (or installation of an aluminum strip if no 
strip is installed), if necessary; and replacement of the tapered shim 
with a new shim (or installation of a shim if no shim is installed).
     Eddy current and ultrasonic inspections for fatigue 
cracking of the flap tracks.
     A detailed visual inspection for corrosion of the flap 
tracks.
     Rework of attachment holes.
     Replacement of the flap track with a new track, if 
necessary.
    The procedures described in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, 
Revision 1, are similar to the procedures described in Boeing Service 
Bulletin 737-57-1065, Revision 3, dated December 17, 1982, which was 
referenced in the original NPRM as the appropriate source of service 
information for certain proposed actions. Among other things, however, 
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, describes more rework 
instructions than does Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57-1065. Airplanes 
reworked according to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57-1065 would require 
additional rework according to this proposed AD and Boeing Service 
Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1.

Actions Since Issuance of NPRM

    The NPRM listed certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C 
series airplanes in its applicability statement. Since the issuance of 
the NPRM, the FAA has received a report of similar cracking in the area 
addressed by the NPRM on a Boeing Model 737-300 series airplane. The 
interface between the inboard track of each outboard flap and the rear 
spar on the subject Model 737-300 series airplane had been modified 
according to procedures similar to those identified as optional 
terminating action in the NPRM. Other Model 737-300, -400, and -500 
series airplanes also have been similarly modified. Because of this 
report, the FAA finds that certain Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series 
airplanes--in addition to the Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series 
airplanes identified in the NPRM--may be subject to the unsafe 
condition addressed by this proposed AD. Therefore, the applicability 
statement of this supplemental NPRM lists all of these airplanes.
    In addition, Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, 
states that no more work is necessary following the rework of the flap 
track described in that service bulletin. Because of the report of 
cracking on the Model 737-300 series airplane described above, the FAA 
finds that rework according to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, 
Revision 1, may not ensure an adequate level of safety for the service 
life of the airplane. Therefore, this supplemental NPRM proposes to 
require additional repetitive inspections following the rework or the 
modification equivalent to the rework that was done during production 
on certain airplanes.

Comments

    Due consideration has been given to the comments received in 
response to the NPRM. Certain comments have resulted in changes to the 
proposal, and those comments are addressed below.

Request To Clarify Airplanes Not Affected By Proposed Rule

    One commenter requests that the FAA revise the proposed rule to 
clarify that certain airplanes are not subject to the proposed actions. 
The commenter states that airplanes having line numbers (L/N) 1032 
through 1585 on which new flap tracks were installed according to 
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57-1203, dated November 15, 1990, do not 
need to have flap tracks replaced as specified in the proposed rule. 
The commenter states that new flap tracks installed according to that 
service bulletin have the new aluminum anti-fret strip that this 
proposed AD would require and meet all requirements of the proposed 
rule.
    The FAA concurs with the commenter's request. The applicability of 
this supplemental NPRM has been revised to exclude airplanes on which 
new flap tracks were installed according to Boeing Service Bulletin 
737-57-1203.

Request To Require Repetitive Inspections for All Airplanes

    One commenter requests that repetitive inspections for cracking be 
required for all airplanes. For airplanes having L/Ns 870 through 1585 
inclusive on which replacement flap tracks are installed, paragraph (c) 
of the NPRM states that no further action is required if no corrosion 
or cracking is found during the initial inspection. The commenter 
states that one-time visual and HFEC inspections may not be sufficient 
to ensure that any crack is found in a timely manner.

[[Page 40164]]

    The FAA concurs with the commenter's request, and paragraph (c) of 
the NPRM has not been included in this supplemental NPRM. This 
supplemental NPRM proposes to require inspections and eventual rework 
or replacement of flap tracks for all airplanes with L/Ns 1 through 869 
inclusive and airplanes with L/Ns 870 through 1585 inclusive on which 
the original flap tracks have been replaced with certain flap tracks. 
As stated above, this supplemental NPRM also proposes to require post-
rework repetitive inspections for all airplanes identified in the 
applicability statement of this document.

Request To Clarify Need for Additional Work on Certain Airplanes

    One commenter, the manufacturer, requests that the proposed AD be 
revised to make it clear that airplanes modified according to Boeing 
Service Bulletin 737-57-1065, Revision 3, require additional work 
according to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249. The commenter states 
that this change is necessary because Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57-
1065, Revision 3, was not intended to address the specific unsafe 
condition identified in the proposed AD.
    The FAA concurs with the commenter's request and has included 
appropriate statements in the ``Explanation of New Service 
Information'' section of the preamble of this supplemental NPRM. Also, 
a new ``Note 2'' has been added to the body of this proposed AD to 
state that airplanes modified according to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
57-1065 are subject to additional work as described in this AD and in 
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1.

Request To Clarify Terminology

    One commenter requests various changes to language used in the 
NPRM. The changes recommended by the commenter include:
     Refer to ``anti-fret strip'' instead of ``rub strip'' in 
the ``Discussion'' and ``Explanation of Relevant Service Information'' 
sections of the proposed AD.
     Clarify the procedures involved in the rework as described 
in the ``Explanation of Relevant Service Information'' section of the 
proposed AD.
     Clarify the cause of the unsafe condition by revising the 
sentence in the ``Discussion'' section of the proposed AD that reads, 
``inadequate clamp-up of the attachment bolts can make the area where 
the flap track attaches to the rear spar more vulnerable to moisture 
absorption and, consequently, to corrosion'' to read, ``insufficient 
clamp-up of the attachment bolts can cause damage to the attachment 
seals, tapered shim, anti-fret strip, and protective finishes, and make 
the area where the flap track attaches to the rear spar more vulnerable 
to moisture absorption and, consequently, to corrosion.''
     Identify the area affected by cracking as ``the upper 
flange of the inboard track of each/the outboard flap at the rear spar 
attachment'' in the ``Discussion'' and ``Explanation of Requirements of 
Proposed Rule'' sections of the preamble, and in the statement of 
unsafe condition in the body of the proposed AD.
    The FAA concurs with the intent of the commenter's request. Though 
some of the specific sections of the preamble referenced by the 
commenter are not repeated in this supplemental NPRM, the changes 
suggested by the commenter have been made in this supplemental NPRM 
wherever appropriate.

Explanation of New Requirements of Proposal

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the 
proposed AD would require, for certain airplanes, new repetitive 
inspections for discrepancies (including corrosion, or missing, 
damaged, or migrated anti-fret strips and tapered shims) of the rear 
spar attachments and cracks in the upper flange of the inboard track at 
the rear spar attachment of each outboard flap. For certain airplanes, 
the proposed AD also would require eventual rework of the flap track 
assembly and rear spar attachments, including replacement of the flap 
track with a new track, if necessary. For all airplanes, this action 
would require post-rework repetitive inspections for cracks in the 
upper flange of the inboard flap tracks at the rear spar attachments, 
and corrective action, if necessary. The actions would be required to 
be accomplished according to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, 
Revision 1, except as discussed below.

Differences Between Supplemental NPRM and Service Bulletin

    This supplemental NPRM differs from Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
57A1249, Revision 1, in the following ways:
     Though the service bulletin states compliance times in 
terms of flight cycles and calendar time, this proposed AD states 
compliance times only in calendar time. The FAA finds it appropriate to 
state compliance times for the requirements of this proposed AD only in 
calendar time because corrosion cracking is a function of time, not 
flight cycles.
     The airplane manufacturer recommends that the actions in 
the service bulletin be accomplished on airplanes with 20,000 flight 
cycles or more, or 10 years of service. The FAA finds that, as of the 
effective date of this AD, all airplanes identified in paragraph (a) of 
this proposed AD will have been in service for more than 10 years since 
their date of manufacture. Therefore, this supplemental NPRM does not 
refer to this threshold in the compliance times for paragraphs (a), 
(b), and (c) of this AD.
     Operators also should note that, though the service 
bulletin specifies that the manufacturer may be contacted for 
disposition of certain repair conditions, this proposed AD would 
require the repair of those conditions to be accomplished according to 
a method approved by the FAA, or according to 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.

Conclusion

    Since this change expands the scope of the originally proposed 
rule, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment 
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 2,890 airplanes of the affected design in 
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 1,100 airplanes of U.S. 
registry would be affected by this proposed AD.
    It would take approximately 4 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the proposed inspections, at an average labor rate of $60 per work 
hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed 
inspections on U.S. operators is estimated to be $264,000, or $240 per 
airplane, per inspection cycle.
    It would take approximately 12 work hours per airplane to 
accomplish the proposed rework, at an average labor rate of $60 per 
work hour. Required parts would cost approximately $532. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of the rework proposed by this AD on U.S. 
operators is estimated to be $1,377,200, or $1,252 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements 
of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions 
in the future if

[[Page 40165]]

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 proposed herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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); 
and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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:

Boeing: Docket 99-NM-21-AD.

    Applicability: Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 
series airplanes; certificated in any category; EXCEPT airplanes on 
which any replacement flap tracks were installed according to Boeing 
Service Bulletin 737-57-1203, dated November 15, 1990, or production 
equivalent.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
otherwise 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 (f) 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.

    Note 2: Airplanes modified according to Boeing Service Bulletin 
737-57-1065 are subject to additional work as described in this AD 
and in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, dated June 
1, 2000.

    To find and fix discrepancies of the inboard tracks of the 
outboard flaps, which could result in loss of the outboard trailing 
edge flaps and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane, 
accomplish the following:

Initial Inspections

    (a) For airplanes with line numbers (L/N) 1 through 869 
inclusive, and airplanes with L/Ns 870 through 1585 on which the 
original flap tracks have been replaced with certain tracks as 
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, 
including Appendix A, dated June 1, 2000: Within 6 months after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, accomplish the 
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, according 
to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, including 
Appendix A, dated June 1, 2000.
    (1) Perform a detailed visual inspection for discrepancies 
(e.g., corrosion, or missing, damaged, or migrated anti-fret strips 
and tapered shims) of the rear spar attachments of the flap tracks.
    (2) Perform detailed visual, high frequency eddy current (HFEC), 
and ultrasonic inspections for cracking in the upper flange of the 
inboard track of each outboard flap at the rear spar attachments.

    Note 3: Inspections and rework accomplished according to Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, including Appendix A, dated 
December 16, 1999, is considered acceptable for compliance with the 
applicable action specified in this AD.


    Note 4: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed visual 
inspection is defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a 
specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to 
detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is 
normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at 
intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such 
as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning 
and elaborate access procedures may be required.''

Repetitive Inspections

    (b) For airplanes subject to paragraph (a) of this AD: If no 
discrepancy is found during any inspection required by paragraph (a) 
of this AD, thereafter, repeat the inspections specified in 
paragraph (a) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 9 months, until 
the actions required by paragraph (c) of this AD have been 
accomplished.

Rework

    (c) For airplanes subject to paragraph (a) of this AD: At the 
applicable time specified in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD, 
accomplish rework of the flap track assembly and aft flap track 
attachments (including removal of the flap track; a detailed visual 
inspection for a missing, damaged, or migrated anti-fret strip and 
tapered shim of the rear spar attachments of the flap track; 
replacement of the anti-fret strip with a new aluminum anti-fret 
strip (or installation of an aluminum strip if no strip is 
installed), as applicable; replacement of the tapered shim with a 
new shim (or installation of a shim if no shim is installed); eddy 
current and ultrasonic inspections for fatigue cracking of the flap 
tracks; a detailed visual inspection for corrosion of the flap 
tracks; and rework of attachment holes), including replacement of 
the flap tracks, as applicable, by accomplishing all actions 
specified in part II of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 737-57A1249, Revision 1, including Appendix A, 
dated June 1, 2000. Do these actions according to that service 
bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (e) of this AD. 
Accomplishment of the actions required by this paragraph constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by 
paragraph (b) of this AD.
    (1) If no discrepancy is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD: Do the rework within 24 months 
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (2) If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required 
by paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD: Do the rework prior to further 
flight.

Repetitive Inspections

    (d) For all airplanes: At the applicable time specified in 
paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD, and thereafter at least every 
24 months, perform detailed visual, HFEC, and ultrasonic inspections 
for cracking in the upper flange of the inboard track of each 
outboard flap at the rear spar attachments according to Part II of 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
57A1249, Revision 1, including Appendix A, dated June 1, 2000.
    (1) For airplanes subject to paragraph (c) of this AD, do the 
inspections within 10 years after accomplishment of the rework 
according to paragraph (c) of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes other than those identified in paragraph 
(d)(1) of this AD, do the inspections within 10 years since the 
airplane's date of manufacture, or within 6 months after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

[[Page 40166]]

Repair Instructions and Exception to Procedures in Service Information

    (e) If any discrepancy is found during any action required by 
paragraphs (a), (b), or (c) of this AD, and the service bulletin 
specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action; OR if any 
discrepancy is found during inspections according to paragraph (d) 
of this AD: Prior to further flight, repair according to a method 
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), FAA; or according to data meeting the type certification 
basis of the airplane approved by a Boeing Company Designated 
Engineering Representative (DER) who has been authorized by the 
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a repair method to 
be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this 
paragraph, the approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (f) 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 5: 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

    (g) 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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 26, 2001.
Vi L. Lipski,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-19261 Filed 8-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-39-P