[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 18, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33817-33821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13362]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0073; Product Identifier 2017-NM-100-AD; Amendment 
39-19318; AD 2018-13-06]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 
The Boeing Company Model 767-300 and -300F series airplanes. This AD 
was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking in the lower outboard wing 
skin at the farthest outboard fastener of the inboard segment of a 
certain stringer. This AD requires repetitive high frequency eddy 
current (HFEC) inspections for cracking of the lower outboard wing skin 
at the inboard segment of a certain stringer, and repair if necessary. 
We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these 
products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 22, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 22, 
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, 
contact Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 S 102nd Street, Suite 200, 
Seattle, WA 98168; telephone 206-762-1171; internet https://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com. You may view this service information 
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des 
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the 
FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available

[[Page 33818]]

on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and 
locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0073.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0073; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains 
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and 
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Rauschendorfer, Aerospace 
Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th 
St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3528; email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company 
Model 767-300 and -300F series airplanes. The NPRM published in the 
Federal Register on February 9, 2018 (83 FR 5738). The NPRM was 
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking in the lower outboard wing skin 
at the farthest outboard fastener of the inboard segment of stringer L-
9.5 on airplanes with winglets installed per Supplemental Type 
Certificate ST01920SE. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive high 
frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking of the lower 
outboard wing skin at the inboard segment of a certain stringer, and 
repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking 
in the lower outboard wing skin, which could result in failure and 
subsequent separation of the wing and winglet and consequent reduced 
controllability of the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the 
NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment. Aviation Partners Boeing 
(APB) concurred with the NPRM.

Request To Provide Credit for Previously Approved Repairs

    All Nippon Airways (ANA) and American Airlines (AAL) asked that 
credit be given for repair deviations approved by the Boeing Commercial 
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) using 8100-9 
forms dated after June 15, 2017. ANA stated that Boeing ODAs will be 
using APB analysis methodology to evaluate and approve the repairs. ANA 
and AAL stated that Boeing indicated in Multi-Operator Message MOM-MOM-
17-0480-01B, dated August 29, 2017, that repairs approved after June 
15, 2017, would be acceptable as alternative methods of compliance 
(AMOCs) to the final rule if using the referenced service information. 
Both commenters asked that credit language for those previously 
approved repairs be added to the content of the proposed AD.
    We agree with the commenters' requests for the reasons provided. 
The revised APB analysis methodology was approved by the FAA on June 
15, 2017. Therefore, we have added paragraph (i)(2) to this AD to 
include that approval.

Request To Allow Alternative Oversize Fastener Holes

    AAL asked that we allow oversize fasteners of at least 1/64 inch to 
be installed at all fastener locations common to inboard stringer L-
9.5. AAL stated that the referenced service information and the APB 
modification drawing are very restrictive regarding oversize fasteners 
that are outside of the five critical fasteners at each end of inboard 
stringer L-9.5. AAL added that hole damage during fastener removal at 
the existing stringer L-9.5 is common.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. This type of 
deviation would require an engineering evaluation to assess inboard 
stringer L-9.5 and the skin fastener locations to determine if it is 
feasible for the oversize fasteners to be installed. However, under the 
provisions of paragraph (j) of this AD, we will consider requests for 
approval of an AMOC, if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate 
that installing 1/64-inch oversize fasteners at all fastener locations 
common to inboard stringer L-9.5 will provide an acceptable level of 
safety. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Add Alternative Alodine Type

    Delta Air Lines (Delta) asked that we add a new paragraph to the 
proposed AD specifying that Alodine coating ``Bonderite M-CR 600 Aero'' 
is an acceptable alternative to ``Alodine 600'' coating. Delta stated 
that APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 
2017, calls out Alodine 600 in paragraph 2.B.2, ``Parts and Materials 
Supplied by the Operator,'' and in Drawing 767-9420, Sheet 1, in 
paragraph 3.B, Part 2, Steps 4 and 5, as an ``RC'' (Required for 
Compliance) step. Delta noted that the name of the Alodine coating 
``Alodine 600'' has been changed to ``Bonderite M-CR 600 Aero.'' Delta 
added that the FAA issued a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin 
(SAIB) that cited an AMOC for the use of Bonderite products.
    We agree with the commenter's request, for the reason provided. 
Alodine products made by Henkel manufacturing have been renamed to 
Bonderite. We issued SAIB HQ-18-09, dated February 5, 2018, which cited 
the AMOC that allows the use of Henkel Bonderite products as an 
alternative to Henkel Alodine products. We have revised paragraphs 
(g)(1)(ii)(A) and (g)(2)(i) of this AD to allow the use of Bonderite M-
CR 600 Aero and Bonderite M-CR 600 RTU Aero as an alternative coating.

Requests To Clarify Compliance Time Definition

    United Airlines (UAL) and Delta asked that we clarify the 
``Compliance Times'' definition specified in the preamble of the NPRM. 
The commenters stated that the initial compliance time is defined as 
1,500 flight cycles or 7,500 flight cycles after winglet installation, 
but it should be 1,500 flight cycles or 7,500 flight hours after 
winglet installation. The commenters noted that this should be 
corrected to be consistent with the compliance time specified in the 
referenced service information.
    We agree with the commenters that the compliance time definition in 
the NPRM is inaccurate, and should specify ``The initial compliance 
time is the later of: 1,500 flight cycles or 7,500 flight hours after 
winglet installation, whichever occurs first.'' This language provided 
notice regarding compliance times that were specified in the referenced 
service information. The compliance time is correct in the referenced 
service information and does not conflict with this AD. Since that 
section of the preamble does not reappear in the final rule, no change 
to this AD is necessary.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this final rule with the changes described

[[Page 33819]]

previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these 
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final 
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed APB Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated 
April 11, 2017. The service information describes procedures for an 
HFEC inspection for cracking of the lower outboard wing skin at the 
inboard segment of stringer L-9.5, and on-condition actions that 
include repetitive HFEC inspections, a preventive modification (repair) 
that includes installing new stringers, repetitive post-modification 
(repair) HFEC inspections for cracking, and repair. This service 
information is reasonably available because the interested parties have 
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means 
identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 140 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                            Estimated Costs--Required Actions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product                  Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC Inspections.....................  1 work-hour x $85 per              $0   $85, per inspection      $11,900, per inspection cycle.
                                        hour = $85, per                         cycle.
                                        inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                      Estimated Costs--On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Action                       Labor cost         Parts cost             Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preventive Modification (Repair)....  50 work-hours x $85              $0  $4,250.
                                       per hour = $4,250.
Post-modification (repair)            1 work-hour x $85 per             0  $85, per inspection cycle.
 Inspections.                          hour = $85, per
                                       inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for on-condition repairs that might be necessary as a 
result of the post-modification (repair) inspections specified in this 
AD.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be 
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected 
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected 
individuals. As a result, we have included all available costs in our 
cost estimate.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the 
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by 
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is 
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but 
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the 
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and 
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    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 airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2018-13-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19318; Docket No. FAA-
2018-0073; Product Identifier 2017-NM-100-AD.

[[Page 33820]]

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 22, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-300 and -300F 
series airplanes, certificated in any category, with Aviation 
Partners Boeing winglets installed; as identified in Aviation 
Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated 
April 11, 2017.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking in the lower 
outboard wing skin at the farthest outboard fastener of the inboard 
segment of stringer L-9.5 on airplanes with winglets installed per 
Supplemental Type Certificate ST01920SE. We are issuing this AD to 
address fatigue cracking in the lower outboard wing skin, which 
could result in failure and subsequent separation of the wing and 
winglet and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Inspections, Preventive Modification (Repair), 
Repetitive Post-Modification (Repair) Inspections, and Repair

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, except as required by 
paragraph (h) of this AD: Do a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 
inspection for cracking of the lower outboard wing skin at the 
inboard segment of stringer L-9.5, in accordance with Part 1 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service 
Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017.
    (1) For airplanes on which ``Condition 1'' is found, as defined 
in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing 
Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, 
during any inspection required by the introductory text of paragraph 
(g) or paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this AD: Do the actions required by 
paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Repeat the inspection specified in the introductory text of 
paragraph (g) of this AD thereafter at the applicable times 
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners 
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 
2017.
    (ii) Do the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A) and 
(g)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD:
    (A) Before further flight, do the preventive modification in 
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, 
dated April 11, 2017. The use of Alodine 600-RTU, Henkel Bonderite 
M-CR 600 Aero, or Henkel Bonderite M-CR 600 RTU Aero coating is an 
acceptable alternative to Alodine 600 coating.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A) of this AD:  Guidance on 
identifying alternative Henkel Bonderite Alodine coatings can also 
be found in Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) HQ-18-
09, dated February 5, 2018. The SAIB may be viewed online at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/0/F87909D65FCE4BFA8625822B005AE82A?OpenDocument&Highlight=hq-18-09.

    (B) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, do an HFEC inspection for 
cracking, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017; and repeat the inspection 
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017.
    (2) For airplanes on which ``Condition 2'' is found as defined 
in the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing 
Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, 
during any inspection required by the introductory text of paragraph 
(g) or paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this AD: Do the actions required by 
paragraph (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Before further flight, repair in accordance with Part 2 of 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service 
Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017. The use of 
Alodine 600-RTU, Henkel Bonderite M-CR 600 Aero, or Henkel Bonderite 
M-CR 600 RTU Aero coating is an acceptable alternative to Alodine 
600 coating.

    Note 2 to paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this AD:  Guidance on 
identifying alternative Henkel Bonderite Alodine coatings can also 
be found in SAIB HQ-18-09, dated February 5, 2018. The SAIB may be 
viewed online at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/0/F87909D65FCE4BFA8625822B005AE82A?OpenDocument&Highlight=hq-18-09.

    (ii) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, do an HFEC inspection for 
cracking, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017; and repeat the inspection 
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-
57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017.
    (3) If any crack is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(B) or (g)(2)(ii) of this AD, repair before 
further flight using a method approved in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Although Aviation 
Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated 
April 11, 2017, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions, 
and specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), this 
AD requires repair as specified in this paragraph.

(h) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Aviation Partners 
Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 
2017, specifies a compliance time of ``after the initial issue date 
of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the 
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) For Group 2 airplanes: This paragraph provides credit for 
the actions specified in Part 1 and Part 2 of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-
013, Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017, that are required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the 
effective date of this AD using Aviation Partners Boeing Service 
Bulletin AP767-57-013, dated November 30, 2016.
    (2) Repairs of the lower outboard wing skin approved after June 
15, 2017, and before the effective date of this AD, if approved by 
the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation 
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 
ACO Branch, FAA, are approved for the applicable repairs required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to 
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found 
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request 
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District 
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the 
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the 
person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be 
emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding 
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD 
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the 
Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be 
approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration 
deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the 
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD: For 
service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required 
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and 
(j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step 
and any figures

[[Page 33821]]

identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a 
step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the RC requirement is 
removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any 
deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted 
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection 
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC 
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done 
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy 
condition.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Allen 
Rauschendorfer, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle 
ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and 
fax: 206-231-3528; email: [email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Aviation Partners Boeing Service Bulletin AP767-57-013, 
Revision 1, dated April 11, 2017.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 S 102nd Street, Suite 200, Seattle, 
WA 98168; telephone 206-762-1171; internet https://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 12, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13362 Filed 7-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P