> **[Federal Aviation Administration]{.underline}**
>
> [RGL Home]{.underline}

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

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

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Airworthiness Directive**

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

> DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
>
> Federal Aviation Administration
>
> 14 CFR Part 39 \[61 FR 11529 NO. 56 03/21/96\]
>
> \[Docket No. 94-NM-179-AD; Amendment 39-9542; AD 96-06-05\]
>
> Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Series Airplanes
>
> **PDF Copy (If Available):**
>
> AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT
>
> ACTION: Final rule.
>
> SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes two existing airworthiness
> directives (AD), applicable to certain Boeing Model 727 series
> airplanes, that currently require repetitive visual inspections to
> detect cracks of the elevator rear spar, and repair, if necessary.
> This amendment adds new inspections to detect cracks and loose
> brackets of the elevator rear spar; adds a new terminating
> modification for the inspections, and expands the applicability of the
> rules to include additional airplanes. This amendment is prompted by
> reports of cracking in the spar radii at the tab hinge location of the
> elevator rear spar on certain airplanes. The actions specified by this
> AD are intended to prevent cracking in elements of the elevator rear
> spar assembly, which could result in excessive free play of the
> elevator control tab and possible tab flutter.
>
> DATES: Effective April 22, 1996.
>
> The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
> regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
> April 22, 1996.
>
> 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:
>
> Walter Sippel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
> Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
> 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
> 227-2774; fax (206) 227-1181.
>
> SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
> Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 84-22-02,
> amendment 39-4951 (49 FR 45743, November 20, 1984), and AD 87-24-03,
> amendment 39-5769 (52 FR 43742, November 16, 1987), both of which are
> applicable to Boeing Model 727 series airplanes, was published in the
> **Federal Register** as a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
> on September 19, 1995 (60 FR 47896). The action proposed to require
> repetitive visual inspections to detect cracks and loose brackets of
> the elevator rear spar, and various follow-on actions. The
> supplemental NPRM also proposed to require the installation of a
> modification of the elevator rear spar that would constitute
> terminating action for the repetitive inspections. Additionally, the
> supplemental NPRM proposed to expand the applicability of the existing
> proposed rules to include additional airplanes.
>
> 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 proposal.
>
> A discussion of other comments received follows:
>
> **Requests to Withdraw the Proposal**
>
> Two commenters request that the FAA withdraw the proposal. These
> commenters consider that the problem addressed is strictly a quality
> control problem and is not associated with airplanes on a fleet-wide
> basis.
>
> The FAA does not concur. There have been at least 13 occurrences of
> cracking found in modified elevator rear spars on in-service
> airplanes. New information has revealed that the shear plate
> contacting the radius of the rear spar is not the only problem that is
> creating the addressed cracking. New data show that loose tee fittings
> attached to the rib may also contribute to cracking in the rear spar.
> In light of this, the FAA finds no reason to consider the unsafe
> condition to be limited to few airplanes, nor a single operator\'s
> quality program.
>
> **Request to Allow Inspections with the Elevator Tab Installed**
>
> One commenter requests that the proposed rule be revised to allow the
> inspection of modified elevator rear spars to be accomplished with the
> elevator tab installed. This commenter, an operator, states that it
> has inspected all of its affected modified airplanes using this method
> and have not found any cracking of rear spars.
>
> The FAA cannot concur with this commenter\'s request since no
> technical data were submitted that could demonstrate that this method
> of inspection would provide an acceptable level of safety (compared to
> the proposed inspection methods). Additionally, the reliability of the
> inspection method suggested by the commenter is not clear. (For
> example, would other operators obtain accurate results? Have the
> results of inspections performed with elevator tabs installed been
> compared to those of inspections performed with elevator tabs not
> installed?) The FAA suggests that this commenter submit justifying
> data and apply for the approval of this inspection as an alternative
> method of compliance with the AD, in accordance with the provisions of
> paragraph (j) of the final rule.
>
> **Requests to Extend the Inspection Interval for Modified Airplanes**
>
> Several commenters request that the proposed rule be revised to extend
> the compliance time for accomplishing the visual inspection of
> modified airplanes. One commenter requests that it be extended from
> the proposed 4,000 flight hours to 3,000 flight cycles after the
> effective date of the final rule. This commenter, an operator, states
> that it modified its fleet of affected airplanes (in accordance with
> AD 84-22-02 and 87-24-03) between 1987 and 1992. This operator has
> been inspecting the subject area on these modified airplanes at every
> \"C\" check (approximately every 3,000 flight cycles) and has found no
> cracking to date. Other commenters request that the initial inspection
> be required at the next regularly scheduled \"C\" check scheduled for
> the airplane. These commenters assert that the work hours needed to
> accomplish this inspection and the complexity of this inspection
> require that it be accomplished at a main base facility and by
> maintenance personnel specifically trained for this task.
>
> The FAA does not concur with these commenters\' request. The FAA has
> received reports of cracking in rear spars on several modified
> airplanes after approximately 4,000 flight hours (after modification).
> In addition, a crack has been found on a new, modified one-piece spar
> that had accumulated approximately 4,000 fight hours. In light of
> these findings, the FAA has determined that the compliance time of
> 4,000 flight hours represents the maximum interval of time allowable
> for the affected airplanes to continue to operate prior to
> accomplishing the required inspection without compromising safety. The
> FAA does not consider a \"C\" check to be an appropriate inspection
> interval, since maintenance schedules for \"C\" checks may vary from
> operator to operator, and there would be no assurance that the
> inspection would be accomplished during the maximum interval of 4,000
> flight hours. Further, the FAA does not consider 3,000 flight cycles
> to be an appropriate interval, since many fatigue cycles can occur per
> flight and the subject cracking is associated with fatigue.
> Consequently, an interval of \"3,000 flight cycles\" would result in a
> much longer time period than data show is acceptable.
>
> **Requests to Delete Calendar Time from Inspection Intervals**
>
> Several commenters request that the proposed rule be revised to delete
> the references to calendar time in the repetitive inspection intervals
> for both modified and unmodified spars. The proposal would require
> that, in those cases where no cracking is found, visual inspections be
> conducted every \"1,600 flight hours or 18 months, whichever occurs
> first.\" The commenters contend that calendar time as an inspection
> interval is inappropriate in this case because the subject cracking is
> related to fatigue (which is associated with flight cycles or flight
> hours), and not to conditions such as corrosion (which is associated
> with calendar time or environmental conditions). These commenters
> request that the inspection interval be expressed only in flight
> cycles or flight hours.
>
> The FAA concurs. Since the cracking addressed by this AD is the result
> of problems associated with fatigue, it is more appropriate that
> structure be inspected at intervals related to flight hours rather
> than calendar time. The final rule has been revised to delete the
> references to \"18 months\" in the compliance times for the repetitive
> inspections.
>
> **Requests to Delete Mandatory Terminating Action**
>
> Several commenters request that the proposed rule be revised to delete
> the requirement to accomplish the terminating modification within 5
> years. These commenters contend that continuing repetitive inspections
> of the area will provide an acceptable level of safety. One of these
> commenters, an operator, states that its existing inspection program,
> which has been carried out successfully in its fleet over the past 10
> years, is adequate for finding and repairing cracks prior to the time
> that a serious cracking condition can develop. Another commenter
> states that it has continued to inspect its airplanes that previously
> have been modified and has not detected any cracking in the modified
> structure.
>
> The FAA concurs that installation of the terminating modification need
> not be mandatory. The FAA has reconsidered the information it has
> received concerning the subject cracks that have been found on in
> service airplanes. This information indicates that cracking has been
> found during the scheduled inspection periods, and before any cracking
> was able to propagate to critical lengths. Additionally, the FAA finds
> that inspections are easy to accomplish, since the area is easily
> accessible, and they are effective in finding cracks. Moreover, the
> cracking is easily detectable and the consequences of the cracking are
> not likely to be catastrophic. In light of this, the FAA has
> determined that continuing inspections will provide an acceptable
> level of safety, and that the terminating modification need not be
> mandatory. The final rule has been revised to provide for a program of
> repetitive inspections, in lieu of installation of the terminating
> modification, for airplanes on which no cracking is detected during
> the required inspections. The terminating modification will be
> provided as an optional installation for those airplanes.
>
> **Requests for On-going Repetitive Inspections in Lieu of Terminating
> Action**
>
> Several commenters request that, if the proposed AD is revised to
> delete the requirement that would mandate installation of the
> terminating modification, then it should include a specific schedule
> of repetitive inspections of the affected airplanes. These commenters
> provide various suggestions for this inspection schedule:
>
> 1\. One commenter requests that repetitive inspections of all
> airplanes be allowed at intervals of 4,000 flight hours. This
> commenter states that it is regularly conducting inspections of all of
> its affected airplanes at approximately 4,000 flight hour intervals
> and has found little cracking or other discrepancies.
>
> 2\. Another commenter requests that continued repetitive inspections
> of unmodified two-piece spars and all modified spars all be allowed to
> be conducted at intervals of 4,000 flight hours. This commenter, an
> operator, conducts inspections of airplanes with these configurations
> in its fleet every 4,000 flight hours. In the last 18 months, 33
> cracked spars have been found during 84 inspections of unmodified
> spars, and 4 cracked spars have been found during 36 inspections of
> modified spars. All cracks were found and repaired in a timely manner,
> and no flutter of the flight control surface was experienced. Based on
> this experience, this commenter considers 4,000-flight hour
> inspections to be both effective and economical.
>
> 3\. One commenter requests that the inspections of unmodified spars
> (either one- or two-piece) be repeated at intervals of 1,600 flight
> hours or 13 months, whichever occurs later. The commenter considers
> the proposed inspection interval of \"1,600 flight hours or 18 months,
> whichever occurs first\" is far too restrictive. This commenter, an
> operator, states that its suggested interval would allow it to conduct
> the inspections during its regularly scheduled maintenance periods,
> without disrupting scheduling.
>
> The FAA responds to these specific suggestions as follows:
>
> As for Item 1, the FAA cannot concur with the suggestion that all
> airplanes, whether modified or unmodified, be inspected at the same
> interval, as one commenter suggested. Since reports indicate that
> cracking has been found on modified one-piece spars within 4,000
> flight hours after modification, inspections every 4,000 flight hours
> are appropriate for these spars. However, because modified spars have
> certain reinforcements and less interference, they are less prone to
> the subject cracking than are unmodified spars; therefore, cracking
> could be expected to occur in unmodified spars earlier than it could
> develop in the modified spars. In light of this, inspection intervals
> of fewer flight hours will be more effective for detecting cracking in
> unmodified one-piece spars in a timely manner.
>
> As for Item 2, the FAA concurs that a repetitive inspection interval
> of 4,000 flight hours for unmodified two-piece spars and all modified
> spars is acceptable. In-service reports have shown that the 4,000
> flight hour inspection interval is effective and appropriate for
> detecting cracking in a timely manner.
>
> As for Item 3, the FAA does not agree with the suggestion that an
> inspection interval of 1,600 flight hours or 13 months, whichever is
> later, is appropriate for two-piece unmodified spars. First, as
> discussed previously, a calendar time (i.e., \"13 months\") is
> inappropriate in addressing problems associated with fatigue (such as
> the cracking addressed by this AD action). Second, while 1,600 flight
> hours is appropriate for unmodified one-piece spars, it is not
> appropriate for unmodified two-piece spars. The configuration of
> two-piece spars makes them inherently less prone to cracking than the
> one-piece spars, and the inspections that have been accomplished in
> accordance with AD 87-24-03 at the 4,000 flight hour interval have
> been shown to be effective in controlling cracking. Therefore, the FAA
> finds that the 4,000-flight hour interval for inspections of the
> unmodified two-piece spars is suitable.
>
> In light of the information presented by commenters to this
> supplemental NPRM, as well as the reports of inspection findings, the
> FAA has determined that a different specific repetitive inspection
> interval for each of the various configurations of spars is
> appropriate. Taking this into account, the FAA has revised the final
> rule as follows:
>
> For airplanes equipped with unmodified one-piece spars: If no cracking
> is found, the inspections are to be repeated every 1,600 flight hours.
> (This interval is unchanged from that previously required by AD
> 84-22-02.)
>
> For airplanes equipped with modified one-piece spars: If no cracking
> is found, the inspections are to be repeated every 4,000 fight hours.
>
> For airplanes equipped with unmodified two-piece spars: If no cracking
> is found, the inspections are to be repeated every 4,000 flight hours.
> (This interval is unchanged from that previously required by AD
> 87-24-03.)
>
> For airplanes equipped with modified two piece spars: If no cracking
> is found, the inspections are to be repeated every 4,000 flight hours.
>
> For all configurations: If cracking is found during any inspection and
> subsequently is stop-drilled, the inspection is repeated within 1,600
> flight hours after stop-drilling, and the terminating modification is
> required to be accomplished within 3,200 flight hours after
> stop-drilling. (This provision is not changed from what was proposed
> in the notice.)
>
> The FAA has determined that this change \-- providing for continuing
> inspections in lieu of mandatory terminating action \-- will not
> compromise safety, since the quality and timeliness of the repeated
> inspections will ensure that cracking will be detected before it can
> propagate to critical levels. Additionally, the FAA has determined
> that this change represents merely an optional method of compliance
> with the rule as it was originally proposed. The optional procedures
> will not impose an additional burden on any operator. They are a
> logical outgrowth of the notice that do not necessitate providing an
> additional opportunity for public comment.
>
> **Correction of Typographical Errors**
>
> The FAA has been advised that, in certain sections of the notice, the
> numbers of the applicable service bulletins were incorrectly cited.
> The FAA acknowledges these typographical errors and has revised the
> final rule to specify the correct Boeing Service Bulletin numbers of:
> 727-55-0087 and 727-55-0089.
>
> **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 1,631 Model 727 series airplanes of the
> affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 1,166
> airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this proposed AD.
>
> The inspections will take approximately 17 work hours per airplane to
> accomplish (this includes the time required to gain access, remove
> parts, inspect, install, and perform functional testing), at an
> average labor rate of \$60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
> cost impact of the inspection requirements of this AD on U.S.
> operators is estimated to be \$1,189,320, or \$1,020 per airplane, per
> inspection cycle.
>
> 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.
>
> For operators who elect to install the optional terminating
> modification, it will take approximately 430 work hours per airplane
> to accomplish, at an average labor rate of \$60 per work hours.
> Required parts will cost approximately \$8,580 per airplane. Based on
> these figures, the cost impact of the optional modification is
> estimated to be \$34,380 per airplane.
>
> **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:
>
> § 39.13 - \[Amended\]
>
> 2\. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-4951 (59 FR
> 45743, November 20, 1984), and amendment 39-5769 (52 FR 43742,
> November 16, 1987), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD),
> amendment 39-9542, to read as follows:
>
> **96-06-05 BOEING**: Amendment 39-9542. Docket 94-NM-179-AD.
> Supersedes AD 84-22-02, amendment 39-4951; and AD 87-24-03, amendment
> 39-5769.
>
> Applicability: Model 727 series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 1832
> 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 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 (j) 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 excessive free play of the elevator control tab and
> possible tab flutter, accomplish the following:
>
> \(a\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0085, dated August 31, 1984 (specified
> as terminating action in AD 84-22-02, amendment 39-4951), has not been
> accomplished and the repetitive inspections required by AD 84-22-02
> have not been initiated: Prior to the accumulation of 8,000 total
> flight hours since date of manufacture, or within 300 flight hours
> after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a
> visual inspection to detect cracks and loose hinge brackets of the
> elevator rear spar in the area along the upper and lower edges at the
> shear plate, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0089,
> dated June 29, 1995. Then accomplish the follow-on actions (i.e.,
> repetitive inspections, stop-drilling, modification) in accordance
> with that service bulletin, at the times specified as follows.
>
> NOTE 2: AD 84-22-02 pertains to the one-piece elevator rear spar.
>
> \(1\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 1,600 flight hours.
>
> \(2\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by this paragraph, accomplish the requirements of
> paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(b\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0085, dated August 31, 1984 (specified
> as terminating action in AD 84-22-02, amendment 39-4951), has not been
> accomplished and the repetitive inspections required by AD 84-22-02
> have been initiated: Accomplish either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of
> this AD, as applicable.
>
> \(1\) If no crack has been detected as a result of inspections
> required by AD 84-22-02: Within 1,600 flight hours after the last
> inspection required by that AD, perform a visual inspection to detect
> cracks and loose brackets of the elevator rear spar in the area along
> the upper and lower edges at the shear plate, in accordance with the
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. Accomplish
> follow-on actions (i.e., repetitive inspection, stop-drilling,
> modification) in accordance with that service bulletin, at the times
> specified as follows:
>
> \(i\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 1,600 flight hours.
>
> \(ii\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by this paragraph, accomplish the requirements of
> paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(2\) If any crack has been stop-drilled in accordance with AD
> 84-22-02, accomplish the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD at
> the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(c\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0085, dated August 31, 1984 (specified
> as terminating action in AD 84-22-02, amendment 39-4951), has been
> accomplished: Within 4,000 flight hours after the effective date of
> this AD, perform a visual inspection to detect cracks and loose hinge
> brackets of the elevator rear spar in the area along the upper and
> lower edges at the shear plate, in accordance with Boeing Service
> Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. Accomplish follow-on
> actions (i.e., repetitive inspections, stop-drilling, modification) in
> accordance with that service bulletin, at the times specified as
> follows:
>
> \(1\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 4,000 flight hours.
>
> \(2\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by this paragraph, accomplish the requirements of
> paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(d\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-087, dated June 20, 1986 (specified as
> terminating action in AD 87-24-03, amendment 39-5769), has not been
> accomplished and the repetitive inspections required by AD 87-24-03
> have not been initiated: Accomplish the requirements of paragraph
> (d)(1) of this AD at the earliest of the times specified in paragraph
> (d)(2).
>
> NOTE 3: AD 87-24-03 pertains to the two-piece elevator rear spar.
>
> \(1\) Perform a visual inspection to detect cracks and loose hinge
> brackets of the elevator rear spar in the area along the upper and
> lower edges at the shear plate, at the earliest of the times specified
> in paragraph (d)(2) of this AD, and in accordance with Boeing Service
> Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. Accomplish follow-on
> actions (i.e., repetitive inspection, stop-drilling, modification) in
> accordance with that service bulletin, at the times specified as
> follows:
>
> \(i\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 4,000 flight hours.
>
> \(ii\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by this paragraph, accomplish the requirements of
> paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in that paragraph
>
> \(2\) Accomplish the initial visual inspection required by paragraph
> (d)(1) of this AD at the earliest of the following times:
>
> \(i\) Prior to the accumulation of 27,000 total flight hours since
> date of manufacture, or within 4,000 flight hours after December 24,
> 1987 (the effective date of 87-24-03, amendment 39-5769), whichever
> occurs later; or
>
> \(ii\) Prior to the accumulation of 12,000 total flight hours since
> date of manufacture, or within 4,000 flight hours after the effective
> date of this AD, whichever occurs later; or
>
> \(iii\) Prior to the accumulation of 27,300 total flight hours since
> date of manufacture, or within 300 flight hours after the effective
> date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
>
> \(e\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-087, dated June 20, 1986 (specified as
> terminating action in AD 87-24-03, amendment 39-5769), has not been
> accomplished and the repetitive inspections required by AD 87-24-03
> have been initiated: Accomplish either paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of
> this AD, as applicable.
>
> \(1\) If no crack has been detected as a result of inspections
> required by AD 87-24-03: Within 4,000 flight hours after the last
> inspection required by that AD, perform a visual inspection to detect
> cracks and loose brackets of the elevator rear spar in the area along
> the upper and lower edges at the shear plate, in accordance with
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. Accomplish
> follow-on actions (i.e., repetitive inspection, stop-drilling,
> modification) in accordance with that service bulletin, at the times
> specified as follows:
>
> \(i\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 4,000 flight hours.
>
> \(ii\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, accomplish the
> requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in
> that paragraph.
>
> \(2\) If any crack has been detected and stop-drilled in accordance
> with AD 87-24-03, accomplish the requirements of paragraph (g) of this
> AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(f\) For airplanes on which the modification or repair described in
> Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-087, dated June 20, 1986 (specified as
> terminating action in AD 87-24-03, amendment 39-5769), has been
> accomplished: Within 4,000 flight hours after the effective date of
> this AD, perform a visual inspection to detect cracks and loose hinge
> brackets of the elevator rear spar in the area along the upper and
> lower edges at the shear plate, in accordance with Boeing Service
> Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. Accomplish follow-on
> actions (i.e., repetitive inspection, stop-drilling, modification) in
> accordance with the service bulletin, at the times specified as
> follows:
>
> \(1\) Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to
> exceed 4,000 flight hours.
>
> \(2\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled as a result of any
> inspection required by this paragraph, accomplish the requirements of
> paragraph (g) of this AD at the times specified in that paragraph.
>
> \(g\) If any crack is detected and stop-drilled in accordance with
> paragraph (a)(2), (b)(1)(ii), (b)(2), (c)(2), (d)(1)(ii), (e)(1)(ii),
> (e)(2), or (f)(2) of this AD, accomplish the following:
>
> \(1\) Within 1,600 flight hours after stop-drilling, perform a visual
> inspection to detect cracks and loose hinge brackets of the elevator
> rear spar in the area along the upper and lower edges at the shear
> plate, and accomplish follow-on actions (i.e., stop-drilling,
> modification) in accordance with the service bulletin. If any crack
> growth is detected after stop-drilling, prior to further flight,
> modify the elevator rear spar in accordance with Part II of the
> Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0089,
> dated June 29, 1995. Accomplishment of this modification constitutes
> terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this
> AD.
>
> \(2\) Within 3,200 flight hours after stop-drilling, modify the
> elevator rear spar in accordance with Part II of the Accomplishment
> Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29,
> 1995. Accomplishment of this modification constitutes terminating
> action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD.
>
> \(h\) Modification of the elevator rear spar in accordance with Part
> II of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin
> 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995, constitutes terminating action for
> the requirements of this AD.
>
> \(i\) 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.
>
> \(j\) 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 4: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative
> methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the
> Seattle ACO.
>
> \(k\) The actions shall be done in accordance with Boeing Service
> Bulletin 727-55-0089, dated June 29, 1995. 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.
>
> \(l\) This amendment becomes effective on April 22, 1996.
>
> **Service Bulletin for the Lotus Notes Client:**
>
> [FAA.gov Home]{.underline} \| [Privacy Policy]{.underline} \| [Web
> Policies & Notices]{.underline} \| [Contact Us]{.underline} \|
> [Help]{.underline}
>
> **Readers & Viewers:** [PDF Reader]{.underline} \| [MS Word
> Viewer]{.underline} \| [MS PowerPoint Viewer]{.underline} \| [MS Excel
> Viewer]{.underline} \| [WinZip]{.underline}