This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

9667 

Vol. 80, No. 36 

Tuesday, February 24, 2015 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0246; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–187–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 737–300, 

–400, and –500 series airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by reports 

of fatigue cracking found at the left-side 

and right-side upper frame, at a certain 

area. This proposed AD would require 

repetitive medium frequency eddy 

current (MFEC) inspections for cracking 

of the left-side and right-side upper 

frame, and repair (including open hole 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections for cracking of fastener 

holes) if necessary. This proposed AD 

also provides an optional preventative 

modification which would terminate the 

repetitive inspections at the modified 

location. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking, 

which if not corrected, can grow in size 

and result in a severed frame, which 

could lead to rapid decompression and 

reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 10, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P. O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. It is also 

available on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

0246. 

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–2015– 

0246; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

wayne.lockett@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2015–0246; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–187–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We received reports of fatigue 

cracking found at frame station 360 

between stringer 13 and stringer 14. At 

the time of crack detection, the 

airplanes had accumulated between 

37,826 to 42,986 total flight cycles. The 

reported cracks ranged from 0.35 inches 

to 1.5 inches in length. Cracking of the 

left-side or right-side upper frame at 

station 360 between stringer 13 and 

stringer 14, if not corrected, can grow in 

size and result in a severed frame, 

which could lead to rapid 

decompression and reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated August 12, 

2014. This service information describes 

procedures for inspections for cracking 

of the left-side and right-side upper 

frame, at station 360 between stringer 13 

and stringer 14; repair, and optional 

preventative modification. For 

information on the procedures and 

compliance times, see this service 

information. This service information is 

reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for 

ways to access this service information. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9668 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 36 / Tuesday, February 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Explanation of ‘‘RC’’ Steps in Service 

Information 

The FAA worked in conjunction with 

industry, under the Airworthiness 

Directives Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to 

enhance the AD system. One 

enhancement was a new process for 

annotating which steps in the service 

information are required for compliance 

with an AD. Differentiating these steps 

from other tasks in the service 

information is expected to improve an 

owner’s/operator’s understanding of 

crucial AD requirements and help 

provide consistent judgment in AD 

compliance. The steps identified as RC 

(required for compliance) in any service 

information identified previously have a 

direct effect on detecting, preventing, 

resolving, or eliminating an identified 

unsafe condition. 

Steps that are identified as RC in any 

service information must be done to 

comply with the proposed AD. 

However, steps that are not identified as 

RC are recommended. Those steps that 

are not identified as RC may be deviated 

from using accepted methods in 

accordance with the operator’s 

maintenance or inspection program 

without obtaining approval of an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC), provided the steps identified 

as RC can be done and the airplane can 

be put back in a serviceable condition. 

Any substitutions or changes to steps 

identified as RC will require approval of 

an AMOC. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1339, dated August 12, 2014, 

specifies to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 109 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspections ............................................. 14 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,190 

per inspection cycle.

$0 $1,190 per inspection cycle.$129,710 per inspection cycle. 

Preventative modification (optional) ....... 15 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,275 

per inspection cycle.

$0 $1,275 per inspection cycle.$138,975 per inspection cycle. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary on-condition actions that 

would be required based on the results 

of the proposed inspection. We have no 

way of determining the number of 

aircraft that might need these actions: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Repair and open hole HFEC inspection ...................... 36 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,060 ...................... $0 $3,060 

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 proposed 

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. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify 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), 

(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. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 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. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 36 / Tuesday, February 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 9669 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2015–0246; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–187–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 10, 

2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes, certificated in any category, as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1339, dated August 12, 2014. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

fatigue cracking found at the left-side and 

right-side upper frame, at station 360 

between stringer 13 and stringer 14. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the left-side and right-side upper 

frame at station 360 between stringer 13 and 

stringer 14, which if not corrected, can grow 

in size and result in a severed frame, which 

could lead to rapid decompression and 

reduced structural integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections for Cracking 

At the applicable times specified in table 

1 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated 

August 12, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD: Do a medium 

frequency eddy current (MFEC) inspection 

for cracking on the left-side and right-side of 

the upper frame at Station 360 between 

stringer 13 and stringer 14, in accordance 

with Part 2 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1339, dated August 12, 2014. If no 

cracking is found, repeat the inspections at 

the applicable times specified in Table 1 of 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated 

August 12, 2014. Accomplishment of the 

actions specified in paragraph (j) of this AD 

terminates the repetitive inspections required 

by this paragraph at the modified area only. 

(h) Repair 

If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD: Before further flight, repair the cracking 

including doing an open hole high frequency 

eddy current (HFEC) inspection for cracking 

of the holes, in accordance with Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated August 

12, 2014, except as required by paragraph 

(i)(1) of this AD. Repair of any crack 

terminates the repetitive inspection 

requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD for 

the repaired area only. If any cracking is 

found during any inspection required by this 

paragraph, repair using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures specified 

in paragraph (l) of this AD. 

(i) Exceptions to the Service Information 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1339, dated August 12, 2014, 

specifies contacting Boeing for repair 

instructions: Before further flight, repair 

using a method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of 

this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1339, dated August 12, 2014, 

specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

original issue date of this service bulletin,’’ 

this AD requires compliance within the 

specified time after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(j) Optional Preventative Modification 

Modification of an inspection area 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, 

including doing open hole and surface HFEC 

inspections for cracking of the area to be 

modified, in accordance with Part 4 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated August 

12, 2014, except as required by paragraph 

(i)(1) of this AD, terminates the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD at the modified location only. 

(k) Post-Repair and Post-Modification 

Inspections 

The post-repair and post-modification 

inspections specified in Tables 4 and 5 of 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated 

August 12, 2014, are not required by this AD. 

Note 1 to paragraph (k) of this AD: The 

post-repair and post-modification inspections 

specified in Tables 4 and 5 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1339, dated August 12, 

2014, may be used in support of compliance 

with section 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2) 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(b)(2)). 

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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 ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9–ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(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 

required by this AD if it is approved by 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) Except as required by paragraph (i)(1) 

of this AD: If any service information 

contains steps that are identified as RC 

(Required for Compliance), those steps must 

be done to comply with this AD; any steps 

that are not identified as RC are 

recommended. Those steps that are not 

identified 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 steps identified as RC 

can be done and the airplane can be put back 

in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions 

or changes to steps identified as RC require 

approval of an AMOC. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may view this referenced service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

11, 2015. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03677 Filed 2–23–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 251 

[Docket ID: DOD–2014–OS–0058] 

RIN 0790–AJ28 

National Language Service Corps 

(NLSC) 

AGENCY: Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness, DoD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule establishes in the 

Code of Federal Regulations the 

National Language Services Corps 

(NLSC) by describing the program and 

its responsibilities per the January 2013 

National Defense Authorization Act 

which authorized the Secretary of 

Defense to establish the NLSC as a 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS