80738 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 246 / Thursday, December 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

(3) No uncommanded lateral or 

directional motion, and the pilot must 

retain good lateral and directional 

control by conventional use of the 

cockpit controls throughout the 

maneuver. 

(4) The airplane must not exhibit 

buffeting of a magnitude or severity that 

would act as a deterrent to completing 

the maneuver specified in § 25.201(a) as 

amended by this proposed special 

condition. 

(b) In maneuvers with increased rates 

of deceleration, some degradation of 

characteristics associated with a 

transient excursion beyond the 

stabilized alpha-limit is acceptable. 

However, the airplane must not exhibit 

dangerous characteristics or 

characteristics that would deter the pilot 

from holding the longitudinal control on 

the aft stop for a period of time 

appropriate to the maneuvers. 

(c) It must always be possible to 

reduce incidence by conventional use of 

the longitudinal control. 

(d) The rate at which the airplane can 

be maneuvered from trim speeds 

associated with scheduled operating 

speeds, such as V2 and VREF up to alphalimit, should not be unduly damped or 

significantly slower than can be 

achieved on conventionally controlled 

transport airplanes. 

7. Atmospheric Disturbances— 

Operation of the high incidence 

protection function must not adversely 

affect aircraft control during expected 

levels of atmospheric disturbances, nor 

impede the application of recovery 

procedures in case of windshear. 

Simulator tests and analysis may be 

used to evaluate such conditions, but 

must be validated by limited flight 

testing to confirm handling qualities at 

critical loading conditions. 

8. Longitudinal Control—In lieu of the 

requirements of § 25.145(a), (a)(1) and 

(b)(6), the following special conditions 

are proposed: 

(a) It must be possible, at any point 

between the trim speed prescribed in 

§ 25.103(b)(6) as amended by this 

proposed special condition and Vmin, 

to pitch the nose downward so that the 

acceleration to this selected trim speed 

is prompt. 

(b) With the landing gear extended, no 

change in trim control, or exertion of 

more than 50 pounds control force 

(representative of the maximum shortterm force that can be applied readily by 

one hand) may be required for the 

following maneuver: With power off, 

flaps extended and the airplane 

trimmed at 1.3 VSR1, obtain and 

maintain airspeeds between Vmin and 

either 1.6VSR1 or VFE, whichever is 

lower. 

9. Airspeed Indicating System—In 

lieu of § 25.1323(c)(1) and (c)(2), the 

following special conditions are 

proposed: 

(a) VMO to Vmin with the flaps 

retracted; and 

(b) Vmin to VFE with flaps in the 

landing position. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 13, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32236 Filed 12–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0847; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–056–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model 777–200, –200LR, 

–300, and –300ER Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain Model 777–200, –200LR, 

–300, and –300ER series airplanes. The 

original NPRM would have required 

doing an inspection to identify the part 

number of the motor operated valve 

(MOV) actuators of the main and center 

fuel tanks; replacing certain MOV 

actuators with new MOV actuators; and 

measuring the electrical resistance of 

the bond from the adapter plate to the 

airplane structure, and doing corrective 

actions if necessary. The original NPRM 

also would have required revising the 

Airworthiness Limitations section of the 

Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness. The original NPRM 

resulted from fuel system reviews 

conducted by the manufacturer. This 

action revises the original NPRM by 

adding airplanes to the applicability. 

This action also revises the original 

NPRM by removing the requirement for 

revising the Airworthiness Limitations 

section of the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to prevent 

electrical current from flowing through 

an MOV actuator into a fuel tank, which 

could create a potential ignition source 

inside the fuel tank. This condition, in 

combination with flammable fuel 

vapors, could result in a fuel tank 

explosion and consequent loss of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by January 18, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, 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, Washington 98124– 

2207; telephone 206–544–5000, 

extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail 

me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; 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 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tak 

Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6499; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 246 / Thursday, December 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 80739 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2008–0847; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–056–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 issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) (the ‘‘original 

NPRM’’) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to 

include an airworthiness directive (AD) 

that would apply to certain Model 777– 

200, –200LR, –300, and –300ER series 

airplanes. That original NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 7, 2008 (73 FR 45893). That 

original NPRM proposed to require 

doing an inspection to identify the part 

number of the motor operated valve 

(MOV) actuators of the main and center 

fuel tanks; replacing certain MOV 

actuators with new MOV actuators; and 

measuring the electrical resistance of 

the bond from the adapter plate to the 

airplane structure, and doing corrective 

actions if necessary. The original NPRM 

also would have required revising the 

Airworthiness Limitations section of the 

Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness (ICA). 

Actions Since Original NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the original NPRM, 

the manufacturer has informed us that 

certain airplanes were missing from the 

effectivity in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, dated August 2, 

2007, which was referenced in the 

original NPRM as the appropriate source 

of service information. 

In addition, since we issued the 

original NPRM, we have determined 

that the proposed requirement for 

revising the Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWL) section of the ICA is 

unnecessary. Incorporation of AWL No. 

28–AWL–19 and AWL No. 28–AWL–20 

is already mandated by AD 2008–11–13, 

Amendment 39–15536 (73 FR 30737, 

May 29, 2008), which is applicable to 

Model 777–200, –200LR, –300, and 

–300ER series airplanes. Therefore, we 

have removed Note 1 and paragraphs 

(h), (i), and (j) from the original NPRM. 

Relevant Service Information 

Since the issuance of the original 

NPRM, we reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 

1, dated May 20, 2010, which adds 

airplanes to the effectivity, and corrects 

an MOV actuator part number. We also 

reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 777– 

28A0034, Revision 2, dated September 

20, 2010, which specifies to cap seal the 

bonding jumper fasteners when 

installing the MOV actuator. Boeing 

Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 

2, dated September 20, 2010, specifies 

that no more work is necessary on 

airplanes modified in accordance with 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777– 

28A0034, dated August 2, 2007; and 

Revision 1, dated May 20, 2010. 

We have revised paragraphs (c), (g), 

and (h) of this supplemental NPRM to 

refer to Boeing Service Bulletin 777– 

28A0034, Revision 2, dated September 

20, 2010. In addition, we have added 

new paragraph (j) to this supplemental 

NPRM to provide credit for actions 

accomplished before the effective date 

of this AD in accordance with Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, 

dated August 2, 2007; and Revision 1, 

dated May 20, 2010. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received from 

the two commenters. 

Request To Use Later Revisions of the 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document 

Boeing, and Air Transport Association 

(ATA) on behalf of its member United 

Airlines (UAL), requested that the FAA 

reference later revisions of the MPD 

document in paragraph (h) of the 

original NPRM. 

As stated previously, we have 

removed paragraph (h) (the requirement 

to revise the AWL section of the ICA) of 

the original NPRM. Therefore, no 

revision to this supplemental NPRM is 

necessary in this regard. 

Allow the Use of Later Revisions of 

Alternative Critical Design 

Configuration Control Limitations 

(CDCCLs) 

ATA, on behalf of its member UAL, 

stated that paragraph (i) of the original 

NPRM should include instructions 

similar to those in paragraph (i) of AD 

2008–11–13, which allows operators to 

use alternative ‘‘CDCCLs that are part of 

a later revision of February 2008 of the 

MPD’’ that is approved by the FAA to 

avoid confusion and to promote 

common compliance rules. 

As stated previously, we have 

removed paragraph (i) of the original 

NPRM. Therefore, no revision to this 

supplemental NPRM is necessary in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise the Costs of 

Compliance 

Boeing, and ATA on behalf of its 

member UAL, requested that we revise 

the Costs of Compliance section in the 

original NPRM to include the cost of 

parts. ATA stated that the cost of parts 

presents a significant expense to the 

operators since there are 11 MOV 

actuators on each of the 197 airplanes 

affected by the original NPRM, costing 

$5,477 per actuator. Boeing stated that 

the cost of parts is substantial and, 

when accounted alongside with the cost 

of labor, estimated work-hours, and the 

total number of affected airplanes, the 

cost would be higher than what is stated 

in the original NPRM. 

We agree to include the cost of parts 

in this supplemental NPRM. We have 

revised the Costs of Compliance section 

accordingly. 

Request To Clarify the Accomplishment 

Instructions in the Service Bulletin 

ATA, on behalf of its member UAL, 

requested clarification of the 

Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, 

dated August 2, 2007. UAL asserted that 

the logical flow (‘‘if—then’’ condition) of 

the installation instructions is 

incomplete and can be further clarified. 

UAL also stated that certain Boeing 777 

aircraft maintenance manuals 

referenced as sources of guidance in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777– 

28A0034, dated August 2, 2007, have 

two sections, ‘‘Pre’’ and ‘‘Post’’ Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, 

and that the service bulletin should 

specify which section is applicable. 

We agree with UAL that some of the 

instructions in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, dated August 2, 

2007, are unclear. Those issues have 

been clarified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 1, 

dated May 20, 2010; and Boeing Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 2, 

dated September 20, 2010. As stated 

previously, we have revised this 

supplemental NPRM to refer to Boeing 

Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 

2, dated September 20, 2010, and to 

provide credit for accomplishment of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 777– 

28A0034, dated August 2, 2007, and to 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
80740 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 246 / Thursday, December 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Revision 1, dated May 20, 2010, before 

the effective date of the AD. 

Request To Prohibit the Installation of 

Part Number (P/N) MA20A1001–1 

ATA, on behalf of its member UAL, 

expressed that the intent of the original 

NPRM is to remove the MOV actuator 

having P/N MA20A1001–1 and to 

prohibit installation of P/N 

MA20A1001–1 once the AD has been 

complied with. UAL stated that it has 

reviewed the NPRM and cannot find 

language that prohibits the installation 

of P/N MA20A1001–1; UAL stated that 

such language should be in this 

proposed AD. 

We partially agree. We disagree that it 

is necessary to specifically prohibit the 

installation of P/N MA20A1001–1 once 

the AD has been complied with because 

after accomplishing the mandatory 

actions, operators are required to 

maintain airplanes in compliance with 

the AD. To ensure that the unsafe 

condition cannot be introduced before 

compliance with the AD, we have added 

paragraph (i) to this supplemental 

NPRM to prohibit installation of an 

MOV actuator, P/N MA20A1001–1, after 

the effective date of this AD. 

Request To Postpone the AD or Extend 

the Compliance Time 

ATA, on behalf of its member UAL, 

requested that the FAA postpone the 

proposed AD or extend the compliance 

time until reliability issues pertaining to 

the MOV actuator with P/N 

MA30A1001 are resolved. UAL stated 

that Boeing Fleet Team Digest 737NG– 

FTD–28–07002 discusses the potential 

of the P/N MA30A1001 actuator having 

cracked or damaged capacitors. UAL 

stated that if the MOV actuators with 

the defective design are installed due to 

regulatory mandate, the opportunity of 

actuator failure is introduced, which 

creates unnecessary economic burden 

for operators. 

We disagree with UAL’s request to 

postpone the AD or extend the 

compliance time. The problem of the 

capacitor does not constitute a new 

unsafe condition. The investigation 

conducted by the supplier of the 

affected MOV actuators concluded that 

damage to the capacitors was 

introduced due to certain manufacturing 

processes. To address this issue, the 

supplier changed manufacturing 

processes in March 2007. We are aware 

that a number of MOV actuators that 

were produced under the manufacturing 

processes before that change were 

returned to the supplier between 

December 2006 and October 2007. 

Boeing also informed us that no 

actuators have been returned to the 

supplier due to damaged capacitors 

since October 2007. We have 

determined that the manufacturing 

process changes have adequately 

addressed the reliability issues; 

therefore, the current inventory of spare 

MOV actuators would be unlikely to 

contain a discrepant part. We consider 

it inappropriate to delay this AD since 

we have determined that an unsafe 

condition exists and that replacement of 

certain parts must be accomplished to 

ensure continued safety. We have not 

changed this supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

FAA’s Determination and Proposed 

Requirements of the Supplemental 

NPRM 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all 

pertinent information and determined 

an unsafe condition exists and is likely 

to exist or develop on other products of 

the same type design. Certain changes 

described above expand the scope of the 

original NPRM. As a result, we have 

determined that it is necessary to reopen 

the comment period to provide 

additional opportunity for the public to 

comment on this supplemental NPRM. 

Additional Changes to the Original 

NPRM 

In the Costs of Compliance section in 

the original NPRM, 197 airplanes were 

estimated to be affected. The correct 

number of affected airplanes in this 

supplemental NPRM is 127 airplanes. 

We have revised the Costs of 

Compliance section accordingly. 

We have determined that a review of 

airplane records will be adequate to 

identify the MOV actuator part number. 

Therefore, we have added a records 

review as an option to the inspection in 

paragraph (g) of this supplemental 

NPRM (paragraph (f) in the original 

NPRM). 

We have revised paragraph (h) of this 

supplemental NPRM (paragraph (g)(1) in 

the original NPRM) to specify the 

correct replacement actuator part 

number. We have also revised paragraph 

(h) of this supplemental NPRM to allow 

the installation of a serviceable MOV 

actuator. In addition, we have revised 

paragraph (h) of this supplemental 

NPRM to clarify that measuring the 

electrical resistance of the bond from 

the adapter plate is only required at 

certain MOV actuator locations. 

We have added a new paragraph (d) 

to this supplemental NPRM to provide 

the Air Transport Association of 

America (ATA) Code 28, Fuel. This 

code is added to make this 

supplemental NPRM parallel with other 

new AD actions. We have reidentified 

subsequent paragraphs accordingly. 

We have revised this AD to identify 

the legal name of the manufacturer as 

published in the most recent type 

certificate data sheet for the affected 

airplane models. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 127 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 

Inspection of MOV Actuators ........ Up to 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 .............. $0 Up to $510 ....... Up to $64,770. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary replacements 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 replacements. 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Replacement of MOV Actuator Without 

Fuel Tank Access.

Up to 47 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$3,995.

Up to $5,477, per actuator ................... Up to $9,472. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 246 / Thursday, December 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 80741 

ON-CONDITION COSTS—Continued 

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Replacement of MOV Actuator With 

Fuel Tank Access.

Up to 423 work-hours × $85 per hour 

= $35,955.

Up to $5,477, per actuator ................... Up to $41,432. 

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. 

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), 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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

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 AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2008–0847; Directorate Identifier 2008– 

NM–056–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by January 

18, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to The Boeing 

Company Model 777–200, –200LR, –300, and 

–300ER series airplanes, certificated in any 

category; as identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 2, dated 

September 20, 2010. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28, Fuel. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. The 

Federal Aviation Administration is issuing 

this AD to prevent electrical current from 

flowing through a motor operated valve 

(MOV) actuator into a fuel tank, which could 

create a potential ignition source inside the 

fuel tank. This condition, in combination 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result in 

a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of 

the airplane. 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Inspection 

(g) Within 60 months after the effective 

date of this AD, do an inspection of the MOV 

actuators of the main and center fuel tanks 

for part number (P/N) MA20A1001–1, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 777– 

28A0034, Revision 2, dated September 20, 

2010. A review of airplane maintenance 

records is acceptable in lieu of this 

inspection if the part number can be 

conclusively determined from that review. 

Replacement 

(h) If any P/N MA20A1001–1 is found 

during the inspection required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD, within 60 months after the 

effective date of this AD, replace the MOV 

actuator with a new or serviceable MOV 

actuator, P/N MA30A1001; and as applicable, 

measure the electrical resistance of the bond 

from the adapter plate to the airplane 

structure and do all applicable corrective 

actions; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 2, 

dated September 20, 2010. Do all applicable 

corrective actions before further flight. 

Part Installation 

(i) As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install an MOV actuator, P/N 

MA20A1001–1, on any airplane. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

(j) Actions done in accordance with Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–28A0034, dated 

August 2, 2007; or Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, Revision 1, dated 

May 20, 2010; are considered acceptable for 

compliance with the corresponding actions 

required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD; 

except that replacement of an MOV actuator 

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–28A0034, dated August 2, 2007, 

is acceptable for the replacement required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD, provided that the 

replacement P/N is MA30A1001. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(k)(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. Send information to ATTN: Tak 

Kobayashi, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6499; fax 

(425) 917–6590. Information may be e-mailed 

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

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
80742 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 246 / Thursday, December 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 16, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32208 Filed 12–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1202; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–167–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell 

Douglas Corporation Model MD–90–30 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Model MD–90–30 airplanes. This 

proposed AD would require repetitive 

inspections for cracking of the left and 

right upper center skin panels of the 

horizontal stabilizer, and corrective 

action if necessary. This proposed AD 

was prompted by a report of a crack 

found in the upper skin panel at the aft 

inboard corner of a right horizontal 

stabilizer. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct cracks in the 

horizontal stabilizer upper center skin 

panel. Uncorrected cracks might 

ultimately lead to the loss of overall 

structural integrity of the horizontal 

stabilizer. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by February 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, 

Long Beach, California 90846–0001; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; 

fax 206–766–5683; e-mail 

dse.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; 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: 

Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer, Los 

Angeles ACO, Airframe Branch, ANM– 

120L, FAA Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 

Blvd, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; 

telephone: (562) 627–5233; fax: (562) 

627–5210; e-mail: roger.durbin@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– 

2010–1202; Directorate Identifier 2010– 

NM–167–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 have received a report of a crack 

to a Model MD–80 airplane upper center 

skin panel of the right horizontal 

stabilizer at the aft inboard corner 

during an inspection for cracks in the 

upper and lower aft skin panels of the 

horizontal stabilizer in accordance with 

AD 2007–10–04, Amendment 39–15045 

(72 FR 25960, May 8, 2007). That 

airplane had accumulated 47,146 total 

flight hours and 26,490 total flight 

cycles when the crack was found. The 

cause of the cracking is suspected to be 

fatigue. The Model MD–90–30 airplane 

horizontal stabilizer is similar in design 

and loading to that of the Model MD– 

80 airplane horizontal stabilizer. 

Therefore, Model MD–90–30 airplanes 

may also be subject to the identified 

unsafe condition. 

A crack in the upper center skin panel 

may transfer the load to the upper aft 

skin panel. This may result in the upper 

aft skin panel cracking faster than the 

existing inspection intervals that are 

required by AD 2009–13–08, 

Amendment 39–15947 (74 FR 30922, 

June 29, 2009). Uncorrected cracking 

could result in loss of the overall 

structural integrity of the horizontal 

stabilizer. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin MD90–55A015, dated July 16, 

2010. This service bulletin describes 

procedures for repetitive eddy current 

inspections, either (Option 1) two high 

frequency eddy current (ETHF) scans 

and one low frequency eddy current 

(ETLF) scan, or (Option 2) three ETHF 

scans, to detect cracking of the right and 

left upper center skin panels of the 

horizontal stabilizer. Corrective actions 

include replacing any cracked 

horizontal stabilizer upper center skin 

panel with a serviceable panel or 

contacting Boeing for possible 

temporary repair instructions. 

The repetitive interval is 5,200 flight 

cycles or 2,500 flight cycles depending 

on the eddy current inspection option 

selected. 

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 the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90– 

55A015, dated July 16, 2010, provides 

an option to contact the manufacturer 

for instructions on how to repair 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS