81412 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

cracking of the replacement frame section 

(frame webs, inner chord, and outer chord); 

and do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions; by accomplishing all 

the actions specified in Part 1 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1254, Revision 1, 

dated July 9, 2009, except as specified in 

paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. Do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. 

Thereafter, repeat the inspection at intervals 

not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles since 

accomplishing the detailed inspection or at 

intervals not to exceed 9,000 flight cycles 

since accomplishing the HFEC inspection, as 

applicable. 

(1) For airplanes on which a partial frame 

splice repair at BS 616 or BS 639 has been 

done, and the inner chord and web have been 

cold-worked: Inspect within 44,000 flight 

cycles after the repair has been done. 

(2) For airplanes on which a partial frame 

splice repair at BS 616 or BS 639 has been 

done, and the inner chord and web have not 

been cold-worked: Inspect within 29,000 

flight cycles after that repair has been done. 

Alternative Inspection of Repaired or 

Modified Area 

(i) For airplanes on which a repair or 

preventative modification exists on the inner 

chord below the floor which prevents the 

accomplishment of the detailed or HFEC 

inspection in that area as required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD: In lieu of inspecting 

that area, do a detailed or HFEC inspection 

of the inner chord along the length of the 

repair and around the fastener heads in 

accordance with Part 1 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1254, Revision 1, 

dated July 9, 2009. 

Exceptions to Service Information 

(j) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1254, Revision 1, dated July 9, 2009, 

specifies to contact Boeing for repair 

instructions and repair: Before further flight, 

repair the cracking using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures specified 

in paragraph (m) of this AD. 

(k) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1254, Revision 1, dated July 9, 2009, 

specifies to submit information to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

Terminating Action 

(l) Doing the repair specified in Part 4 of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1254, 

Revision 1, dated July 9, 2009, terminates the 

repetitive inspection requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD for the repaired 

frame only. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(m)(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: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 917–6447; fax (425) 

917–6590. Or, e-mail information to 9–ANM– 

Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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. 

(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 an 

Authorized Representative for the 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. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(n) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1254, Revision 1, dated July 

9, 2009, to do the actions required by this 

AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this 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. 

(3) You may review copies of the 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. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

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/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington on 

December 16, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32354 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0913; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–101–AD; Amendment 

39–16545; AD 2010–26–06] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model 737–600, –700, –700C, 

–800, and –900 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and 

–900 series airplanes. This AD requires 

inspections for scribe lines in the 

fuselage skin at lap joints, the splice 

strap at certain butt joints, the skin or 

doubler at certain approved repair 

doublers, and the skin at decal 

locations; and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. This AD 

results from reports of scribe line 

damage found adjacent to the skin lap 

joints, decals, and wing-to-body fairings. 

We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct scribe lines, which can develop 

into fatigue cracks in the skin. 

Undetected fatigue cracks can grow and 

cause sudden decompression of the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective February 1, 

2011. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of February 1, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this 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 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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527) 

is the Document Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81413 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6447; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an airworthiness 

directive (AD) that would apply to 

certain Model 737–600, –700, –700C, 

–800, and –900 series airplanes. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on October 19, 2009 (74 FR 

53442). That NPRM proposed to require 

inspections for scribe lines in the 

fuselage skin at lap joints, the splice 

strap at certain butt joints, the skin or 

doubler at certain approved repair 

doublers, and the skin at decal 

locations; and related investigative and 

corrective actions, if necessary. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received from 

the commenters. 

Support for the NPRM 

The National Safety Transportation 

Board (NTSB) and Air Transport 

Association (ATA), on behalf of its 

member AirTran, support the intent of 

the NPRM. 

Request To Refer to Latest Revision of 

Service Bulletin 

The Boeing Company requests that we 

revise the NPRM to refer to the latest 

version of the appropriate service 

information, Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53A1289, Revision 1, dated 

November 18, 2009. 

We agree to refer to the latest version 

of the service information. Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 

1, dated November 18, 2009, shows 

changes of airplane operators in 

Paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, and clarifies 

requirements for inspections of areas of 

the fuselage having decals. Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 

1, dated November 18, 2009, does not 

require additional work beyond the 

original version of that service bulletin, 

which was cited as the appropriate 

source of service information in the 

NPRM. We have revised the AD 

requirements to refer to Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009, as the 

appropriate source of service 

information, and we have added 

paragraph (h) to this final rule to 

provide credit for actions performed in 

accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009. 

Request To Update Exception in Note 1 

of the NPRM 

The Boeing Company requests that we 

revise the NPRM to update the 

exception referenced in Note 1 of the 

NPRM because Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53A1289, Revision 1, dated 

November 18, 2009, adds an exception 

to the inspections. The additional 

exception is described in subparagraph 

1.f. in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

that service bulletin. Southwest Airlines 

also requests that we add the same 

provision. Southwest notes that the 

additional provision states, ‘‘If the 

operator’s records show that decal 

installation and removal procedures 

were used, at all times since delivery, 

which included pre-cutting decals prior 

to installation on the airplane and no 

use of metallic tooling of any kind 

during the installation or removal of 

decals on the airplane, then the [decal] 

inspections [per Tables 5 through 9] are 

not required.’’ 

We agree. The specified decal 

installation and removal procedures 

have been shown to not result in scribe 

damage to the fuselage. We have 

updated Note 1 in this AD to include 

the additional exception specified in 

subparagraph 1.f. in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009. 

Request To Include Training About 

Scribe Lines and Scratches 

The National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB) is concerned that the 

NPRM does not address the underlying 

condition that mechanics and 

technicians do not have the knowledge, 

training, and awareness to recognize 

that minor damage to pressurized 

airplane skin can result in fatigue 

cracking, which can result in 

depressurization events. The NTSB 

requests that the FAA reexamine 

existing maintenance practices and 

training techniques to educate 

personnel about the serious 

consequences of minor scratches and 

scribe lines on pressurized fuselage skin 

panels. 

We acknowledge the NTSB’s 

concerns. However, such training is 

outside the scope of the AD 

requirements as defined in 14 CFR part 

39. (Part 12 provides inspection 

procedures for scribe marks found 

before the initial inspection.) We have 

worked with industry groups and 

manufacturers to increase awareness of 

scribe lines and their effects on skin 

panels. This topic has also been 

addressed at Industry Steering 

Committee (ISC), Maintenance Steering 

Group (MSG), and Structures Task 

Group (STG) meetings. We have not 

changed the AD in regard to this issue. 

Request To Remove Hard Time Date 

Continental Airlines (Continental) 

requests that we review the hard time 

date of July 1, 2007, that is stated in 

‘‘Compliance,’’ paragraph 1.E.1(a) 

through 1.E.1(e) of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009. Continental states that a hard 

time date should not matter if the 

operator can provide documents that 

show sealant and decals were removed 

using an approved method after the 

operator received the airplane. 

We have reviewed the hard time date, 

as requested by the commenter. The 

date of July 1, 2007, was selected 

because all the Boeing documentation 

was revised as of this date to detail the 

proper method for removing paint, 

sealant, and decals. Not all operators 

may have used methods equivalent to 

the methods stated in this 

documentation, but they may have used 

methods detailed in documentation 

published before this date. As a result, 

the date of July 1, 2007, is included 

appropriately in Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53A1289, Revision 1, dated 

November 18, 2009. Operators may 

submit a request for approval of an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) if their methods for removing 

paint, sealant, and decals were 

implemented before July 1, 2007, and 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have not changed the AD in regard 

to this issue. 

Request To Incorporate Instructions 

into Structural Repair Manual (SRM) 

Continental requests that the 

instructions given in Part 12 of the work 

instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009, be incorporated into the 

structural repair manual (SRM) before 

the release of the AD because the SRM 

is for non-routine or non-scheduled 

events. (Part 12 provides inspection 

procedures for scribe marks found 

before the initial inspection.) 

Continental states that the current 

instructions make it difficult to comply 

with the NPRM by the operators’ 

mechanics because they would use the 

SRM only for repair to damages that are 

discovered or that occurred during a 

non-routine event. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81414 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

We disagree with the request. 

Significant effort has been made to 

educate operators about the effects of 

scribe lines on the fuselage structure. 

Therefore, all mechanics should be 

aware of scribe lines. Also, the service 

bulletins pertaining to scribe lines for 

all Boeing models contain instructions 

for repairing scribe line damage found 

before the inspection threshold. We 

have not changed the AD in regard to 

this issue. 

Request To Allow All Repairs Using the 

SRM 

Continental requests that we revise 

the NPRM to allow all repairs using the 

SRM. Continental states that it does not 

agree that all repairs need to be 

approved by Boeing or the FAA Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, as specified 

in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, and in 

paragraphs (i) and (k) of the NPRM. 

Continental proposes that we add an 

exception to Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009, to allow all repairs other than 

repairs done for the Limited Return to 

Service (LTRS) program to be 

accomplished in accordance with the 

SRM or to be FAA-approved. 

Continental states because the scribe 

lines do not result from a design 

deficiency, no differences exist between 

these repairs and any other repairs on 

the airplanes. Continental states that if 

such an exception is not allowed, 

operators are unfairly penalized by 

being forced to use Boeing’s repair 

services. While Continental 

acknowledges that paragraph (k)(2) of 

the NPRM (now paragraph (p)(2) of the 

final rule) allows requests for AMOC 

approvals, it states that the FAA’s 

response time to approve AMOCs does 

not allow airplanes to return to service 

in a timely manner that supports 

operational requirements. Continental 

states that this is why the designee 

program exists as given in section 

183.29 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 183.29) and FAA 

Order 8100.15, which should not be 

overridden by the proposed AD. 

We agree to revise the final rule to 

add an exception to the accomplishment 

instructions specified by Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009. We agree that 

repairs to the fuselage where the scribe 

line is removed are not different from 

other repairs to the airplane. Also, 

Boeing has revised the Allowable 

Damage section of the SRM to address 

scribe line damage. We have added a 

new paragraph (k) to the final rule to 

allow for repair in accordance with an 

FAA-approved method. We have also 

added Note 2 to the final rule that 

provides guidance for repairing scribe 

damage. 

Request To Correct ‘‘Relevant Service 

Information’’ in NPRM 

Continental requests that we correct 

the ‘‘Relevant Service Information’’ 

section in the NPRM because Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, 

dated January 14, 2009, does not specify 

final repairs by using the SRM. Instead, 

Continental states that Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated 

January 14, 2009, specifies to contact 

Boeing for final repairs. 

We agree. However, this section does 

not appear in this final rule. We have 

not changed the AD in regard to this 

issue. 

Request To Revise Exceptions for 

Airplanes That Have Been Scuff 

Sanded 

Air Transport Association (ATA), on 

behalf of its member American Airlines 

(American), states that the list of 

exceptions in section 1.E, ‘‘Compliance,’’ 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, 

should be revised to specify that 

airplanes that have been scuff sanded 

and repainted do not require 

inspections in areas where they have 

been repainted. American states that it 

does not use complete paint on the 

external surfaces and leaves most of the 

fuselage in natural metal finish. 

American states that it rarely 

accomplishes a chemical strip of the 

painted stripes and that the sealant can 

be damaged by chemical strippers. This 

process does not require removal and 

reapplication, which might cause scribe 

marks. 

We partially agree. The operator’s 

unique finish on the fuselage limits the 

potential for the development of scribe 

lines. However, we do not agree that 

changing this AD is necessary because 

operators may interpret such an 

exception to allow sanding after paint 

and sealant are removed, and these 

methods might eliminate any evidence 

of scribe marks. Operators may submit 

requests for approval of an AMOC for 

their particular finish configuration. We 

have not changed the AD in regard to 

this issue. 

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance 

ATA, on behalf of its members Air 

Tran Airlines (Air Tran) and American, 

requests that we revise the costs of 

compliance. AirTran states that 

complying with the NPRM would cost 

$2,500 per airplane and that it would 

have to procure special tooling for each 

site performing the inspection. 

American Airlines states that complying 

with the NPRM without any changes 

would cost it $1,004,080 for labor and 

$3,458,455 for additional out-of-service 

time. 

We have revised the costs of 

compliance to increase the labor rate 

from $80 to $85. However, we have not 

changed the costs of compliance 

otherwise. The cost information below 

describes only the direct costs of the 

specific actions required by this AD. 

Based on the best data available, the 

manufacturer provided the number of 

work hours necessary to do the required 

actions. This number represents the 

time necessary to perform only the 

actions actually required by this AD. We 

recognize that, in doing the actions 

required by an AD, operators might 

incur incidental costs in addition to the 

direct costs. The cost analysis in AD 

rulemaking actions, however, typically 

does not include incidental costs such 

as the time required to gain access and 

close up, time necessary for planning, or 

time necessitated by other 

administrative actions. Those incidental 

costs, which might vary significantly 

among operators, are almost impossible 

to calculate. 

Request To Require Reporting of Only 

Positive Findings of Cracks 

Southwest Airlines (Southwest) and 

Qantas request that we revise the AD to 

require reporting of only crack findings. 

Southwest notes that AD 2006–07–12, 

Amendment 39–14539 (71 FR 16211, 

March 31, 2006), a similar AD that 

requires inspection for scribe lines on 

Model 737 airplanes, requires the 

reporting of cracks found only during 

LRTS inspections, not scribe lines found 

as a result of the initial scribe 

inspections. Qantas asks why a report 

for a one-time inspection is required. 

We agree to provide clarification of 

the rationale for reporting requirements 

and to revise the reporting 

requirements. The data will be used to 

determine if the existing inspection 

thresholds and the repeat inspection 

intervals provided in the LRTS program 

may be increased, which may result in 

less work for operators in the future. We 

have revised paragraph (o) of this final 

rule to require reporting only positive 

findings of cracks found during any 

inspections required by this AD. 

Request To Add Instructions for 

Addressing Scribe Lines Outside Zones 

Southwest requests that we revise the 

AD to either state how to address scribe 

lines found in zones outside of those 

zones specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009, or add a statement that ‘‘no 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81415 

zone’’ scribes do not require repetitive 

inspections or terminating actions. 

Southwest did not provide justification 

for its request. 

We disagree that revising the NPRM is 

necessary. This AD requires inspections 

and a terminating action in only the 

zones identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009. Any zone 

that is not identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009, is not subject 

to inspection or repair requirements of 

this rule. (See paragraph 3.A. Note 13 of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, 

Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009.) 

We have not changed the AD in regard 

to this issue. 

Request To Address Scribe Lines Less 

than 0.001 Inch Deep 

Southwest requests that we revise the 

AD to address scribe lines that are less 

than 0.001 inch deep. Southwest states 

that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, dated January 14, 2009, states 

that no further inspections are required 

for such scribe lines, but Southwest 

requests that the AD specifically state 

that such lines do not require 

terminating action. Southwest asks why 

the compliance time is ‘‘before further 

flight’’ if no inspections are required. 

Southwest asks if that means no 

additional NDT inspections are required 

at the time of finding such lines. 

We partially agree with the 

commenter’s request. The compliance 

table in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin requires clarification 

as it shows the compliance time of 

‘‘before further flight’’ for inspecting 

scribe lines that are less than 0.001 inch 

deep. We have clarified this issue by 

stating in paragraph (m) of this AD that 

no further inspections are required 

provided that correct sealant removal 

procedures are used. 

Request To Allow the Blending of 

Scribe Lines 

Southwest requests that we revise the 

AD to allow operators to blend scribe 

lines in accordance with the SRM by 

treating the scribe line as a gouge or 

scratch. Southwest states that the 737– 

700 SRM does not address scribe lines 

in the Allowable Damage section. 

Southwest states that Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1262 (the appropriate 

source of service information for a onetime inspection for scribe lines and 

cracks in the fuselage skin at certain lap 

joints, butt joints, external repair 

doublers, and other areas in AD 2006– 

07–12, Amendment 39–14539 (71 FR 

16211, March 31, 2006)) allows the 

blending of scribe lines in accordance 

with the SRM by treating the scribe line 

as a gouge or scratch. However, 

Southwest notes, Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated January 

14, 2009, does not allow for the same 

treatment, but recommends that 

operators contact Boeing for repair 

instructions. 

We agree. All Boeing Model 737 

SRMs were revised as a result of the 

scribe issue to address scribe damage in 

butt joints and within 1.0 inch of lap 

splice lower edges and external repair 

edges. This information is found in the 

Allowable Damage sections of the 

SRMs. We have added Note 2 to this 

final rule, as noted previously. 

Request To Include Terminating Action 

for Repairing Scribe Lines 

Southwest requests that 

accomplishing repairs or modifications 

in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1232 be an approved 

method for terminating scribe line 

inspections. Southwest did not provide 

any justification for its request. 

We disagree. The repair and 

modification specified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1232 are specifically 

designed for chem mill step cracking, 

not scribe lines. The modification 

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53–1232 would not meet the 

requirements of this AD. The 

modification provided in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009, does not 

extend a minimum of three fastener 

rows below any scribe line damage at a 

lap joint, and the doubler and tripler 

used on the repair specified in Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 

1, dated November 18, 2009, do not 

extend a minimum of three fastener 

rows below any scribe damage at a lap 

joint. We have not changed the AD in 

regard to this issue. 

Request To Include an Exception for 

Inspections of Areas Covered by 

Certain Repairs 

Southwest requests that we revise the 

NPRM to contain a provision excluding 

inspections of areas that are covered by 

repairs that span a minimum of three 

rows above and below the inspection 

area. 

We agree with the commenter. This 

exception is provided in other scribe 

line ADs for other Boeing airplane 

models and should apply in this AD as 

well. We have added paragraph (l) to 

this AD to provide this exception to 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, 

Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009. In 

addition, we have also added an 

exception to not require removal of a 

repair even if it does not span a 

potential scribe by 3 or more fastener 

rows and there is no evidence of scribe 

lines within 10 inches of the repair. 

Request To Include Exception for 

Inspections of Areas Under the Dorsal 

Fin Fairing 

Southwest requests that we include 

an exception for inspections of areas 

under the dorsal fin fairing. Southwest 

requests that this area be treated the 

same as the wing-to-body fairing, i.e., if 

the area under the dorsal fin fairing has 

never been stripped or repainted since 

delivery, then the scribe line inspection 

should not be required in that area. 

We agree. We have added paragraph 

(n) of this final rule to provide an 

exception for this area. 

Request for Clarification of the 

Compliance Time 

Qantas states since a scribe line can 

occur at any time during the service life 

of an airplane and at many locations, 

this program uses both total flight cycles 

and structural criticality of location to 

determine the inspection requirements. 

Qantas asks if the compliance time takes 

into account scribe lines induced before 

the first repainting of the airplane. 

We agree to provide clarification. The 

compliance times specified in Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 

1, dated November 18, 2009, do not 

account for scribe lines induced before 

the first repainting. All analysis was 

accomplished using the assumption that 

scribe lines might be induced during 

repainting only when the sealant is 

removed from lap and butt joints and 

around external doublers. The FAA has 

received no prior reports of scribe line 

damage on Model 737NG airplanes 

before the first repainting. We will 

investigate the reports provided by the 

commenter and all operators, and will 

take action as necessary. We have not 

changed the AD in regard to this issue. 

Request To Omit Instructions for 

Restoring the Surface Finish 

ATA, on behalf of its member 

American, requests that we do not 

consider as part of the AD the 

methodology in Part 11—‘‘Surface 

Finish Restoration’’ of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated 

January 14, 2009. American states that 

it has internal processes that meet the 

intent of the requirement for the 

reapplication of removed finishes, 

although those processes may not be 

identical in material, workflow, or 

processes. 

We partially agree with the 

commenter. While the unique finishes 

on the fuselage may warrant using 

different processes than those used on a 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81416 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

typical fuselage, we disagree with the 

request because the commenter did not 

provide details on the processes that 

meet the intent of the AD. We will 

consider requests for an approval of an 

AMOC if data demonstrate that it meets 

an acceptable level of safety. We did not 

change the AD in regard to this issue. 

Explanation of Changes Made to This 

AD 

We have revised the ‘‘Alternative 

Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)’’ 

paragraph in this AD to clarify the 

delegation authority for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization. We have 

also revised paragraph (k) of this final 

rule to clarify that repairs must be made 

in accordance with an FAA-approved 

method. 

Explanation of Change to Applicability 

We have revised the applicability of 

the existing AD to identify model 

designations as published in the most 

recent type certificate data sheet for the 

affected models. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously. 

We also determined that these changes 

will not increase the economic burden 

on any operator or increase the scope of 

the AD. 

Explanation of Change to Costs of 

Compliance 

Since issuance of the NPRM, we have 

increased the labor rate used in the 

Costs of Compliance from $80 per workhour to $85 per work-hour. The Costs of 

Compliance information, below, reflects 

this increase in the specified hourly 

labor rate. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 782 

airplanes of U.S. registry. The following 

table provides the estimated costs for 

U.S. operators to comply with this AD. 

TABLE—ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours Average labor rate 

per hour Parts Cost per product Number of U.S.- registered airplanes Fleet cost 

Inspection .......... 53 $85 $0 $4,505 per inspection cycle.782 $3,522,910 per 

inspection 

cycle. 

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 

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), 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. 

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 

■ 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: 

2010–26–06 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–16545. Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0913; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–101–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective February 1, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to The Boeing 

Company Model 737–600, –700, –700C, 

–800, and –900 series airplanes, certificated 

in any category, as identified in Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from reports of scribe 

line damage found adjacent to the skin lap 

joints, decals, and wing-to-body fairings. The 

Federal Aviation Administration is issuing 

this AD to detect and correct scribe lines, 

which can develop into fatigue cracks in the 

skin. Undetected fatigue cracks can grow and 

cause sudden decompression 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) At the applicable times specified in 

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

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009 (‘‘the service 

bulletin’’), except as provided in paragraph (i) 

of this AD, do detailed external inspections 

for scribe lines in the fuselage skin at lap 

joints, the splice strap at certain butt joints, 

the skin or doubler at certain approved repair 

doublers, and the skin at decals; and do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, by accomplishing all 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81417 

actions specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin, except as 

provided by paragraphs (j), (k), (l), (m), and 

(n) of this AD. 

Note 1: The inspection exceptions 

described in subparagraphs 1.a. through 1.f. 

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

Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, Revision 1, 

dated November 18, 2009, apply to this AD. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished According 

to Previous Issue of Service Bulletin 

(h) Actions accomplished before the 

effective date of this AD according to Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, dated 

January 14, 2009, are considered acceptable 

for compliance with the corresponding 

actions specified in this AD. 

Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications 

(i) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 

2009, specifies a compliance time after the 

date on the service bulletin, this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after the effective date of this AD. 

(j) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 

2009, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action, accomplish applicable 

actions using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (p) of this AD. 

(k) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 

2009, specifies to contact Boeing for 

instructions to repair scribe lines: Remove 

the scribe line damage and install a 

reinforcing repair using an FAA-approved 

method. 

Note 2: Guidance for repairing scribe 

damage (e.g., nicks, gouges, scratches, and 

corrosion) may be found in the Allowable 

Damage section of the appropriate Boeing 

737 Structural Repair Manual (SRM). 

Note 3: Operators must obtain an approved 

damage tolerance evaluation for any repair 

installed to comply with Section 

121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(c)(2) of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) 

or 129.109(c)(2)). 

(l) Inspections are not required in areas 

where an existing repair covers a potential 

scribe line or where the scribe line is within 

10 inches of the repair, provided the repair 

spans a minimum of three fastener rows 

beyond each side of the potential scribe line 

location (perpendicular to the scribe line 

direction). If a repair doubler does not span 

the potential scribe line location by 3 or more 

fastener rows, but there is no evidence of 

scribe lines within 10 inches of the repair, 

then inspections under the repair are not 

required. 

(m) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 18, 

2009, specifies a compliance time of ‘‘before 

further flight’’ for inspecting scribe lines less 

than 0.001 inch deep for cracks, no further 

inspections are required by paragraph (g) of 

this AD, provided that correct sealant 

removal procedures are used for future work 

at those locations. 

(n) If records show that the airplane has 

never been stripped and repainted under the 

dorsal fin fairing since delivery from Boeing, 

then this AD does not require inspections 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD for the 

butt joint, lap joint, and repairs in the areas 

under the dorsal fin fairing. 

Report 

(o) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (o)(1) or (o)(2) of this AD: Submit 

a report of positive findings of cracks found 

during the inspections required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD. You may use Appendix B of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53A1289, 

Revision 1, dated November 18, 2009. Send 

the report to Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124– 

2207. The report must contain, at a 

minimum, the inspection results, a 

description of any discrepancies found, the 

airplane serial number, and the number of 

flight cycles and flight hours on the airplane. 

Under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in this AD and has 

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(p)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 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: Wayne Lockett, 

Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM– 

120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

917–6447; fax (425) 917–6590. Or, e-mail 

information 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. 

(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 an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization who 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. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(q) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53A1289, Revision 1, dated November 

18, 2009, to do the actions required by this 

AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this 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. 

(3) You may review copies of the 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. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

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/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 10, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31899 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1006; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–057–AD; Amendment 

39–16543; AD 2010–26–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Piper 

Aircraft, Inc. Model PA–28–161 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above that are equipped 

with Thielert Aircraft Engine GmbH 

(TAE) Engine Model TAE–125–01 

installed per Supplemental Type 

Certificate (STC) No. SA03303AT. This 

AD requires installing a full authority 

digital engine control (FADEC) backup 

battery, replacing the supplement pilot’s 

operating handbook and FAA approved 

airplane flight manual, and revising the 

limitations section of the supplement 

airplane maintenance manual. This AD 

was prompted by an incident where an 

airplane experienced an in-flight engine 

shutdown caused by a momentary loss 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES