Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 69747 

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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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 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, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(k) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, ACO, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6577; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: Berhane.Alazar@faa.gov. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Service Bulletin 767–53A0209, 

Revision 1, dated July 27, 2011. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) 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. 

(4) You may review copies of the 

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. 

(5) 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/ 

cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

31, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–27344 Filed 11–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0722; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–262–AD; Amendment 

39–17260; AD 2012–23–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain The Boeing Company Model 

737–100 and –200 series airplanes. The 

existing AD currently requires various 

inspections for cracks in the outboard 

chord of the frame at body station (BS) 

727 and in the outboard chord of 

stringer (S) 18A, and repair or 

replacement of cracked parts. This new 

AD adds airplanes to the applicability 

statement in the existing AD and adds 

inspections for cracks in the BS 727 

frame outboard chords and the radius of 

the auxiliary chord, for certain 

airplanes. This new AD also removes 

the inspections of the outboard chord of 

S–18A required by the existing AD. This 

AD was prompted by several reports of 

fatigue cracking in the frame outboard 

chord at BS 727 and in the radius of the 

auxiliary chord on airplanes that were 

not affected by the existing AD. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the outboard and 

auxiliary chords, which could result in 

reduced structural integrity of the 

outboard chord and consequent rapid 

decompression of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

26, 2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of December 26, 2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain other publications listed in 

this AD as of August 18, 1995 (60 FR 

36981, July 19, 1995). 

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; 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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone (425) 

917–6450; fax (425) 917–6590; email 

alan.pohl@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to supersede AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 

19, 1995). That AD applies to the 

specified products. The NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 5, 2011 (76 FR 47522). That 

NPRM proposed to continue to require 

various inspections for cracks in the 

outboard chord of the frame at BS 727, 

and repair or replacement of cracked 

parts. That NPRM also proposed to add 

airplanes to the applicability statement 

in the existing AD and add inspections 

for cracks in the BS 727 frame outboard 

chords and the radius of the auxiliary 

chord, for certain airplanes. That NPRM 

also proposed to remove the inspections 

of the outboard chord of S–18A required 

by the existing AD. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal (76 FR 47522, 

August 5, 2011) and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Support for NPRM (76 FR 47522, 

August 5, 2011) 

Europe Airpost has no objection to the 

NRPM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 2011), 

and noted that it has already 

implemented the procedures in Boeing 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
69748 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006, into its 

maintenance program. 

Request To Remove ‘‘Total’’ From 

Compliance Time 

Southwest Airlines (SWA) asked that 

paragraph (o) of the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011), which specifies 

the compliance time as ‘‘Before the 

accumulation of 50,000 total flight 

cycles, but fewer than or equal to 60,000 

total flight cycles, after accomplishing 

the modification of the outboard chord 

of the frame * * *’’ be changed to 

delete the word ‘‘total.’’ SWA states that 

this would eliminate any confusion as 

to whether the subject inspection is to 

be done between 50,000 and 60,000 

total airplane flight cycles, or between 

50,000 and 60,000 flight cycles after the 

modification installation. 

We agree with the commenter. The 

intent of paragraph (o) of this AD is to 

do the inspection between 50,000 and 

60,000 flight cycles after accomplishing 

the modification. We have changed 

paragraph (o) of this AD accordingly. In 

addition, for clarification, we have 

removed ‘‘total’’ from paragraphs (g), 

(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(4) of this 

AD. 

Request To Clarify Certain Compliance 

Times 

Boeing asked that we clarify the 

compliance time for the inspection 

specified in paragraph (i)(1) of the 

NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 2011). 

Boeing stated that paragraph (c)(1) of 

AD 95–12–17, Amendment 39–9268 (60 

FR 36981, July 19, 1995), states ‘‘Inspect 

prior to the accumulation of 4,500 flight 

cycles after the effective date of this 

AD.’’ The new language in paragraph 

(i)(1) of the NPRM states ‘‘Inspect prior 

within 4,500 flight cycles after August 

18, 1995.’’ Boeing noted that this looks 

like a typographical error. 

We find that there is a terminology 

error in paragraph (c)(1) of the existing 

AD 95–12–17, Amendment 39–9268 (60 

FR 36981, July 19, 1995), and in 

paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. We have 

corrected that paragraph to read: 

‘‘Inspect within 4,500 flight cycles after 

August 18, 1995 * * *.’’ We have also 

corrected similar terminology in 

paragraphs (i)(2), (i)(3), and (i)(4) of this 

AD. 

Boeing also asked that we clarify the 

compliance time specified in paragraph 

(n) of the NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 

5, 2011). Boeing stated that Table 3 of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, specifies ‘‘total airplane flight 

cycles after replacement’’ and paragraph 

(g) of the NPRM addresses previously 

replaced frame upper outboard chords 

for comparison. Boeing added that 

paragraphs (n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii) of the 

NPRM identify the threshold for a 

replaced frame upper outboard chord in 

terms of ‘‘total flight cycles,’’ but Table 

3 of that service bulletin identifies the 

threshold based on cycles ‘‘after chord 

replacement.’’ 

We agree that the compliance time 

specified in paragraphs (n)(1)(i) and 

(n)(1)(ii) of this AD should be expressed 

in terms of flight cycles after 

replacement of the outboard chords, as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006, not total flight 

cycles on the airplane. We have clarified 

the compliance time in paragraphs 

(n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii) of this AD 

accordingly. 

Request To Include Repair Instructions 

Boeing asked that we include repair 

instructions in paragraph (o) of the 

NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 2011) for 

crack findings during the open-hole 

eddy current inspection. Boeing notes 

that no repair instructions are provided. 

Boeing suggests the following be added 

for the repair: ‘‘Except as required by 

paragraph (p) of this AD, if any crack is 

found during the inspection required by 

this paragraph, before further flight, 

repair in accordance with Part 3 or Part 

4, as applicable, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006.’’ 

We agree with the commenter for the 

reason provided. In paragraph (o) of the 

NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 2011), 

we inadvertently omitted the repair 

language specified in paragraphs (l) 

through (n) of the NPRM from paragraph 

(o) of the NPRM. In the preamble of the 

NPRM in the ‘‘Relevant Service 

Information’’ section, we described 

additional inspections, and repair or 

replacement if necessary. Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 

2, dated May 25, 2006, contains repair 

instructions in Part 3 and Part 4. 

Therefore, we have added the text 

‘‘* * * repair in accordance with Part 3 

or Part 4 * * *.’’ to paragraph (o) of this 

AD. Paragraph (p) of this AD already 

contains a reference to paragraph (o) of 

this AD for the exception to the repair 

procedure. 

Request To Clarify Repair Instructions 

Boeing asked that we clarify the repair 

instructions specified in paragraph (l) of 

the NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 

2011) for cracks found in the auxiliary 

chord. Boeing stated that paragraph (l) 

of the NPRM specifies ‘‘If any crack is 

found, before further flight, repair in 

accordance with the requirements in 

paragraph (p) of this AD.’’ Boeing noted 

that paragraph (p) of the NPRM directs 

the reader to paragraph (s) of the NPRM 

for an alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) if Part 3 or Part 4 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006, cannot 

be accomplished. Boeing added that 

neither Part 3 nor Part 4 provide repair 

instructions for the auxiliary chord. 

Boeing added that paragraph (n) of the 

NPRM provides clear instructions for 

accomplishing the crack repair. 

We acknowledge the commenter’s 

concerns. The inspection identified in 

paragraph (l) of this AD is required to 

detect cracks in the auxiliary chord 

radius of the frame at BS 727. The 

inspection identified in paragraph (n) of 

this AD is required to detect cracks in 

the forward flange of the outboard chord 

at BS 727. The repair instructions for 

those areas are specified in different 

parts of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service information; 

therefore, the repair identified in 

paragraph (n) of this AD should not 

refer to the same repair instructions as 

those identified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD. Since Parts 3 and 4 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service information do not provide 

repair instructions for the auxiliary 

chord, we have clarified the repair 

instructions in paragraph (l) of this AD 

by changing the reference from 

paragraph (p) to paragraph (s) of this 

AD. In addition, we have removed the 

reference to paragraph (l) from 

paragraph (p) of this AD for further 

clarification. 

Request To Clarify When Time-Limited 

Repairs Are Required for Certain 

Airplanes 

Boeing asked that we clarify when 

time-limited repairs, as specified in 

paragraph (q) of the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011), installed in 

accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006, must be replaced. 

Boeing stated that paragraph (q) of the 

NPRM identifies replacement for timelimited repairs installed in accordance 

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 

1, dated May 25, 1995; but does not 

provide a compliance time for timelimited repairs installed in accordance 

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006. Boeing added that the compliance 

time specified in Table 6 of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 

2, dated May 25, 2006, is not to exceed 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 69749 

4,500 flight cycles from the time of the 

installation. 

We agree to clarify paragraph (q) of 

this AD. In the NPRM (76 FR 47522, 

August 5, 2011), we did not refer to 

airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 

2, dated May 25, 2006, as airplanes 

affected by paragraph (q) of this AD. 

However, Step 3.b. of ‘‘Part 4—STA 727 

Frame Outboard Chord Time-Limited 

Repair’’ of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006, specifies doing the 

replacement of the time-limited repair at 

the time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of that service bulletin 

revision (i.e., 4,500 flight cycles after the 

time-limited replacement). Therefore, 

we have determined that Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 

2, dated May 25, 2006, should be added 

to paragraph (q) of this AD as a 

reference for airplanes affected by that 

paragraph. 

Request To Clarify Affected Airplanes 

Boeing asked that the affected 

airplanes be added to paragraph (j) of 

the NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 

2011). Boeing stated that paragraph (h) 

of the NPRM identifies the affected 

airplanes, and that paragraph (j) of the 

NPRM has similar requirements and 

should match paragraph (h) of the 

NPRM. 

We agree that the affected airplane 

models should be added to paragraph (j) 

of this AD for clarification and 

consistency. We have changed that 

paragraph to include the affected 

airplane models. 

Boeing also asked that we clarify 

paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of the 

NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 5, 2011), 

by specifying that the airplanes affected 

by those paragraphs, which are restated 

from AD 95–12–17, Amendment 39– 

9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), are 

only those Model 737–100 and –200 

series airplanes having line numbers 1 

through 999 inclusive. Boeing stated 

that the NPRM requirements do not 

differentiate for Model 737–200 series 

airplanes having line numbers beyond 

999 and do not identify Model 737– 

200C series airplanes. 

We agree that the restated 

requirements specified in this AD only 

affect Model 737 airplanes having line 

numbers 1 through 999 inclusive. We 

have added that clarification to 

paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of this AD. 

Request To Clarify Affected Airplanes 

Relative to Supplemental Structural 

Inspection Document (SSID) 

Inspections 

Boeing asked that we provide 

clarification of certain affected airplanes 

in paragraph (s)(5) of the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011). Boeing stated 

that AD 2008–08–23, Amendment 39– 

15477 (73 FR 21237, April 21, 2008), 

only applies to Model 737–200C series 

airplanes. Boeing added that Boeing 

SSID D6–37089, Revision E, dated May 

1, 2007, applies to Model 737–100, 

–200, and –200C series airplanes. 

Boeing also asked that we clarify that 

AD 2008–09–13, Amendment 39–15494 

(73 FR 24164, May 2, 2008), is only 

applicable to Model 737–300, –400, and 

–500 series airplanes. Boeing stated that 

paragraph (s)(5) of the NPRM refers to 

Boeing 737–400/500/600 SSID D6– 

82669, dated May 1, 2007, but noted 

that Model 737–600 is a next generation 

(NG) airplane, not a 737 ‘‘Classic’’ 

airplane. 

Boeing also asked that the structurally 

significant item (SSI) F–29 SSID 

inspections (which describe visual and 

eddy current inspections of the BS 727 

bulkhead outer chord) in paragraph 

(s)(5) of the NPRM (76 FR 47522, August 

5, 2011) refer to Appendix A of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006, for 

consistency. Boeing states that currently 

paragraph 1.F. of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006, refers to table 1 of 

Appendix A. 

We agree that some clarifications are 

necessary for the reasons provided by 

the commenter. Therefore, we have 

included the appropriate information in 

paragraph (s)(5) of this AD. We clarified 

that AD 2008–08–23, Amendment 39– 

15477 (73 FR 21237, April 21, 2008), 

applies to Model 737–200C series 

airplanes. We changed the reference to 

‘‘Boeing 737–400/500/600 SSID’’ to the 

correct reference, which is ‘‘Boeing 737– 

300/400/500 SSID.’’ In addition, we 

added a reference to Appendix A, Table 

1, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, for the SSI F–29 SSID inspections. 

Request To Clarify Actions Required for 

Affected Airplanes 

Boeing asked that we clarify actions to 

be taken for airplanes affected by both 

the restated requirements and the new 

requirements of the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011). Boeing stated 

that paragraphs (g) through (j) of the 

NPRM are identified as applicable to 

Model 737–100 and –200 series 

airplanes; and paragraphs (m) and (n) of 

the NPRM are applicable to airplanes 

identified in Tables 2 and 3, 

respectively, of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006. Boeing noted that 

Model 737–100 and –200 series 

airplanes (having line numbers 1 

through 999 inclusive) are identified in 

Groups 1, 2, and 3 of that service 

bulletin; both tables 2 and 3 of that 

service bulletin identify Groups 1, 2, 

and 3. Boeing added that Model 737– 

100 and –200 series airplanes have 

threshold and repetitive inspection 

requirements from both the restated and 

the new requirements of the NPRM. 

We agree with the commenter that 

some clarification is necessary. We have 

changed paragraphs (m) and (n) of this 

AD (new requirements) to include the 

statement that accomplishing the new 

inspections in each paragraph ends the 

corresponding retained inspections in 

paragraphs (g) through (j) of this AD. 

Request To Clarify Revised Paragraph 

Identifiers 

Boeing asked that we clarify the 

‘‘Revised paragraph identifiers’’ table in 

the preamble of the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011). Boeing states 

that paragraph (g) of AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 

19, 1995), corresponds to the new 

paragraph (r) of the NPRM (optional 

terminating action), not the new 

paragraph (l) of the NPRM, which is 

related to auxiliary chord inspections. 

Boeing also asked that we clarify that 

the terminating action specified in 

paragraphs (h) and (j) of the NPRM 

refers to the terminating action in 

paragraph (r) of this AD instead of 

paragraph (l) of this AD. 

We agree that there is an error in the 

‘‘Revised paragraph identifiers’’ table in 

the preamble of the NPRM. Paragraph 

(g) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 39– 

9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), 

pertains to the terminating action in 

paragraph (r) of this AD; however, since 

that section of the preamble does not 

reappear in the final rule, no change to 

the AD is necessary. We also agree that 

the terminating action reference in 

paragraphs (h) and (j) of this AD should 

refer to paragraph (r) of this AD. We 

have changed paragraphs (h) and (j) of 

the final rule accordingly. 

Request To Correct Certain Paragraph 

References 

Boeing asked that we correct the 

references to paragraphs (l)(1)(i) and 

(l)(1)(ii) of the NPRM (76 FR 47522, 

August 5, 2011) specified in paragraph 

(k)(1) of the NPRM to instead refer to 

paragraphs (k)(1)(i) and (k)(1)(ii) of the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
69750 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

NPRM. Boeing stated that paragraph (l) 

of the NPRM is related to auxiliary 

chord inspections, while paragraphs 

(k)(1)(i) and (k)(1)(ii) of the NPRM relate 

to the subject crack finding in paragraph 

(k)(1) of the NPRM. 

We agree there is a typographical 

error in paragraph (k)(1) of the NPRM 

(76 FR47522, August 5, 2011). 

Paragraph (l) of the NPRM does not 

include any subparagraphs and should 

not have been referenced in paragraph 

(k)(1) of the NPRM. We have corrected 

paragraph (k)(1) of the final rule 

accordingly to refer to paragraph 

(k)(1)(i) or (k)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

In addition, we have clarified 

paragraph (r) of this AD by referring to 

inspection paragraphs (g) through (o) of 

this AD and removing references to 

paragraphs (p) and (q) of this AD. 

Clarification of Service Information 

Reference 

We have removed the service 

information referenced in paragraph 

(k)(2) of the NPRM (76 FR47522, August 

5, 2011) because it is redundant to the 

service information specified in 

paragraph (k) of the NPRM. Paragraph 

(k) of the final rule specifies to 

accomplish (k)(1) or (k)(2) of the final 

rule in accordance with the service 

information specified in paragraph (k) of 

the final rule. 

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— 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 

47522, August 5, 2011) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 47522, 

August 5, 2011). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 574 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Number of 

U.S. 

airplanes 

Cost on U.S. operators 

Various inspections (retained 

actions from AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 

FR 36981, July 19, 1995)).

4 work-hours × $85 per hour 

= $340 per inspection 

cycle.

$0 $340 per inspection 

cycle.

296 $100,640 per inspection cycle. 

Ultrasonic inspection (new action).13 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $1,105 per inspection cycle.

0 $1,105 per inspection 

cycle.

574 $634,270 per inspection cycle. 

Detailed and HFEC inspections (new actions).13 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $1,105 per inspection cycle.

0 $1,105 per inspection 

cycle.

574 $634,270 per inspection cycle. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary repairs that would be 

required based on the results of the 

inspections. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these repairs: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Optional modification (retained action from AD 95–12– 

17, Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995)).

50 work-hours × $85 per hour = $4,250 .......................... $3,680 $7,930 

Repair of cracking of the outboard chord frame .............. 514 work hours × $85 per hour = $42,690 ...................... 13,586 57,276 

Time-limited repair cracking of the outboard chord frame 63 work hours × $85 per hour = $5,355 .......................... 2,732 8,087 

Repair of cracking of the outboard chord ......................... 49 work hours × $85 per hour = $4,165 .......................... 4,255 8,420 

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 have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 69751 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 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 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

95–12–17, Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 

36981, July 19, 1995), and adding the 

following new AD: 

2012–23–04 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–17260; Docket No. 

FAA–2011–0722; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–262–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective December 26, 2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 737–100, –200, –200C, 

–300, –400, and –500 series airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by several reports 

of fatigue cracking in the frame outboard 

chord at body station (BS) 727, and cracks in 

the radius of the auxiliary chord on airplanes 

that were not affected by the existing AD (60 

FR 36981, July 19, 1995). We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of 

the outboard and auxiliary chords, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity of 

the outboard chord and consequent rapid 

decompression of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Initial Inspection: BS 727 Frame 

Chord Has Been Replaced 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (a) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), with 

revised service information. For Model 737– 

100 and –200 series airplanes having line 

numbers 1 through 999 inclusive, on which 

the BS 727 frame upper outboard chord has 

been replaced as specified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1088: Prior to the 

accumulation of 30,000 flight cycles since 

replacement of the upper outboard chord, or 

within 4,500 flight cycles after August 18, 

1995 (the effective date of AD 95–12–17) 

whichever occurs later, perform close visual, 

pulse echo shear wave (PESW), and high 

frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections 

to detect cracks in the outboard chord of the 

frame at BS 727, in accordance with Part I 

of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

dated June 30, 1994; Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 1, dated May 25, 

1995; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006; as 

applicable. As of the effective date of this 

AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, to accomplish the actions required by 

this paragraph. 

(h) Retained Repetitive Inspections: BS 727 

Frame Chord Has Been Replaced 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (b) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), with 

revised service information. For Model 737– 

100 and –200 series airplanes having line 

numbers 1 through 999 inclusive, on which 

the BS 727 frame upper outboard chord has 

been replaced as specified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1088: Repeat the 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD at the time specified in paragraphs (h)(1), 

(h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(4) of this AD, as 

applicable, until the optional terminating 

action described in paragraph (r) of this AD 

is accomplished. 

(1) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 27,000 

or more flight cycles, but fewer than 50,000 

flight cycles since the replacement of the 

outboard chord: Perform the next inspection 

within 15,000 flight cycles. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 15,000 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 50,000 or more flight cycles 

since the replacement of the outboard chord. 

Do the inspections required by paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD at the time specified. 

(2) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 50,000 

or more flight cycles, but fewer than 60,000 

flight cycles, since the replacement of the 

outboard chord: Perform the next inspection 

within 7,500 flight cycles. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 7,500 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 60,000 or more flight cycles 

since the replacement of the outboard chord. 

Do the inspections required by paragraph 

(h)(3) of this AD at the time specified. 

(3) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 60,000 

or more flight cycles, but fewer than 70,000 

flight cycles, since the replacement of the 

outboard chord: Perform the next inspection 

within 5,000 flight cycles. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 5,000 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 70,000 or more flight cycles 

since the replacement of the outboard chord. 

Do the inspections required by paragraph 

(h)(4) of this AD at the time specified. 

(4) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 70,000 

or more flight cycles since replacement of the 

outboard chord: Perform the next inspection 

within 3,000 flight cycles. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 3,000 flight cycles. 

(i) Retained Initial Inspection: BS 727 Frame 

Chord Has Not Been Replaced or Only 

Lower Outboard Chord Has Been Replaced 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (c) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), with 

revised service information. For Model 737– 

100 and –200 series airplanes having line 

numbers 1 through 999 inclusive, on which 

the BS 727 frame outboard chord has not 

been replaced, or on which only the lower 

outboard chord has been replaced as 

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53– 

1088: Perform close visual, PESW, and HFEC 

inspections to detect cracks in the outboard 

chord of the frame at BS 727, in accordance 

with Part I of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; or Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated 

May 25, 2006; as applicable. As of the 

effective date of this AD, use only Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006, to 

accomplish the actions required by this 

paragraph. Perform these inspections initially 

at the time specified in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), 

(i)(3), or (i)(4) of this AD, as applicable. 

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated 

27,000 or more total flight cycles, but fewer 

than 50,000 total flight cycles, as of August 

18, 1995 (the effective date of AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995)): Inspect within 4,500 flight cycles 

after August 18, 1995. 

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated 

50,000 or more total flight cycles, but fewer 

than 60,000 total flight cycles, as of August 

18, 1995 (the effective date of AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995)): Inspect within 2,500 flight cycles 

after August 18, 1995. 

(3) For airplanes that have accumulated 

60,000 or more total flight cycles, but fewer 

than 70,000 total flight cycles as of August 

18, 1995 (the effective date of AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995)): Inspect within 1,500 flight cycles 

after August 18, 1995. 

(4) For airplanes that have accumulated 

70,000 or more total flight cycles as of August 

18, 1995 (the effective date of AD 95–12–17, 

Amendment 39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 

1995)): Inspect within 500 flight cycles or 90 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
69752 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

days after August 18, 1995, whichever occurs 

first. 

(j) Retained Repetitive Inspections: BS 727 

Frame Chord Has Been Replaced or Only 

Lower Outboard Chord Has Been Replaced 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (d) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), with 

revised service information. For Model 737– 

100 and –200 series airplanes having line 

numbers 1 through 999 inclusive, on which 

the BS 727 frame outboard chord has not 

been replaced, or on which only the lower 

outboard chord has been replaced as 

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53– 

1088: Repeat the inspections required by 

paragraph (i) of this AD at the time specified 

in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), and (j)(4) of 

this AD, as applicable, until the optional 

terminating action described in paragraph (r) 

of this AD is accomplished. 

(1) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (i) or (j) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 27,000 

or more total flight cycles, but fewer than 

50,000 total flight cycles: Perform the next 

inspection within 15,000 flight cycles. Repeat 

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 15,000 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 50,000 or more total flight 

cycles. Do the inspections required by 

paragraph (j)(2) of this AD at the time 

specified. 

(2) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (i) or (j) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 50,000 

or more total flight cycles, but fewer than 

60,000 total flight cycles: Perform the next 

inspection within 7,500 flight cycles. Repeat 

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 7,500 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 60,000 or more total flight 

cycles. Do the inspections required by 

paragraph (j)(3) of this AD at the time 

specified. 

(3) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (i) or (j) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 60,000 

or more total flight cycles, but fewer than 

70,000 total flight cycles: Perform the next 

inspection within 5,000 flight cycles. Repeat 

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 5,000 flight cycles until the airplane 

has accumulated 70,000 or more total flight 

cycles. Do the inspections required by 

paragraph (j)(4) of this AD at the time 

specified. 

(4) If, at the time of the most recent 

inspection required by paragraph (i) or (j) of 

this AD, the airplane has accumulated 70,000 

or more total flight cycles: Perform the next 

inspection within 3,000 flight cycles. Repeat 

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 3,000 flight cycles. 

(k) Retained Repair, Replacement, and 

Additional Inspections 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (f) of AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), with 

revised service information. If any crack is 

found in the outboard chord of the frame at 

BS 727 during any inspection required by 

paragraphs (g) through (j) of this AD, 

accomplish paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this 

AD, as applicable, in accordance with Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, dated 

June 30, 1994; Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 1, dated May 25, 1995; or 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006; as 

applicable. As of the effective date of this 

AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, to accomplish the actions required by 

this paragraph. 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, dated 

June 30, 1994; Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 1, dated May 25, 1995; 

and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006; 

refer to either Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53–1088, dated December 14, 1989; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1088, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 2006; as an additional source 

of guidance for procedures to replace the 

chord. 

(1) For any crack that extends from the 

forward edge of the chord or from the 

forward fastener hole, but that does not 

extend past the second fastener hole, 

accomplish the actions specified in either 

paragraph (k)(1)(i) or (k)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

Thereafter, perform initial and repetitive 

inspections in accordance with paragraphs 

(g) and (h) of this AD. 

(i) Prior to further flight, install the time 

limited repair. Within 4,500 flight cycles or 

within 18 months after accomplishing the 

time-limited repair, whichever occurs first, 

replace the outboard chord. Or 

(ii) Prior to further flight, replace the 

outboard chord. 

(2) For any crack that extends from the 

forward edge of the chord, or from the 

forward fastener hole, and that extends past 

the second fastener hole, prior to further 

flight, replace the outboard chord. Thereafter, 

perform initial and repetitive inspections in 

accordance with paragraphs (g) and (h) of 

this AD. 

(l) New Initial and Repetitive Inspections: 

BS 727 Auxiliary Chord 

For airplanes identified in table 5 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006: Before the 

accumulation of 27,000 total flight cycles, or 

within 5,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later, do 

internal detailed and HFEC inspections to 

detect cracks in the auxiliary chord radius of 

the frame at BS 727, in accordance with Part 

1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006. Repeat the 

inspections thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 15,000 flight cycles until the optional 

terminating action described in paragraph (r) 

of this AD is accomplished. If any crack is 

found, before further flight, repair in 

accordance with the requirements of 

paragraph (s) of this AD. 

(m) New Initial and Repetitive Inspections: 

BS 727 Frame Chord Has Not Been Replaced 

and Has Not Been Modified 

For airplanes identified in table 2 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006: Do the 

applicable inspections required by paragraph 

(m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD at the time 

specified, in accordance with Part 1 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006. Except as required by 

paragraph (p) of this AD, if any crack is 

found during any inspection required by 

paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, before 

further flight, repair in accordance with Part 

3 or Part 4 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, as applicable. Repeat the inspections 

until the optional terminating action 

described in paragraph (r) of this AD is 

accomplished. Accomplishing the 

inspections in this paragraph ends the 

inspections required by paragraphs (i) and (j) 

of this AD. 

(1) For airplanes on which the inspections 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; have not been performed 

as of the effective date of this AD: Do the 

inspections required by paragraphs (m)(1)(i) 

and (m)(1)(ii) of this AD at the time specified. 

(i) Before the accumulation of 27,000 total 

flight cycles, or within 5,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later: Do ultrasonic and surface HFEC 

inspections to detect cracks in the forward 

flange of the outboard chord of the frame at 

BS 727. Repeat the inspections thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles. 

(ii) Before the accumulation of 27,000 total 

flight cycles, or within 10,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later: Do an open hole eddy current 

inspection to detect cracks in the forward 

flange of the outboard chord of the frame at 

BS 727. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight cycles. 

(2) For airplanes on which the inspections 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; have been performed as 

of the effective date of this AD: Repeat the 

applicable inspection specified in paragraphs 

(m)(1)(i) and (m)(1)(ii) of this AD thereafter 

at intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles 

for the ultrasonic and surface HFEC 

inspections, and at intervals not to exceed 

15,000 flight cycles for the open hole eddy 

current inspection. 

(n) New Initial and Repetitive Inspections: 

BS 727 Frame Chord Has Been Replaced and 

Has Not Been Modified 

For airplanes identified in table 3 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006: Do the 

applicable inspections required by paragraph 

(n)(1) or (n)(2) of this AD at the time 

specified, in accordance with Part 1 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006. Except as required by 

paragraph (p) of this AD, if any crack is 

found during any inspection required by 

paragraph (n)(1) or (n)(2) of this AD, before 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 69753 

further flight, repair in accordance with Part 

3 or Part 4, as applicable, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, 

dated May 25, 2006. Repeat the inspections 

until the optional terminating action 

described in paragraph (r) of this AD is 

accomplished. Accomplishing the 

inspections in this paragraph ends the 

inspections required by paragraphs (g) and 

(h) of this AD. The detailed and eddy current 

inspections of the outboard chord of S–18A 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, are not required by this AD. 

(1) For airplanes on which the inspections 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; have not been done as 

of the effective date of this AD: Do the 

inspections required by paragraphs (n)(1)(i) 

and (n)(1)(ii) of this AD at the time specified. 

(i) Within 27,000 flight cycles since 

replacement of the upper outboard chord, or 

within 5,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do 

ultrasonic, low frequency eddy current, and 

edge HFEC inspections to detect cracks in the 

forward flange of the outboard chord of the 

frame at BS 727. Repeat the inspections 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000 

flight cycles. 

(ii) Within 27,000 flight cycles since 

replacement of the upper outboard chord, or 

within 10,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do 

an open hole eddy current inspection to 

detect cracks in the forward flange of the 

outboard chord of the frame at BS 727. 

Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals 

not to exceed 15,000 flight cycles. 

(2) For airplanes on which the inspections 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; have been done as of the 

effective date of this AD: Repeat the 

applicable inspection specified in paragraphs 

(n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii) of this AD thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles for 

the ultrasonic, low frequency eddy current, 

and edge HFEC inspections, and at intervals 

not to exceed 15,000 flight cycles for the 

open hole eddy current inspection. 

(o) New One-Time Inspection: BS 727 Frame 

Chord Has Been Modified 

For airplanes identified in table 4 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006: Within 

60,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the 

modification of the outboard chord of the 

frame at BS 727 at S–18A, but no earlier than 

50,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the 

modification; do a one-time follow-on open 

hole eddy current inspection to detect cracks 

in the modified chord, in accordance with 

Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006. Except as 

required by paragraph (p) of this AD, if any 

crack is found during the inspection required 

by this paragraph, before further flight, repair 

in accordance with Part 3 or Part 4, as 

applicable, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006. 

(p) New Repairs 

If any crack is found during any inspection 

required by paragraphs (m), (n), or (o) of this 

AD, and the repairs specified in Part 3 and 

Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006, cannot be 

installed using the procedures identified in 

this service bulletin: Before further flight, 

repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (s) of this AD. 

(q) New Replacement of Time-Limited 

Repair 

For any airplane on which a time-limited 

repair is installed on the outboard chord of 

the frame at body station BS 727 as specified 

in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, dated June 30, 1994; Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 1, 

dated May 25, 1995; or Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated 

May 25, 2006: Within 4,500 flight cycles after 

installation of the repair, or within 6 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later, replace the repair in accordance 

with Part 9 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006. 

(r) New Optional Terminating Action 

Accomplishment of the applicable action 

specified in paragraph (r)(1) or (r)(2) of this 

AD, in accordance with Part 2 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, dated June 

30, 1994; Part II of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 1, dated May 25, 1995; or 

Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006; constitutes 

terminating action for the inspections 

required by paragraphs (g) through (o) this 

AD. 

(1) Installation of the preventative 

modification. 

(2) Replacement of the cracked chord and 

installation of the preventative modification. 

(s) 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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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 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, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 95–12–17, Amendment 

39–9268 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995), are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of this AD. 

(5) For airplanes identified in Tables 2, 3, 

and 5 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006: The 

Manager, Seattle ACO, approves the 

inspection methods, thresholds, and 

repetitive intervals defined in Appendix A, 

Table 1, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 

2006, as an AMOC for the inspections of the 

structurally significant items (SSIs) identified 

in paragraphs (s)(5)(i) and (s)(5)(ii) of this 

AD. This approval applies only to SSIs F– 

29A and F–29B of the applicable 

supplemental structural inspection document 

(SSID) and only for the portions of the BS 

727 outer chord that have been inspected or 

that have been repaired or modified in 

accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1166, Revision 2, dated 

May 25, 2006. All provisions of ADs 2008– 

08–23, Amendment 39–15477 (73 FR 21237, 

April 21, 2008); and 2008–09–13, 

Amendment 39–15494 (73 FR 24164, May 2, 

2008); that are not specifically referenced in 

this paragraph remain fully applicable and 

must be done. If operators choose this 

AMOC, they must revise their FAA-approved 

maintenance or inspection program to 

incorporate the alternative inspections in this 

paragraph. 

(i) Inspections of SSIs F–29A and F–29B 

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

2008–08–23, Amendment 39–15477 (73 FR 

21237, April 21, 2008), which applies to 

Model 737–200C series airplanes (Boeing 

737–100/200/200C SSID D6–37089, Revision 

E, dated May 1, 2007). 

(ii) Inspections of SSIs F–29A and F–29B 

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

2008–09–13, Amendment 39–15494 (73 FR 

24164, May 2, 2008), which applies to Model 

737–300, –400, and –500 series airplanes 

(Boeing 737–300/400/500 SSID D6–82669, 

dated May 1, 2007). 

(t) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425) 917– 

6450; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

alan.pohl@faa.gov. 

(u) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
69754 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1 16 U.S.C. 824s (2006). 

2Promoting Transmission Investment through 

Pricing Reform, Order No. 679, 71 FR 43294 (Jul. 

31, 2006), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,222 (2006), order 

on reh’g, Order No. 679–A, 72 FR 1152 (Jan. 10, 

2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,236, order on reh’g, 

119 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2007). 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(3) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on December 26, 2012. 

(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2006. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(4) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on August 18, 1995 (60 FR 

36981, July 19, 1995). 

(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1166, dated June 30, 1994, including 

Addendum, approved for IBR August 18, 

1995 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995). 

(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53A1166, 

Revision 1, dated May 25, 1995, including 

Addendum, approved for IBR August 18, 

1995 (60 FR 36981, July 19, 1995). 

(5) For Boeing 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; Internet https:// 

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(6) You may view this service information 

at 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. 

(7) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

16, 2012. 

John P. Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–27636 Filed 11–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Parts 2 and 35 

[Docket No. RM11–26–000] 

Promoting Transmission Investment 

Through Pricing Reform 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Policy statement. 

SUMMARY: The Commission issues this 

policy statement to provide guidance 

regarding its evaluation of applications 

for electric transmission incentives 

under section 219 of the Federal Power 

Act. In the six years since the 

Commission implemented section 219 

by issuing Order No. 679, the 

Commission has acted on numerous 

applications for transmission incentives. 

The Commission has now determined it 

would be beneficial to provide 

additional guidance and clarity with 

respect to certain aspects of its 

transmission incentives policies under 

section 219 of the Federal Power Act 

and Order No. 679. In particular, the 

Commission: reframes its nexus test to 

focus more directly on the requirements 

of Order No. 679; expects applicants to 

take all reasonable steps to mitigate the 

risks of a project, including requesting 

those incentives designed to reduce the 

risk of a project, before seeking an 

incentive return on equity (ROE) based 

on a project’s risks and challenges; 

provides general guidance that may 

inform applications for an incentive 

ROE based on a project’s risks and 

challenges; and promotes additional 

transparency with respect to the impacts 

of the Commission’s incentives policies. 

The Commission finds that the 

additional guidance provided through 

this policy statement is necessary to 

encourage transmission infrastructure 

investment while maintaining just and 

reasonable rates, consistent with section 

219 of the Federal Power Act. The 

Commission will apply this policy 

statement on a prospective basis to 

incentive applications received after the 

date of its issuance. 

DATES: Effective November 15, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Borden, Office of Energy Policy 

and Innovation, 888 First Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

8734, david.borden@ferc.gov. 

Andrew Weinstein, Office of General 

Counsel, 888 First Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

6230, andrew.weinstein@ferc.gov. 

Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, 

Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, John R. 

Norris, and Cheryl A. LaFleur. 

Policy Statement 

(Issued November 15, 2012) 

1. The Commission issues this policy 

statement to provide guidance regarding 

its evaluation of applications for electric 

transmission incentives under section 

219 of the Federal Power Act (FPA).1 In 

the six years since the Commission 

implemented section 219 by issuing 

Order No. 679,2 the Commission has 

acted on numerous applications for 

transmission incentives. The 

Commission has now determined it 

would be beneficial to provide 

additional guidance and clarity with 

respect to certain aspects of its 

transmission incentives policies under 

section 219 of the Federal Power Act 

and Order No. 679. In particular, the 

Commission: reframes the nexus test to 

focus more directly on the requirements 

of Order No. 679; expects applicants to 

take all reasonable steps to mitigate the 

risks of a project, including requesting 

those incentives designed to reduce the 

risk of a project, before seeking an 

incentive return on equity (ROE) based 

on a project’s risks and challenges; 

provides general guidance that may 

inform applications for an incentive 

ROE based on a project’s risks and 

challenges; and promotes additional 

transparency with respect to the impacts 

of the Commission’s incentives policies. 

The Commission finds that the 

additional guidance provided through 

this policy statement is necessary to 

encourage transmission infrastructure 

investment while maintaining just and 

reasonable rates, consistent with section 

219 of the FPA. The Commission will 

apply this policy statement on a 

prospective basis to incentive 

applications received after the date of its 

issuance. 

I. Background 

2. Section 1241 of the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005 added a new section 219 to 

the FPA. The Commission implemented 

section 219 by issuing Order No. 679, 

which established by rule incentivebased rate treatments for investment in 

electric transmission infrastructure for 

the purpose of benefiting consumers by 

ensuring reliability and reducing the 

cost of delivered power by reducing 

transmission congestion. Since the 

issuance of Order No. 679, the 

Commission has evaluated more than 85 

applications representing over $60 

billion in potential transmission 

investment. 

3. On May 19, 2011, the Commission 

issued a notice of inquiry (NOI) seeking 

public comment regarding the scope 

and implementation of the 

Commission’s incentives policies. The 

Commission received over 1,500 pages 

of comments reflecting a wide range of 

perspectives on the Commission’s 

incentives policies. The Commission 

appreciates the robust participation by 

the diverse group of commenters, and 

has carefully considered the comments 

received in formulating this policy 

statement. The Commission’s issuance 

of this policy statement is driven by its 

experience applying its incentives 

policies to individual incentive 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES