[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012)] 

[Rules and Regulations] 

[Pages 21429-21433] 

From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [http://www.gpo.gov/] 

[FR Doc No: 2012-8228] 

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0025; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-208-AD; 

Amendment 39-17012; AD 2012-07-06] 

RIN 2120-AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a new 

revision to the airworthiness limitations of the maintenance planning 

document. This AD requires revising the maintenance program to update 

inspection requirements to detect fatigue cracking of principal 

structural elements (PSEs). We are issuing this AD to ensure that 

fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected and corrected; such 

fatigue cracking could adversely affect the structural integrity of 

these airplanes. 

DATES: This AD is effective May 15, 2012. 

 The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 

reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of May 15, 2012. 

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; email me.boecom@boeing.com; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com/. You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information 

on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

 You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/; or in person at the Docket Management Facility 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 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: James Sutherland, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917- 

6533; fax: (425) 917-6590; email: James.Sutherland@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

 We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. 

That NPRM published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2011 (76 FR 

3054). That NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance program 

to update inspection requirements to detect fatigue cracking of 

principal structural elements (PSEs). 

Comments 

 We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 

this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 

(76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) and the FAA's response to each comment. 

Request To Refer to Latest Service Information 

 Boeing and Japan Airlines (JAL) requested that we revise the NPRM 

(76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) to refer to two new revisions of Section 

9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance 

Planning Data (MPD) Document, published after we issued the NPRM. 

Boeing stated that both revisions contain the same structures 

airworthiness limitations (AWL) data, but were revised for reasons that 

did not affect the data in Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations-- 

Structural Inspections of that document, which was specified in the 

NPRM. 

 We agree with the request to refer to the later service 

information. We have changed this final rule to refer to Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 1 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document to this AD. (Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision January 2010, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document was specified in the NPRM 

(76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011).) (Subsection B, Airworthiness 

Limitations--Structural Inspections, of Section 9, ``Airworthiness 

Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' 

D622W001-9, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document 

is identical to the January 2010 revision.) We have changed paragraph 

(g) in this final rule accordingly. 

[[Page 21430]] 

Request To Revise Inspection Requirements for Certain Airplanes 

 JAL requested that, for certain airplanes, we revise paragraph (g) 

of the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) to require inspection 

procedures and intervals as determined by the damage tolerance rating 

check form, rather than Section 2, Structural Inspection Program, of 

the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. JAL 

acknowledged that Section 2 of this MPD document usually incorporates 

recommended inspection procedures and intervals. JAL noted, however, 

that Section 2 in the latest revision of this MPD document includes 

data only for Model 777-200 series airplanes. Since no data are 

provided for the remaining airplanes affected by this AD (Model 777- 

200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes), JAL requested that 

those airplanes be excluded from the requirement until the MPD document 

includes relevant data. 

 We do not agree that the requested change is necessary, because the 

information regarding required inspection methods and intervals for 

these airplanes is provided in Subsection B, Airworthiness 

Limitations--Structural Inspections, of Section 9, ``Airworthiness 

Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' 

D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning 

Data (MPD) Document. We have not changed the final rule regarding this 

issue. 

Request To Retain Applicability 

 Boeing also advised that the revised inspection requirements in 

Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of 

the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, affect only 

Model 777-200, -300, -300ER and -200LR series airplanes. Boeing 

reported that Section 9 of the Boeing 777F MPD document was previously 

developed based on the same damage tolerance methods and the same fleet 

and full-scale test data as those included in Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. Boeing asserted, 

therefore, that Model 777F series airplanes should be included in the 

applicability of the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) regardless of 

changes made to Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision 

July 2011, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. 

Including those airplanes will ensure the ability to obtain approval of 

potential future deviations for repairs or alternative inspections via 

alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) (as described in paragraph 

(j) of this AD). Boeing made this comment in the event another party 

requested that we remove Model 777F series airplanes from the NPRM. 

 We acknowledge Boeing's concern, and agree that there is no reason 

to remove Model 777F series airplanes from the applicability specified 

in the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011). We have not changed the 

final rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Remove Certain Advisory Circular Reference 

 Note 2 of the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) (paragraph (c)(2) 

of this AD) provided guidance on certain revised operator maintenance 

documents that include new inspections. Boeing requested that we remove 

the last sentence of that note, which stated that guidance for the 

determination can be found in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 25.1529-1A, 

dated November 20, 2007 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf). Boeing stated that this AC, as 

revised, applies only to airplanes below 7,500 pounds gross weight, so 

this AC no longer applies to Model 777 airplanes. 

 We agree with Boeing's request and rationale. We have revised 

paragraph (c) of this AD accordingly. 

Request To Allow Additional Alternative Inspections and Intervals 

 American Airlines (AAL) and Boeing requested that we revise 

paragraph (h) of the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011), which 

prohibited alternative inspections or intervals except as specifically 

approved as AMOCs. To reduce the workload associated with requesting 

and approving AMOCs, the commenters requested that we include other 

specified procedures and intervals. 

 Structurally Significant Items (SSIs) 53-00-I01, -I02, and -I03 

define the entire fuselage skin as an SSI, and AAL was concerned that 

the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) provided no guidance or 

information on how to address new and existing repairs. AAL surmised 

that any external doubler repair (past or future) would conceal a 

portion of the skin and would need AMOC approval for the inspection, 

which would be impossible to perform with the repair in place. AAL 

contended that any repair approved in accordance with section 25.571 of 

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 25.571) or section 26.43(c) of 

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 26.43(c)) has been addressed 

for fatigue and damage tolerance and would provide the level of safety 

desired by the NPRM. 

 Boeing requested that we also allow alternative inspections and 

intervals specified in a later revision to Section 9, ``Airworthiness 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 2 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' 

D622W001-9, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. 

Since Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, of the Boeing 777 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document changes frequently and is FAA 

approved, no subsequent re-approval should be necessary via AMOC. 

Boeing also requested that we allow alternative inspections and 

intervals if certain damage tolerance requirements have been met in 

accordance with section 25.571(b) of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR 25.571(b)), or section 26.43(c) of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 26.43(c)), or section 26.43(d) of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 26.43(d)). 

 We disagree with the requests. Paragraph (h) in this AD requires 

compliance with the inspections unless AMOC approval is obtained as 

specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Allowing later revisions of 

service documents in an AD violates Office of the Federal Register 

regulations for approving materials incorporated by reference. Affected 

operators may, however, request approval to use a later revision of 

referenced service information as an alternative method of compliance. 

In response to AAL's concern, operators must request a method of 

compliance to address new and existing repairs, under the provisions of 

paragraph (j) of the final rule. We have not changed the final rule 

regarding this issue. 

Request To Allow Optional Materials 

 AAL requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 

2011) to allow the optional use of BMS materials (sealants) permitted 

in Boeing Document D-590, the Boeing 777 Airplane Maintenance Manual, 

or the Boeing 777 Structural Repair Manual--instead of the specific 

materials specified in Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) 

and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, 

Revision January 2010, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning 

[[Page 21431]] 

Data (MPD) Document. The use of alternative materials would allow for 

ready compliance if the current BMS materials were discontinued or 

improved. 

 We disagree with the request. The documents referenced by the 

commenter specify specific procedures to remove the sealant, rather 

than specific types of sealant. Further, some existing ADs including 

those related to Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 

88''), Amendment 21-78 and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83 (67 FR 

72830, December 9, 2002), require specific sealants, which may be 

identified in the BMS specifications, but only certain sealants may be 

used to comply with SFAR88; operators are limited to the use of 

sealants approved by other AD actions in areas that overlap with this 

AD. The application of the sealants and materials in Subsection B, 

Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections, of Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, is often controlled by 

other ADs that mandate the use of certain sealants for Subsections D 

and E (of SFAR88). Operators may request an AMOC to use materials that 

have been determined to be acceptable for the various ADs applicable to 

Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of 

the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. We have not 

changed the final rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Consider Future Boeing Delegated Compliance Organization 

Delegation 

 Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (i)(3) of the NPRM (76 FR 

3054, January 19, 2011), which provides information about AMOCs for 

repairs. Boeing requested that we also specify AMOCs for inspection 

methods, since there may be instances where the operator cannot conduct 

the inspection method specified in Section 9, ``Airworthiness 

Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' 

D622W001-9, Revision January 2010, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance 

Planning Data (MPD) Document, identified in the NPRM. Although 

authority to approve AMOCs for supplemental inspections of baseline 

structure may not currently exist for the Boeing Delegated Compliance 

Organization (BDCO), Boeing suggested that including both repairs and 

inspections would allow for potential future expansion of delegation. 

 We disagree with the request. The nondiscretionary basis for this 

type of delegation has not yet been developed. At present, the FAA must 

approve tasks that involve discretion, and may delegate only 

nondiscretionary tasks. In any event, any change to delegation 

authority in the future will not affect the AD. We have not changed the 

final rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Clarify Allowable Equivalent Procedures 

 AAL requested clarification of certain procedures. AAL observed the 

phrase ``refer to,'' used in Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, 

Revision January 2010, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document, to specify certain chapters in an AMM. AAL noted that 

use of this phrase in service bulletins allows operators to use their 

equivalent procedures. AAL requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 

3054, January 19, 2011) to state that equivalent procedures are 

acceptable where the phrase ``refer to'' is used in Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document. 

 We disagree with the request. As the commenter noted, the phrase 

``refer to'' is used in both AMMs and Boeing service bulletins. In a 

service bulletin, use of the phrase ``refer to'' generally means that a 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 3 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
determination was made to permit operators' equivalent procedures where 

applicable, and use of the phrase ``as given in'' or ``in accordance 

with'' generally means that operators' equivalent procedures are not 

acceptable. But these definitions do not apply to Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, for which operators' 

equivalent procedures are not specifically allowed. Under the 

provisions of paragraph (j) of this final rule, however, we will 

consider requests for approval to use different procedures, if 

sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the procedures would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed the final 

rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Revise Compliance Time for Inspecting Replacement Parts 

 Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (g) of the NPRM (76 FR 

3054, January 19, 2011) to permit the compliance time thresholds to be 

reset for new replacement parts. Boeing asserted that Section 9, 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document does not explicitly state 

that the inspection threshold for new parts starts when the part is 

replaced, and that other existing ADs include terminating action that 

zero-times certain fastener locations. Boeing made this request to 

allow operators to take credit for the younger life of those parts. 

 We agree that this change is necessary to accommodate new 

replacement parts. We have changed the initial compliance time 

accordingly in paragraph (g) of this AD. 

Request To Revise Compliance Time for Reporting 

 JAL noted that Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision 

July 2011, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document 

includes a reporting timeframe of 10 days after an inspection finding. 

JAL reported that these inspections are often accomplished during a 

heavy maintenance inspection where many inspections are accomplished 

over many days. Tracking all of the reporting at the time of return to 

service is easier rather than sending individual events occurring 

during the maintenance check. JAL therefore requested that the 

reporting time frames be revised from 10 days after a finding to 10 

days after the airplane is returned to service. 

 We agree with JAL's request and rationale. We have added this 

reporting provision in paragraph (g) in the final rule. We have also 

added new paragraph (i) in this final rule to explain the requirements 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act, which requires agencies to consider the 

extent of the paperwork burden that will accompany any new rule. And we 

have reidentified subsequent paragraphs accordingly. 

Request To Revise Compliance Time Determination 

 Boeing noted that FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 120-93, dated November 

20, 2007 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf) provides 

[[Page 21432]] 

guidance for addressing damage tolerance inspection requirements for 

repairs and alterations to certain removable structural components. 

Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 3054, January 19, 2011) 

to add a provision to paragraph (g) of the NPRM, allowing FAA AC 120-93 

as a means to establish compliance times for rotable parts where the 

data are not available. 

 We disagree. That AC provides guidance and an acceptable means for 

developing the age of removable parts for the purpose of determining 

compliance times for repairs and alterations. If the actual age, flight 

hours, and flight cycles are unknown for a part affected by the AD, we 

would consider the operator's request for an AMOC. This allows Boeing 

and operators the option to propose methods in detail that use FAA AC 

120-93, dated November 20, 2007 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf), for guidance. We have not 

changed the final rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Clarify Certain PSEs 

 Wang Jian requested clarification of the identity of certain PSEs. 

Attached to this comment was a copy of a page from the Boeing 777F 

Structural Repair Manual, which identified primary structure for repair 

classification. From this page, the commenter observed that the main 

deck floor panels are identified as PSEs on Model 777F series 

airplanes, but not on other aircraft such as Model 747-400F series 

airplanes. 

 Although the commenter's question concerning the PSE differences 

between the Model 747 and 777 is not related to the inspections 

required by this AD, the intent of the question may be explained in 

more detail in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 25.1529-1A, dated November 

20, 2007 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf). We have not changed the final rule regarding 

this issue. 

Explanation of Additional Changes Made to This AD 

 We have redesignated Note 1 and Note 2 of the NPRM (76 FR 3054, 

January 19, 2011) as paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD 

respectively. These changes have not changed the intent of this AD. 

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 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 4 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

 We estimate that this AD will affect 153 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: 

 Estimated Costs 

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

 Cost per Cost on U.S. 

 Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators 

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

Maintenance program revision.......... 1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $0 $85 $13,005 

 $85. 

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

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), 

 (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and 

 (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 

negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 

reference, Safety. 

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 

0 

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: 

 Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

Sec. 39.13 [Amended] 

0 

2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2012-07-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17012; Docket No. FAA2011-0025; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-208-AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

 This AD is effective May 15, 2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

 None. 

(c) Applicability 

 This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, - 

300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes, certificated in any 

category, with an original airworthiness certificate or original 

export certificate of airworthiness issued before September 1, 2010. 

 (1) Airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate or 

original export certificate of airworthiness issued on or after 

September 1, 2010, must already be in compliance with the 

airworthiness 

[[Page 21433]] 

limitations (AWLs) specified in this AD because those limitations 

were applicable as part of the airworthiness certification of those 

airplanes. 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 5 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
 (2) This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance 

documents to include new inspections. Compliance with these 

inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have 

been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas 

addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to 

accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must 

request approval for an alternative method of compliance according 

to paragraph (j) of this AD. The request should include a 

description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure 

the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. 

(d) Subject 

 Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association 

(ATA) of America Codes 27, Flight Controls; 28, Fuel; 32, Landing 

Gear; 52, Doors; 53, Fuselage; 54, Nacelles/Pylons; 55, Stabilizers; 

and 57, Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

 This AD was prompted by a new revision to the airworthiness 

limitations of the maintenance planning document. We are issuing 

this AD to ensure that fatigue cracking of various principal 

structural elements (PSEs) is detected and corrected; such fatigue 

cracking could adversely affect the structural integrity of these 

airplanes. 

(f) Compliance 

 Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 

unless already done. 

(g) Revision of Maintenance Program 

 (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise 

the maintenance program by incorporating the information in 

Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections, of 

Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, 

of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, except 

as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD. 

 (2) The initial compliance time for the inspections is within 

the applicable times specified in Subsection B, Airworthiness 

Limitations--Structural Inspections, of Section 9, of 

``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 

777 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, or within 18 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, or 

within the applicable time specified in Subsection B, Airworthiness 

Limitations--Structural Inspections, of Section 9, ``Airworthiness 

Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs),'' D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document, from the time of 

installation for new parts. 

 (3) Reports specified in Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' 

D622W001-9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance 

Planning Data (MPD) Document may be submitted within 10 days after 

the airplane is returned to service, instead of 10 days after each 

individual finding as specified in this document. 

(h) Alternative Inspections and Inspection Intervals 

 After accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of 

this AD, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be 

used unless the alternative inspection or interval is approved as an 

alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. 

(i) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement 

 A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty 

for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to 

the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that 

collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control 

Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 

2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is 

estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the 

time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the 

collection of information. All responses to this collection of 

information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this 

burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to 

the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200. 

(j) 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-ANM-Seattle-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 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 6 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012
district office. 

 (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 

used for any repair in the areas affected 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 James Sutherland, 

Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: (425) 

917-6533; fax: (425) 917-6590; email: James.Sutherland@faa.gov. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

 (1) You must use the following service information to do the 

actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The 

Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 

reference (IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the 

following service information: 

 (i) Section 9, ``Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' D622W001-9, 

Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document. 

 (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; email 

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 an NARA facility, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.

 Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 23, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012-8228 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P 

Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012) Page 7 of 7

file://C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\dmcl\00000578\xhq1engrxp00145\822a2c44\... 10/11/2012