55732 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

97–22–05—McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–10176. Docket 96–NM–95–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9–10, –20, –30,

–40, and –50 series airplanes and C–9

(military) series airplanes; as listed in

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin

53–257, Revision 1, dated February 9, 1996,

and McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service

Bulletin 25–331, dated December 10, 1993;

operating in a passenger or passenger/cargo

configuration; certificated in any category.

Note 1: The requirements of this AD

become applicable at the time an airplane

operating in an all-cargo configuration is

converted to a passenger or passenger/cargo

configuration.

Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure that the emergency internal

release system of the tailcone performs its

intended function in the event of an

emergency evacuation, accomplish the

following:

(a) For airplanes listed in McDonnell

Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin 53–257,

Revision 1, dated February 9, 1996: Within

36 months after the effective date of this AD,

modify the emergency internal release system

of the tailcone in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(b) For airplanes listed in McDonnell

Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin 25–331, dated

December 10, 1993: Within 36 months after

the effective date of this AD, modify the

accessory compartment in accordance with

the service bulletin.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Los Angeles ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(e) The actions shall be done in accordance

with McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service

Bulletin 53–257, Revision 1, dated February

9, 1996, and McDonnell Douglas DC–9

Service Bulletin 25–331, dated December 10,

1993. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Technical Publications

Business Administration, Department C1–

L51 (2–60). Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California;

or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

December 2, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October

17, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28319 Filed 10–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–229–AD; Amendment

39–10179; AD 97–22–07]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737

series airplanes, that currently requires

repetitive inspections to detect cracking

of the lower skin at the lower row of

fasteners in the lap joints of the

fuselage, and repair of any cracking

detected. This amendment requires that

the inspections be accomplished at

more frequent intervals. This

amendment also adds a requirement for

modification of the fuselage lap joints at

certain locations, which constitutes

terminating action for repetitive

inspections of modified areas. This

amendment is prompted by reports of

numerous fatigue cracks in the lower

skin of the fuselage lap joints at the

lower row of fasteners. The actions

specified in this AD are intended to

prevent such fatigue cracking, which

could result in sudden decompression

of the airplane.

DATES: Effective November 12, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications, as listed in the

regulations, is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of November

12, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–

53A1177, dated November 8, 1994, as

listed in the regulations, was approved

previously by the Director of the Federal

Register as of December 27, 1994 (59 FR

63716, December 9, 1994).

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

December 29, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

229–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box

3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gregory L. Schneider or Nenita K.

Odesa, Aerospace Engineers, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, Seattle Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington;

telephone (425) 227–2028 or (425) 227–

2557; fax (425) 227–1181.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55733

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

28, 1988, a Boeing Model 737 series

airplane was involved in an accident in

which a 15-foot long section of fuselage

structure peeled open during flight. In

light of this, the FAA initiated an Aging

Fleet Program. The objective of that

program is to identify and implement

procedures to ensure the continuing

structural airworthiness of aging

transport category airplanes.

As part of the Aging Fleet Program,

the airplane manufacturer conducted

cyclic pressure (fatigue) tests to evaluate

the performance of the various fuselage

skin panel lap joint configurations. The

fuselage skin panel joint consists of two

adjacent panels that overlap each other

longitudinally and are joined together

by three rows of fasteners at the overlap

(hence, lap joint). Cracks in the upper

skin of the lap joint led to the structural

failure that occurred in the 1988

accident discussed previously. These

‘‘first generation’’ lap joints, installed on

early Model 737 series airplanes having

line numbers 1–291, were modified by

replacing the countersunk fasteners in

the upper fastener row of the lap joint

with protruding head fasteners to

correct and prevent cracking in the

upper skin of the lap joint. No cracking

has been detected to date in the lower

fastener row of these (modified)‘‘first

generation’’ lap joints.

In 1994, tests were conducted on

‘‘second generation’’ lap joints; test

results revealed cracks in the lower skin

of this lap joint. The airplane

manufacturer determined that these

cracks were caused by increased stresses

in this area due to the increased bending

stresses associated with the installation

of a doubler on the upper skin. This

doubler was installed on ‘‘second

generation’’ lap joints as an

improvement to the lap joint to prevent

cracks in the upper skin. This lap joint

configuration, which incorporates the

additional doubler, was installed on

Model 737 series airplanes having line

numbers 292 through 2565.

In light of results of these tests, the

manufacturer inspected the lap joints of

five aging airplanes and detected a total

of 273 fatigue cracks. The use of eddy

current inspection techniques were

required as the cracks in the lower skin

are not detectable visually due to the

positioning of the lower skin between

the upper skin and the circumferential

tear strap. Many of these cracks were

found to have occurred simultaneously

at adjacent fastener hole locations in the

lower skin of the fuselage lap joint.

This type of cracking of the lap joint

is known as multiple site damage

(MSD). MSD is characterized by the

simultaneous presence of fatigue cracks

in the same structural element (such as

the lower skin panel of the lap joint).

Coalescence of cracks at adjacent

fastener holes in the lower skin can lead

to sudden fracture and failure of the lap

joint, which could result in rapid

decompression of the airplane. Due to

the reduction in the residual strength of

a lap joint in the presence of MSD. This

reduction of the structural integrity of

the fuselage may occur at loads

significantly below those that would be

expected for structure having a single

large crack. The accident discussed

previously has demonstrated

dramatically that small cracks acting

together can have a significant effect on

the residual strength of the aircraft

structure.

Issuance of Previous Rule

On December 2, 1994, the FAA issued

AD 94–25–05, amendment 39–9089 (59

FR 63716, December 9, 1994),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737

series airplanes, to require repetitive

eddy current inspections to detect

cracking of the lower skin at the lower

row of fasteners in the lap joints of the

fuselage between body stations 259.50

and 1016, and repair of any cracking

detected. That AD was prompted by

reports of fatigue cracking occurring

simultaneously at adjacent fastener hole

locations in the lower skin of the

fuselage lap joint. The actions required

by AD 94–25–05 are intended to prevent

sudden decompression of the airplane

due to undetected cracking of the

fuselage skin.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since the issuance of AD 94–25–05,

the FAA has received additional reports

of fatigue cracking in the lower skin of

the lap joints of the fuselage on

airplanes previously inspected in

accordance with that AD. The FAA

received reports of numerous cracks on

a number of airplanes that had

accumulated between 52,000 and 78,000

total flight cycles and that had been

inspected using low frequency eddy

current (LFEC) inspection techniques.

The majority of these cracks occurred at

left and right stringers 4, 10, and 14.

The FAA also received recent reports

indicating that extensive cracking was

found on three airplanes on which high

frequency eddy current (HFEC)

inspections and modification of the lap

joints had been accomplished in

accordance with Revision 1 of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177.

Approximately eight months had

elapsed since the initial LFEC

inspections required by AD 94–25–05

had been accomplished. These airplanes

had accumulated between 76,000 and

84,400 total flight cycles. The total

number of cracks reported was between

246 and 360 on these three airplanes,

and the majority of these cracks

occurred at left and right stringers 4, 10,

and 14. On one of these airplanes,

cracking was found along a 111-inch

section of stringer 4L at every fastener

hole in the lower row of fasteners in the

lower skin that had not been repaired

during the previous LFEC inspection

(82% of the total fastener holes).

In the preamble to AD 94–25–05, the

FAA specified that the actions required

by that AD were considered ‘‘interim

action’’ and that the manufacturer was

developing a modification to positively

address the unsafe condition. The FAA

indicated that it may consider further

rulemaking action once the modification

was developed, approved, and available.

The manufacturer now has developed

such a modification, and the FAA has

determined that further rulemaking

action is indeed necessary; this AD

follows from that determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Since the issuance of AD 94–25–05,

the FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–

53A1177, Revision 1, dated September

19, 1996; Revision 2, dated July 24,

1997; and Revision 3, dated September

18, 1997; which describe procedures for

inspections similar to those specified in

the original issue of the alert service

bulletin. (The original issue of the alert

service bulletin was cited in AD 94–25–

05 as the appropriate source of service

information).

Revision 1 of the alert service bulletin

describes procedures for modification of

the lap joints at the lower row of

fasteners in the lower skin of the

fuselage [reference Part III (‘‘Preventive

Change’’) of the Accomplishment

Instructions of the alert service

bulletin].

The relevant changes in Revision 2 of

the alert service bulletin include

procedures for more frequent repetitive

inspections of the lower skin at the

lower row of fasteners in the lap joints

of the fuselage.

For certain lap joint locations on

Model 737–200 series airplanes only,

Revision 2 of the alert service bulletin

also describes procedures for an option

to the modification (‘‘Preventive

Change’’) described in Revision 1 of the

alert service bulletin. This option

[reference Part IV (‘‘Lap Joint Repair’’) of

the Accomplishment Instructions of the

alert service bulletin] involves installing

a lap joint repair on the entire length of

the skin panel at certain lap joint

locations.
55734 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Revision 3 of the alert service bulletin

is essentially the same as Revision 2;

however, Revision 3 corrects a

particular fastener size specified in Part

IV of the Accomplishment Instructions

of the alert service bulletin.

Accomplishment of the modification

eliminates the need for the repetitive

inspections only of those areas that have

been modified. Accomplishment of the

actions specified in the alert service

bulletin is intended to adequately

address the identified unsafe condition.

FAA’s Determinations

Based on reports of numerous cracks

detected on airplanes inspected

previously, the FAA finds that, for

certain airplanes, the repetitive LFEC

inspections required currently by AD

94–25–05 must be accomplished at

more frequent intervals to detect cracks

that, in the presence of MSD, could

propagate to the point of structural

failure of the lap joints and result in

rapid decompression of the airplane.

Based upon reports of extensive MSD

found in the lower skin of the lap joints

located at stringers 4, 10, and 14, there

may be a significant reduction in the

residual strength of these lap joints.

Because of this reduction in strength, in

combination with the possibility that

cracks may go undetected due to human

factors, the FAA finds that the reduced

inspection interval provided by this AD

may not be adequate to detect cracks

which could propagate to the point of

structural failure. As a result, for

airplanes that have accumulated 70,000

or more total flight cycles, the FAA has

concluded that modifications of the lap

joints at stringers 4, 10, and 14 (as

required by this AD) on which the most

severe cracking has been detected, must

be required on an emergency basis.

Explanation of Requirements of Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of this same

type design, this AD supersedes AD 94–

25–05 to continue to require repetitive

inspections to detect cracking of the

lower skin at the lower row of fasteners

in the lap joints of the fuselage, and

repair of any cracking detected. This AD

requires that the inspections be

accomplished at more frequent

intervals.

This AD also requires modification of

the fuselage lap joints at certain

locations. Accomplishment of the

modification constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspections only

of those areas that have been modified

in accordance with this AD.

The inspections and modification are

required to be accomplished in

accordance with the alert service

bulletin described previously.

Explanation of Compliance Time for

Initial Inspection

Operators should note that, for certain

airplanes, the compliance time for

accomplishment of the initial inspection

required by this AD is approximately

120 days. That number of days is

usually sufficient to allow for prior

notice to the public and a brief comment

period before adoption of a final rule. In

this AD, however, that compliance time

was selected because of:

• The large number of aircraft

affected by the AD;

• The large number of work hours

required to accomplish the inspection;

and

• The availability of an adequate

number of maintenance facilities able to

accommodate scheduling the fleet for

inspection.

A shorter compliance time might have

resulted in the unnecessary removal of

airplanes from service pending

scheduling. Nevertheless, the FAA has

determined that immediate adoption is

necessary in this case because of the

importance of initiating the required

inspections and modification as soon as

possible.

Differences Between the AD and the

Relevant Service Bulletins

Operators should note that, for

airplanes that have accumulated

between 60,000 and 65,000 total flight

cycles, the alert service bulletin

specifies a repetitive inspection of 3,500

flight cycles until the airplane has

accumulated 65,000 total flight cycles.

However, for that group of airplanes,

this AD requires that repetitive

inspections be accomplished at intervals

not to exceed 1,200 flight cycles. The

FAA has determined that, because of the

safety implications and consequences of

multiple site damage associated with

fatigue cracking of the fuselage skin, it

is necessary to require earlier repetitive

inspections to ensure the continued

operational safety of the fleet.

For Boeing Model 737–200 series

airplanes only, Part IV of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 3, dated September 18, 1997,

recommends installation of a support

cradle at station 540. However, this

installation is not intended to support

the weight of the airplane. Therefore,

this AD does not require installation of

this support cradle. In addition, to

clarify the reference in the alert service

bulletin for supporting the airplane in

the jig position, paragraph (g)(2) of this

AD explicitly requires that, prior to

conducting the repair of the lap joint,

the airplane be supported in the jig

position, including support (removal) of

the engine weight. This action is

required to be accomplished in

accordance with Boeing Document D6–

15565, ‘‘737 Structural Repair Manual

(SRM),’’ Chapter 51, Subject 51–50–1,

Revision 70, dated July 5, 1997.

Subsequent Rulemaking

The FAA may consider separate

rulemaking action for airplanes that

have accumulated more than 70,000

total flight cycles to require

modification of the lap joints at the

remaining locations specified in Part III

(‘‘Preventive Change’’) of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the

alert service bulletin.

In addition, for airplanes that have

accumulated less than 70,000 total flight

cycles, the FAA may consider requiring

accomplishment of this modification at

all locations specified in the alert

service bulletin.

Determination of Rule’s Effective Date

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this rule by

submitting such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications shall identify the rules

docket number and be submitted in

triplicate to the address specified under

the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the rules docket for examination by
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55735

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the rules docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 97–NM–229–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the rules docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

rules docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–9089 (59 FR

63716, December 9, 1994), and by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD), amendment 39–10179, to read as

follows:

97–22–07 Boeing: Amendment 39–10179.

Docket 97–NM–229–AD. Supersedes AD

94–25–05, Amendment 39–9089.

Applicability: Model Boeing 737 series

airplanes having line numbers 292 through

2565 inclusive, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. The

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the modification, alteration, or repair

on the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent sudden decompression of the

airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Perform a low frequency eddy current

inspection to detect cracking of the lower

skin at the lower row of fasteners in the lap

joints of the fuselage at the time specified in

paragraph (b) or (c) of this AD, as applicable,

in accordance with Part I (‘‘Inspection’’) of

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, dated

November 8, 1994; Revision 1, dated

September 19, 1996; Revision 2, dated July

24, 1997; or Revision 3, dated September 18,

1997.

(b) For airplanes that have accumulated

70,000 total flight cycles or more as of the

effective date of this AD: Perform the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD at the later of the times specified in

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Within 100 flight cycles after the

effective date of this AD.

(2) Within 300 flight cycles after the last

inspection accomplished in accordance with

AD 94–25–05, amendment 39–9089.

(c) For airplanes that have accumulated

less than 70,000 total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Perform the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD at the later of the times specified in

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 60,000

total flight cycles.

(2) At the earliest of the times specified in

paragraph (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(ii), and (c)(2)(iii) of

this AD.

(i) Within 3,500 flight cycles after the last

inspection accomplished in accordance with

AD 94–25–05, amendment 39–9089.

(ii) Within 1,200 flight cycles after the

effective date of this AD.

(iii) Prior to the accumulation of 70,300

total flight cycles.

(d) If any cracking is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair it in

accordance with Part II (‘‘Crack Repair’’) of

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, dated

November 8, 1994; Revision 1, dated

September 19, 1996; Revision 2, dated July

24, 1997; or Revision 3, dated September 18,

1997.

(e) Repeat the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD at the time specified

in paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this AD, as

applicable, until the modification required by

paragraph (f) or (g) of this AD, as applicable,

is accomplished.

(1) If the airplane had accumulated less

than 70,000 total flight cycles at the time of

the immediately preceding inspection,

perform the next inspection within 1,200

flight cycles or prior to the accumulation of

70,300 total flight cycles, whichever occurs

first.

(2) If the airplane had accumulated 70,000

or more total flight cycles at the time of the

immediately preceding inspection, perform

the next inspection within 300 flight cycles.

(f) Except as provided by paragraph (g) of

this AD, modify the fuselage lap joints at the

lower row of fasteners at stringer locations

right/left stringer 4 between body station (BS)

360 and BS 1016; and right/left stringers 10

and 14 between BS 360 and BS 540, and

between BS 727 and BS 1016; in accordance

with Part III (‘‘Preventive Change’’) of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, Revision 1,

dated September 19, 1996; Revision 2, dated

July 24, 1997; or Revision 3, dated September

18, 1997; at the time specified in paragraph

(h) of this AD. Accomplishment of this

modification constitutes terminating action

for the repetitive inspections only for the

areas that have been modified in accordance

with this AD.

(g) For Boeing Model 737–200 series

airplanes only:

(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (g)(2)

and (g)(3) of this AD, in lieu of

accomplishing the modification (‘‘Preventive

Change’’) specified in paragraph (f) of this

AD, installation of the lap joint repair in

accordance with Part IV (‘‘Lap Joint Repair’’)

of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 3, dated September 18, 1997, at the

locations specified in Part IV of the alert

service bulletin, may be accomplished.

Accomplishment of the repair constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections only for the areas that have been

modified in accordance with this AD.

(2) Prior to conducting the repair, support

the airplane in the jig position, including

support (removal) of the engine weight, in

accordance with Boeing Document D6–

15565, ‘‘737 Structural Repair Manual

(SRM),’’ Chapter 51, Subject 51–50–1,

Revision 70, dated July 5, 1997.

Note 2: Chapter 51, Subject 51–50–1 of the

referenced SRM references Subjects 51–50–2,

51–50–3, and 51–60 of the referenced SRM

as additional sources of service information.

(3) Notwithstanding the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
55736 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

737–53A1177, Revision 3, dated September

18, 1997, the repair described in paragraph

(g)(1) of this AD may be accomplished

without installing a support cradle at station

540.

(h) Accomplish the modification required

by paragraph (f) or (g) of this AD, as

applicable, at the latest of the times specified

in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this

AD.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 70,000

total flight cycles.

(2) Within 600 flight cycles after the

effective date of this AD.

(3) Within 80 days after the effective date

of this AD.

(i) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

(j) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(k) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–

53A1177, dated November 8, 1994; Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 1, dated September 19, 1996; Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 2, dated July 24, 1997; Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, Revision 3,

dated September 18, 1997; and Boeing

Document D6–15565, ‘‘737 Structural Repair

Manual (SRM),’’ Chapter 51, Subject 51–50–

1, Revision 70, dated July 5, 1997, which

contains the following list of effective pages

(NOTE: The issue date and revision level of

the SRM are indicated only on the Title Page;

no other page of the document contains this

information.):

Page No. Revision level

shown on page

Date

shown

on page

Title page .......... 70 ..................... July 5,

1997.

1 ........................ Not shown ........ Feb. 5,

1989.

2, 3, 11, 12 ....... Not shown ........ Aug. 5,

1988.

4 ........................ Not shown ........ Feb. 1,

1978.

5, 6, 8–10 ......... Not shown ........ Aug. 1,

1968.

7 ........................ Not shown ........ Feb. 1,

1975.

(1) The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 1, dated September 19, 1996; Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

Revision 2, dated July 24, 1997; Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, Revision 3,

dated September 18, 1997; and Boeing

Document D6–15565, ‘‘737 Structural Repair

Manual (SRM),’’ Chapter 51, Subject 51–50–

1, Revision 70, dated July 5, 1997; is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) The incorporation by reference of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1177,

dated November 8, 1994, was approved

previously by the Director of the Federal

Register as of December 27, 1994 (59 FR

63716, December 9, 1994).

(3) Copies may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707,

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

(l) This amendment becomes effective on

November 12, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October

21, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28347 Filed 10–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Part 201

[Docket No. 97–5A]

Copyright Restoration of Works in

Accordance With the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act; NIE Corrections

Procedure

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of

Congress.

ACTION: Interim regulations with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is

issuing interim regulations to govern the

filing of Correction Notices of Intent to

Enforce a Restored Copyright under

section 104A of the copyright law, as

amended by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act. The effect of the

interim regulation is to establish

procedures for the correction of errors in

previously filed Notices of Intent to

Enforce a Restored Copyright and to

provide a suggested format for

submitting such information.

DATES: This interim regulation is

effective October 28, 1997. Comments

should be in writing and received on or

before November 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: If delivered by hand, an

original and ten (10) copies of

comments should be delivered to:

Library of Congress, Office of the

General Counsel, Copyright Office,

James Madison Memorial Building,

Room LM–403, First and Independence

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20540. If

sent by mail, an original and ten (10)

copies of comments should be

addressed to: David Carson, General

Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, PO Box

70400, Southwest Station, Washington,

DC 20024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charlotte Douglass, Principal Legal

Advisor to the General Counsel,

Copyright GC/I&R, PO Box 70400,

Southwest Station, Washington, DC

20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8380.

Telefax: (202) 707–8366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On December 8, 1994, President

Clinton signed the ‘‘Uruguay Round

Agreements Act’’ (URAA), Pub. L. 103–

465, 108 Stat. 4809. The URAA restored

copyright in certain foreign works from

any country that, from January 1, 1996,

forward, is a member of the Berne

Convention for the Protection of Literary

and Artistic Works, a member of the

World Trade Organization (WTO), or

subject to a Presidential Proclamation

determining eligibility. 60 FR 7793 (Feb.

9, 1995); Proclamation No. 6780, 60 FR

15845 (Mar. 27, 1995). Nationals of such

countries have copyright automatically

restored in their works effective on the

first date the particular source country

becomes a country in any of the abovelisted three categories. However, to be

restored, works must meet certain other

requirements. Such works must:

(1) Not be in the public domain in its

source country through expiration of the

term of protection;

(2) Be in the public domain in the

United States due to noncompliance

with formalities imposed at any time by

United States copyright law, lack of

subject matter protection in the case of

sound recordings fixed before February

15, 1972, or lack of national eligibility;

(3) Have at least one author or

rightholder who was, at the time the

work was created, a national or

domiciliary of an eligible country;

(4) If published, be first published in

an eligible country and not published in

the United States during the 30-day

period following publication in such

eligible country.

Notwithstanding the fact that the

work meets the above requirements, any

work ever owned or administered by the

Alien Property Custodian and in which

the restored copyright would be owned

by a government or instrumentality

thereof, is not a restored work. 17 U.S.C.

104A(a)(2).