Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 15523 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0495; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–172–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 737–300, 

–400, and –500 series airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by reports 

of cracking at certain fastener locations 

in the window corners of the window 

belt area. This proposed AD would 

require repetitive high frequency eddy 

current (HFEC) inspections for fatigue 

cracking in certain fastener locations in 

the window corners of the window belt 

area, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. This 

proposed AD would also provide an 

optional preventive modification that 

would terminate the repetitive 

inspections at the modified location. We 

are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct fatigue cracking around fastener 

locations that could cause multiple 

window corner skin cracks, which 

could result in rapid decompression and 

loss of structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 8, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, 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. You may view 

this 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. It is also available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

0495. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

0495; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Haytham Alaidy, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6573; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

haytham.alaidy@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2015–0495; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–172–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We have received reports of cracking 

at certain fastener locations in the 

window corners of the window belt. At 

the time of the crack detection, the 

airplanes had accumulated between 

37,842 and 49,050 total flight cycles. 

Fatigue cracking of the fastener 

locations in the window corners of the 

window belt area between station (STA) 

360 and STA 540 and between STA 727 

and STA 908, left-side and right-side of 

the fuselage, at and between stringers 

S–11 and S–13, if not corrected, could 

result in cracking around fastener 

locations that could cause multiple 

window corner skin cracks, which 

could result in rapid decompression and 

loss of structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

Related Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1328, dated July 22, 

2014. The service information describes 

procedures for inspections, preventative 

modification, and repairs of the window 

corners. Refer to this service 

information for information on the 

procedures and compliance times. This 

service information is reasonably 

available; see ADDRESSES for ways to 

access this service information. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information identified 

previously. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ are actions that correct or 

address any condition found. Corrective 

actions in an AD could include, for 

example, repairs. 

Explanation of ‘‘RC’’ Steps in Service 

Information 

The FAA worked in conjunction with 

industry, under the Airworthiness 

Directive Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to 

enhance the AD system. One 

enhancement was a new process for 

annotating which steps in the service 

information are required for compliance 

with an AD. Differentiating these steps 

from other tasks in the service 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15524 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

information is expected to improve an 

owner’s/operator’s understanding of 

crucial AD requirements and help 

provide consistent judgment in AD 

compliance. The steps identified as RC 

(required for compliance) in any service 

information identified previously have a 

direct effect on detecting, preventing, 

resolving, or eliminating an identified 

unsafe condition. 

Steps that are identified as RC in any 

service information must be done to 

comply with the proposed AD. 

However, steps that are not identified as 

RC are recommended. Those steps that 

are not identified as RC may be deviated 

from using accepted methods in 

accordance with the operator’s 

maintenance or inspection program 

without obtaining approval of an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC), provided the steps identified 

as RC can be done and the airplane can 

be put back in a serviceable condition. 

Any substitutions or changes to steps 

identified as RC will require approval of 

an AMOC. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1328, dated July 22, 2014, specifies 

to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 142 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS: REQUIRED ACTIONS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspection .......................... Up to 2,312 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$196,520 per inspection cycle.

$0 Up to $196,520 per inspection cycle.Up to $27,905,840 per 

inspection cycle. 

ESTIMATED COSTS: OPTIONAL ACTIONS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Preventive modification ..... 108 work-hours × $85 per hour = $9,180 ................................................. $0 $9,180. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary repairs that would be 

required based on the results of the 

proposed inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need repairs: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Repair ............................... Up to 18 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,530 per repair ......................... $0 Up to $1,530 per repair. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(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. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 15525 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2015–0495; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–172–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by May 8, 

2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes, certificated in any category, as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1328, dated July 22, 2014. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

fatigue cracking at certain fastener locations 

in the window corners of the window belt 

area. We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct fatigue cracking around the fastener 

locations that could cause multiple window 

corner skin cracks, which could result in 

rapid decompression and loss of structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspections 

At the applicable time specified in tables 

1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1328, 

dated July 22, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(1) of this AD: Do external 

surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections for cracking of the skin at the 12 

fastener locations at the upper forward and 

lower aft corners of each window between 

station (STA) 360 and STA 540 and between 

STA 727 and STA 908, left-side and rightside of the fuselage, at and between stringers 

S–11 and S–13, and all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1328, dated July 22, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. 

Repeat the inspections at the applicable 

times specified in tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 

1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1328, dated July 22, 2014, 

until the terminating action specified in 

paragraph (h) of this AD is done. 

(h) Optional Preventive Modification 

Accomplishment of a preventive 

modification in the fastener locations in the 

window corners of the window belt area 

between station (STA) 360 and STA 540 and 

between STA 727 and STA 908, left-side and 

right-side fuselage, at and between stringers 

S–11 and S–13, terminates the inspections 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the 

modified location only. The modification, 

including all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions, must be done in 

accordance with Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1328, dated July 22, 

2014, except as required by paragraph (i)(2) 

of this AD. 

(i) Exceptions to the Service Bulletin 

Specifications 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1328, dated July 22, 2014, specifies 

a compliance time ‘‘after the original issue 

date of this service bulletin,’’ this AD 

requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1328, dated July 22, 2014, specifies 

to contact Boeing for repair instructions: 

Before further flight, repair the cracking 

using a method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of 

this AD. 

(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 

paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@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) If any service information contains 

steps that are identified as RC (Required for 

Compliance), those steps must be done to 

comply with this AD; any steps that are not 

identified as RC are recommended. Those 

steps that are not identified as RC may be 

deviated from using accepted methods in 

accordance with the operator’s maintenance 

or inspection program without obtaining 

approval of an AMOC, provided the steps 

identified as RC can be done and the airplane 

can be put back in a serviceable condition. 

Any substitutions or changes to steps 

identified as RC require approval of an 

AMOC. 

(4) 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 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Haytham Alaidy, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: haytham.alaidy@faa.gov. 

(2) 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. You 

may view 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 

13, 2015. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06574 Filed 3–23–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0493; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–184–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed 

Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin 

Aeronautics Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed 

Martin Aeronautics Company Model 

188 series airplanes. This proposed AD 

was prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the upper and lower 

wing skin planks at the attachment of 

the main landing gear (MLG) ribs at 

certain wing-stations are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This 

proposed AD would require an 

inspection (for cracking) and 

modification of the chordwise fastener 

rows of the upper and lower wing 

planks at the attachments to the MLG 

ribs at certain wing-stations. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent fatigue 

cracking of the upper and lower wing 

skin planks at the attachment of the 

MLG ribs, which could result in failure 

of the wing. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 8, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS