Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 221 / Friday, November 14, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 67383 

(2) On July 3, 2006 (71 FR 34814, June 16, 

2006), the Director of the Federal Register 

previously approved the incorporation by 

reference of Airbus Temporary Revision 

4.03.00/28, dated May 4, 2006. 

(3) Contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office— 

EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 

Blagnac Cedex, France; fax +33 5 61 93 44 

51; e-mail: account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com, for a copy of 

this service information. You may review 

copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington; or at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/

code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_

locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

24, 2008. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–25997 Filed 11–13–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1147; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–128–AD; Amendment 

39–15719; AD 2008–13–12 R1] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, 

–400, and –500 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to certain Boeing Model 

737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and 

–500 series airplanes. That AD currently 

requires various repetitive inspections 

for cracking of the upper frame to side 

frame splice of the fuselage, and other 

specified and corrective actions if 

necessary. That AD also provides for an 

optional preventive modification, which 

terminates the repetitive inspections. 

This new AD adds an optional 

terminating action that was 

inadvertently omitted from that AD. 

This AD results from a report that the 

upper frame of the fuselage was severed 

between stringers S–13L and S–14L at 

station 747, and the adjacent frame at 

station 767 had a 1.3-inch-long crack at 

the same stringer location. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the upper frame to 

side frame splice of the fuselage, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the frame and adjacent lap 

joint. This reduced structural integrity 

can increase loading in the fuselage 

skin, which will accelerate skin crack 

growth and result in decompression of 

the airplane. 

DATES: Effective December 1, 2008. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of December 1, 2008. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain other publication listed in 

this AD on August 12, 2008 (73 FR 

38905, July 8, 2008). 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by January 13, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

206–544–9990; fax 206–766–5682; 

e-mail DDCS@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

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 street address for 

the Docket Office (telephone 800–647– 

5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6447; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

On June 12, 2008, we issued AD 

2008–13–12, amendment 39–15575 (73 

FR 38905, July 8, 2008), for certain 

Boeing Model 737–100, –200, –200C, 

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

That AD requires various repetitive 

inspections for cracking of the upper 

frame to side frame splice of the 

fuselage, and other specified and 

corrective actions if necessary. That AD 

also provides for an optional preventive 

modification, which terminates the 

repetitive inspections. That AD resulted 

from a report that the upper frame of the 

fuselage was severed between stringers 

S–13L and S–14L at station 747, and the 

adjacent frame at station 767 had a 1.3- 

inch-long crack at the same stringer 

location. We issued that AD to detect 

and correct fatigue cracking of the upper 

frame to side frame splice of the 

fuselage, which could result in reduced 

structural integrity of the frame and 

adjacent lap joint. This reduced 

structural integrity can increase loading 

in the fuselage skin, which will 

accelerate skin crack growth and result 

in decompression of the airplane. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2008–13–12, we 

have determined that we inadvertently 

omitted paragraph (j)(3) from that AD. 

Paragraph (j)(3) provided operators with 

a third option for doing an optional 

terminating action, which terminates 

the repetitive inspections required by 

paragraph (f) of the existing AD. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This AD 

The unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

on other airplanes of the same type 

design. For this reason, we are issuing 

this AD to revise AD 2008–13–12. This 

new AD retains the requirements of the 

existing AD. This AD also adds an 

optional terminating action 

inadvertently omitted from the existing 

AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 1,509 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This AD continues to affect about 524 

airplanes of U.S. registry. The 

inspections currently required by AD 

2008–13–12 and retained in this AD 

take between 18 and 38 work hours per 

airplane, depending on airplane 

configuration. The average labor rate is 

$80 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required inspections required 

by this AD for U.S. operators is between 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
67384 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 221 / Friday, November 14, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

$754,560 and $1,592,960, or $1,440 and 

$3,040 per airplane, per inspection 

cycle. 

FAA’s Justification and Determination 

of the Effective Date 

The omitted paragraph was 

previously published in the NPRM for 

the existing AD and affected operators 

had the opportunity to comment on that 

action at that time. Therefore, we have 

determined that notice and opportunity 

for public comment before issuing this 

AD are unnecessary and that good cause 

exists for making this amendment 

effective in less than 30 days. 

Comments Invited 

This AD is a final rule that involves 

requirements affecting flight safety, and 

we did not provide you with notice and 

an opportunity to provide your 

comments before it becomes effective. 

However, we invite you to send any 

written data, views, or arguments about 

this AD. Send your comments to an 

address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2008–15719; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–128–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this AD. We will consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and may amend this 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 AD. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the 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); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

See the ADDRESSES section for a location 

to examine the regulatory evaluation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by removing amendment 39–15575 (73 

FR 38905, July 8, 2008) and adding the 

following new airworthiness directive 

(AD): 

2008–13–12 R1 Boeing: Amendment 39– 

15719. Docket No. FAA–2008–1147; 

Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–128–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective December 1, 

2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD revises AD 2008–13–12. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737– 

100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 

series airplanes, certificated in any category; 

as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1261, dated January 19, 2006. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report that the 

upper frame of the fuselage was severed 

between stringers S–13L and S–14L at station 

747, and the adjacent frame at station 767 

had a 1.3-inch-long crack at the same stringer 

location. We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct fatigue cracking of the upper frame to 

side frame splice of the fuselage, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity of the 

frame and adjacent lap joint. This reduced 

structural integrity can increase loading in 

the fuselage skin, which will accelerate skin 

crack growth and result in decompression of 

the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2008– 

13–12 

Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Actions 

(f) At the applicable compliance time listed 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1261, 

including Appendices A through X inclusive, 

dated January 19, 2006; except as provided 

by paragraph (g) of this AD: Do the applicable 

inspections for cracking of the upper frame 

to side frame splice of the fuselage by doing 

all of the actions, as specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin; except as provided by paragraphs 

(h) and (i) of this AD. Do all applicable 

specified and corrective actions before 

further flight in accordance with the service 

bulletin. Repeat the applicable inspections 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 

flight cycles until the terminating action in 

paragraph (j) of this AD has been 

accomplished. 

(g) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1261, including Appendices A 

through X inclusive, dated January 19, 2006, 

specifies a compliance time relative to the 

date on the service bulletin, this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after August 12, 2008 (the effective date 

of AD 2008–13–12). 

(h) If any crack is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1261, 

including Appendices A through X inclusive, 

dated January 19, 2006, specifies to contact 

Boeing for appropriate action: Before further 

flight, repair the crack in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this 

AD. 

(i) For airplanes on which a repair has been 

previously accomplished: If, during 

accomplishment of the corrective actions 

required by paragraph (f) of this AD, it is 

found that the repair was not done per the 

Boeing 737–100/200 Structural Repair 

Manual (SRM) 53–10–4, Figure 1; or the 

Boeing 737–300/400/500 SRM 53–00–07, 

Figure 201, Repair 1; as applicable; before 

further flight, repair in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this 

AD. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 221 / Friday, November 14, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 67385 

Optional Terminating Action 

(j) Accomplishing the actions specified in 

paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD, as 

applicable, terminates the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (f) of this 

AD for the repaired or modified frames only. 

(1) Accomplishment of the repair specified 

in Part 3, or the preventive modification 

specified in Part 4, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1261, including Appendices A 

through X inclusive, dated January 19, 2006. 

(2) Accomplishment of the repair or the 

preventive modification specified in Boeing 

Message M–7200–02–01294, dated August 

20, 2002. 

(3) Accomplishment of the repair or the 

preventive modification in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO). 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, 

ATTN: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

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

917–6590; has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1261, dated January 19, 

2006, to do the actions required by this AD, 

unless the AD specifies otherwise. If you do 

the optional terminating actions specified in 

this AD, you must use Boeing Message M– 

7200–02–01294, dated August 20, 2002; or 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1261, 

dated January 19, 2006; to do those optional 

actions, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

Boeing Message M–7200–02–01294, dated 

August 20, 2002, under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 

1 CFR part 51. 

(2) On August 12, 2008 (73 FR 38905, July 

8, 2008), the Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1261, 

dated January 19, 2006. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–9990; fax 206–766–5682; e-mail 

DDCS@boeing.com; Internet https:// 

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may review copies of the service 

information incorporated by reference at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

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

the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

10, 2008. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–25893 Filed 11–13–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 1420 

Final Rule: Standard for All Terrain 

Vehicles 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The recently-enacted 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’), sets forth several 

requirements for all terrain vehicles 

(‘‘ATVs’’). Among these, the CPSIA 

requires the United States Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘CPSC’’) to publish 

in the Federal Register as a mandatory 

consumer product safety standard the 

American National Standard for Four 

Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment 

Configuration, and Performance 

Requirements developed by the 

Specialty Vehicle Institute of America 

(American National Standard ANSI/ 

SVIA 1–2007). This document satisfies 

that requirement and reviews other 

provisions of the CPSIA that apply to 

ATVs. 

DATES: The rule takes effect April 13, 

2009. The incorporation by reference of 

the publication listed in this rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of April 13, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tanya Topka, Office of Compliance and 

Field Operations, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone (301) 504–7594. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) 

was enacted on August 14, 2008. Public 

Law 110–314, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 

14, 2008). The CPSIA amends statutes 

which the U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or 

‘‘CPSC’’) administers, adding 

requirements with broad applicability 

and some product-specific provisions as 

well. Section 232 of the CPSIA adds a 

new section 42 to the Consumer Product 

Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’) that sets forth 

numerous requirements for all terrain 

vehicles (‘‘ATVs’’). 15 U.S.C. 42, as 

added by CPSIA § 232. 

The Commission has been involved 

with ATVs since the 1980s. In 1987, the 

Commission filed a lawsuit to declare 

ATVs an imminently hazardous 

consumer product under section 12 of 

the CPSA against the five companies 

that were the major distributors of ATVs 

in the U.S. at that time. The section 12 

lawsuit was settled by Consent Decrees 

that were filed on April 28, 1988 and 

remained in effect for ten years. The 

Consent Decrees contained provisions 

concerning restrictions on the 

distribution of three-wheel ATVs; 

development of a voluntary 

performance standard; requirements for 

ATV warning labels, owner’s manuals, 

point of purchase safety materials, free 

rider training, and media and 

advertising materials. The parties also 

agreed to promote and sell adult-size 

ATVs (defined in the Consent Decrees 

as ATVs with engines greater than 90 

cc) only for the use of riders 16 years of 

age and older. 

In accordance with the Consent 

Decrees, the main distributors, working 

through the Specialty Vehicle Institute 

of America (‘‘SVIA’’), continued work 

on a voluntary standard for ATVs. The 

standard, known as ANSI/SVIA, The 

American National Standard for Four 

Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment 

Configuration, and Performance 

Requirements, was first published in 

1990, was revised in 2001 and again in 

2007. 

While the Consent Decrees were in 

effect, the companies entered into 

monitoring agreements with the CPSC 

agreeing to monitor their dealers’ 

compliance with the Consent Decrees’ 

requirements, particularly the age 

restrictions. 

After the Consent Decrees expired, the 

distributors who had been parties to the 

Consent Decrees (and three companies 

that had entered the market later) 

developed action plans, also known as 

letters of undertaking, in which the 

companies agreed to undertake 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES