Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 25905 

(ii) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–34–4273, including Appendix 01, 

dated January 30, 2013. 

(iii) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–34–5093, including Appendix 01, 

dated January 30, 2013. 

(2) Replace with a flat plate having P/N 

F3411007920000 or P/N F3411007920100, in 

accordance with a method approved by 

either the Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA; or the European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) or its delegated agent. 

(i) Exception to Paragraphs (g) and (h) of 

This AD 

For airplanes on which Airbus 

Modification 203285 (improve AOA flat plate 

protection treatment) has been embodied in 

production: The actions specified in 

paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD are not 

required, provided that, since first flight, no 

AOA probe conic plate having P/N 

F3411060200000 or P/N F3411060900000 

has been installed. 

(j) Parts Installation Prohibition 

As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install, on any airplane, an AOA 

sensor conic plate having P/N 

F3411060200000 or P/N F3411060900000 or 

an AOA protection cover having P/N 

98D34203003000. 

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 227–1138; fax (425) 

227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9- 

ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

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. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0023, dated 

February 1, 2013, and the service information 

specified in paragraphs (l)(1)(i), (l)(1)(ii), 

(l)(1)(iii), (l)(1)(iv) and (l)(1)(v) of this AD for 

related service information: 

(i) Airbus A330 Temporary Revision 

TR293, Issue 1.0, dated December 4, 2012. 

(ii) Airbus A340 Temporary Revision 

TR294, Issue 1.0, dated December 4, 2012. 

(iii) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A330–34–3293, including Appendix 01, 

dated January 31, 2013. 

(iv) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–34–4273, including Appendix 01, 

dated January 30, 2013. 

(v) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–34–5093, including Appendix 01, 

dated January 30, 2013. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS— 

Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point 

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, 

France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 

5 61 93 45 80; email airworthiness.A330– 

A340@airbus.com; Internet http:// 

www.airbus.com. You may review copies of 

the referenced service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23, 

2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–10486 Filed 5–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0362; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–030–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 727 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the frame-to-floor beam 

attachment is subject to widespread 

fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed 

AD would require repetitive high 

frequency eddy current inspections for 

any crack of the frames at body station 

(STA) 188 through STA 344, and repair 

if necessary. We are proposing this AD 

to detect and correct fatigue cracking at 

the frame-to-floor beam attachment, on 

both the left- and right-sides, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane, and 

decompression of the cabin. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by June 17, 2013. 

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 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356. 

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 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: 

Chandra Ramdoss, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

phone: (562) 627–5239; fax: (562) 627– 

5210; email: 

chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
25906 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0362; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–030–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 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). As an airplane ages, 

WFD will likely occur, and will 

certainly occur if the airplane is 

operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

structural failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this action is 

necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

Cracks were discovered in the frame 

web common to the floor beam 

attachment during a Model 727 

extended pressure test. Using the 

extended pressure test results, a WFD 

assessment was performed for fuselage 

frames common to the floor beam 

attachments. The result of the 

assessment is a recommendation for an 

inspection program for the section 41 

frame fastener holes in the area of the 

floor beam attachments. Frame cracking 

could adversely affect the integrity of 

the airplane structure. Extended frame 

cracking could lead to complete fracture 

of the frame, which may result in 

damage to the skin and cause a possible 

decompression. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 727–53– 

0234, dated January 17, 2013. For 

information on the procedures and 

compliance times, see this service 

information at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0362. 

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 described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

This proposed AD would require that 

requests for approval of alternative 

methods of compliance (AMOCs) be 

directed to the Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office. 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 727–53–0234, dated January 17, 

2013, 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 106 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 

estimate the following costs to comply 

with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspection ..................... 118 work-hours × $85 per hour = $10,030 per 

inspection cycle.

$0 $10,030 per inspection 

cycle.

$1,063,180 per inspection cycle 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 25907 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed 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 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): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0362; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–030–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by June 17, 

2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–100C, 727– 

200, and 727–200F series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, as identified in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

727–53–0234, dated January 17, 2013. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the frame-to-floor beam attachment is 

subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking at the frame-to-floor beam 

attachment, on both the left- and right-sides, 

which could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane, and decompression 

of the cabin. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection and Repair 

Before the accumulation of 61,000 total 

flight cycles, or within 24 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later, do a high frequency eddy current 

inspection for cracking of the frames (for 

certain stations), in the area of the floor beam 

attachments on both the left- and right-sides 

of the airplane, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 727–53– 

0234, dated January 17, 2013. Repeat this 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 20,000 flight cycles. If any crack is 

found during any inspection required by this 

AD, before further flight, repair the crack 

using a method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (h) of 

this AD. 

(h) 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 (i)(2) of the Related Information 

section 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) 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 

Aircraft Certification Office (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. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Chandra Ramdoss, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, 

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; phone: 

(562) 627–5239; fax: (562) 627–5210; email: 

chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov. 

(2) For information about AMOCs, contact 

Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, Seattle 

ACO, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: 425–917– 

6577; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

berhane.alazar@faa.gov. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356. For information on 

the availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23, 

2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–10487 Filed 5–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1