Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules 17415 

(1) The ‘‘fuel control drive’’ is a series of 

mating splines located between the fuel 

pump and fuel control governor. 

(2) The fuel control drive consists of four 

drive splines: The fuel pump internal spline, 

the fuel control external ‘‘quill shaft’’ spline, 

and the stub shaft internal and external 

splines. 

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, may approve 

AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, 

Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 

Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712– 

4137; phone: 562–627–5246; fax: 562–627– 

5210; email: joseph.costa@faa.gov. 

(2) Information pertaining to operating 

recommendations for affected engines after a 

fuel control drive failure is contained in 

Honeywell Operating Information Letter 

(OIL) OI331–12R6, dated May 26, 2009, for 

multi-engine airplanes; and OIL OI331–18R4, 

dated May 26, 2009, for single-engine 

airplanes. Information on fuel control drive 

inspection can be found in Section 72–00–00 

of the applicable TPE331 maintenance 

manuals. These Honeywell OILs and the 

TPE331 maintenance manuals can be 

obtained from Honeywell using the contact 

information in paragraph (i)(3) of this 

proposed AD. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Honeywell International 

Inc., 111 S. 34th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034– 

2802; phone: 800–601–3099; Internet: 

https://myaerospace.honeywell.com/wps/

portal. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

March 15, 2016. 

Ann C. Mollica, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–06936 Filed 3–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–5034; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–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 all The 

Boeing Company Model 737–600, –700, 

–700C, –800, –900, and 900ER series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the S–14L and S–14R lap 

splices are subject to widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). This proposed AD 

would require repetitive low frequency 

eddy current inspections for cracking in 

the lower fastener row of the S–14L and 

S–14R lap splices and repair if 

necessary. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct widespread cracking 

in the S–14L and S–14R lap splices that 

could rapidly link up and result in 

possible rapid decompression and 

reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 13, 2016. 

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 NPRM, 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–2016– 

5034. 

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–2016– 

5034; 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: 

Jason Deutschman, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

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

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6595; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Jason.deutschman@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– 

2016–5034; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

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 

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-sitemstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

17416 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

damage 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 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. 

We received reports that the existing 

inspection program is not sufficient to 

preclude the occurrence of WFD in the 

S–14L and S–14R lap splices. This 

condition, if not corrected, could result 

in widespread cracking that could 

rapidly link up and result in possible 

rapid decompression and reduced 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1352, dated October 2, 

2015. The service information describes 

procedures for low frequency eddy 

current inspections for cracking in the 

lower fastener row of the S–14L and S– 

14R lap splices and repair. This service 

information is reasonably available 

because the interested parties have 

access to it through their normal course 

of business or by the means identified 

in the ADDRESSES section. 

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 these same 

type designs. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ For 

information on the procedures and 

compliance times, see this service 

information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

5034. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1352, dated October 2, 2015, 

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 1,513 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 for Group 1 airplanes (1,471 airplanes).84 work-hours × $85 per hour 

= $7,140 per inspection 

cycle.

$0 $7,140 per inspection cycle ... $10,502,940 per inspection 

cycle. 

Inspection for Group 2 airplanes (42 airplanes).65 work-hours × $85 per hour 

= $5,525 per inspection 

cycle.

$0 $5,525 per inspection cycle ... $232,050 per inspection 

cycle. 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules 17417 

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– 

2016–5034; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–172–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by May 13, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 737–600, –700, –700C, 

–800, –900, and –900ER series airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

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 S–14L and S–14R lap splices are 

subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

widespread cracking in the S–14L and S–14R 

lap splices that could rapidly link up and 

result in possible rapid decompression and 

reduced structural integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections 

At the applicable compliance time 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1352, 

dated October 2, 2015, do a low frequency 

eddy current inspection for cracking of the 

lower fastener row of S–14L and S–14R lap 

splices, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1352, dated October 

2, 2015. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

the applicable times specified in paragraph 

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

Bulletin 737–53A1352, dated October 2, 

2015. If any cracking is found, before further 

flight, repair 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)(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) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair, 

modification, or alteration 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. To be 

approved, the repair method, modification 

deviation, or alteration deviation must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) For service information that contains 

steps that are labeled as Required for 

Compliance (RC), the provisions of 

paragraphs (h)(4)(i) and (h)(4)(ii) of this AD 

apply. 

(i) The steps labeled as RC, including 

substeps under an RC step and any figures 

identified in an RC step, must be done to 

comply with the AD. An AMOC is required 

for any deviations to RC steps, including 

substeps and identified figures. 

(ii) Steps not labeled 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 RC steps, 

including substeps and identified figures, can 

still be done as specified, and the airplane 

can be put back in an airworthy condition. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Jason Deutschman, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917– 

6595; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Jason.deutschman@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 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. 

Issued in Renton Washington, on March 

20, 2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–07023 Filed 3–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–5035; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–042–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker 

Services B.V. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 

0070 and Mark 0100 airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by reports 

of cracking in a certain area of the 

pressure bulkhead webplate and skin 

connection angle. This proposed AD 

would require a one-time inspection of 

the affected pressure bulkhead webplate 

and skin connection angle, and 

corrective actions if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

cracking of the pressure bulkhead 

webplate and skin connection angle that 

could lead to sudden inflight 

decompression of the airplane resulting 

in injury to occupants. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 13, 2016. 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS