16108 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

section as part of its review of the 

petition. 

(d) All comments on a petition will 

become part of the petition file and will 

be available for public inspection in the 

FSIS docket room and posted on the 

FSIS Web site at http:// 

www.fsis.usda.gov/. 

(e) Any interested person who wishes 

to suggest an alternative action to the 

action requested by the petition should 

submit a separate petition that complies 

with these regulations and not submit 

the alternative as a comment on the 

petition. 

(f) If FSIS determines that a comment 

received on a petition is in fact a request 

for an alternative action, the Agency 

will inform the commenter in writing. 

The Agency will take no further action 

on the requested alternative action 

unless the commenter submits an 

appropriate petition for rulemaking. 

§ 392.8 Expedited review. 

(a) A petition will receive expedited 

review by FSIS if the requested action 

is intended to enhance the public health 

by removing or reducing foodborne 

pathogens or other potential food safety 

hazards that might be present in or on 

meat, poultry, or egg products. 

(b) For a petition to be considered for 

expedited review, the petitioner must 

submit scientific information that 

demonstrates that the requested action 

will reduce or remove foodborne 

pathogens or other potential food safety 

hazards that are likely to be present in 

or on meat, poultry, or egg products, 

and how it will do so. 

(c) If FSIS determines that a petition 

warrants expedited review, FSIS will 

review the petition ahead of other 

pending petitions. 

§ 392.9 Availability of additional guidance. 

Information related to the submission 

and processing of petitions for 

rulemaking may be found on the FSIS 

Web site at http://www/fsis.usda.gov/. 

Done at Washington, DC, on: April 6, 2009. 

Alfred V. Almanza, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–8106 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0412; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–346–AD; Amendment 

39–15870; AD 2009–07–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD), 

which applies to all Boeing Model 737– 

300, –400, and –500 series airplanes. 

That AD currently requires repetitive 

inspections for discrepancies of the 

fuselage skin under the dorsal fin 

assembly, and repairing if necessary. 

This new AD requires an inspection for 

any chafing or crack in the fuselage skin 

and abrasion resistant coating at the 

dorsal fin landing, an inspection for 

damage to the dorsal fin seals, attach 

clip, and seal retainer, and other 

specified and corrective actions as 

necessary. The new requirements will 

end the need for the existing repetitive 

inspections. This AD results from a 

report of an 18-inch crack found in the 

fuselage skin area under the blade seals 

of the nose cap of the dorsal fin due to 

previous wear damage, and additional 

reports of fuselage skin wear. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent discrepancies 

of the fuselage skin, which could result 

in fatigue cracking due to cabin 

pressurization and consequent rapid inflight decompression of the airplane 

fuselage. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 

14, 2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of May 14, 2009. 

On November 12, 2004 (69 FR 62567, 

October 27, 2004), the Director of the 

Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of Boeing 

Message Number 1–QXO35, dated 

October 13, 2004. 

ADDRESSES: 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 address for the 

Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527) 

is the Document Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

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 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that 

supersedes AD 2004–22–05, amendment 

39–13833 (69 FR 62567, October 27, 

2004). The existing AD applies to all 

Boeing Model 737–300, –400, and –500 

series airplanes. That NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 24, 2008 (73 FR 22088). That 

NPRM proposed to continue to require 

repetitive inspections for discrepancies 

of the fuselage skin under the dorsal fin 

assembly, and repairing if necessary. 

That NPRM also proposed to add an 

inspection for any chafing or crack in 

the fuselage skin and abrasion resistant 

coating at the dorsal fin landing, an 

inspection for damage to the dorsal fin 

seals, attach clip, and seal retainer, and 

other specified and corrective actions as 

necessary. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments that have 

been received on the NPRM. 

Request To Clarify Certain Language in 

Paragraph (i) of the NPRM 

Boeing asks that we change certain 

language in paragraph (i) of the NPRM 

to add the word ‘‘abrasion’’ as follows: 

‘‘Do a detailed inspection for any signs 

of abrasion, chafing, or crack . * * *’’ 

Boeing also asks that we change that 

same paragraph to make the word 

‘‘retainer’’ plural as follows: ‘‘do a 

detailed inspection for damage to the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 16109 

dorsal fin seals, attach clip, and seal 

retainers, and do all applicable other 

specified and corrective actions * * *’’ 

Boeing states that these changes will 

clarify that the inspection is also for 

signs of abrasion and that there is more 

than one seal retainer. 

We agree to add the word ‘‘abrasion’’ 

(in parentheses) to the description of the 

discrepancies specified in paragraph (i) 

of the AD because abrasion is a 

synonym of chafing. We also agree that 

there are multiple seal retainers and we 

have also included that in paragraph (i) 

of the AD for clarification. 

Boeing also asks that we change the 

last sentence in paragraph (i) of the 

NPRM for clarification to add that 

paragraph (g) of the NPRM is also 

terminated by the actions in paragraph 

(i). 

We do not agree to change the last 

sentence in paragraph (i) of this AD. 

Paragraph (g) is corrective action that is 

accomplished if any discrepancy is 

found during any inspection required by 

paragraph (f) of the AD. The terminating 

action in paragraph (i) is for the 

repetitive inspections in paragraph (f); 

therefore, if operators are no longer 

performing those inspections then the 

corrective action will not be necessary. 

We have made no change to the AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Expand Inspection to Add 

the Wear Strip 

Japan Transocean Air (JTA) asks that 

we expand the inspection specified in 

paragraph (i) of the NPRM to include an 

inspection of either the fuselage skin or 

the wear strip. JTA notes that AD 2004– 

22–05 requires repetitive detailed 

inspections for discrepancies (wear or 

cracking) of the fuselage skin under the 

dorsal fin assembly, and the new 

requirements retain this inspection. JTA 

states that it plans to install wear strips 

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1266, dated August 30, 

2007. In order to avoid removal of the 

wear strip, JTA asks that repetitive 

inspections for either the fuselage skin 

or the wear strip be included in the 

NPRM. 

We do not agree to include a 

requirement to inspect either the 

fuselage skin or the wear strip. 

Accomplishing all of the applicable 

actions in paragraph (i) of the AD 

terminates the repetitive inspections 

required by AD 2004–22–05; the new 

requirements do not retain the repetitive 

inspections as noted by the commenter. 

Paragraph (i) of the NPRM follows the 

inspection procedures specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

53A1266, dated August 30, 2007. 

However, according to the provisions of 

paragraph (l) of this AD, the operator 

can apply for an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC) if supporting data 

is provided. We have made no change 

to the AD in this regard. 

Request To Add a Note to the 

Applicability Section 

Boeing asks that we add a note to the 

applicability section of the NPRM to 

address operators who may have 

accomplished repairs or modifications 

in the subject area. Boeing states that 

some operators have accomplished 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–1057, 

dated December 12, 1996, structural 

repair manual (SRM) repairs, or AD 

2004–22–05 in the subject area and 

some of the repairs are no longer 

acceptable. 

We do not agree to add a note to the 

applicability section in this AD. The 

new inspections required by paragraph 

(i) of the AD are required on all 

airplanes, as identified in paragraph (c) 

of this AD. For airplanes on which 

existing repairs, alterations, or 

modifications do not allow for the 

inspections, you must request an AMOC 

as required by 14 CFR 39.17. We will 

consider requests for AMOCs under the 

provisions of paragraph (l) of the AD, 

which will then be evaluated to ensure 

that the unsafe condition has been 

addressed. We have made no change to 

the AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Compliance Section 

Boeing asks that we clarify the action 

required in the compliance section as 

specified at the end of the sentence of 

paragraph (e) of the NPRM. Paragraph 

(e) specifies in part ‘‘* * * unless the 

actions have already been done.’’ Boeing 

suggests we change that language in 

paragraph (e) to read: ‘‘* * * unless the 

actions required by this AD have 

already been done.’’ Boeing states that 

this change would clarify the actions 

required by the AD. 

We do not agree to clarify paragraph 

(e) of this AD. We find that the current 

language is clear as written. We have 

made no change to the AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Clarify the Purpose of 

Restating the Requirements in AD 

2004–22–05 

Boeing asks that we clarify the reason 

for the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of the NPRM. 

Boeing states that the purpose of 

restating the requirements of AD 2004– 

22–05 in the NPRM is unclear and 

confusing. Boeing notes that we need to 

clearly indicate if the restatement 

section is meant to reprint AD 2004–22– 

05, and if so, those sections should 

contain the same language and indicate 

that the previous AD is obsolete. Boeing 

adds that if the intention of the new AD 

is to restate some of the requirements of 

AD 2004–22–05, then Boeing points out 

that Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55– 

1057, dated December 12, 1996 

(referenced in AD 2004–22–05) has been 

cancelled; Boeing Message Number I– 

QXO35, dated October 13, 2004 (also 

referenced in AD 2004–22–05), has been 

superseded by Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1266, dated August 30, 

2007, which does not require repetitive 

inspections. 

We do not agree that the reason for 

the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of the AD 

needs clarification because these 

statements are restating the 

requirements of AD 2004–22–05, which 

is being superseded by this AD. As 

specified in the new requirements in 

paragraph (i) of this AD, accomplishing 

the actions in paragraph (i) terminates 

the repetitive inspections required by 

paragraph (f) of the AD. Since paragraph 

(f) restates the requirements in AD 

2004–22–05, accomplishing those 

requirements is no longer necessary 

after accomplishing the requirements in 

paragraph (i); however, the 

requirements of AD 2004–22–05, as 

restated in this AD, remain in effect 

until the requirements of paragraph (i) 

of this AD are accomplished. Paragraph 

(g) of the AD is the follow-on repair if 

discrepancies are found, and paragraph 

(h) just specifies that reporting is not 

required. Therefore, we have made no 

change to the AD in this regard. 

Request To Change Paragraph (l)(4) of 

the NPRM 

Boeing asks that we change paragraph 

(l)(4) of the NPRM to specify the 

following: ‘‘AMOCs approved 

previously in accordance with AD 

2004–22–05 and repairs accomplished 

in accordance with 737–300/–400/–500 

SRM 737–53–60–01, repairs 9 and 10, 

are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of paragraphs 

(f) and (g) of this AD, if they fulfill the 

requirements provided in paragraph (i) 

of this AD.’’ Boeing states that better 

clarification of the language is necessary 

to encompass SRM repairs. Boeing notes 

that the addition of reference to 

paragraph (i) is required because some 

airplanes on which AD 2004–22–05 has 

been accomplished will not meet the 

new requirements. 

We do not agree to change paragraph 

(l)(4) of the AD. AMOCs approved 

previously for AD 2004–22–05 are 

approved as AMOCs to the provision of 

paragraphs (f) and (g) of this AD only. 

All airplanes are subject to the new 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

16110 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

inspection requirements specified in 

paragraph (i) of the AD. For airplanes on 

which existing repairs, alterations, or 

modifications do not allow for the 

inspection, we will consider requests for 

AMOCs under the provisions of 

paragraph (l) of the AD, which will then 

be evaluated to ensure that the unsafe 

condition has been addressed. We have 

made no change to the AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Exclude Certain Inspections 

of the Fuselage Skin 

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines asks that 

the NPRM specify that inspections of 

the fuselage skin aft of body station (BS) 

887 and BS 908 are not required if 

inspections done previously per AD 

2004–22–05 have resulted in findings 

only between BS 857 and BS 887 (no 

findings aft of BS 887), or BS 857 and 

BS 908 (no findings aft of BS 908), as 

applicable; and when a repair has been 

installed per Boeing 737–300/–400/–500 

SRM, Chapter 53–60–01, Repair 9 or 

Repair 10, as applicable, including 

installation of CRES 0.016 inch thick 

wear strips. KLM notes that the 

following language should be included 

in the NPRM: ‘‘A one-time detailed 

inspection for damage to dorsal fin 

seals, attach clip, and seal retainer, and 

accomplishment of all the applicable 

corrective actions per the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1266–R0 is 

still required.’’ 

We do not agree to exclude the 

inspections noted above by KLM. Repair 

9 of Chapter 53–60–01 of the Boeing 

737–300/–400/–500 SRM was revised in 

2006 and operators that used the earlier 

version of Repair 9 are required to 

comply with the new requirements in 

this AD. Installation of the latest Repair 

9 or Repair 10 of Chapter 53–60–01 of 

the Boeing 737–300/–400/–500 SRM, 

including the wear strips, does not 

eliminate the potential for wear damage 

aft of the repair location. Operators are 

still required to inspect this area to 

ensure there is no damage. However, 

according to the provisions of paragraph 

(l) of this AD, we may approve requests 

for an AMOC if the request includes 

data that prove that excluding the 

inspections would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. We have not 

changed the AD in this regard. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data, including the comments 

that have been received, and determined 

that air safety and the public interest 

require adopting the AD with the 

changes described previously. We have 

determined that these changes will 

neither increase the economic burden 

on any operator nor increase the scope 

of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 1,963 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This AD affects about 627 airplanes of 

U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2004–22–05 and retained in this AD 

take about 2 work hours per airplane, at 

an average labor rate of $80 per work 

hour. Based on these figures, the 

estimated cost of the currently required 

actions for U.S. operators is $100,320, or 

$160 per airplane, per inspection cycle. 

The new actions take about 15 work 

hours per airplane, at an average labor 

rate of $80 per work hour. Required 

parts cost about $801 per airplane. 

Based on these figures, the estimated 

cost of the new actions specified in this 

AD for U.S. operators is $1,254,627, or 

$2,001 per airplane. 

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 this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

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 39–13833 (69 

FR 62567, October 27, 2004) and by 

adding the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2009–07–11 Boeing: Amendment 39–15870. 

Docket No. FAA–2008–0412; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–346–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective May 14, 

2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–22–05. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 

737–300, –400, and –500 series airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report of an 18- 

inch crack found in the fuselage skin area 

under the blade seals of the nose cap of the 

dorsal fin due to previous wear damage, and 

additional reports of fuselage skin wear. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent discrepancies 

of the fuselage skin, which could result in 

fatigue cracking due to cabin pressurization 

and consequent rapid in-flight 

decompression of the airplane fuselage. 

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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 16111 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004– 

22–05 

Repetitive Detailed Inspections 

(f) For airplanes specified in either 

paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(3), or (f)(4) of this 

AD: Accomplish a detailed inspection for 

discrepancies (wear or cracking) of the 

fuselage skin under the dorsal fin assembly 

by doing all the actions specified in Boeing 

Message Number 1–QXO35, dated October 

13, 2004. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 9,000 flight cycles. 

Accomplishing all of the applicable actions 

specified in paragraph (i) of this AD 

terminates the repetitive inspections required 

by this paragraph. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive 

examination of a specific item, installation, 

or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate procedures may be 

required.’’ 

(1) For airplanes with line numbers 1001 

through 2828 inclusive that have not been 

inspected as of November 12, 2004 (the 

effective date of AD 2004–22–05), in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–55–1057, dated December 12, 1996; or 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 1999: Inspect 

before the accumulation of 18,000 total flight 

cycles, or within 90 days after November 12, 

2004, whichever is later. 

(2) For airplanes with line numbers 2829 

through 3132 inclusive that are not included 

in the effectivity of Boeing Service Bulletin 

737–55–1057, dated December 12, 1996; or 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 1999: Inspect 

before the accumulation of 18,000 total flight 

cycles, or within 90 days after November 12, 

2004, whichever is later. 

(3) For airplanes with line numbers 1001 

through 2828 inclusive that have been 

inspected, but not repaired or modified as of 

November 12, 2004, in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–1057, dated 

December 12, 1996; or Revision 1, dated July 

22, 1999: Inspect within 9,000 flight cycles 

after accomplishing the inspection, or within 

90 days after November 12, 2004, whichever 

is later. 

(4) For airplanes with line numbers 1001 

through 2828 inclusive that have been 

inspected and repaired or modified as of 

November 12, 2004, in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–1057, dated 

December 12, 1996; or Revision 1, dated July 

22, 1999: Inspect within 18,000 flight cycles 

after accomplishing the repair or 

modification, or within 90 days after 

November 12, 2004, whichever is later; and 

if a repair doubler is installed, before further 

flight, inspect the repair doubler for 

discrepancies (wear or cracking). 

Note 2: Boeing Message Number 1–QXO35, 

dated October 13, 2004, references Part I of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–1057, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 1999, as an 

additional source of service information for 

accomplishing the actions required by 

paragraph (f) of this AD. 

Repair 

(g) If any discrepancy (wear or cracking) is 

found during any inspection required by 

paragraph (f) of this AD, before further flight, 

repair in accordance with a method approved 

by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), FAA; or using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (1) of this AD. 

Reporting Not Required 

(h) Although Boeing Message Number 1– 

QXO35, dated October 13, 2004, specifies to 

report any fuselage skin cracking found 

during the detailed inspections, this AD does 

not include that requirement. 

New Requirements of This AD 

New Inspections and Other Specified and 

Corrective Actions 

(i) At the applicable compliance times 

specified in paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–53A1266, dated August 

30, 2007, except as provided by paragraph (j) 

of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for any 

chafing (abrasion) or crack in the fuselage 

skin of the dorsal fin landing and abrasion 

resistant coating, do a detailed inspection for 

damage to dorsal fin seals, attach clip, and 

seal retainers, and do all the applicable other 

specified and corrective actions, by 

accomplishing all of the applicable actions 

specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1266, dated August 30, 2007, except 

as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD. 

Accomplishing all of the applicable actions 

specified in this paragraph terminates the 

repetitive inspections required by paragraph 

(f) of this AD. 

Exception to Compliance Times 

(j) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1266, dated August 30, 2007, 

specifies counting the compliance time from 

‘‘* * * the date on the service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires counting the compliance time 

from the effective date of this AD. 

Exception to Corrective Actions 

(k) If any damage is found aft of body 

station 908 during any inspection required by 

this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–53A1266, dated August 30, 2007, 

specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate 

action: Before further flight, repair the 

fuselage skin using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (l) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in 

accordance with 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. 

(4) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2004–22–05 are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of paragraphs (f) and (g) of this 

AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(m) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–53A1266, dated August 30, 

2007; and Boeing Message Number 1– 

QXO35, dated October 13, 2004; as 

applicable; to do the actions required by this 

AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–53A1266, 

dated August 30, 2007, under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 

and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) The Director of the Federal Register 

previously approved the incorporation by 

reference of Boeing Message Number 1– 

QXO35, dated October 13, 2004, on 

November 12, 2004 (69 FR 62567, October 

27, 2004). 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

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

5680; e-mail me.boecom@boeing.com; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221 or 425–227–1152. 

(5) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference 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 March 

25, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–7159 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES