2378 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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, Los Angeles 

ACO Branch, 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) Except as required by paragraph (h)(2) 

of this AD: For service information that 

contains steps that are labeled as RC, the 

provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(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. If a step or substep is 

labeled ‘‘RC Exempt,’’ then the RC 

requirement is removed from that step or 

substep. 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. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO 

Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– 

5313; fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

payman.soltani@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., 

MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; 

telephone 562–797–1717; internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Transport Standards Branch, 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 January 

5, 2018. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00662 Filed 1–16–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–9523; Product 

Identifier 2016–NM–134–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposal to supersede Airworthiness 

Directive (AD) 2014–12–13, which 

applies to all The Boeing Company 

Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, 

–400, and –500 series airplanes. The 

first SNPRM proposed to revise the 

proposal by expanding the inspection 

area, and terminating, rather than 

superseding, the requirements of AD 

2014–12–13, after accomplishment of 

the initial inspections. This action 

proposes to again revise the proposal by 

requiring the installation of standardsize fasteners for a certain configuration. 

We are proposing this AD to address the 

unsafe condition on these products. 

Since these actions impose an 

additional burden over that proposed in 

the first SNPRM, we are reopening the 

comment period to allow the public the 

chance to comment on these proposed 

changes. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

SNPRM published in the Federal 

Register on August 11, 2017 (82 FR 

37549), is reopened. 

We must receive comments on this 

SNPRM by March 5, 2018. 

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 SNPRM, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: 

Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 

2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110–SK57, 

Seal Beach, CA 90740; telephone 562– 

797–1717; internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 

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– 

9523. 

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– 

9523; 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 SNPRM, 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: 

Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles 

ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount 

Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; 

phone: 562–627–5313; fax: 562–627– 

5210; email: payman.soltani@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– 

2016–9523; Product Identifier 2016– 

NM–134–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this SNPRM. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

SNPRM because of those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued AD 2014–12–13, 

Amendment 39–17874 (79 FR 39300, 

July 10, 2014) (‘‘AD 2014–12–13’’). AD 

2014–12–13 requires actions to address 

an unsafe condition on all The Boeing 

Company Model 737–100, –200, –200C, 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2379 

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

AD 2014–12–13 requires repetitive 

inspections for cracking of the aft 

support fitting for the main landing gear 

(MLG) beam, and the rear spar upper 

chord and rear spar web; and repair if 

necessary. 

We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD to supersede 

AD 2014–12–13 that would apply to all 

The Boeing Company Model 737–100, 

–200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 

series airplanes. The NPRM published 

in the Federal Register on January 5, 

2017 (82 FR 1254) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The 

NPRM was prompted by reports of 

cracking in locations outside the 

inspection area identified in AD 2014– 

12–13, in the inspar upper skin at Wing 

Buttock Line (WBL) 157 and in the skin 

at two holes common to the rear spar in 

the same area, and in the rear spar web 

on both wings. Subsequent inspections 

revealed that the right rear spar upper 

chord was almost completely severed 

and the left rear spar upper chord was 

completely severed. The NPRM 

proposed to expand the inspection area 

and add applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions. 

We subsequently issued an SNPRM, 

which was published in the Federal 

Register on August 11, 2017 (82 FR 

37549) (‘‘the first SNPRM’’). The first 

SNPRM was prompted by reports of 

additional cracking in the inspar upper 

skin at WBL 157 and in the skin at two 

holes common to the rear spar in the 

same area, and rear spar web cracks 

were also noted on both wings. The first 

SNPRM proposed to expand the 

inspection area and terminate (rather 

than supersede) the requirements of AD 

2014–12–13, after accomplishment of 

the initial inspections. 

Actions Since the First SNPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the first SNPRM, we 

have determined that standard-size 

fasteners are required for installation for 

a certain configuration, as explained 

below under ‘‘Request to Install 

Standard-Size Fasteners.’’ 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, 

dated July 22, 2016. The service 

information describes procedures for 

repetitive high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC) open hole inspections for any 

cracking in the forward support fitting, 

the aft support fitting, the rear spar 

upper chord, and the rear spar web at 

the 12 fastener holes (locations 1–12). 

The service information also describes 

procedures for optional HFEC open hole 

inspections for any cracking in the 

forward support fitting, the aft support 

fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and 

the rear spar web, and HFEC surface 

inspections for any cracking in the rear 

spar upper chord and rear spar upper 

web, as applicable. The service 

information also describes procedures 

for related investigative and corrective 

actions. 

We also reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–57A1328, dated 

July 22, 2016. The service information 

describes procedures for repetitive eddy 

current inspections of the left and right 

wing for any cracking in the inspar 

upper skin and at the repair parts if 

applicable, and related investigative and 

corrective actions. 

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. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the first SNPRM. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the first SNPRM and the 

FAA’s response to each comment. 

Request To Install Standard-Size 

Fasteners 

Boeing requested that standard-size 

fasteners be used for installation on the 

airplane instead of same-type and samesize fasteners. Boeing stated that for 

Group 7, Configuration 1 airplanes 

specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, 

dated July 22, 2016, the service 

information specifies to install standardsize fasteners (not oversize) and 

specifies a loose-fit design feature 

common to the aft fitting at fastener #5. 

Boeing commented that the loose-fit 

design feature is consistent with the 

type design and decreases the potential 

for future cracking. Boeing also stated 

that if the actions of Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 737–57– 

1318, dated May 15, 2013, have been 

done, it is possible that the fasteners 

have already been oversized and the 

loose-fit design feature has already been 

eliminated. Boeing commented that this 

recommendation will allow the 

opportunity to restore the fastener #5 

location to the intended fastener fit (i.e., 

loose fit in the aft fitting and tight fit in 

the forward fitting, web and chord). 

We agree with the commenter for the 

reasons provided above. We have 

revised paragraph (h)(2) of this 

proposed AD to require the installation 

of standard-size fasteners, and if the 

existing fastener holes exceed the 

permitted hole diameter, operators must 

do a repair before further flight using a 

method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (l) 

of this proposed AD. 

Request for Credit for Previous Actions 

All Nippon Airlines (ANA) requested 

credit for previous actions specified in 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD (in the 

first SNPRM). ANA stated that credit 

should be provided if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of 

the AD using option 1 or 2 of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737– 

57–1318, dated May 15, 2013, and the 

HFEC open hole inspection for the 

forward support fitting should be done 

at the same time as the existing 

inspection within a shortened 

inspection interval. 

ANA commented that based on the 

current descriptions of the proposed AD 

(in the first SNPRM), all operators must 

do the initial inspection even if they 

have chosen option 1 or 2 of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737– 

57–1318, dated May 15, 2013. Since AD 

2014–12–13 has been effective since 

July 25, 2014, ANA believes many 

operators have already completed the 

initial inspection and started the 

repetitive inspection in accordance with 

Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 737–57–1318, dated May 15, 

2013. ANA questioned the 

reasonableness of the requirement for 

operators who have chosen option 1 or 

2 of Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 737–57–1318, dated May 15, 

2013, to do the initial inspection again 

within the compliance time specified in 

table 2 through table 9 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, 

dated July 22, 2016. 

We disagree with the commenter’s 

request. Paragraph (h) of the proposed 

AD (in the first SNPRM) includes a 

requirement to do the HFEC open hole 

inspection of the forward fitting in 

addition to the inspections that were 

previously required by AD 2014–12–13 

with updated service information, 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 

2016. Since AD 2014–12–13 was issued, 

there have been reports of cracks found 

in the forward fitting. Therefore, Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, has 

added an inspection of the forward 

fitting. Paragraph (l) of this proposed 

AD would allow operators to request 

approval of an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC) if they previously 

performed the HFEC open hole 

inspection of this stack up, including 

the forward fitting, and they have 

documentation that the inspection of 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
2380 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

the forward fitting was done. We have 

not changed this proposed AD regarding 

this issue. 

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. Certain changes described 

above expand the scope of the first 

SNPRM. As a result, we have 

determined that it is necessary to reopen 

the comment period to provide 

additional opportunity for the public to 

comment on this second SNPRM. 

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM 

This SNPRM 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– 

9523. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this SNPRM. Related 

investigative actions are follow-on 

actions that (1) are related to the 

primary action, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this SNPRM. Corrective actions 

correct or address any condition found. 

Corrective actions in an AD could 

include, for example, repairs. 

Differences Between This SNPRM and 

the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 

57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 

2016; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–57A1328, dated July 22, 2016; 

specify to contact the manufacturer for 

certain instructions, but this proposed 

AD would require accomplishment of 

repair methods, modification 

deviations, and alteration deviations 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 471 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 

HFEC open hole inspections.82 work-hours × $85 per hour = $6,970 per inspection cycle.$0 $6,970 per inspection 

cycle.

$3,282,870 per inspection cycle. 

Eddy current inspection 14 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,190 per inspection cycle.0 $1,190 per inspection 

cycle.

$560,490 per inspection 

cycle. 

ESTIMATED COSTS FOR OPTIONAL ACTIONS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Inspection ...................... Up to 41 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,485 

per inspection cycle.

$0 Up to $1,641,435 per inspection cycle. 

We have received no definitive data 

that will enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this SNPRM. 

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. 

This proposed AD is issued in 

accordance with authority delegated by 

the Executive Director, Aircraft 

Certification Service, as authorized by 

FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance 

with that order, issuance of ADs is 

normally a function of the Compliance 

and Airworthiness Division, but during 

this transition period, the Executive 

Director has delegated the authority to 

issue ADs applicable to transport 

category airplanes to the Director of the 

System Oversight Division. 

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, 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2381 

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– 

2016–9523; Product Identifier 2016– 

NM–134–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by March 5, 2018. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD affects AD 2014–12–13, 

Amendment 39–17874 (79 FR 39300, July 10, 

2014) (‘‘AD 2014–12–13’’), and AD 2015–21– 

08, Amendment 39–18301 (80 FR 65921, 

October 28, 2015) (‘‘AD 2015–21–08’’). 

(c) Applicability 

(1) This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 737–100, –200, –200C, 

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

certificated in any category. 

(2) Installation of Supplemental Type 

Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect 

the ability to accomplish the actions required 

by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which 

STC ST01219SE is installed, a ‘‘change in 

product’’ alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to 

comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 

39.17. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 57, Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

additional cracking in the inspar upper skin 

at Wing Buttock Line (WBL) 157 and in the 

skin at two holes common to the rear spar in 

the same area, and rear spar web cracks were 

also noted on both wings. Subsequent 

inspections revealed that the right rear spar 

upper chord was almost completely severed 

and the left rear spar upper chord was 

completely severed. We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct cracking of the forward 

and aft support fittings for the main landing 

gear (MLG) beam, and the rear spar upper 

chord and rear spar web in the area of rear 

spar station (RSS) 224.14, which could grow 

and result in a fuel leak and possible fire. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Required Actions for Group 1 Airplanes 

(MLG Support Fittings and Rear Spar) 

For airplanes identified as Group 1 in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016: At the 

applicable time specified in table 1 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, do applicable 

inspections and corrective actions using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD. 

(h) Required Actions for Groups 2–7 

Airplanes (MLG Support Fittings and Rear 

Spar) 

For airplanes identified as Groups 2–7 in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016: At the 

applicable time specified in table 2 through 

table 9 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, except as 

required by paragraph (j)(3) of this AD, do 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) open 

hole inspections for any cracking in the 

forward support fitting, the aft support 

fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and the 

rear spar web at the 12 fastener holes 

(locations 1–12); or HFEC open hole 

inspections for any cracking in the forward 

support fitting, the aft support fitting, the rear 

spar upper chord, and the rear spar web, and 

an HFEC surface inspection for any cracking 

in the rear spar upper chord and rear spar 

upper web; as applicable; and do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, 

dated July 22, 2016, except as provided by 

paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, and except as 

required by paragraphs (h)(2) and (j)(1) of this 

AD. Do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions before further flight. 

Thereafter, repeat the HFEC inspection at the 

applicable time specified in table 2 through 

table 9 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016. 

(1) Options provided in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, 

dated July 22, 2016, for accomplishing the 

inspection are acceptable for the 

corresponding requirements in the 

introductory text of paragraph (h) of this AD, 

provided that the inspections are done at the 

applicable times in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 

22, 2016. 

(2) For Group 7, Configuration 1, airplanes 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 

2016: Install standard-size fasteners in 

accordance with figures 29 and 30 of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016. If the 

existing fastener holes exceed the permitted 

hole diameter, repair before further flight 

using a method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of 

this AD. 

(i) Eddy Current Inspection (Inspar Upper 

Skin) 

For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 737–57A1328, dated July 22, 

2016: At the applicable time specified in 

table 1 and table 2 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1328, dated July 22, 2016, 

except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this 

AD, do an eddy current inspection of the left 

and right wings for any cracking in the inspar 

upper skin, and at the repair parts if 

installed, and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–57A1328, dated July 22, 2016, except as 

required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Do all 

related investigative and corrective actions 

before further flight. Thereafter, repeat the 

eddy current inspection at the applicable 

time specified in table 1 and table 2 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1328, dated 

July 22, 2016. 

(j) Exceptions to the Service Information 

(1) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1318, 

Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016; or Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 737–57A1328, dated 

July 22, 2016; specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (l) of this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–57A1328, dated July 22, 2016, specifies 

a compliance time ‘‘after the Original Issue 

date of this service bulletin,’’ this AD 

requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

737–57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 

2016, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 1 date of this service bulletin, 

whichever occurs later,’’ this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after the effective date of this AD. 

(k) Terminating Action 

(1) Accomplishing the initial inspections 

and applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions required by paragraphs (g), 

(h), and (i) of this AD, as applicable, 

terminates all requirements of AD 2015–21– 

08. 

(2) Accomplishing the initial inspections 

and applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions required by paragraphs (g) 

and (h) of this AD, as applicable, terminates 

all requirements of AD 2014–12–13. 

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 

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 

certification office, send it to the attention of 

the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of 

this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9- 

ANM-LAACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
2382 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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, Los Angeles 

ACO Branch, 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) AMOCs approved previously for AD 

2014–12–13 are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of paragraphs (g) 

and (h) of this AD. 

(5) Except as required by paragraph (j)(1) 

of this AD: For service information that 

contains steps that are labeled as Required 

for Compliance (RC), the provisions of 

paragraphs (l)(5)(i) and (l)(5)(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. If a step or sub-step is 

labeled ‘‘RC Exempt,’’ then the RC 

requirement is removed from that step or 

sub-step. 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. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO 

Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– 

5313; fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

payman.soltani@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., 

MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740; 

telephone 562–797–1717; internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Transport Standards Staff, 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 

December 28, 2017. 

John P. Piccola, Jr., 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00109 Filed 1–16–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket No. CPSC–2017–0044] 

Clothing Storage Unit Tip Overs; 

Extension of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking; extension of comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (Commission or CPSC) 

published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPR) regarding 

clothing storage unit (CSU) tip overs in 

the Federal Register on November 30, 

2017. The ANPR invited the public to 

submit written comments during a 60- 

day comment period, beginning on the 

ANPR publication date. In response to 

a request for an extension of the 

comment period, the Commission is 

extending the comment period by 75 

days. 

DATES: Submit comments by April 14, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2017– 

0044, electronically or in writing: 

Electronic Submissions: You may 

submit electronic comments to the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at: http://

www.regulations.gov, by following the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

The Commission does not accept 

comments submitted by electronic mail 

(email), except through 

www.regulations.gov. 

Written Submissions: You may submit 

written comments by mail, hand 

delivery, or courier to: Office of the 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone (301) 504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number for this notice. All comments 

may be posted to: http://

www.regulations.gov without change, 

including any personal identifiers, 

contact information, or other personal 

information. Do not submit confidential 

business information, trade secret 

information, or other sensitive or 

protected information that you do not 

want to be available to the public. If you 

submit such information, the 

Commission recommends that you do so 

by mail, hand delivery, or courier. 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments regarding this 

rulemaking, go to: http://

www.regulations.gov, insert docket 

number CPSC–2017–0044 in the 

‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the prompts. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 30, 2017, the Commission 

published an ANPR in the Federal 

Register, initiating rulemaking under 

the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 

U.S.C. 2051–2089) and seeking 

comments and information regarding 

the risk of injury associated with CSU 

tip overs. 82 FR 56752. The ANPR 

provided a 60-day comment period, 

which will close on January 29, 2018. 

The American Home Furnishings 

Alliance (AHFA) has requested that the 

Commission extend the comment period 

an additional 75 days, given AHFA’s 

pending Freedom of Information Act (5 

U.S.C. 552) request for the raw data 

underlying the ANPR; the numerous 

subjects on which the ANPR seeks 

comments; and the time necessary to 

analyze the preliminary findings, 

complex issues, and substantial amount 

of data in the ANPR. 

The Commission grants this request, 

extending the comment period for an 

additional 75 days, until April 14, 2018. 

Alberta E. Mills, 

Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00552 Filed 1–16–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 

18 CFR Part 1304 

RIN 3316–AA23 

Floating Cabin Regulation 

AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Tennessee Valley 

Authority (TVA) is proposing to amend 

its regulations that govern floating 

cabins located on the Tennessee River 

and its tributaries. The mooring of 

floating cabins on the TVA reservoir 

system has increased, and TVA has 

determined that this poses an 

unacceptable risk to navigation, safety, 

and the environment. Left unaddressed, 

floating cabins convert the public waters 

under TVA’s management to private 

use. The proposed amendments would 

re-define nonnavigable houseboats and 

floating cabins using one term— 

‘‘floating cabins’’—and prohibit new 

floating cabins on TVA-managed 

reservoirs after December 16, 2016. The 

proposed amendments also include 

limited mooring standards, limitations 

on expansions of floating cabins, and 

requirements for owners to register their 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS