39150 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 127 / Monday, July 2, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

restrictions’’ means the applicable 

provisions of title I of the Ethics in 

Government Act of 1978, subpart D of 

this part, and the trust instrument. 

§ 2634.503 Determinations. 

(a) Violations. If the Office of 

Government Ethics learns that 

violations or apparent violations of the 

trust restrictions exist that may warrant 

revocations of trust certification or 

trustee approval previously granted 

under § 2634.407 or § 2634.405, the 

Director may, pursuant to the procedure 

specified in paragraph (b) of this 

section, appoint an attorney on the staff 

of the Office of Government Ethics to 

review the matter. After completing the 

review, the attorney will submit 

findings and recommendations to the 

Director. 

(b) Review procedure. (1) In the 

review of the matter, the attorney shall 

perform such examination and analysis 

of violations or apparent violations as 

the attorney deems reasonable. 

(2) The attorney shall provide an 

independent trustee and, if appropriate, 

the interested parties, with: 

(i) Notice that revocation of trust 

certification or trustee approval is under 

consideration pursuant to the 

procedures in this subpart; 

(ii) A summary of the violation or 

apparent violations that shall state the 

preliminary facts and circumstances of 

the transactions or occurrences involved 

with sufficient particularity to permit 

the recipients to determine the nature of 

the allegations; and 

(iii) Notice that the recipients may 

present evidence and submit statements 

on any matter in issue within ten 

business days of the recipient’s actual 

receipt of the notice and summary. 

(c) Determination. (1) In making 

determinations with respect to the 

violations or apparent violations under 

this section, the Director shall consider 

the findings and recommendations 

submitted by the attorney, as well as 

any written statements submitted by the 

independent trustee or interested 

parties. 

(2) The Director may take one of the 

following actions upon finding a 

violation or violations of the trust 

restrictions: 

(i) Issue an order revoking trust 

certification or trustee approval; 

(ii) Resolve the matter through any 

other remedial action within the 

Director’s authority; 

(iii) Order further examination and 

analysis of the violation or apparent 

violation; or 

(iv) Decline to take further action. 

(3) If the Director issues an order of 

revocation, parties to the trust 

instrument will receive prompt written 

notification. The notice shall state the 

basis for the revocation and shall inform 

the parties of the consequence of the 

revocation, which will be either of the 

following: 

(i) The trust is no longer a qualified 

blind or qualified diversified trust for 

any purpose under Federal law; or 

(ii) The independent trustee may no 

longer serve the trust in any capacity 

and must be replaced by a successor, 

who is subject to the prior written 

approval of the Director. 

Subpart G—Penalties 

§ 2634.702 [Amended] 

■ 4. Section 2634.702 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. Paragraph (a) is amended by 

removing the cross-reference to 

‘‘§ 2634.407’’ in the first sentence and 

replacing it with ‘‘§ 2634.408(d)(1) or 

(e)(1)’’. 

■ b. Paragraph (b) is amended by 

removing the cross-reference to 

‘‘§ 2634.407’’ in the first sentence and 

replacing it with ‘‘§ 2634.408(d)(1) or 

(e)(1)’’. 

Subpart I—Confidential Financial 

Disclosure Reports 

§ 2634.907 [Amended] 

■ 5. Section 2634.907(i)(2)(i) is 

amended by removing the crossreferences to ‘‘§ 2634.403’’ and 

‘‘§ 2634.404’’ and replacing both with 

‘‘§ 2634.402’’. 

APPENDIX A TO PART 2634 

[Amended] 

■ 6. The instruction following the 

Appendix A heading is amended by 

removing the cross-reference to 

‘‘§ 2634.406(b)’’ and replacing it with 

‘‘§ 2634.405(d)(2)’’. 

APPENDIX B TO PART 2634 

[Amended] 

■ 7. Appendix B is amended as follows: 

■ a. The instruction following the 

Appendix B heading is amended by 

removing the cross-reference to 

‘‘§ 2634.408(b)’’ and replacing it with 

‘‘§ 2634.408(d)(4)’’. 

■ b. The first paragraph of the 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE form 

is amended by removing the crossreference to ‘‘5 CFR 2634.406’’ and 

replacing it with ‘‘5 CFR 2634.405’’. 

■ c. Subparagraph (A) of the 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE form 

is amended by removing ‘‘(including 5 

CFR 2634.403(b)(12)(i) for a qualified 

blind trust, and 5 CFR 2634.404(c)(12)(i) 

for a qualified diversified trust)’’ and 

replacing it with ‘‘(including 5 CFR 

2634.408(d)(1)(i))’’. 

■ d. Subparagraph (C) of the 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE form 

is amended by removing ‘‘(including 5 

CFR 2634.403(b)(12)(iii) for a qualified 

blind trust and 5 CFR 

2634.404(c)(12)(iii), for a qualified 

diversified trust)’’ and replacing it with 

‘‘(including 5 CFR 2634.408(d)(1)(iii))’’. 

■ e. Subparagraph (D) of the 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE form 

is amended by removing ‘‘(5 CFR 

2634.408(b) and (c))’’ and replacing it 

with ‘‘(5 CFR 2634.408)’’. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15998 Filed 6–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6345–03–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 915 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–11–0094; FV12–915–1 

IR] 

Avocados Grown in South Florida; 

Decreased Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Interim rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This rule decreases the 

assessment rate established for the 

Avocado Administrative Committee 

(Committee) for the 2012–13 and 

subsequent fiscal periods from $0.37 to 

$0.25 per 55-pound bushel container of 

Florida avocados handled. The 

Committee locally administers the 

marketing order which regulates the 

handling of avocados grown in South 

Florida. Assessments upon Florida 

avocado handlers are used by the 

Committee to fund reasonable and 

necessary expenses of the program. The 

fiscal period begins April 1 and ends 

March 31. The assessment rate will 

remain in effect indefinitely unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated. 

DATES: Effective July 3, 2012. Comments 

received by August 31, 2012, will be 

considered prior to issuance of a final 

rule. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order and Agreement Division, Fruit 

and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938; or Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

reference the document number and the 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 127 / Monday, July 2, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 39151 

date and page number of this issue of 

the Federal Register and will be 

available for public inspection in the 

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular 

business hours, or can be viewed at: 

http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments submitted in response to this 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

Internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Jamieson, Marketing Specialist or 

Christian D. Nissen, Regional Manager, 

Southeast Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324– 

3375, Fax: (863) 325–8793, or Email: 

Doris.Jamieson@ams.usda.gov or 

Christian.Nissen@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Laurel May, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order No. 

915, as amended (7 CFR part 915), 

regulating the handling of avocados 

grown in South Florida, hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is 

effective under the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the marketing order now 

in effect, Florida avocado handlers are 

subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate as issued herein will be 

applicable to all assessable Florida 

avocados beginning April 1, 2012, and 

continue until amended, suspended, or 

terminated. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. Such 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing, USDA would rule on the 

petition. The Act provides that the 

district court of the United States in any 

district in which the handler is an 

inhabitant, or has his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction to 

review USDA’s ruling on the petition, 

provided an action is filed not later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule decreases the assessment 

rate established for the Committee for 

the 2012–13 and subsequent fiscal 

periods from $0.37 to $0.25 per 55- 

pound bushel container of avocados. 

The Florida avocado marketing order 

provides authority for the Committee, 

with the approval of USDA, to formulate 

an annual budget of expenses and 

collect assessments from handlers to 

administer the program. The members 

of the Committee are producers and 

handlers of Florida avocados. They are 

familiar with the Committee’s needs and 

with the costs for goods and services in 

their local area and are thus in a 

position to formulate an appropriate 

budget and assessment rate. The 

assessment rate is formulated and 

discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all 

directly affected persons have an 

opportunity to participate and provide 

input. 

For the 2010–11 and subsequent fiscal 

periods, the Committee recommended, 

and USDA approved, an assessment rate 

that would continue in effect from fiscal 

period to fiscal period unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated by USDA 

upon recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

information available to USDA. 

The Committee met on December 14, 

2011, and unanimously recommended 

2012–13 expenditures of $324,575 and 

an assessment rate of $0.25 per 55- 

pound bushel container of avocados. In 

comparison, last year’s budgeted 

expenditures were $349,575. The 

assessment rate of $0.25 is $0.12 lower 

than the rate currently in effect. The 

Committee recommended the decrease 

in assessment rate due to a reduction in 

expenditures for research and to help 

reduce industry costs. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2012–13 year include $101,705 for 

salaries, $75,000 for research, $48,000 

for employee benefits, and $25,800 for 

insurance and bonds. Budgeted 

expenses for these items in 2011–12 

were $101,705, $100,000, $48,000, and 

$25,800, respectively. 

The assessment rate recommended by 

the Committee was derived by 

reviewing anticipated expenses, 

expected shipments of Florida 

avocados, and available reserves. 

Florida avocado shipments for the year 

are estimated at 1,000,000 55-pound 

bushel containers which should provide 

$250,000 in assessment income. Income 

derived from handler assessments, along 

with interest income and funds from the 

Committee’s authorized reserve, will be 

adequate to cover budgeted expenses. 

Funds in the reserve (currently 

$315,000) will be kept within the 

maximum permitted by the order 

(approximately three fiscal periods’ 

expenses as stated in § 915.42). 

The assessment rate established in 

this rule will continue in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated by USDA 

upon recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

available information. 

Although this assessment rate is 

effective for an indefinite period, the 

Committee will continue to meet prior 

to or during each fiscal period to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. The 

dates and times of Committee meetings 

are available from the Committee or 

USDA. Committee meetings are open to 

the public and interested persons may 

express their views at these meetings. 

USDA will evaluate Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking will be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

Committee’s 2012–13 budget and those 

for subsequent fiscal periods will be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
39152 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 127 / Monday, July 2, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

There are approximately 30 handlers 

of Florida avocados subject to regulation 

under the order and approximately 300 

producers of avocados in the production 

area. Small agricultural service firms, 

which include avocado handlers, are 

defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) as those whose 

annual receipts are less than $7,000,000, 

and small agricultural producers are 

defined as those having annual receipts 

less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

According to Committee data and 

information from the National 

Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS), 

the average price for Florida avocados 

during the 2011–12 season was around 

$16.50 per 55-pound bushel container 

and total shipments were near 1,200,000 

55-pound bushels. Using the average 

price and shipment information 

provided by the Committee, the majority 

of avocado handlers could be 

considered small businesses under 

SBA’s definition. In addition, based on 

avocado production, producer prices, 

and the total number of Florida avocado 

producers, the average annual producer 

revenue is less than $750,000. 

Consequently, the majority of avocado 

handlers and producers may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule decreases the assessment 

rate established for the Committee and 

collected from handlers for the 2012–13 

and subsequent fiscal periods from 

$0.37 to $0.25 per 55-pound bushel 

container of avocados. The Committee 

unanimously recommended 2012–13 

expenditures of $324,575 and an 

assessment rate of $0.25 per 55-pound 

bushel container. The assessment rate of 

$0.25 is $0.12 lower than the 2011–12 

rate. The quantity of assessable Florida 

avocados for the 2012–13 season is 

estimated at 1,000,000. Thus, the $0.25 

rate should provide $250,000 in 

assessment income. Income derived 

from handler assessments, along with 

interest income and funds from the 

Committee’s authorized reserves, will be 

adequate to cover budgeted expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2012–13 year include $101,705 for 

salaries, $75,000 for research, $48,000 

for employee benefits, and $25,800 for 

insurance and bonds. Budgeted 

expenses for these items in 2011–12 

were $101,705, $100,000, $48,000, and 

$25,800, respectively. 

The Committee recommended the 

decrease in assessment rate due to a 

reduction in expenditures for research 

and to help reduce industry costs. 

The Committee reviewed and 

unanimously recommended 2012–13 

expenditures of $324,575 which 

included decreases in research 

programs. Prior to arriving at this 

budget, alternative expenditure levels 

were discussed based upon the relative 

value of various research projects to the 

Florida avocado industry. The 

assessment rate of $0.25 per 55-lb 

bushel container of assessable avocados 

was then determined by reviewing the 

total recommended budget, the quantity 

of assessable avocados, estimated at 

1,000,000 55-lb bushel containers for 

the 2012–13 season, and available 

reserves. Assessments will be 

approximately $74,575 less than the 

anticipated expenses, which the 

Committee determined to be acceptable. 

A review of historical information and 

preliminary information pertaining to 

the upcoming crop year indicates that 

the grower price for the 2010–11 season 

could range between $5.00 and $56.00 

per 55-pound bushel container of 

avocados. Therefore, the estimated 

assessment revenue for the 2012–13 

season as a percentage of total grower 

revenue could range between .4 and 5 

percent. 

This action decreases the assessment 

obligation imposed on handlers. 

Assessments are applied uniformly on 

all handlers, and some of the costs may 

be passed on to producers. However, 

decreasing the assessment rate reduces 

the burden on handlers, and may reduce 

the burden on producers. In addition, 

the Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the Florida 

avocado industry and all interested 

persons were invited to attend the 

meeting and participate in Committee 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

Committee meetings, the December 14, 

2011, meeting was a public meeting and 

all entities, both large and small, were 

able to express views on this issue. 

Finally, interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on this interim rule, 

including the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189 Generic 

OMB Fruit Crops. No changes in those 

requirements as a result of this action 

are necessary. Should any changes 

become necessary, they would be 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

This action imposes no additional 

reporting or recordkeeping requirements 

on either small or large Florida avocado 

handlers. As with all Federal marketing 

order programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: www.ams.usda.gov/ 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Laurel May at 

the previously mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Committee and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also 

found and determined upon good cause 

that it is impracticable, unnecessary, 

and contrary to the public interest to 

give preliminary notice prior to putting 

this rule into effect, and that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

because: (1) The 2012–13 fiscal period 

begins on April 1, 2012, and the 

marketing order requires that the rate of 

assessment for each fiscal period apply 

to all assessable Florida avocados 

handled during such fiscal period; (2) 

the Committee needs to have sufficient 

funds to pay its expenses which are 

incurred on a continuous basis; (3) 

handlers are aware of this action which 

was unanimously recommended by the 

Committee at a public meeting and is 

similar to other assessment rate actions 

issued in past years; and (4) this interim 

rule provides a 60-day comment period, 

and all comments timely received will 

be considered prior to finalization of 

this rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 915 

Avocados, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 915 is amended as 

follows: 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 127 / Monday, July 2, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 39153 

PART 915—AVOCADOS GROWN IN 

SOUTH FLORIDA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 915 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 915.235 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 915.235 Assessment rate. 

On and after April 1, 2012, an 

assessment rate of $0.25 per 55-pound 

container or equivalent is established 

for avocados grown in South Florida. 

Dated: June 26, 2012. 

David R. Shipman, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–16063 Filed 6–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0673; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–091–AD; Amendment 

39–17109; AD 2012–13–07] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all The 

Boeing Company Model 737–100, –200, 

–200C, –300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes. This AD requires inspecting 

parts or doing a records review to 

determine if certain trailing edge flap 

carriages are installed, doing repetitive 

inspections for corrosion, and flaking or 

missing thermal coating on suspect 

carriage spindles, and related 

investigative and corrective actions, if 

necessary; this AD also provides 

optional terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections. This AD was 

prompted by reports of corrosion found 

on carriage that are located on the 

outboard flaps. We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct corrosion of the 

carriage spindle, which could result in 

a fracture; fracture of both the inboard 

and outboard carriage spindles, at the 

forward ends through the large 

diameters, on a single flap assembly, 

could adversely affect the continued 

safe flight and landing of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective July 17, 

2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in the AD 

as of July 17, 2012. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by August 16, 2012. 

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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, 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; 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. 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 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: 

Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; phone: (425) 

917–6440; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We received reports of corrosion 

found on carriages that are located on 

the outboard flaps. Each of the suspect 

carriages had accumulated fewer than 

7,000 total flight cycles. The suspect 

carriages had tungsten-carbide-cobaltchrome coating applied with high 

velocity oxygenated fuel (HVOF) 

thermal coating on the spindle. The 

HVOF thermal coating had flaked off the 

lower surface of the spindle, at the root 

of the spindle. Cracked, flaking, or 

missing thermal coating can lead to 

moisture ingress, which might begin 

corroding the alloy steel base metal. 

Corrosion pits in this area could create 

a stress concentration where a crack can 

start in the base metal, resulting in the 

inability of the carriage to sustain limit 

load. Corrosion of the carriage spindle, 

if not detected and corrected, could 

result in fracture of the spindle. One 

fractured carriage spindle on a flap can 

be compensated for with pilot inputs to 

the aileron or rudder (increasing pilot 

workload). However, fracture of both the 

inboard and outboard carriage spindles, 

at the forward ends through the large 

diameters, on a single flap, could 

adversely affect the continued safe flight 

and landing of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1319, dated April 16, 

2012, as revised by Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 737–57A1319, Revision 1, 

dated June 6, 2012. This service 

information describes the following 

procedures. 

• For all airplanes, inspection of parts 

or review of maintenance records to 

determine if a carriage, i.e., a carriage 

with HVOF thermal coating, is installed 

at wing butt line (WBL) 254 or WBL 

355. 

• For any suspect carriage or carriage 

with an unidentifiable part number 

(P/N): Repetitive detailed inspections 

for corrosion, missing, or flaking 

thermal coating on the forward end of 

the carriage spindle at the root (with the 

option to do a borescope inspection 

instead), and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. 

• Related investigative action is a 

detailed inspection for corrosion 

inhibiting compound (CIC) coverage on 

the lower surface of the spindle at the 

root. 

• The corrective actions include 

applying or reapplying CIC, and 

replacing the suspect carriage with a 

new or serviceable carriage. 

• Replacement of the suspect carriage 

with a new or serviceable non-HVOF 

thermal coated carriage eliminates the 

need for the repetitive inspections for 

that carriage only. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES