Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2001 / Proposed Rules 34591

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Swedish airworthiness directive 1–160,

dated August 24, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 22,

2001.

Kalene C. Yanamura,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–16381 Filed 6–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–20–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–600, –700, and –800 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD); applicable to certain

Boeing Model 737–600, –700, and –800

series airplanes; that currently requires

repetitive inspections of certain elevator

hinge plates, and corrective action, if

necessary. That AD also provides for an

optional replacement of the elevator

hinge plates with new, improved hinge

plates, which would end the repetitive

inspections. This action proposes to

require accomplishment of the

previously optional replacement of the

elevator hinge plates with new,

improved hinge plates, as terminating

action for the repetitive inspections.

This action is necessary to prevent

fatigue cracking of the elevator hinge

plates, which could lead to the loss of

the attachment of the elevator to the

horizontal stabilizer, and consequent

reduced controllability of the airplane.

This action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

August 13, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

20–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–20–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2028; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this action may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this action

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2001–NM–20–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

2001–NM–20–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On March 15, 2001, the FAA issued

AD 2001–06–08, amendment 39–12155

(66 FR 16116, March 23, 2001);

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737–

600, –700, and –800 series airplanes; to

require repetitive inspections of certain

elevator hinge plates, and corrective

action, if necessary. That AD also

provides for an optional replacement of

the elevator hinge plates with new,

improved hinge plates, which would

end the repetitive inspections. That

action was prompted by a report that—

during flight testing of Boeing Model

737–600, –700, and –800 series

airplanes—the elevator hinge plates at

elevator hinges 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8

experienced higher-than-expected loads

due to buffeting by the spoiler. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

detect and correct fatigue cracking of the

elevator hinge plates, which could lead

to the loss of the attachment of the

elevator to the horizontal stabilizer, and

consequent reduced controllability of

the airplane.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

In the preamble to AD 2001–06–08,

the FAA indicated that the actions

required by that AD were considered

‘‘interim action’’ and that further

rulemaking action was being considered

to require the replacement of the

elevator hinge plates with new parts,

which was provided as optional in AD

2001–06–08, and which would

terminate the repetitive inspections

currently required by that AD. The FAA

now has determined that further

rulemaking action is indeed necessary,

34592 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2001 / Proposed Rules

and this proposed AD follows from that

determination.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

supersede AD 2001–06–08 to continue

to require repetitive inspections of

certain elevator hinge plates, and

corrective action, if necessary. The

proposed AD would add a new

requirement for replacement of the

elevator hinge plates with new,

improved hinge plates, which would

end the repetitive inspections. Except as

discussed below, the actions would be

required to be accomplished in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

737–55–1067, dated October 19, 2000,

which was described in AD 2001–06–

08.

Difference Between This Proposed AD

and the Service Bulletin

Although the service bulletin

specifies to contact Boeing for wear

limits during replacement of elevator

hinge plates, this AD requires that such

wear limits be obtained from the

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), FAA, or a Boeing

Company Designated Engineering

Representative who has been authorized

by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make

such findings.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 84 airplanes

of the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 39

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD.

The inspections that are currently

required by AD 2001–06–08 take

approximately 4 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

currently required actions on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $9,360, or

$240 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The new replacement that is proposed

in this AD action would take

approximately 44 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost

approximately $13,116 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed requirements of this AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$614,484, or $15,756 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this proposed AD were not adopted. The

cost impact figures discussed in AD

rulemaking actions represent only the

time necessary to perform the specific

actions actually required by the AD.

These figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

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. Therefore,

it is determined that this proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that 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); and (3) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(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. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–12155 (66 FR

16116, March 23, 2001), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Boeing: Docket 2001–NM–20–AD.

Supersedes AD 2001–06–08,

Amendment 39–12155.

Applicability: Model 737–600, –700, and

–800 series airplanes; line numbers 1 through

84 inclusive; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent fatigue cracking of the elevator

hinge plates, which could lead to the loss of

the attachment of the elevator to the

horizontal stabilizer, and consequent reduced

controllability of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2001–

06–08

Inspections and Corrective Actions

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 7,000 total

flight cycles or within 90 days after April 9,

2001 (the effective date of AD 2001–06–08),

whichever occurs later, perform high

frequency eddy current and detailed visual

inspections of the hinge plate at elevator

hinge 4, and a detailed visual inspection of

the elevator hinge plate lugs (three locations)

at elevator hinges 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Do these

inspections per Part I of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–

55–1067, dated October 19, 2000. Repeat the

inspections thereafter no later than every

4,000 flight cycles, per the service bulletin,

until paragraph (b) of this AD has been

accomplished. If any cracking or unusual

wear (i.e., elongated holes, loose or missing

nuts or bolts, or missing primer or finish) is

found during any inspection per this

paragraph, before further flight, replace the

affected hinge plate with a new, improved

hinge plate, and modify the elevator upper

skin, the upper and lower hinge covers, and

the upper and lower closure panels, as

applicable, per the service bulletin, except as

provided by paragraph (c) of this AD. Such

replacement and modification ends the

repetitive inspections for the replaced hinge

plate.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2001 / Proposed Rules 34593

New Requirements of This AD

Replacement of Hinge Plates

(b) Before the accumulation of 15,000 total

flight cycles, or within 5 years since the

airplane’s date of manufacture, whichever

occurs first: Replace the elevator hinge plates

at hinges 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, with new,

improved hinge plates; per Part II of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 737–55–1067, dated October

19, 2000, except as provided by paragraph (c)

of this AD. The replacement includes

modification of the elevator upper skin, the

upper and lower hinge covers, and the upper

and lower closure panels, as applicable.

Doing this replacement ends the repetitive

inspections required by this AD.

Exception to Service Bulletin Instructions:

Wear Limits

(c) During the replacement of elevator

hinge plates per paragraph (a) or (b) of this

AD, where Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–

1067, dated October 19, 2000, specifies to

contact Boeing for wear limits, before further

flight, contact the Manager, Seattle Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, or a Boeing

Company Designated Engineering

Representative who has been authorized by

the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such

findings. For wear limits to be approved by

the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this

paragraph, the Manager’s approval letter

must specifically reference this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 22,

2001.

Kalene C. Yanamura,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–16382 Filed 6–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–114–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–81, –82, –83, and

–87 Series Airplanes, Model MD–88

Airplanes, and Model MD–90–30 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9–81–

82–83, and–87 series airplanes, Model

MD–88 airplanes, and Model MD–90–30

series airplanes, that currently requires

a revision to the applicable Airplane

Flight Manual (AFM) to provide the

flightcrew with the appropriate landing

distance and flap positions, if

applicable, for wet or icy runways. That

AD also provides for an optional

terminating action for the applicable

AFM revision. For certain airplanes, this

action would require accomplishment of

the previously optional terminating

action. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

the flightcrew from performing a

scheduled landing on a runway of

potentially insufficient length due to

failure of the weight-on-wheels spoiler

lockout mechanism system and possible

inactivation of the autospoiler actuator,

which could result in the airplane

overrunning the end of the runway

during landing on a wet or icy runway.

DATES: Comments must be received by

August 13, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

114–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–114–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group,

Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Data and Service

Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–

0024). This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Albert Lam, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5346;

fax (562) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this action may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments