Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 50899 

15,000 total flight hours, or within 18 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

(2) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

(g)(2) or (g)(4) of this AD: Before the 

accumulation of 15,000 flight hours since the 

replacement of the HSTA, or within 18 

months after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later. 

(3) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD: Before the accumulation of 

3,500 flight hours since the replacement of 

the HSTA, or within 12 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later. 

(4) For airplanes that have received an 

original airworthiness certificate or original 

export certificate of airworthiness on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Before the 

accumulation of 15,000 total flight hours, or 

within 18 months after the issuance of the 

original airworthiness certificate or original 

export certificate of airworthiness, whichever 

occurs later. 

Lubrication 

(j) Within the compliance times specified 

in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), and (j)(4) of 

this AD, as applicable: Lubricate the ballnut 

and ballscrew in accordance with Part 3 of 

the Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service bulletin. Repeat the lubrication 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,000 

flight hours or 12 months, whichever occurs 

first. 

(1) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

(g)(1) of this AD: Before the accumulation of 

15,000 total flight hours, or within 18 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

(2) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

(g)(2) or (g)(4) of this AD: Before the 

accumulation of 15,000 flight hours since the 

replacement of the HSTA, or within 18 

months after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later. 

(3) For airplanes identified in paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD: Before the accumulation of 

3,500 flight hours since the replacement of 

the HSTA, or within 12 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later. 

(4) For airplanes that have received an 

original airworthiness certificate or original 

export certificate of airworthiness on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Before the 

accumulation of 15,000 total flight hours, or 

within 18 months after the issuance of the 

original airworthiness certificate or original 

export certificate of airworthiness, whichever 

occurs later. 

Credit for Using Original Issue of Service 

Bulletin 

(k) Actions performed prior to the effective 

date of this AD, in accordance with Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–27A0059, dated 

September 18, 2003, are considered 

acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding actions specified in 

paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD. 

Credit for Hard-Time Replacement of HSTA 

(l) Any HSTA overhauled within the 

compliance times specified in paragraphs (h), 

(i), and (j) of this AD or before the effective 

date of this AD—as part of a ‘‘hard-time’’

replacement program that includes removal 

of the HSTA from the airplane and overhaul 

of the stabilizer ballscrew in accordance with 

original equipment manufacturer component 

maintenance manual instructions—meets the 

intent of one detailed inspection, one 

freeplay inspection, and one lubrication of 

the HSTA. Therefore, any such HSTA is 

considered acceptable for compliance with 

the initial accomplishment of the actions 

specified in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this 

AD, and repetitions of those actions may be 

determined from the performance date of that 

overhaul. 

Parts Installation 

(m) As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install, on any airplane, a 

horizontal stabilizer trim actuator that is not 

new or overhauled, unless a detailed 

inspection, freeplay measurement, and 

lubrication of that actuator are performed in 

accordance with paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of 

this AD, as applicable. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(n)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: 

Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, 

FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6490; fax (425) 917–6590; has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

21, 2008. 

Kevin Hull, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–20087 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–29255; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–085–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, 

–400, and –500 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain Boeing Model 737–100, –200, 

–200C, –300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes. The original NPRM would 

have required doing repetitive internal 

eddy current and detailed inspections to 

detect cracked stringer tie clips; 

measuring the fastener spacing and the 

edge margin if applicable, and doing 

applicable corrective and related 

investigative actions. As a temporary 

alternative to doing the actions 

described previously, the original 

NPRM would have required repetitive 

inspections of the skin and lap joints for 

cracks and evidence of overload 

resulting from cracked stringer tie clips, 

and applicable corrective actions if 

necessary. The original NPRM resulted 

from a report of several cracked stringer 

tie clips. This action revises the original 

NPRM by including repetitive external 

eddy current sliding probe inspections 

of the lap joints for cracks and evidence 

of overload resulting from cracked 

stringer tie clips. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to detect and 

correct multiple adjacent cracked 

stringer tie clips and damaged skin and 

frames, which could lead to the skin 

and frame structure developing cracks 

and consequent decompression of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by September 

23, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

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 proposed AD, the 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
50900 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

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: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2007–29255; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–085–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) (the ‘‘original 

NPRM’’) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to 

include an airworthiness directive (AD) 

that would apply to certain Boeing 

Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, 

–400, and –500 series airplanes. That 

original NPRM was published in the 

Federal Register on September 20, 2007 

(72 FR 53706). That original NPRM 

proposed to require doing repetitive 

internal eddy current and detailed 

inspections to detect cracked stringer tie 

clips; measuring the fastener spacing 

and the edge margin if applicable; and 

doing applicable corrective and related 

investigative actions. As a temporary 

alternative to doing the actions 

described previously, that original 

NPRM proposed to require repetitive 

external general visual inspections of 

the skin and lap joints for cracks and 

evidence of overload resulting from 

cracked stringer tie clips, and applicable 

corrective actions if necessary. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received from 

the four commenters. 

Requests To Revise Grace Period for 

Accomplishing Inspections A and B 

US Airways requests that, for certain 

airplane configurations, the grace period 

for accomplishing the initial inspections 

specified in paragraph (g) of the original 

NPRM (Inspection A) be extended from 

2 years to 4 years. KLM requests that the 

grace period of Inspection A be 

extended to 8 years, and that the 

intervals for accomplishing the 

temporary alternative inspection 

specified in paragraph (h) of the original 

NPRM (Inspection B) be reduced. 

US Airways states that it has been 

successfully inspecting the same area 

for corrosion and other damage per the 

Corrosion Prevention and Control 

Program (CPCP), as required by AD 90–

25–01, amendment 39–6789 (55 FR 

49263, November 27, 1990). US Airways 

states that the compliance time should 

be extended for operators accomplishing 

the CPCP. US Airways and KLM state 

extending the compliance time for 

accomplishing Inspection A would 

allow operators to better schedule that 

inspection, and thus would limit the 

economic impact. US Airways also 

states that temporary alternative 

inspections specified in paragraph (h) of 

the original NPRM (Inspection B) are 

not as desirable as Inspection A. US 

Airways believes Inspection B would 

increase the risk of damage to airplanes 

due to operators’ need to use various lift 

equipment to reach the inspection area. 

We do not agree with the commenters’

request to extend the compliance time 

specified in paragraph (g) of the 

supplemental NPRM (Inspection A) or 

to reduce the compliance time specified 

in paragraph (h) of the supplemental 

NPRM (Inspection B). We have 

determined that the visual inspections 

required by AD 90–25–01 do not detect 

multiple adjacent cracks at stringer tie 

clips, which is the identified unsafe 

condition of this supplemental NPRM. 

The CPCP inspections cited do not focus 

on the areas of affected stringer tie clips. 

In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for this supplemental 

NPRM, we considered not only the 

degree of urgency associated with 

addressing the identified unsafe 

condition, but the practical aspect of 

incorporating the proposed inspections 

into affected operators’ maintenance 

schedules in a timely manner. Further, 

deferral of Inspection A for multiple 

clip failures does not provide an 

acceptable level of safety. In light of 

these items, we have determined that 

the applicable compliance times 

identified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of 

the supplemental NPRM are 

appropriate. However, paragraph (o) of 

the supplemental NPRM provides 

affected operators the opportunity to 

apply for an adjustment of the 

compliance time if the operator also 

presents data that justify the adjustment. 

Requests To Clarify Inspection B 

The Air Transport Association (ATA), 

on behalf of one of its members, United 

Airlines, and Boeing request that 

paragraph (h) of the NPRM be clarified 

as to which affected airplanes the 

temporary alternative inspections 

specified in paragraph (h) of the original 

NPRM (Inspection B) may be done on. 

The commenters state that a note in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–

53–1268, dated August 25, 2006 

(referred to as the appropriate source of 

service information for doing the 

proposed actions), limits Inspection B to 

airplanes having stringer tie clips 

replaced in accordance with Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1085, Revision 

1, dated May 10, 1990. The commenters 

note that the AD does not have such a 

limitation. 

We agree with the commenters that 

clarification is necessary. Paragraph (h) 

of the supplemental NPRM specifies to 

do all ‘‘applicable’’ actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1268. As noted 

by the commenters, a note in the 

Accomplishment Instructions states, 

‘‘The Option B Inspection is not allowed 

on airplanes that have not accomplished 

terminating action of replacing the 

stringer tie clips as given in Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1085.’’ However, the 

note does not explain that Boeing 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1085 affects 

only airplanes having line numbers 1 

through 1000 inclusive. Without such 

an explanation, operators could 

misinterpret that paragraph (h) of the 

supplemental NPRM may be done on 

airplanes having line numbers 1001 and 

subsequent, which are also subject to 

the proposed actions of this 

supplemental NPRM. Therefore, we 

have added Note 3 to this supplemental 

NPRM to clarify this point. 

Boeing also requests that the first 

sentence of paragraph (h) of the NPRM 

be revised to include eddy current 

inspections of the lap joints. Boeing 

states that, for Inspection B, Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–

53–1268 specifies eddy current 

inspections of the lap joints. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 50901 

We agree. It was our intent that the 

proposed inspections align with those 

specified in Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1268. 

Therefore, we have revised paragraph 

(h) of the supplemental NPRM 

accordingly. 

Request To Clarify Unsafe Condition 

Boeing requests that, for clarification 

purposes, the unsafe condition 

throughout the original NPRM be 

revised from ‘‘* * * multiple cracked 

stringer tie clips * * *.’’ to ‘‘* * * 

multiple adjacent cracked stringer tie 

clips * * *.’’ Boeing states that the 

safety concern is when there are 

multiple ‘‘adjacent’’ stringer tie clips 

(three or more) that are cracked. 

We agree and have revised the 

supplemental NPRM accordingly. 

Request To Clarify Relevant Service 

Information Section 

Boeing requests several editorial 

changes to the Relevant Service 

Information section of the original 

NPRM for clarification purposes. 

We partially agree. We acknowledge 

that Boeing’s suggested changes to that 

section would further clarify the 

information specified in the service 

bulletin. However, the Relevant Service 

Information section of the original 

NRPM does not reappear in the 

supplemental NPRM. Therefore, we 

have made no change to this 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Revise Work-Hour Estimate 

Boeing requests that the work hours 

for Inspection A in the Costs of 

Compliance section of the original 

NPRM be revised from between 40 and 

103 to between 253 and 307. Boeing 

states that Inspection A requires internal 

access, which requires many more hours 

than that shown in the Estimated Costs 

table. 

We do not agree. The Costs of 

Compliance section describes only the 

direct costs of the specific actions 

proposed by this supplemental NPRM. 

The estimated work hours represent the 

time necessary to perform only the 

actions actually proposed by this 

supplemental NPRM. We recognize that, 

in doing the actions required by an AD, 

operators might incur incidental costs in 

addition to the direct costs. The cost 

analysis in AD rulemaking actions, 

however, typically does not include 

incidental costs such as the time 

required to gain access and close up, 

time necessary for planning, or time 

necessitated by other administrative 

actions. Those incidental costs, which 

might vary significantly among 

operators, are almost impossible to 

calculate. Therefore, we have made no 

change to the supplemental NPRM in 

this regard. 

Clarification of Unsafe Condition 

The Summary section and paragraph 

(d) of the NPRM state, ‘‘We are 

proposing this supplemental NPRM to 

prevent multiple cracked stringer tie 

clips and damaged skin and frames 

***’’ For clarification purposes, we 

have changed the phrase ‘‘to prevent’’ to 

‘‘to detect and correct’’ in that section 

and paragraph of this supplemental 

NPRM. 

FAA’s Determination and Proposed 

Requirements of the Supplemental 

NPRM 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all 

pertinent information and determined 

an unsafe condition exists and is likely 

to exist or develop on other products of 

the same type design. Certain changes 

described above expand the scope of the 

original NPRM. 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 supplemental NPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 787 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. The following table provides 

the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours 1

Average 

labor rate 

per hour 

Cost per airplane 1

Number of 

U.S.- 

registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 1

Inspection A ...................... Between 40 and 103 ......... $80 Between $3,200 and 

$8,240, per inspection 

cycle.

787 Between $2,518,400 and 

$6,484,880, per inspection cycle. 

Inspection B (temporary alternative to Inspection 

A).

Between 2 and 109 ........... 80 Between $160 and $8,720 787 Between $125,920 and 

$6,862,640, per inspection cycle. 

1 Depending on the airplane configuration. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

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), 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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
50902 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2007–29255; 

Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–085–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

September 23, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) AD 93–08–04, amendment 39–8551. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737–

100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 

series airplanes, certificated in any category; 

as identified in Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1268, dated August 

25, 2006. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report of several 

cracked stringer tie clips. We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct multiple adjacent 

cracked stringer tie clips and damaged skin 

and frames, which could lead to the skin and 

frame structure developing cracks and 

consequent decompression of the airplane. 

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. 

Service Bulletin References 

(f) The term ‘‘the service bulletin,’’ as used 

in this AD, means the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 737–53–1268, dated August 

25, 2006. 

Inspection A: Required Internal Inspections, 

Applicable Corrective and Related 

Investigative Actions, and Measurement 

(g) Do repetitive internal eddy current and 

detailed inspections to detect cracked 

stringer tie clips; measure the fastener 

spacing and the edge margin if applicable; 

and do applicable corrective and related 

investigative actions. Do all applicable 

actions at the applicable compliance times 

and repeat intervals identified in Tables 2 

through 8 inclusive of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of the service bulletin; except 

as provided by paragraphs (i) through (l) of 

this AD. Do all applicable actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin, except as 

provided by paragraph (m) of this AD. 

Note 1: The service bulletin refers to 

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53A1177, 

Revision 6, dated May 31, 2001, as an 

additional source of service information for 

doing an internal eddy current inspection of 

the lap joint for certain airplane 

configurations. 

Inspection B: Temporary Alternative 

External Inspections and Corrective Actions 

(h) As a temporary alternative to doing the 

actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 

do repetitive external general visual 

inspections of the skin and lap joints and 

repetitive external eddy current sliding probe 

inspections of the lap joints for cracks and 

evidence of overload resulting from cracked 

stringer tie clips, and applicable corrective 

actions if necessary. Do all applicable actions 

at the applicable compliance times and 

repeat intervals identified in Tables 9 

through 12 inclusive of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of the service bulletin, but not 

to exceed the flight cycles in the ‘‘Inspection 

Period Allowed’’ column of the tables; except 

as provided by paragraphs (i) and (l) of this 

AD. Do all applicable actions in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service bulletin, except as provided by 

paragraph (m) of this AD. 

Note 2: The eddy current inspection along 

the stringer tie clip radius to detect damage 

and replacement, as applicable, specified in 

paragraph 3.B.5. of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin are not 

required by this AD. The actions are optional 

and can be done in addition to and at the 

same time as the actions required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

Note 3: Inspection B may be used on 

affected airplanes having line numbers 1 

through 1000 inclusive on which the 

terminating action (i.e., replacement of 

stringer tie clips) specified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1085, Revision 1, dated May 

10, 1990, has been done; and on affected 

airplanes having line numbers 1001 and 

subsequent. The service bulletin contains a 

similar note. 

Exceptions to Service Information 

(i) Where the service bulletin specifies a 

compliance time after the date of the service 

bulletin, this AD requires compliance within 

the specified compliance time after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(j) For Model 737–100, –200, and –200C 

series airplanes, on which Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1085, Revision 1, dated May 

10, 1990, has not been done in accordance 

with AD 93–08–04: As of the effective date 

of this AD, do the applicable inspections 

from station (STA) 559 to STA 887 in 

accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD, at 

the applicable compliance times specified in 

paragraph (b) of AD 93–08–04. 

(k) In the first row of Tables 5 and 6 of 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of the service 

bulletin, where the service bulletin specifies 

a compliance time of before 25,000 total 

airplane flight cycles, this AD requires a 

compliance time of before the accumulation 

of 25,000 total flight cycles, or within 2 years 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

(l) Where the service bulletin specifies no 

starting point (e.g., ‘‘after the date on the 

service bulletin’’) for a grace period, this AD 

requires compliance within the specified 

grace period after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(m) Where the service bulletin specifies to 

contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before 

further flight, repair the discrepancy using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this 

AD. 

Certain Actions End Certain Requirements of 

AD 93–08–04 

(n) Accomplishment of the internal eddy 

current and detailed inspections for STA 559 

to STA 887 in accordance with paragraph (g) 

of this AD constitutes compliance with the 

inspections required by paragraph (a) of AD 

93–08–04, as it pertains to Boeing Service 

Bulletin 737–53–1085, Revision 1, dated May 

10, 1990. Accomplishment of the internal 

eddy current and detailed inspections does 

not terminate the remaining requirements of 

AD 93–08–04, as it applies to other service 

bulletins. Operators are required to continue 

to inspect and/or modify per the other 

service bulletins listed in that AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(o)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

917–6447; fax (425) 917–6590; has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

20, 2008. 

Kevin Hull, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–20102 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS