Document ID: FAA-2016-9307-0007
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Company Airplanes
Posted Date: 2017-08-01T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 1, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35641-35644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15486]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9307; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-076-AD; 
Amendment 39-18970; AD 2017-15-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 
The Boeing Company Model 787-9 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a 
determination that the shoulder bolt used on the outboard clevis of the 
forward support fitting of the ram air turbine (RAT) might not be long 
enough to allow for proper installation of the RAT; therefore, the 
clevis of the joint could be clamped together, resulting in reduced 
fatigue life and possible fracture of the clevis. This AD requires 
inspecting for cracking of the clevis of the forward support fitting of 
the RAT, installing a longer shoulder bolt, and replacing the forward 
support fitting if any cracking is found. We are issuing this AD to 
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective September 5, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of September 5, 
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, 
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 
Airplane Directorate, 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-2016-9307.

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-
9307; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket 
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and 
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone: 425-917-6490; fax: 425-917-6590; email: 
kelly.mcguckin@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company 
Model 787-9 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on 
November 28, 2016 (81 FR 85448) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted 
by a determination that the shoulder bolt used on the outboard clevis 
of the forward support fitting of the RAT might not be long enough to 
allow for proper installation of the RAT; therefore, the clevis of the 
joint could be clamped together, resulting in reduced fatigue life and 
possible fracture of the clevis. The NPRM proposed to require 
inspecting for cracking of the clevis of the forward support fitting of 
the RAT, installing a longer shoulder bolt, and replacing the forward 
support fitting with a new fitting if any cracking is found. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent fracture of the clevis of the forward 
support fitting of the RAT, which could result in the RAT departing the 
airplane during a dual non-restartable engine loss, and consequent loss 
of control of the airplane, or injury to maintenance crews during 
periodic RAT ground tests.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and 
the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    Boeing and Ahmed Ahmed Hamdy concur with the content of the NPRM.

[[Page 35642]]

Request To Clarify Certain Requirements

    United Airlines (UAL) asked that we clarify the credit language 
used in paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. UAL stated that, as written, 
paragraph (h) of the proposed AD specifies that previous accomplishment 
of Boeing Message TBC-CAL-15-0089-01B, dated September 22, 2015 
(identified in paragraph (h)(3) of the proposed AD), provides credit 
for the actions required by paragraph (g) of the proposed AD. UAL noted 
that if the intent is to give credit for all the actions specified in 
paragraph (g) of the proposed AD, it's incorrect because that Boeing 
message only provides procedures to replace the subject bolt; the high 
frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection and fitting replacement are 
not included in those procedures.
    We agree that clarification of paragraph (h) of this AD is 
necessary. We have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to provide credit 
for the shoulder bolt replacement specified in paragraph (g) of this 
AD, if it was performed before the effective date of this AD using the 
applicable service information specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.

Request To Replace the Bolt Before Accomplishing the Inspection

    UAL asked that we allow replacement of the shoulder bolt before 
accomplishing the HFEC inspection, which will shorten the time for the 
replacement. UAL stated that the 12,000-flight-hour or 24-month time 
limit to accomplish all actions in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD is 
understandable; however, due to the possibility of extended downtime if 
the fitting replacement is required, the HFEC inspection must be done 
during a heavy maintenance check, which could be a considerable amount 
of time after the effective date of the AD. UAL added that Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB290031-00, Issue 001, dated March 25, 
2016, does not separate the bolt replacement from the inspection, but 
the proposed AD should provide that option.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. A fracture of the 
clevis of the forward support fitting of the RAT will not be addressed 
by replacing the subject bolt without an HFEC inspection of the 
fitting. When operators replace the bolt, they must also inspect the 
fitting. Replacing the bolt without inspecting this fitting could 
result in undetected cracking in the fitting, which is the cause of the 
unsafe condition in this AD. Repetitive removal and replacement of the 
bolt may also cause further stress on the forward support fitting, 
which could contribute to additional cracking of the fitting, 
especially if the fitting is already cracked. Paragraph (h) of this AD 
provides credit to operators that have replaced the subject bolt prior 
to the effective date of this AD. However, as of the effective date of 
this AD, when complying with paragraph (g) of this AD, all corrective 
actions must be done before further flight. We acknowledge that 
replacing the fitting due to potential inspection findings will require 
significant effort and downtime; however, only two airplanes of U.S. 
Registry are affected by the requirements of this AD. With a limited 
number of airplanes affected and a relatively long compliance time 
provided, operators should have adequate time to schedule the 
maintenance for accomplishing the actions required by this AD. 
Therefore, we have made no changes to this AD in this regard.

Request To Change Unsafe Condition

    One commenter, Julia Stotts, asked that we change the unsafe 
condition identified in the NPRM from ``. . . to prevent fracture of 
the clevis of the forward support fitting of the RAT, which could 
result in the RAT departing the airplane during a dual non-restartable 
engine loss, and consequent loss of control of the airplane, or injury 
to maintenance crews during periodic RAT ground tests'' to ``. . . 
detect and correct fatigue cracking in the forward engine mounts, which 
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and could 
lead to in-flight loss of an engine, possibly resulting in reduced 
controllability of the airplane.'' The commenter suggested the change 
to encompass both fracture of the clevis and the possibility of the RAT 
departing from the airplane, which could lead to loss of an engine.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. The commenter 
provided no justification for revising the unsafe condition to include 
fatigue cracking in the forward engine mounts and possible loss of an 
engine. The unsafe condition in this AD stems from a determination that 
the shoulder bolt used on the outboard clevis of the forward support 
fitting of the RAT might not be long enough to allow for proper 
installation of the RAT; therefore, the clevis of the joint could be 
clamped together, resulting in reduced fatigue life and possible 
fracture of the clevis causing possible departure of the RAT from the 
airplane. The suggested change is not related to the identified unsafe 
condition or the potential end level effect resulting from that unsafe 
condition. We have made no changes to this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB290031-00, 
Issue 001, dated March 25, 2016. The service information describes 
procedures for inspecting for cracking of the clevis of the forward 
support fitting of the RAT, installing a longer shoulder bolt, and 
replacing the forward support fitting with a new fitting if any 
cracking is found. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 2 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection/shoulder bolt             3 work-hours x $85 per hour            $152            $407            $814
 replacement.                         = $255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 35643]]

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements of 
the forward support fitting that would be required based on the results 
of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft 
that might need these replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forward support fitting replacement........  15 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $28,309         $29,584
                                              $1,275.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be 
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected 
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected 
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost 
estimate.

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, 
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (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.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2017-15-10 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18970; Docket No. FAA-
2016-9307; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-076-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 5, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-9 airplanes, 
certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin B787-81205-SB290031-00, Issue 001, dated March 25, 2016.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 29; Hydraulic 
power.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that the shoulder bolt 
used on the outboard clevis of the forward support fitting of the 
ram air turbine (RAT) might not be long enough to allow for proper 
installation of the RAT; therefore, the clevis of the joint could be 
clamped together, resulting in reduced fatigue life and possible 
fracture of the clevis. We are issuing this AD to prevent fracture 
of the clevis of the forward support fitting of the RAT, which could 
result in the RAT departing the airplane during a dual non-
restartable engine loss, and consequent loss of control of the 
airplane, or injury to maintenance crews during periodic RAT ground 
tests.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Inspection, Replacement of Shoulder Bolt, and Replacement of RAT 
Forward Support Fitting if Necessary

    Within 12,000 flight hours or 24 months after the effective date 
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a high frequency eddy current 
inspection for cracking of the clevis of the forward support fitting 
of the RAT, and install a longer shoulder bolt, in accordance with 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
B787-81205-SB290031-00, Issue 001, dated March 25, 2016. If any 
cracking is found, before further flight, replace the RAT forward 
support fitting with a new fitting, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-
81205-SB290031-00, Issue 001, dated March 25, 2016.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the shoulder bolt replacement 
specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, if that action was performed 
before the effective date of this AD using the applicable service 
information specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), or (h)(4) 
of this AD.
    (1) Boeing Message TBC-ANA-15-0272-01B, dated September 22, 
2015.
    (2) Boeing Message TBC-ANZ-15-0016-06B, dated October 14, 2015.
    (3) Boeing Message TBC-CAL-15-0089-01B, dated September 22, 
2015.
    (4) Boeing Message TBC-VAA-15-0089-01B dated September 22, 2015.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
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 ACO, send it to the 
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. 
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 
principal inspector, 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,

[[Page 35644]]

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, Seattle 
ACO, 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) For service information that contains steps that are labeled 
as Required for Compliance (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. 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 Kelly McGuckin, 
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, 
Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 
425-917-6490; fax: 425-917-6590; email: kelly.mcguckin@faa.gov.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in 
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB290031-00, Issue 
001, dated March 25, 2016.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) 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.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 14, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-15486 Filed 7-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P