AD 03-20

[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 479-481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 03-20]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-402-AD; Amendment 39-12997; AD 2002-26-09]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757-200 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION:  Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Boeing Model 757-200 series airplanes with 
stowage bins installed forward of door 2 at Station 680. This AD 
requires a one-time inspection to determine if a certain intercostal is 
installed for support of the overhead stowage bin(s) at Station 680, 
and follow-on actions, if necessary. This action is necessary to 
prevent failure of the stowage bin attachment fitting at Station 680, 
which could result in the overhead stowage bin falling onto the 
passenger seats below and injuring passengers or impeding the 
evacuation of passengers in an emergency. This action is intended to 
address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective February 10, 2003.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of February 10, 2003.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules 
Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of 
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Crotty, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-1675; fax (425) 227-1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 757-200 
series airplanes with stowage bins installed forward of door 2 at 
Station 680 was published in the Federal Register on May 15, 2002 (67 
FR 34639). That action proposed to require a one-time inspection to 
determine if a certain intercostal is installed for support of the 
overhead stowage bin(s) at Station 680, and follow-on actions, if 
necessary.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received. One commenter states that it offers no comments 
because it does not operate any affected airplanes.

Extend Compliance Time for Installation of Intercostal(s)

    Several commenters request that the FAA extend the compliance time 
for installation of the intercostal(s), if necessary, from 24 months to 
60 months after the effective date of the AD. The commenters point out 
that the time required to gain access for installing the intercostal(s) 
is significant (the commenters estimate 65 work hours is needed to gain 
access, install, and close up), and the proposed 24-month compliance 
time would not allow most operators to accomplish the proposed actions 
during a heavy maintenance visit. The commenters also state that, based 
on preliminary inspections, a significant portion of the airplane fleet 
may be without the subject intercostal. To ensure that an acceptable 
level of safety is maintained if the compliance time is extended to 60 
months, the commenters recommend accomplishment of repetitive 
inspections for cracking every 18 months.
    The FAA concurs that extending the compliance time for the 
installation of the intercostal(s) is an acceptable alternative to 
requiring installation of the intercostal(s) within 24 months after the 
effective date of this AD, provided that repetitive inspections for 
cracking are performed until the intercostal is installed. Therefore, 
we have revised paragraph (b) in this final rule to add subparagraphs 
(b)(1) and (b)(2), which specify the compliance alternatives.

Reduce Compliance Time for One-Time Inspection

    The same commenters who request extension of the compliance time 
for installing the intercostal also request that we reduce the 
compliance time from 24 months to 12 months for the one-time inspection 
to determine if the subject intercostal is installed. One of the 
commenters explains that reducing the compliance time in this way would 
ensure that any structural damage is found and fixed in a timely 
manner.
    We do not concur with the request to reduce the compliance time for 
the one-time inspection. In developing an appropriate compliance time 
for this AD, we considered not only the manufacturer's recommendation, 
but the degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe 
condition, and the time necessary to perform the inspection. In light 
of all of these factors, we find a 24-month compliance time for 
completing the required inspection to be warranted, in that it 
represents an appropriate interval of time allowable for affected 
airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. No change 
is necessary in this regard.

Request To Allow Stop-Drilling of Cracks

    Two commenters request that we revise paragraph (c) of the proposed 
AD to allow stop-drilling of any crack that is found, instead of 
requiring repair before further flight. The commenters state that, 
following stop-drilling of the crack, the affected overhead stowage bin 
could be blocked out until an interim repair is installed within 90 
days. The commenters state no justification for

[[Page 480]]

this request, but one commenter notes that the stowage bins at Station 
680 on its airplanes are above a galley, so no passenger sits under the 
subject stowage bins.
    We do not concur with the commenters' request. The commenters 
provide no data to substantiate that their request would provide an 
acceptable level of safety. However, an affected operator may request 
approval of an alternative method of compliance as provided by 
paragraph (d) of this AD. We may consider approving such an alternative 
method of compliance if data are submitted to support that an 
alternative repair method would provide an acceptable level of safety. 
No change is necessary in this regard.

Request To Issue Supplemental NPRM

    The commenters who request extension of the compliance time for 
installation of the intercostal, reduction of the compliance time for 
the initial inspection, and inclusion of a provision for stop-drilling 
cracks, recommend that we issue a supplemental NPRM, supported by a 
revised service bulletin.
    We do not concur with the commenters' request. Under the provisions 
of the Administrative Procedure Act, we issue a supplemental NPRM and 
reopen the period for public comment when we determine that a change to 
a proposed AD will either increase the economic burden on an operator 
or increase the scope of the proposed AD. The change that we are making 
to this AD--extension of the compliance time for installing the 
intercostal--does not increase the economic burden on any operator nor 
does it expand the scope of the proposed AD. Also, the airplane 
manufacturer has not issued a revised service bulletin. For these 
reasons, as well as the potentially adverse effect on safety that 
delaying issuance of this final rule may cause, we find it unnecessary 
to issue a supplemental NPRM. Thus, no change has been made in this 
regard.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest 
require the adoption of the rule with the change previously described. 
We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic 
burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 403 Model 757-200 series airplanes of the 
affected design in the worldwide fleet. We estimate that 219 airplanes 
of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.
    The required inspection will take up to 2 work hours per airplane 
(1 work hour per side of the airplane), at the average labor rate of 
$60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
inspection required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be up 
to $26,280, or $120 per airplane.
    Should an operator be required to do the installation, it will take 
up to 2 work hours per airplane (1 work hour per side of the airplane), 
at the average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will 
cost approximately $1,310 per airplane. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of this installation is estimated to be $1,430 per 
airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this 
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this 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 adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons described above, I certify that this action (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); 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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of 
the Federal Aviation Regulation (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.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

2002-26-09 Boeing: Amendment 39-12997. Docket 2000-NM-402-AD.

    Applicability: Model 757-200 series airplanes, certificated in 
any category, as listed in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-25-0194, 
dated February 11, 1999, and having stowage bins installed forward 
of door 2 at Station 680.

    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 failure of the stowage bin attachment fitting at 
Station 680, which could result in the overhead stowage bin falling 
onto the passenger seats below and injuring passengers or impeding 
the evacuation of passengers in an emergency, accomplish the 
following:

One-Time Inspection

    (a) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do a 
one-time general visual inspection to determine if an intercostal is 
installed between stringers 8 and 9 for support of the overhead 
stowage bin at Station 680, on the left and right sides of the 
airplane, as applicable, according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
25-0194, dated February 11, 1999. If an intercostal is installed on 
each side that has an overhead stowage bin at Station 680, no 
further action is necessary.


[[Page 481]]


    Note 2:  For the purpose of this AD, a general visual inspection 
is defined as: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior 
area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, 
or irregularity. This level of inspection is made under normally 
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, 
flashlight, or drop-light, and may require removal or opening of 
access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be 
required to gain proximity to the area being checked.''

Follow-On Actions

    (b) For each side of the airplane that has an overhead stowage 
bin at Station 680 but no intercostal installed: Before further 
flight after the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, do 
a detailed inspection for cracking or damage of stringer 8 and the 
tie rod mounting assembly according to Boeing Service Bulletin 757-
25-0194, dated February 11, 1999. Then, do either paragraph (b)(1) 
or (b)(2) of this AD.

    Note 3:  For the purpose of this AD, a detailed 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.''

    (1) Repeat the detailed inspection for cracking or damage of 
stringer 8 and the tie rod mounting assembly every 18 months, and 
within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do paragraph 
(b)(2) of this AD.
    (2) Before further flight, install a new intercostal between 
stringers 8 and 9, according to the service bulletin. This 
installation terminates the repetitive inspections specified in 
paragraph (b)(1) of this AD.

Repair of Cracking or Damage

    (c) If any cracking or damage is found during any detailed 
inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD: Before further 
flight, and before installation of the intercostal, repair per a 
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification 
Office (ACO), FAA; or per data meeting the type certification basis 
of the airplane approved by a Boeing Company Designated Engineering 
Representative who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, 
to make such findings. For a repair method to be approved, the 
approval 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 4: 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 
Sec. Sec.  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.

Incorporation by Reference

    (f) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be 
done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 757-25-1094, dated 
February 11, 1999, excluding Evaluation Form. This incorporation by 
reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in 
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be 
obtained form Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, 
Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North 
Capital Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Effective Date

    (g) This amendment becomes effective on February 10, 2003.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 24, 2002.
Vi L. Lipski,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-20 Filed 1-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M