AD 2000-07-12
Applicability
| Type | Manufacturer | Model | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 727-100 Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Series Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 727-100C Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Series Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 727-200 Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Series Airplanes |
Unsafe Condition
Fatigue cracking and corrosion in certain Boeing Model 727 series airplanes approaching or exceeding their economic design service goal.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Required Actions
Conduct repetitive structural inspections of certain aging airplanes, and repair if necessary. The inspections may be terminated upon accomplishment of the specified actions.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Compliance Time
Within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date for airplanes that have not exceeded the initial inspection threshold, or as specified in paragraph (b) for airplanes that have already undergone inspections in accordance with AD 94-07-08.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Affected Aircraft
Boeing Model 727 series airplanes, specifically those on which the modification specified by either Revision 2 or Revision 3 of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127 has not been accomplished.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Federal Register Abstract
This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Boeing Model 727 series airplanes, that requires repetitive structural inspections of certain aging airplanes, and repair, if necessary. This amendment also provides for optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This amendment is prompted by reports of incidents involving fatigue cracking and corrosion in transport category airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their economic design service goal. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent degradation of the structural capabilities of the affected airplanes. This AD relates to the recommendations of the Airworthiness Assurance Task Force assigned to review Model 727 series airplanes, which indicate that, to assure long term continued operational safety, various structural inspections should be accomplished.
Document Text
Show stored source text (verify against official source)
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 11, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19310-19313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 00-8516]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 99-NM-53-AD; Amendment 39-11666; AD 2000-07-12]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 727 series airplanes, that requires
repetitive structural inspections of certain aging airplanes, and
repair, if necessary. This amendment also provides for optional
terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This amendment is
prompted by reports of incidents involving fatigue cracking and
corrosion in transport category airplanes that are approaching or have
exceeded their economic design service goal. The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent degradation of the structural
capabilities of the affected airplanes. This AD relates to the
recommendations of the Airworthiness Assurance Task Force assigned to
review Model 727 series airplanes, which indicate that, to assure long
term continued operational safety, various structural inspections
should be accomplished.
DATES: Effective May 16, 2000.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of May 16, 2000.
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 FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. 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: Walter Sippel, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2774; 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 727 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on June 25, 1999 (64 FR
34168). That action proposed to require repetitive structural
inspections of certain aging airplanes, and repair, 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.
Support for the Proposal
The Air Transport Association (ATA) of America, on behalf of three
of its members, indicates that these members generally support the
proposal. One of those members states that it does not operate any
Boeing Model 727-200 series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 1214;
another member has no objections to the proposed rule; and another
member has no objection to the intent of the proposed rule but proposes
certain clarifications.
Requests To Correct References
Two commenters state that a number of incorrect references are
cited in the proposed AD. The commenters recommend changing references
from ``AD 94-05-04'' to ``AD 90-06-09'' in the ``Other Relevant
Rulemaking'' and ``Differences Between Proposed Rule and Service
Bulletin'' sections of the proposed AD, the applicability of the
proposed AD, and paragraph (d) of the proposed AD [cited as paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) in the final rule]. One of the commenters contends
that Revision 3 of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, dated August
24, 1989 (which is referenced in Boeing Document Number D6-54860),
clearly references repetitive inspections at intervals of 14,000 flight
cycles. However, the Boeing document only specifies an inspection in
accordance with Note 2 of Revision 3 of the service bulletin, and Note
2 does not refer to the repetitive inspections. Another of the
commenters contends that Revision 2 of the service bulletin, dated
February 13, 1976, was cited in the Boeing document and was mandated by
AD 94-07-08.
Although the ``Other Relevant Rulemaking'' and ``Differences''
sections are not included in the final rule, the FAA concurs that it is
necessary to change all references from ``AD 94-05-04'' to ``AD 90-06-
09'' because the proposed AD incorrectly referenced AD 94-05-04.
However, with regard to the correct revision number of the service
bulletin, the FAA points out that AD 94-07-08 specifies Revision 3
rather than Revision 2 of the service bulletin, and that Revision 2 of
the service bulletin is relevant to AD 90-06-09. To clarify the
applicability of the final rule,
[[Page 19311]]
the FAA has changed the AD reference, and clarified that the actions
are to be accomplished for certain airplanes on which the modification
specified by either Revision 2 or Revision 3 of the service bulletin
has not been accomplished. In addition, the AD references are changed
in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of the final rule.
Request To Extend Compliance Time for Initial Inspection
The commenter states that the compliance time in paragraph (a) of
the proposed AD should be extended. That compliance time assumes that
all Model 727 series airplanes have exceeded the initial inspection
threshold, as it requires the initial inspection within 2,000 flight
cycles [a phase-in (grace) period] after the effective date of the AD.
The commenter points out that Note 2 in Part III of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 3,
specifies a threshold of 16,000 flight cycles and a phase-in period if
an airplane has exceeded that threshold. The commenter has reviewed the
active fleet of Model 727 series airplanes and has found that, at the
present time, there are 36 airplanes that have accumulated less than
14,000 total flight cycles. The commenter also states that if the
initial inspection has been accomplished in accordance with AD 94-07-
08, that AD also requires repetitive inspection intervals of 14,000
total flight cycles. Therefore, the commenter recommends extending the
compliance time in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD.
The FAA concurs that the compliance time should be extended, and
that whether the initial inspection has or has not been accomplished in
accordance with AD 94-07-08 should be considered. Therefore, paragraph
(a) of the final rule has been revised to specify the inspection
requirements for those airplanes on which the initial inspection has
not been accomplished in accordance with AD 94-07-08, and a new
paragraph (b) has been added to specify the inspection requirements for
those airplanes on which the initial inspection has been accomplished
in accordance with AD 94-07-08. [Paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the
proposed AD have been renumbered as paragraphs (c) and (d) in the final
rule.]
Request To Clarify Type of Inspection
One commenter states that although the proposed AD requires a ``dye
penetrant inspection,'' Revision 3 of the Boeing service bulletin only
specifies a ``penetrant inspection,'' and does not reference a Boeing
process specification, Non-Destructive Test manual reference, or any
other kind of reference as to the type of penetrant inspection (e.g.,
dye or fluorescent) that should be performed.
The FAA acknowledges that clarification of the type of inspection
is necessary. Paragraph (a)(1) of the proposed rule specifies a ``dye
penetrant inspection'' in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 727-
57-0127, Revision 3, and Boeing Standard Overhaul Practices Manual D6-
51702, Chapter 20-20-02, Revision 79, dated March 1, 1999. Although the
service bulletin specifies a ``penetrant inspection,'' Figure 1 of the
Standard Overhaul Practices Manual specifies a ``fluorescent dye
penetrant inspection (Type I).'' Based on the type of inspection
included in the manual, the FAA has clarified the type of inspection
specified in the preamble and paragraph (c) of the final rule.
Request To Clarify Terminating Action Required by AD 94-07-08
One commenter states that operators have expressed concerns that
another AD is being written to mandate the inspections required by
Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127 [Revision 3], when AD 94-07-08
currently mandates such inspections. However, the proposed AD does not
state that it will supersede the inspection requirements of Service
Bulletin 727-57-0127, as mandated by AD 94-07-08. Therefore, the
commenter recommends adding a note to the proposed AD stating that
``Upon incorporation of the requirements of this AD, the inspection
requirements of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127 mandated by AD 94-
07-08 may be deleted.''
The FAA acknowledges the concern expressed by the commenter that
the proposed AD requires inspections currently required by paragraph
(a) of AD 94-07-08. In response, the FAA has clarified in paragraph
(g)(1) of the final rule that accomplishment of the inspections
required by this AD constitutes terminating action for the inspections
required by paragraph (a) of AD 94-07-08, as specified in Boeing
Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 3.
Request To Delete Reference to Corrosion
One commenter states that, although the summary of the proposed AD
states that the AD was prompted by reports of incidents involving
fatigue cracking and corrosion found on older airplane models, Boeing
Service Bulletin 727-57-0127 only addresses fatigue cracking and does
not address corrosion. The FAA infers that the commenter suggests
deleting the reference to corrosion in the summary of the proposed
rule.
The FAA does not concur. Although the service bulletin does not
include a reference to corrosion and only includes a reference to
fatigue cracking, the FAA points out that the Working Group's reference
to Boeing Document Number D6-54860, ``Aging Airplane Service Bulletin
Structural Modification Program--Model 727,'' Revision C, dated
December 11, 1989 (as cited in the Discussion paragraph of the proposed
AD), was established to address problems associated with both fatigue
cracking and corrosion. In light of this, the FAA considers that the
reference to corrosion is appropriate, and no change to the final rule
is necessary in this regard.
Request To Clarify Inspection Requirement for Airplanes in Groups 4
and 5
One commenter recommends revising ``Other Relevant Rulemaking'' in
the proposed AD to clarify that AD 94-07-08 inadvertently omitted the
requirement to mandate repetitive inspections for certain wing ribs on
airplanes in groups 4 and 5, because Section 4 of Boeing Document
Number D6-54860 references Revision 2 of Boeing Service Bulletin 727-
57-0127. The commenter adds that Revision 3 of the service bulletin
specifies an additional rib inspection for airplanes in groups 4 and 5
only, and no additional requirements for airplanes in groups 1, 2, 3,
and 6.
Although ``Other Relevant Rulemaking'' is not included in the final
rule, the FAA acknowledges that AD 94-07-08 inadvertently omitted a
requirement for the repetitive inspections. However, the FAA points out
that the commenter was mistaken in stating that Boeing Document Number
D6-54860, references Revision 3 (rather than Revision 2) of the service
bulletin. In addition, Revision 3 of the service bulletin does include
the additional rib inspection for airplanes in groups 4 and 5.
Therefore, no change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.
Request To Allow Later Revisions of Service Bulletins
One commenter states that, in the ``Initial Inspection'' section of
the NPRM, the reference documents for accomplishing the dye penetrant
and high frequency eddy current inspections include a specific revision
number for the service bulletin. The commenter suggests adding ``or
later revisions'' so that when future revisions are released, there
will not be any confusion as to which revision to use.
[[Page 19312]]
The FAA does not concur with the request to revise the AD to
reference later revisions of the service bulletin, because it cannot
approve the use of a document that does not yet exist. In addition,
when a service bulletin is referenced in an AD, the use of the phrase,
``or later FAA-approved revisions,'' violates Office of the Federal
Register regulations regarding approval of materials that are
incorporated by reference. Therefore, the FAA has determined that it is
necessary to specify a certain revision number for all service
bulletins specified in the final rule. However, the FAA points out that
operators may submit any requests to use a later service bulletin
through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, as provided
for by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Request To Revise Inspection Intervals
One commenter recommends extending the inspection intervals in
paragraph (b) of the proposed AD to give credit for the accomplishment
of initial or previous inspections in accordance with AD 94-07-08, and
basing the next required inspection interval on the date the previous
inspection was accomplished.
The FAA does not concur that it is necessary to revise the
inspection intervals required by paragraph (b) of the proposed AD
[cited as paragraph (e) of the final rule] because paragraph (a) of the
proposed AD [cited as paragraph (b) of the final rule] states that the
initial inspection is required within 2,000 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, ``unless accomplished within the last 12,000
flight cycles in accordance with AD 94-07-08.'' Therefore, the proposed
AD provides credit for a previous inspection that was accomplished
within 12,000 flight cycles; as a result, the proposed AD allows
operators to repeat the inspection within 14,000 flight cycles after
the last inspection. No change to the final rule is necessary in this
regard.
Explanation of Change Made to the Proposal
The FAA has revised paragraph (c) of the proposed rule that
requires repair in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127,
Revision 3. That paragraph, renumbered as paragraph (f) in the final
rule, adds that repair also may be accomplished in accordance with a
method approved by the FAA; or in accordance with data meeting the type
certification basis of the airplane approved by a Boeing Company
Designated Engineering Representative who has been authorized by the
FAA to make such findings.
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of
the AD.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 975 Model 727 series airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 538
airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will
take approximately 300 work hours per airplane to accomplish the
required inspections, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work
hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the inspections
required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $9,684,000, or
$18,000 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
The cost impact figure discussed above is 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.
Should an operator elect to accomplish the optional terminating
action rather than continue the repetitive inspections, it would take
approximately 900 work hours per airplane to accomplish the
modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required
parts will cost approximately $31,144 per airplane. Based on these
figures, the cost impact of this optional terminating action is
estimated to be $85,144 per airplane.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects 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, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed 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 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 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
2000-07-12 Boeing: Amendment 39-11666. Docket 99-NM-53-AD.
Applicability: Model 727-100, -100C, and -200 series airplanes,
line numbers 1 through 1214 inclusive; certificated in any category;
except those on which the modification specified by either Boeing
Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 2, dated February 13, 1976,
or Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 3, dated August 24,
1989, has been installed.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise 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 (h) 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 degradation of the structural capabilities of the
affected airplanes, accomplish the following:
Initial Inspection
(a) For those airplanes on which the initial inspection has not
been accomplished in accordance with AD 94-07-08, amendment
[[Page 19313]]
39-8866: Prior to the accumulation of 16,000 total flight cycles or
within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later, accomplish the inspections required by
either paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD.
(b) For those airplanes on which the initial inspection has been
accomplished in accordance with AD 94-07-08, amendment 39-8866:
Within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
unless accomplished within the last 12,000 flight cycles in
accordance with AD 94-07-08, accomplish the inspections required by
either paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD.
(c) Perform a fluorescent dye penetrant inspection (Type I) to
detect cracking of certain wing ribs at the rib-to-stringer
attachment in the areas specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-
0127, Revision 3, dated August 24, 1989; in accordance with Boeing
Standard Overhaul Practices Manual D6-51702, Chapter 20-20-02,
Revision 79, dated March 1, 1999.
(d) Perform a high frequency eddy current inspection to detect
cracking of certain wing ribs at the rib-to-stringer attachment in
the areas specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision
3, dated August 24, 1989; in accordance with Boeing Commercial Jet
Nondestructive Test Manual, Chapter 51-00-00, Part 6, dated August
5, 1997.
Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Action
(e) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by
either paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD, repeat the applicable
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 14,000 flight
cycles.
(f) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
either paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD, prior to further flight,
repair in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127,
Revision 3, dated August 24, 1989; or in accordance with a method
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA Transport Airplane Directorate; or in accordance with
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 by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as
required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must
specifically reference this AD. Repeat the applicable inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 14,000 flight cycles,
following accomplishment of the repair.
Terminating Action
(g)(1) Accomplishment of the actions required by this AD
constitutes terminating action for the inspections required by
paragraph (a) of AD 94-07-08, as specified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 3, dated August 24, 1989.
(2) Accomplishment of the structural modifications specified in
either Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-0127, Revision 2, dated
February 13, 1976; or Revision 3, dated August 24, 1989; constitutes
terminating action for the requirements of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(h) 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, FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate. An alternative method of compliance that
provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by
the Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: 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
(i) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
Secs. 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
(j) Except as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD, the repairs
shall be done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-
0127, Revision 3, dated August 24, 1989; as applicable. 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 from 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 Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(k) This amendment becomes effective on May 16, 2000.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 31, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-8516 Filed 4-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Source: Official FAA Source ↗
Retrieved: Apr 6, 2026
Rights: U.S. Government Public Domain
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FAA. Always verify with official sources.