AD 2000-12-17
Applicability
| Type | Manufacturer | Model | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-200 Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-300 Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-300F Series | Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes |
Unsafe Condition
Fatigue cracking of the pitch load fittings of the wing front spar, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the strut.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Required Actions
Inspect for fatigue cracking of the pitch load fittings of the wing front spar using either high frequency eddy current (HFEC) or dye penetrant inspection methods. Rework the pitch load fittings if cracking is detected. Accomplish lug bore inspections and an insurance cut as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, or earlier revisions.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Compliance Time
Before further flight
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Affected Aircraft
Boeing Model 767 series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 663 inclusive, certificated in any category.
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 767 series airplanes, that requires repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the pitch load fittings of the wing front spar, and rework, if necessary. This amendment also provides for optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this AD. This amendment is prompted by a structural fatigue analysis that shows that the operational loads of the nacelle are higher than the loads used during initial design of the Model 767. The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect and correct fatigue cracking in the pitch load fittings of the wing front spar, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the strut.
Document Text
Show stored source text (verify against official source)
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37843-37845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 00-15183]
[[Page 37843]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 99-NM-182-AD; Amendment 39-11795; AD 2000-12-17]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series airplanes, that requires
repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the pitch load
fittings of the wing front spar, and rework, if necessary. This
amendment also provides for optional terminating action for the
repetitive inspections required by this AD. This amendment is prompted
by a structural fatigue analysis that shows that the operational loads
of the nacelle are higher than the loads used during initial design of
the Model 767. The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect
and correct fatigue cracking in the pitch load fittings of the wing
front spar, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
strut.
DATES: Effective July 24, 2000.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of July 24, 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 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: James G. Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2783; 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 767 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on December 6, 1999 (64
FR 68058). That action proposed to require repetitive inspections to
detect fatigue cracking of the pitch load fittings of the wing front
spar, and rework, 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 Proposed Rule
One commenter supports the proposed rule.
Request To Allow Alternative Inspection Method
Two commenters request that the FAA revise paragraph (c)(1) of the
proposed rule to allow a dye penetrant inspection to be performed in
lieu of the high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection specified in
that paragraph. Both commenters point out that Boeing Service Bulletin
767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 23, 1999, describes a dye
penetrant inspection that may be used instead of the HFEC inspection.
One of the commenters also points out that the original issue, dated
June 27, 1996, and Revision 1, dated October 31, 1996, of the service
bulletin reference a dye penetrant inspection but not an HFEC
inspection, and some operators have already accomplished the inspection
in accordance with one of the earlier issues of the service bulletin.
(``Note 2'' of the proposed rule states that use of the original issue
or Revision 1 of the service bulletin is acceptable for compliance with
this AD.)
The FAA concurs with the commenters' request to revise paragraph
(c)(1) of this AD. The FAA's intent in the proposed rule was to allow
accomplishment of the dye penetrant inspection in lieu of the HFEC
inspection; however, the proposed rule did not explicitly state that.
Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraph (c)(1) of this final rule to
require accomplishment of either an HFEC or a dye penetrant inspection.
Request to Reference Terminating Action
Several commenters request that the proposed rule be revised to
specify a terminating action for the proposed repetitive inspections.
Though Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, specifies that
incorporation of certain strut improvement program (SIP) service
bulletins is terminating action, the proposed rule does not mention a
terminating action. One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, states
that the proposed rule should be revised to state that accomplishment
of the applicable SIP service bulletin, along with the bushing removal,
lug bore inspections, and insurance cut specified in Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-57-0053, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspection requirements of this AD. One commenter, an operator, also
points out that the SIP service bulletin that is applicable to its
airplanes recommends accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-
0053, Revision 1, dated October 31, 1996, prior to or concurrent with
the SIP bulletin, but the SIP service bulletin does not list Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2. The commenter states that the
bulletins ``do not provide a clear direction on what needs to be
accomplished to terminate the inspection requirements stated in the
NPRM.''
The FAA concurs with the commenters' request. The SIP service
bulletins referenced by the commenter and Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
57-0053, Revision 2, do reference one another, and modification of the
nacelle strut and wing structure as specified in the applicable SIP
service bulletin does constitute terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by this AD, provided that the lug bore inspections
and the insurance cut described in this AD are also accomplished.
Therefore, a new paragraph (g) has been added to this final rule to
provide this as an optional terminating action.
In addition, the FAA is considering separate rulemaking actions to
mandate accomplishment of the SIP service bulletins, and Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2 (as well as the earlier revisions of
that service bulletin), will be specified as an integral part of the
actions required to accomplish the SIP service bulletins. A new ``Note
4'' has been included in this final rule to clarify this.
Request To Specify Removal of Bushings
One commenter requests that paragraph (c) of the proposed rule be
revised to specify that the pitch load fitting bushings must be removed
to accomplish the inspection of the lug bores. The commenter points out
that removal of both the upper link and pitch load fitting bushings is
specified in Figure 1 of the service bulletin. The commenter states
that the omission is an error in the proposed rule.
The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request to revise
paragraph
[[Page 37844]]
(c) of the proposed rule. The FAA acknowledges that the pitch load
fitting bushings must be removed prior to inspection of the lug bores.
Though this was not explicitly stated in the proposed rule, the FAA
finds that it is implied by the wording of paragraph (c), which reads,
``accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this
AD in accordance with [the service bulletin.]'' The service bulletin
states that the HFEC inspection, which is specified in paragraph (c)(1)
of this AD, is to be accomplished ``as specified in Figure 3'' of the
service bulletin. In turn, Figure 3 instructs operators to remove the
bushings prior to accomplishment of the inspection. The FAA finds that
to specify every action contained in the service bulletin would
unnecessarily complicate this AD. Therefore, no change to the final
rule is necessary in this regard.
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 663 Model 767 series airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 312
airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will
take approximately 10 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 AD on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $187,200, or $600 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.
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 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 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 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:
2000-12-17: Boeing: Amendment 39-11795. Docket 99-NM-182-AD.
Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes, line numbers 1
through 663 inclusive, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (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 detect fatigue cracks in the pitch load fittings of the wing
front spar, which could result in reduced structural integrity of
the strut, accomplish the following:
(a) Accomplish the requirements of either paragraph (b) or (c)
of this AD at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (a)(2) of this AD.
(1) Prior to the initial inspection threshold specified in
Figure 1, Table 1.1 of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision
2, dated September 23, 1999.
(2) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 18 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
Note 2: Inspections and repairs accomplished prior to the
effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
767-57-0053, dated June 27, 1996; or Revision 1, dated October 31,
1996; are considered acceptable for compliance with the applicable
action specified in this amendment.
Option 1: Ultrasonic and Eddy Current Inspections
(b) Perform ultrasonic and eddy current inspections to detect
cracks of the pitch load fittings of the wing front spar, in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2,
dated September 23, 1999.
(1) If no crack is detected, repeat the inspections thereafter
at the interval specified in Table 1.2 of Figure 1 of the service
bulletin.
(2) If any crack is detected, prior to further flight, remove
the upper link and the pitch load fitting bushings, and accomplish
both paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Perform a detailed visual inspection of the inner and outer
face pad-up areas of the pitch load fittings to detect damage or
corrosion and to determine if the pad-up areas are parallel, in
accordance with the service bulletin. Except as provided by
paragraph (f) of this AD, if any damage, corrosion, or non-
parallelism is detected, prior to further flight, rework the inner
or outer face of the pitch load fitting where damage or corrosion
was detected, and make pad-up areas parallel, as applicable, in
accordance with the service bulletin.
[[Page 37845]]
(ii) Accomplish paragraph (d) of this AD.
Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed visual
inspection is defined as:
``An intensive visual examination of a specific structural area,
system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a
direct source of good lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by
the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses,
etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate access procedures
may be required.''
Option 2: High Frequency Eddy Current and Detailed Visual Inspections
(c) Remove the upper link and accomplish the requirements of
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 23, 1999.
(1) Perform a high frequency eddy current inspection or a dye
penetrant inspection to detect cracking of the pitch load fittings
of the wing front spar.
(2) Perform a detailed visual inspection of the inner and outer
face pad-up areas of the pitch load fittings to detect damage or
corrosion and to determine if the pad-up areas are parallel. Except
as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD, if any damage, corrosion,
or non-parallelism is detected, prior to further flight, rework the
inner or outer face of the pitch load fitting where damage or
corrosion was detected, and make pad-up areas parallel, as
applicable, in accordance with the service bulletin.
Rework
(d) For airplanes on which any cracking is detected during any
inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD, or on which the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD have been accomplished:
Prior to further flight, accomplish paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of
this AD, as applicable, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 23, 1999; and accomplish
paragraph (e) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes inspected in accordance with paragraph (c) of
this AD and on which no cracking was detected: Make an insurance cut
of the pitch load fitting lug.
(2) For airplanes on which any cracking was detected during any
inspection required by paragraph (b) or (c) of this AD: Except as
provided by paragraph (f) of this AD, rework the lugs of the pitch
load fittings of the wing front spar.
Bushing Installation
(e) For airplanes on which the requirements specified in
paragraph (d) of this AD have been accomplished: Prior to further
flight, install new bushings in the pitch load fittings of the wing
front spar as specified in paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this AD, in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2,
dated September 23, 1999.
(1) Option 1: Install new bushings using the high interference
fit method, and repeat the inspections required by paragraph (b) or
(c) of this AD at the intervals specified in Table 1.3 of Figure 1.
of the service bulletin.
(2) Option 2: Install new bushings using the FORCEMATE method,
and repeat the inspections required by paragraph (b) or (c) of this
AD at the interval specified in Table 1.4 of Figure 1. of the
service bulletin.
Repair
(f) If any damage is detected that is outside the limits
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated
September 23, 1999, and the service bulletin specifies to contact
Boeing for appropriate action: Prior to further flight, repair 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 (DER) who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make such findings. For a repair method to be approved, as
required by this paragraph, the approval letter must specifically
reference this AD.
Optional Terminating Action
(g) Accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2) of this AD constitutes terminating action for the actions
required by this AD.
(1) Modify the nacelle strut and wing structure in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080, dated October 7, 1999 (for
Model 767 series airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney engines);
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0081, dated July 29, 1999 (for Model
767 series airplanes powered by General Electric engines); or Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-54-0082, dated October 28, 1999 (for Model 767
series airplanes powered by Rolls-Royce engines); as applicable.
(2) Accomplish the lug bore inspections and insurance cut of the
pitch load fitting in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 23, 1999.
Note 4: The FAA is considering separate rulemaking actions to
mandate accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletins 767-54-0080, 767-
54-0081, and 767-54-0082. Actions described in Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2 (or previous issues of that service
bulletin), as required by this AD will be specified as an integral
part of the actions required to accomplish these service bulletins.
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. 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 5: 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 in paragraphs (f) and (g)(1) of this AD,
the actions shall be done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
767-57-0053, Revision 2, dated September 23, 1999. 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.
Effective Date
(k) This amendment becomes effective on July 24, 2000.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 9, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-15183 Filed 6-16-00; 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.