AD 2012-15-12
Recurring
final rule
Applicability
| Type | Manufacturer | Model | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-200 Series | Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-300 Series | Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-300F Series | Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |
| aircraft | The Boeing Company | 767-400ER Series | Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |
Unsafe Condition
Cracks of the underwing longeron fittings in the wing center section, which could result in loss of the primary load path between the fuselage and the wing box, and consequent catastrophic damage to the wing box and failure of the wing.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Required Actions
Repetitive inspections of the underwing longeron fitting for cracking using high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections. Investigative and corrective actions are required if cracking is detected.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Compliance Time
Within 3,000 flight cycles or 7,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, for airplanes that have accumulated over 70,000 total flight hours but less than 20,000 total flight cycles.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Affected Aircraft
All The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Federal Register Abstract
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracks of the underwing longeron fittings in the wing center section. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the underwing longeron fitting for cracking, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such cracking, which could result in loss of the primary load path between the fuselage and the wing box, and consequent catastrophic damage to the wing box and failure of the wing.
Applicability Source Text
Show captured applicability text from the source AD
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -
300F, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD: Installation of Supplemental
Type Certificate (STC) ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/
$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the ability to accomplish the
actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC
ST01920SE is installed, a ''change in product'' alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply
with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Document Text
Show stored source text (verify against official source)
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 152 (Tuesday, August 7, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46932-46935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18578]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2011-1322; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-211-AD;
Amendment 39-17141; AD 2012-15-12]
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 all The
Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of
cracks of the underwing longeron fittings in the wing center section.
This AD requires repetitive inspections of the underwing longeron
fitting for cracking, and related investigative and corrective actions
if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such
cracking, which could result in loss of the primary load path between
the fuselage and the wing box, and consequent catastrophic damage to
the wing box and failure of the wing.
DATES: This AD is effective September 11, 2012.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of September 11,
2012.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; phone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: <a href="https://www.myboeingfleet.com">https://www.myboeingfleet.com</a>. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>; 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 Document 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: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-
917-6577; fax: 425-917-6590; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#561433243e37383378173a372c37241630373778313920"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b4f6d1c6dcd5dad19af5d8d5ced5c6f4d2d5d59ad3dbc2">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 19, 2011 (76 FR
78574). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspections of the underwing longeron fitting for
cracking, and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011), and the FAA's response to each
comment.
Request To Use Revised Service Information
Boeing, UPS, and United Airlines (United) requested that the NPRM
(76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011) use the revised service information,
which is Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated
March 12, 2012. (The NPRM referred to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-57A0126, dated August 12, 2011, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 1, dated November 9, 2011, as the
appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
proposed requirements.) Boeing stated that the correction of the
airplane variable effectivity table does not change the intent of the
NPRM, because applicability paragraph (c) of the NPRM states that
``This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -300F
and -400ER series airplanes; certified in any category.'' Boeing also
stated that including Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126,
Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012, in the AD might prevent confusion for
operators of these airplanes.
We agree with this request because Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012, clarifies inspection
areas and
[[Page 46933]]
corrects various typographical errors. Since the NPRM (76 FR 78574,
December 19, 2011) applied to all Model 767-200, -300, -300F and -400ER
series airplanes, the corrected effectivity in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012, does not affect
the applicability of this AD. We have changed the final rule to
reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated
March 12, 2012. We have also added new paragraph (i) to the final rule
to give credit for actions accomplished before the effective date of
this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, dated August
12, 2011, as revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision
1, dated November 9, 2011, and re-identified subsequent paragraphs
accordingly.
Request To Address Effects of NPRM (76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011) on
Winglets
Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) commented that it has reviewed the
NPRM (76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011), and Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-57A0126, dated August 12, 2011, and has determined that
the installation of winglets, per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01920SE, ``does not affect them.'' We infer that APB means the
installation of these winglets does not affect accomplishing the NPRM.
American Airlines (American) stated that the NPRM (76 FR 78574,
December 19, 2011) does not refer to any effects this inspection or
potential repair would have on aircraft equipped with APB winglets.
American stated that the NPRM should include a reference to procedures
or subsequent actions which may need to be taken over and above the
repair, if a repair was to be installed on an airplane with such
winglets.
We agree that the AD should clarify procedures to address these APB
winglets. We have added new Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD to state
that installation of STC ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory-and-
Guidance-Library/rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/$FILE/
ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions
required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is
installed, a ''change in product'' AMOC approval request is not
necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17. For all
other AMOC requests, the operator must request approval according to
paragraph (j) of this AD.
Request To Increase Compliance Times
United suggested the initial inspection compliance time of within
3,000 flight cycles or 7,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, for
airplanes that have accumulated over 70,000 total flight hours but less
than 20,000 total flight cycles, be to changed to within 6,000 flight
cycles or 14,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. United also
stated that, as an alternative for any airplane with less than 20,000
total flight cycles and less than 90,000 total flight hours, the
initial inspection threshold of ``within 3,000 flight cycles'' be
imposed. United stated that imposing the 3,000-flight-cycle or 7,000-
flight-hour compliance times, whichever occurs first, might be more
suitable for those airplanes with very high flight cycles, such as over
30,000 or 35,000 total flight cycles.
United stated it has reviewed its maintenance history and the most
recent inspection results of maintenance planning data (MPD) structural
tasks (53-622-00 and 53-632-00) on four of its high-time airplanes.
United stated it had no findings, and based on its maintenance history,
it considers the initial inspection threshold of 7,000 flight hours or
3,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first, on any airplane with more
than 70,000 total flight hours to be overly aggressive for those
operators, like United, that fly airplanes on long routes with very few
flight cycles. With average flight hours of approximately 4,500 and
approximately 650 flight cycles per year, United stated that the 7,000-
flight-hour initial inspection threshold will provide only an
approximate 18-month window of opportunity to accomplish the initial
inspection on many of its airplanes. United asserts that the 18-month
threshold does not provide enough time to schedule this inspection on
this many airplanes at a heavy maintenance environment, which is when
it should be accomplished.
We do not agree, because fatigue analysis is based on statistical
methods. Statistics from four airplanes using only the MPD general
visual inspections, without the benefit of an HFEC inspection, does not
provide sufficient statistical justification to increase the compliance
time. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, we
considered the unsafe condition as well as the recommendations of the
manufacturer, and the practical aspect of accomplishing the required
inspection within an interval of time that corresponds to the normal
maintenance schedules of most affected operators. We have not changed
the final rule in this regard.
Request To Revise On-Condition Costs
UPS stated that the estimated on-conditions parts cost specified in
the NPRM (76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011) only reflect the cost for one
wing.
We agree. We have confirmed that one top-kit is required for each
wing, and that the parts costs for both wings ranges up to $14,290. We
have revised the estimated on-condition costs in the final rule to
include the cost required for both wings.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
<bullet> [Agr]re consistent with the intent that was proposed in
the NPRM (76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
<bullet> Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 78574, December 19, 2011).
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.
Interim Action
We consider this AD interim action. The design approval holder is
currently developing a modification that will address the unsafe
condition identified in this AD. Once this modification is developed,
approved, and available, we might consider additional rulemaking.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 417 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive HFEC inspection....... 3 work-hours x $85 $0 $255 per inspection $106,335 per
per hour = $255 cycle. inspection cycle.
per inspection
cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 46934]]
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary inspections and
replacements 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 on-condition actions.
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tension bolt hole and front 104 work-hours x Up to $14,290................ Up to $23,130.
spar lower chord HFEC $85 per hour =
inspection and fitting $8,840.
replacement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for cracking repairs specified in this AD.
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):
2012-15-12 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17141; Docket No. FAA-
2011-1322; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-211-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 11, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -
300F, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD: Installation of Supplemental
Type Certificate (STC) ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory--
and--Guidance--Library/rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/
$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the ability to accomplish the
actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC
ST01920SE is installed, a ''change in product'' alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply
with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks of the underwing
longeron fittings in the wing center section. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct such cracking, which could result in loss of
the primary load path between the fuselage and the wing box, and
consequent catastrophic damage to the wing box and failure of the
wing.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Inspections, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective Actions
Except as provided by paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) of this AD,
at the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126,
Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012: Do a high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of the underwing longeron
fitting; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March
12, 2012, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD. Do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions before
further flight. Repeat the inspection of the underwing longeron
fitting thereafter at the applicable compliance time and intervals
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012.
(h) Exceptions to Paragraph (g) of This AD
(1) If, during accomplishment of the related investigative
action required by this AD, any cracking is found and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012,
specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before further
flight, do the repair using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
(2) Where Paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March 12, 2012,
specifies a compliance time ``after the original issue date of this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time ``after the effective date of this AD.''
(3) The Condition column of Paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated March
12, 2012, refers to total flight cycles and total flight hours ``as
of the original issue date of this service bulletin.'' However, this
AD applies to the airplanes with the specified total flight cycles
or total flight hours ``as of the effective date of this AD.''
[[Page 46935]]
(i) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
57A0126, dated August 12, 2011, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 1, dated November 9, 2011; both of
which are not incorporated by reference.
(j) 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 the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0b32264a454626586e6a7f7f676e264a4844264a46444826596e7a7e6e787f784b6d6a6a256c647d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="566f7b17181b7b05333722223a337b1715197b171b19157b04332723332522251630373778313920">[email protected]</span></a>.
(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 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. 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.
(k) Related Information
For more information about this AD, contact Berhane Alazar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6577; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3173544359505f541f705d504b5043715750501f565e47"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="460423342e27282368072a273c27340620272768212930">[email protected]</span></a>.
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the following service
information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0126, Revision 2, dated
March 12, 2012.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; phone: 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet: <a href="https://www.myboeingfleet.com">https://www.myboeingfleet.com</a>.
(4) You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
(5) You may also review copies of the 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: <a href="http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html">http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html</a>.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 23, 2012.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-18578 Filed 8-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
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.
Related Airworthiness Directives
2026-05-07
final ruleAirworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
Unsafe Condition: Discovery of a crack at one of the forward lower fastener holes following replacement of a cracked underwing longeron (UWL) fitting. Such cracking could result in loss in the primary load path betw...
2026-05-03 Recurring
final ruleAirworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
Unsafe Condition: scribe lines found at skin lap joints and butt joints, around external repairs and antennas, and at locations where external decals had been cut, which could develop into fatigue cracks in the skin...
2026-04-10 Recurring
final ruleAirworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
Unsafe Condition: Corrosion damage on the Model 767 satellite communications (SATCOM) high gain antenna adapter plate, which could result in parts departing the airplane (PDA). A PDA event of the SATCOM high gain an...
2025-15-08 Recurring
final ruleAirworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
Unsafe Condition: uncommanded fore and aft movement of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, which could cause a flight control obstruction or unintended flight control input, resulting in the loss of the ability...