[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 161 (Friday, August 20, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45477-45481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-21687]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 99-NM-81-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to all Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This proposal would
require repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the lower corners
of the door frame and cross beam of the forward cargo door, and
corrective actions, if necessary. This proposal also would require
eventual modification of the outboard radius of
[[Page 45478]]
the lower corners of the door frame and reinforcement of the cross beam
of the forward cargo door, which would constitute terminating action
for the repetitive inspections. This proposal is prompted by reports
indicating that fatigue cracks have been detected in the lower corners
of the door frame and cross beam of the forward cargo door. The actions
specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue cracking
of the lower corners of the door frame and cross beam of the forward
cargo door, which could result in rapid depressurization of the
airplane.
DATES: Comments must be received by October 4, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-81-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98134-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Kawaguchi, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-1153; fax (425) 227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments,
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 99-NM-81-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules
Docket No. 99-NM-81-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion
The FAA has received several reports indicating that fatigue cracks
have been detected in the lower corners of the door frame and cross
beam of the forward cargo door on Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. Such fatigue cracking results
from cabin pressurization cycles. The sizes of the cracks ranged from
3/8 inch to 17.5 inches in length, and were found on airplanes that had
accumulated between 13,500 and 53,100 total flight hours and between
15,700 and 49,800 total flight cycles.
The manufacturer subsequently redesigned the door frame of the
forward cargo door to be less susceptible to fatigue cracking. However,
investigation has revealed that such cracking has been detected on
airplanes equipped with the redesigned door frame of the forward cargo
door. Recently, two operators reported finding cracks on the lower
corner radius of the aft door frame of the forward cargo door. The
first operator reported finding a 10-inch crack on the aft door frame
and an undisclosed sized crack on the cross beam on an airplane that
had accumulated 23,000 total flight cycles. The second operator
reported finding a 14.5-inch crack on the aft door frame and an
undisclosed sized crack on the cross beam on an airplane that had
accumulated 29,000 total flight cycles. Such cracking, if not detected
and corrected, could result in rapid depressurization of the airplane.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
The FAA previously has issued AD 90-06-02, amendment 39-6489 (55 FR
8372, March 7, 1990), applicable to certain Boeing Model 737 series
airplanes. AD 90-06-02 requires accomplishment of certain structural
modifications. That amendment was prompted by reports of incidents
involving fatigue cracking and corrosion in transport category
airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their design life goal.
For airplanes that have those modifications installed, this proposed AD
would require additional modifications of the aft lower corner of the
door frame of the forward cargo door.
Additionally, the FAA has issued AD 98-25-06, amendment 39-10931
(55 FR 67769, December 9, 1998), applicable to certain Boeing Model
737-200, -200C, -300, and -400 series airplanes. AD 98-25-06 requires
repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the corners of the door
frame and the cross beams of the aft cargo door, and corrective
actions, if necessary. This proposed AD would not affect the
requirements of that AD.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
The FAA has reviewed and approved Boeing 737 Nondestructive Test
Manual, Part 6, Section 51-00-00, Figure 4 and Figure 23, which
describes procedures for performing high frequency eddy current
inspections.
The FAA has also reviewed and approved Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
52-1100, Revision 2, dated March 31, 1994, which describes procedures
for, among other things, repetitive close visual inspections to detect
cracking of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame and
cross beam (i.e., upper and lower chord and web sections) of the
forward cargo door, and corrective actions, if necessary. The
corrective actions involve replacement of the damaged door frame of the
forward cargo door with a new door frame and reinforcement modification
of the upper chord and web sections of the cross beam of the forward
cargo door. The corrective actions also involve installation of a cross
beam repair (if necessary), and preventative modification of the
outboard radius of the lower corners of the door frame. This
modification involves installing a reinforcement angle along the full
length of the lower corners (forward and aft) over the outboard radius
of the lower end of the door frame. For certain airplanes, installation
of the preventative modification of the outboard radius of the lower
corner of the door frame and reinforcement of the cross beam of the
forward cargo door will eliminate the need for the repetitive
inspections.
Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service documents is
[[Page 45479]]
intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition.
Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the
proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions specified in
the service documents described previously, except as discussed below.
Differences Between Proposed Rule and Service Bulletin
Operators should note that, whereas the Boeing service
bulletin specifies close visual inspections only, this proposed AD
would require a high frequency eddy current inspection to detect
cracking of the door frame and a detailed visual inspection to detect
cracking of the cross beam of the forward cargo door. The FAA has
determined that, because of the safety implications and consequences
associated with such fatigue cracking, close visual inspection methods
alone may be inadequate in detecting cracks.
While the Boeing service bulletin does not provide
corrective actions for cracking detected on the lower chord of the
cross beam, this proposed AD would require that the repair of the lower
chord of the cross beam be accomplished in accordance with a method
approved by the FAA.
Operators should further note that, unlike the procedures
described in the Boeing service bulletin, this proposed AD would not
permit the alternative of replacing the door frame of the forward cargo
door in the event that cracks are detected on the cross beam. This
proposed AD would require installation of a cross beam repair (if
necessary) and preventative modification of the outboard radius of the
lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame, and installation of
a reinforcement modification of the cross beam of the forward cargo
door. Additionally, this proposed AD would require additional actions
in the event that cracks are detected in the door frame of the forward
cargo door. This proposed AD would require replacement of the door
frame with a new door frame, reinforcement of the cross beam, and
installation of the preventative modification of the outboard radius of
the lower corners of the door frame. The FAA finds that, in view of the
reports that cracking has occurred on the redesigned door frames, and
because of the safety implications and consequences associated with
such cracking, replacing the door frame without further modification
will not safely address the unsafe condition.
This AD also proposes to mandate, within 4 years, the
preventative modification of the outboard radius of the lower corners
(forward and aft) of the door frame and the reinforcement modification
of the cross beam of the forward cargo door as described in the Boeing
service bulletin (previously described). The modification would be
accomplished, for certain airplanes, in accordance with the Boeing
service bulletin and for certain other airplanes, in accordance with a
method approved by the FAA, and would eliminate the need for the
repetitive inspections.
The FAA has determined that long-term continued operational safety
will be better assured by design changes to remove the source of the
problem, rather than by repetitive inspections. Long-term inspections
may not be providing the degree of safety assurance necessary for the
transport airplane fleet. This, coupled with a better understanding of
the human factors associated with numerous continual inspections, has
led the FAA to consider placing less emphasis on inspections and more
emphasis on design improvements. The proposed modification requirements
are in consonance with these conditions.
The effectivity of the Boeing service bulletin includes
Boeing Model 737 series airplanes having line numbers 0001 through 1231
inclusive. This proposed AD would be applicable to Boeing Model 737
series airplanes having line numbers 0001 through 1231 inclusive, and
also would include Boeing Model 737 series airplanes having line
numbers 1232 and on. The FAA is aware that a design change to the door
frame of the forward cargo door was implemented on the production line
at line number 1232. The FAA finds that, in view of the reports
indicating that cracking has occurred on airplanes having later line
numbers (1251 and 1790) with the change incorporated, the applicability
specified in this proposed AD is appropriate.
Further, operators should note that, although the Boeing
service bulletin recommends that the initial inspection be performed
within 4,500 flight cycles after an airplane has accumulated 12,000
total flight cycles, this proposed AD would require that the initial
inspection be performed within 1 year or 4,500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. The FAA has
determined that the number of total flight cycles for an airplane may
not be a good indicator of the total cycle count for the subject
forward cargo door, because a door may have been removed from an
airplane that had accumulated many total flight cycles and reinstalled
on an airplane that had accumulated relatively fewer total flight
cycles. Due to the limited ability to accurately track the total flight
cycles of the subject forward cargo door, the initial compliance time
specified by this proposed AD is appropriate.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 3,100 airplanes of the affected design in
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 1,400 airplanes of U.S.
registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take
approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed
inspections, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the inspections proposed by
this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $84,000, or $60 per
airplane, per inspection cycle.
It would take approximately 38 work hours per airplane to
accomplish the proposed terminating modifications at an average labor
rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost $1,865 per
airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the terminating
modifications proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$5,803,000, or $4,145 per airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 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 proposed herein would 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
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by
[[Page 45480]]
contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
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:
Boeing: Docket 99-NM-81-AD.
Applicability: All Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -
500 series airplanes; 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 (e) 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 fatigue cracking of the lower corners of the door
frame and cross beam of the forward cargo door, which could result
in rapid depressurization of the airplane, accomplish the following:
High Frequency Eddy Current Initial/Repetitive Inspections
(a) Within 1 year or 4,500 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a high frequency
eddy current (HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of the lower
corners (forward and aft) of the door frame of the forward cargo
door in accordance with Boeing 737 Nondestructive Test Manual, Part
6, Section 51-00-00, Figure 4 or Figure 23.
(1) If no cracking is detected, repeat the HFEC inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles, until the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD have been accomplished.
(2) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required
by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this AD,
which constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.
(i) Replace the door frame of the forward cargo door with a new
door frame; install a cross beam repair and reinforcement
modification of the cross beam in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2, dated March 31, 1994; and
(ii) Modify the replacement door frame of the forward cargo door
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 or
modification method to be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as
required by this paragraph and paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3)(ii), and
(c)(2), the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference
this AD.
Detailed Visual Initial/Repetitive Inspections
(b) Within 1 year or 4,500 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a detailed visual
inspection to detect cracking of the cross beam (i.e., upper and
lower chord and web sections) of the forward cargo door in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994.
Note 2: For the purposes 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) If no cracking is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 4,500 flight cycles until the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD have been accomplished.
(2) If any cracking is detected on the lower chord section of
the cross beam during any inspection required by paragraph (b) of
this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method
approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, 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.
(3) If any cracking is detected on any area excluding the lower
chord section of the cross beam (i.e., upper chord and web section)
during any inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD, prior to
further flight, accomplish the requirements of paragraph (b)(3)(i)
or (b)(3)(ii), as applicable, of this AD, which constitute
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by
paragraph (b)(1) of this AD.
(i) For airplanes with line numbers 1 through 1231: Install a
cross beam repair and preventative modification of the outboard
radius of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door frame in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994.
Note 3: Due to implications and consequences associated with
cracking, this AD does not allow the option of replacing the door
frame as an alternative method of compliance to installing the
preventative modification.
(ii) For airplanes with line numbers 1232 and subsequent:
Install a cross beam repair and preventative modification of the
outboard radius of the lower corners (forward and aft) of the door
frame in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle
ACO 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.
Terminating Action
(c) Within 4 years after the effective date of this AD: Install
the preventative modification of the outboard radius of the lower
corners (forward and aft) of the door frame and the reinforcement
modification of the cross beam of the forward cargo door in
accordance with paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD, as
applicable. Accomplishment of paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD,
as applicable, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes with line numbers 1 through 1231: Accomplish
the preventative modification and the reinforcement modification in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2,
dated March 31, 1994.
(2) For airplanes with line numbers 1232 and subsequent:
Accomplish the preventative modification and the reinforcement
modification in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
Seattle ACO 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.
Modifications Previously Accomplished
(d) For all airplanes on which modifications of the forward
lower corner of the door frame and the cross beam of the forward
cargo door were accomplished in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-52-1100, dated August 25, 1988, or Revision 1, dated
July 20, 1989, or in accordance with the requirements of AD 90-06-
02, amendment 39-6489: Within 4 years after the effective date of
this AD, install the reinforcement modification of the aft corner of
the door frame of the forward cargo door in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-52-1100, Revision 2, dated March 31, 1994.
Accomplishment of such modification constitutes terminating action
for the repetitive inspections required by this AD.
[[Page 45481]]
Note 4: Accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-52-1100,
Revision 2, dated March 31, 1994, does not supersede the
requirements of AD 90-06-02, amendment 39-6489.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(e) 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
(f) 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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 16, 1999.
D. L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-21687 Filed 8-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
