
[Federal Register: May 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 101)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 30009-30014]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23my08-15]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-25390; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-224-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

 
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of 
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 767 airplanes. The original 
NPRM would have required repetitive inspections for cracking of the 
wing skin, and related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. 
The original NPRM resulted from reports of cracks found in the lower 
wing skin originating at the forward tension bolt holes of the aft 
pitch load fitting. This action revises the original NPRM by revising 
certain compliance times. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to 
detect and correct cracking in the lower wing skin for the forward 
tension bolt holes at the aft pitch load fitting, which could result in 
a fuel leak and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by June 17, 
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing 
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory 
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street 
address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the 
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly 
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
917-6421; fax (425) 917-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this supplemental NPRM. Send your comments to an 
address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number 
``Docket No. FAA-2006-25390; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-224-AD'' at 
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite

[[Page 30010]]

comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy 
aspects of this supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments 
received by the closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in 
light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the ``original NPRM'') for certain Boeing 
Model 767 airplanes. The original NPRM was published in the Federal 
Register on July 19, 2006 (71 FR 40948). The original NPRM proposed to 
require repetitive inspections for cracking of the wing skin, and 
related investigative/corrective actions if necessary.

Actions Since Original NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the original NPRM, Boeing has issued Service 
Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007. The 
procedures in Revision 1 are essentially the same as those in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, dated September 29, 2005, which we 
referred to as the appropriate source of service information for 
accomplishing the actions proposed in the original NPRM. However, 
Revision 1 clarifies the compliance times to add a flight-hour 
component. The flight-hour times were inadvertently omitted from the 
original release of the service bulletin. Flight-hour compliance times 
take into account those airplanes that have long flights. We have 
revised this supplemental NPRM to include the clarified compliance 
times.
    We have also added paragraph (n) to the supplemental NPRM to give 
credit for actions done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, dated 
September 29, 2005.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the 
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Requests To Clarify Thresholds for Internal Inspections of the Wing 
Skin in Paragraph (g) of the Original NPRM

    UPS and Japan Airlines (JAL) request that we clarify the thresholds 
for the internal inspections of the wing skin in paragraph (g) of the 
original NPRM. UPS asks that the statement ``prior to [as of] the 
effective date of this AD'' be removed from paragraphs (g)(1) and 
(g)(2) of the original NPRM. UPS states that the current phrases, 
``prior to the effective date of this AD,'' and ``as of the effective 
date of this AD'' would require operators of airplanes on which one of 
the strut improvement program (SIP) service bulletins (Boeing Service 
Bulletins 767-54-0080, Revision 1, dated May 9, 2002; 767-54-0081, 
dated July 29, 1999, Revision 1, dated February 7, 2002; and 767-54-
0082, dated October 28, 1999, Revision 1, dated November 4, 2004, or 
Revision 3, dated September 20, 2007) is accomplished after the 
effective date of the proposed AD to be inspected at 20,000 total 
aircraft cycles rather than 16,500 cycles from the accomplishment of 
the SIP service bulletin. UPS concludes that this is not the intent of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0097. Furthermore, UPS does not 
see any relevant reason for use of this statement in paragraph (g)(1) 
or (g)(2) of the original NPRM. JAL states that doing the SIP service 
bulletins is equivalent to performing the bolt open hole inspection in 
Part 2 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0097.
    We agree with the commenters that the wording in the original NPRM 
does not give credit for work done in accordance with the SIP service 
bulletins after the effective date of the proposed AD. We have revised 
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this supplemental NPRM to clarify this 
point.

Request To Change Inspection Threshold in Paragraph (h) of the Original 
NPRM

    UPS requests that we change the inspection threshold in paragraph 
(h) of the original NPRM so that it is based on the preceding open-hole 
high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection method used. In that 
case, the threshold for the paragraph (h) inspections would be 16,500 
flight cycles, rather than 3,000 flight cycles, from the last 
accomplishment of paragraph (g) of the NPRM. UPS agrees with the 
repetitive interval of 3,000 flight cycles as currently stated in 
paragraph (h) of the original NPRM.
    We do not agree with the commenter that the threshold should be 
based on the preceding open-hole HFEC inspection method. The external 
inspection specified in Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007, will miss cracks that are hidden by the fitting until the crack 
grows beyond the fitting. In particular, the Part 1 inspection will not 
detect large cracks growing aft that are hidden by the fitting. Also, 
there is a preload in the skin due to ``clamp-up stress'' from the 
bolts. These clamp-up stresses add to uncertainty in the analysis. The 
3,000-flight-cycle threshold will allow for additional opportunities to 
detect possible cracks once they grow beyond the fitting. In addition, 
this rationale is the intent of the manufacturer, and this intent has 
been clarified in Revision 1 of the service bulletin. We have not 
changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request To Clarify the Airplane Effectivity in Paragraph (h) of the 
Original NPRM

    UPS requests that we revise the following statement from paragraph 
(h) of the original NPRM: ``For all airplanes, regardless of whether 
Boeing Service Bulletins 767-54-0080, Revision 1, dated May 9, 2002; 
767-54-0081, dated July 29, 1999; or 767-54-0082, dated October 28, 
1999, have been accomplished * * *''. UPS says that this statement is 
both confusing and unnecessary and recommends that we introduce the 
paragraph by simply saying, ``For all airplanes: * * *''.
    We agree that the cited text, beginning with the word 
``regardless,'' is unnecessary, and that revising the paragraph 
effectivity to state, ``For all airplanes: * * *'' is more clear. We 
have revised paragraph (h) of this supplemental NPRM accordingly.

Requests To Clarify Intent of Repair Specified in Paragraph (i) of the 
Original NPRM

    Boeing and JAL request that we change paragraph (i) of the original 
NPRM to make it more clear that:
     A freeze plug repair is not feasible to meet the 
requirements of paragraph (i) of the original NPRM. Boeing explains 
that although cracks found during the inspections required by paragraph 
(g) of the original NPRM can be repaired using a freeze plug as 
specified in paragraph (i) of the original NPRM, cracks found during 
the inspections required by paragraphs (f) and (h) of the original NPRM 
are too large to be repaired using freeze plugs.
     A freeze plug is not eventually required. Boeing explains, 
however, that the wording in paragraph (i) of the original NPRM implies 
it in the phrase, ``* * * until the freeze plug repair specified in 
paragraph (i) of this AD has been accomplished on both wings.''
     Only cracking that cannot be repaired by over-sizing the 
fastener hole to the limit provided in the service

[[Page 30011]]

bulletin must be repaired using the freeze plug method. JAL requests 
that we add specific wording to paragraph (i) of the original NPRM to 
make this clear.
    We agree with the commenters' requests. Freeze plug repairs might 
not be necessary on both wings. It might be possible to remove small 
crack indications in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated 
October 18, 2007. We have revised paragraph (i) of this supplemental 
NPRM and added a new paragraph (j) to this supplemental NPRM to clarify 
the specified points, and we have re-identified the subsequent 
paragraphs.

Request to Revise ``Differences * * *'' Section

    Boeing requests that we revise the fourth paragraph of the 
``Differences between the Proposed AD and the ASB'' (alert service 
bulletin) section. Boeing specifically requests that we revise the 
sentence ``This proposed AD would require that any cracking found 
outside the limits of Part 1 of the ASB'' to instead refer to cracking 
outside the limits of Part 2 of the ASB. Boeing states that the NPRM 
incorrectly refers to Part 1.
    We agree with Boeing that the reference is incorrect. However 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007, clarifies the repair actions that should be taken. In addition, 
we have not retained in the supplemental NPRM the fourth paragraph in 
the section titled ``Differences between the Proposed AD and the ASB'' 
from the original NPRM, and therefore, we have not revised this 
supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Requests Regarding Service Information

    The Modification and Replacement Parts Association (MARPA) requests 
that the service documents deemed essential to accomplishing the 
proposed action be: (1) Incorporated by reference into the regulatory 
instrument (the Federal Register), and (2) published in the docket 
management system (DMS). MARPA justifies the first request by stating 
that it is concerned that failure to incorporate essential service 
information could result in a court decision invalidating the AD. MARPA 
justifies the second request by stating that publishing the service 
information in the DMS would make those documents available to a new 
class of individuals that has emerged since the majority of aircraft 
maintenance is now performed by specialty shops instead of aircraft 
owners and operators. Owners and operators are provided with service 
information by the manufacturer, but specialty shops are not. MARPA 
adds that publishing electronically makes archaic the reason for 
incorporating by reference--to keep from expanding the Federal Register 
needlessly by publishing documents already in the hands of the affected 
individuals.
    In regard to the commenter's request that service documents be made 
available to the public by publication in the Federal Register, we 
agree that incorporation by reference was authorized to reduce the 
volume of material published in the Federal Register and the Code of 
Federal Regulations. However, as specified in the Federal Register 
Document Drafting Handbook, the Director of the Office of the Federal 
Register (OFR) decides when an agency may incorporate material by 
reference. As the commenter is aware, the OFR files documents for 
public inspection on the workday before the date of publication of the 
rule at its office in Washington, D.C. As stated in the Federal 
Register Document Drafting Handbook, when documents are filed for 
public inspection, anyone may inspect filed documents during the OFR's 
hours of business. Further questions regarding publication of documents 
in the Federal Register or incorporation by reference should be 
directed to the OFR.
    In regard to the commenter's request to post service bulletins on 
the Department of Transportation's (DOT's) DMS, effective September 30, 
2007, DOT's DMS was replaced by the Federal Docket Management System 
(FDMS). We are currently in the process of reviewing issues surrounding 
the posting of service bulletins on the FDMS as part of an AD docket. 
Once we have thoroughly examined all aspects of this issue and have 
made a final determination, we will consider whether our current 
practice needs to be revised.
    No change to this supplemental NPRM is necessary in response to 
this comment.

Explanation of Change to Paragraph (h) of the Original NPRM

    Paragraph (h) of the original NPRM was one sentence. We have 
retained the same information, but divided it into paragraph (h), 
paragraph (h)(1), and paragraph (h)(2) to make the information more 
clear.

FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM

    The change discussed above, in the section titled ``Actions Since 
Original NPRM was Issued,'' expands the scope of the original NPRM; 
therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the 
comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on 
this supplemental NPRM.

Differences Between This Supplemental NPRM and Boeing Service Bulletin 
767-57A0097, Revision 1

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD 
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the 
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative 
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization 
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
    Operators should also note that, although the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the service bulletin describe procedures for submitting 
a report of damage found, this proposed AD would not require that 
action.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 918 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet, and about 387 airplanes on the U.S. Registry. The 
following table provides the estimated costs, at an average labor rate 
of $80 per hour, for U.S. operators to comply with this supplemental 
NPRM.

[[Page 30012]]



                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Work
              Action                 hours           Parts            Cost per airplane          Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive inspections, per               8  None.................  $640, per inspection   $247,680.
 inspection cycle (Part 1).                                          cycle.
Inspection, rework, and bolt              8  Between $303 and       Between $943 and       Between $364,941, and
 installation (Part 2).                       $12,716.               $13,356.               $5,168,772.
Repetitive inspections for certain        4  None.................  $320, per inspection   $123,840, per
 airplanes (Part 4).                                                 cycle.                 inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 the 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. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this supplemental NPRM and placed it in the AD docket. See 
the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory 
evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):


Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2006-25390; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
224-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 17, 
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -
400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified 
in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 
18, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracks found in the lower 
wing skin originating at the forward tension bolt holes of the aft 
pitch load fitting. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 
cracking in the lower wing skin for the forward tension bolt holes 
at the aft pitch load fitting, which could result in a fuel leak and 
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the 
actions have already been done.

External Inspections of the Wing Skin

    (f) For airplanes specified as Group 1, Configuration 1, 2, 3, 
or 6; Group 2, Configuration 1, 2, 3, or 6; and Group 3, 
Configuration 1 or 3, as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007: At the later of the 
times specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, perform 
the detailed inspection and the external high frequency eddy current 
(HFEC) or dye penetrant inspections for cracking as specified in 
Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 
767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007. Repeat at intervals 
not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles or 12,000 flight hours, whichever 
occurs first, until the actions required by paragraph (g) or (j) of 
this AD are accomplished.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles or 
30,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 12,000 flight hours after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

Internal Inspections of the Wing Skin

    (g) For airplanes specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of 
this AD: Perform the bolt open-hole inspections for cracking in 
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007, at 
the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, as 
applicable, until the requirement of paragraphs (h) or (j)(1) of 
this AD are accomplished. Doing the actions in this paragraph 
terminates the requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which the modifications of the nacelle 
strut and wing structure specified in any service bulletin listed in 
Table 1 of this AD have been done: Do the inspection at the later 
time specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD. 
Repeat the inspections at intervals not to exceed 16,500 flight 
cycles or 65,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Within 16,500 flight cycles or 65,000 flight hours, 
whichever occurs earlier, after accomplishment of a service bulletin 
identified in Table 1 of this AD.
    (ii) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 12,000 flight hours after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

[[Page 30013]]



                                      Table 1.--Threshold Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Boeing Service Bulletin                     Revision                             Dated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
767-54-0080..............................  Original....................  October 7, 1999.
767-54-0080..............................  1...........................  May 9, 2002.
767-54-0081..............................  Original....................  July 29, 1999.
767-54-0081..............................  1...........................  February 7, 2002.
767-54-0082..............................  Original....................  October 28, 1999.
767-54-0082..............................  1...........................  November 4, 2004.
767-54-0082..............................  3...........................  September 20, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For airplanes on which the modifications of the nacelle 
strut and wing structure specified in any service bulletin listed in 
Table 1 of this AD have not been done: Do the inspection at the 
later of the times specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) 
of this AD. Repeat the inspections at intervals not to exceed 16,500 
flight cycles or 65,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles or 
60,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs earlier.
    (ii) Within 72 months after the effective date of this AD.

Acceptable Method of Compliance With Paragraph (g) of this AD

    (h) For all airplanes: Doing the actions in both paragraphs 
(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD is an acceptable method of compliance 
for the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of this 
AD after the initial paragraph (g) inspection is accomplished.
    (1) Accomplishing the inspections specified in Part 1 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, 
Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007, within 3,000 flight cycles or 
12,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, after the 
accomplishment of the most recent inspection done in accordance with 
paragraph (g) of this AD (Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions 
of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 
18, 2007).
    (2) Repeating the inspections specified in Part 1 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, 
Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007, at intervals not to exceed 3,000 
flight cycles or 12,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Repair of Cracking

    (i) If cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (f) or (h) of this AD: Before further flight, repair in 
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this 
AD.
    (j) If cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, oversize the 
fastener hole in accordance with Part 2, of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, 
dated October 18, 2007, except as provided by paragraphs (j)(1) and 
(j)(2) of this AD.
    (1) If any cracking cannot be removed by oversizing the fastener 
hole in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007, before further flight, accomplish the freeze plug repair in 
accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007, 
except as provided by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Accomplishing the 
freeze plug repair ends the repetitive inspections required by 
paragraphs (f) and (g) of this AD for the repaired wing only.
    (2) If any cracking is outside the limits specified for the 
freeze plug repair in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007, before further flight, repair in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

Repetitive Inspections Required After Freeze Plug Repair

    (k) For airplanes on which of the requirements of paragraph 
(j)(1) of this AD have been accomplished, perform the repetitive 
inspections specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD at 
the times specified.
    (1) At the later time in paragraph (k)(1)(i) or (k)(1)(ii) of 
this AD: Accomplish the external inspections specified in Part 1 of 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-
57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007. If any cracking is 
found during any inspection required by this paragraph, before 
further flight, repair in accordance with the procedures specified 
in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the external inspections at 
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles or 12,000 flight hours, 
whichever occurs earlier.
    (i) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total flight cycles or 
90,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs earlier.
    (ii) Within 18 months after accomplishment of the freeze plug 
repair specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007.
    (2) At the later of the times specified in paragraph (k)(2)(i) 
or (k)(2)(ii) of this AD: Perform an internal HFEC for cracking, in 
accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 
Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2007. If 
any cracking is found during any inspection required by this 
paragraph, before further flight, repair in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the 
inspections at intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight cycles or 
48,000 flight hours, whichever occurs earlier.
    (i) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 total flight cycles or 
90,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs earlier.
    (ii) Within 72 months after accomplishment of the freeze plug 
repair specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated October 18, 
2007.

Repair of Certain Cracking

    (l) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by 
this AD, and Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, dated 
October 18, 2007, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate 
action: Before further flight, repair the cracking using a method 
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph 
(o) of this AD.

No Reporting Requirement

    (m) Although Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, Revision 1, 
dated October 18, 2007, specifies to submit certain information to 
the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously

    (n) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-57A0097, dated 
September 29, 2005, are acceptable for compliance with the 
corresponding requirements of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the authority to approve 
AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures 
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different 
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. 
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC 
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA 
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 
FSDO.
    (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 an 
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes 
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who 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.


[[Page 30014]]


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-11591 Filed 5-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
