Je veux savoir à propos de…

11160

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

STC ST01920SE affects the ability to accomplish some of the actions required by the proposed AD. APB noted that it is in the process of revising the APB
airworthiness limitations AWL and damage tolerance rating DTR Check Form Supplements to define the alternative inspections and/or inspection intervals required for the structural AWLs affected by the revised Boeing service information. APB noted that its documents are alternative to the Boeing service information and that APB planned to apply for an AMOC to the proposed AD if it is adopted as a final rule.
The FAA agrees with the request to add a paragraph providing the specified information. The FAA has redesignated paragraph c of the proposed AD in the NPRM as paragraph c1 of this proposed AD and added paragraph c2 to this proposed AD to advise operators that installation of STC
ST01920SE affects the ability to accomplish some of the actions required by this AD, and that an AMOC may be required in order to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Additionally, the FAA emphasizes that for any airplane that is modified by an STC that affects any structurally significant item SSI inspections, an AMOC approval request is necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17.
Request To Clarify the Intent of Paragraph l4 of the Proposed AD
American Airlines requested that the FAA clarify the intent of the last sentence of paragraph l4 of the proposed AD and confirm that operators are not required to re-notify principal inspectors, as specified in paragraph l2 of the proposed AD, or to revise previously approved AMOCs. The commenter stated that the final sentence of the paragraph seems to nullify the guidance of the previous sentence.
The FAA agrees to clarify the intent of paragraph l4 of this proposed AD.
The intent of paragraph l4 of this proposed AD is to allow previously approved AMOCs only for repairs and alterations. The last sentence of paragraph l4 of this proposed AD is intended to advise that revisions of the AWL prior to the July 2020 revision, that were approved as an AMOC to AD
20141404, Amendment 3917899 79
FR 44672, August 1, 2014 AD 2014
1404, cannot be used to comply with any actions in this proposed AD. In addition, for existing AMOCs to AD
20031810, Amendment 3913301 68
FR 53503, September 11, 2003 AD
20031810, and AD 20141404, operators are not required to re-notify
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:41 Feb 23, 2021

Jkt 253001

FAA personnel in accordance with paragraph l2 of this proposed AD.
Finally, existing AMOCs to ADs 2003
1810 and 20141404 are not required to be revised to specifically reference this proposed AD. This proposed AD
has not been changed with regard to this request.
Request To Clarify Paragraph l5 of the Proposed AD
American Airlines requested clarification of the compliance time for the requirements of paragraph l5 of the proposed AD. American Airlines asserted that for a recently accomplished repair approved by the The Boeing Company Organization Designation Authorization ODA for Stage I, and currently pending damage tolerance evaluation DTE Stage II/III, the compliance time should align with the standard Boeing DTE timeline of 24
months from Stage I approval to completion of Stage I, II, and III
approval. American Airlines also requested confirmation that repair approvals obtained in accordance with paragraph l5 of the proposed AD do not require reference to the proposed AD, since those approvals were issued prior to the effective date of this AD.
The FAA does not agree with the request to allow repairs in progress to use the 24-month Boeing DTE timeline.
To use the provisions specified in paragraph l5 of this proposed AD, the repair must be completed before the effective date of this AD. Repairs accomplished before the effective date of this AD that do not meet the conditions specified in paragraphs l5ii and iii of this proposed AD
have until when the next AD-required inspection is due to obtain any AMOC
that may be needed.
Regarding the repair approval request, the FAA confirms that the approvals do not need to refer to this AD. The FAA
has not changed this proposed AD
regarding this issue.
Request To Clarify Next Wing Tank Entry UPS requested clarification of the term next wing tank entry as used in paragraph h1 of the proposed AD.
The commenter stated that the term is unnecessary and adds confusion.
The FAA agrees with the request to clarify what was meant by next wing tank entry. The intent is to allow accomplishment of the sealant removal task prior to the next accomplishment of the specific maintenance planning document task, and not during a fuel tank entry for non-AWL-related reasons.
The FAA has removed next fuel tank entry from the exception in paragraph
PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

h1 of this proposed AD and replaced it with next accomplishment of the specific Maintenance Planning Document MPD task.
Request To Change the Grace Period in Paragraph h1 of the Proposed AD
UPS requested that the grace period in paragraph h1 of the proposed AD be changed from 6 years to 8 years. UPS
stated it considers that the FAA is providing accommodations for the tasks that can be repeated at intervals up to 4C, considering an 18-month 1C check interval. However, UPS noted that per Subsection B, Structural Inspections of Boeing 767200/300/300F/400ER
Airworthiness Limitations AWLs, D622T001901, dated July 2020, a 1C
check is defined as 3,000 flight cycles, or 24 months, or 9,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. UPS stated that an 8-year grace period is more acceptable to meet the intent of the accommodation by the FAA.
The FAA disagrees with the requested grace period of not to exceed 8 years because the 6-year grace period does meet the FAAs intent to provide a grace period for certain instructions to do certain actions, In addition, the commenter did not provide adequate supporting documentation to justify the escalation. All MPD tasks listed in the Excess Sealant Table of the AWL
document have a baseline repetitive inspection interval of 6 years. Even though these tasks may have the option for escalation of the inspection intervals, each operator addresses escalation differently, and may request an escalation using the AMOC process.
The FAA has not changed this proposed AD regarding this issue.
Request To Allow an Acceptable Method of Compliance for Certain Tasks FedEx Express requested that the FAA
incorporate Boeing 767200/300/300F/
400ER Airworthiness LimitationsLine Number Specific, D622T001902, dated April 2019, as another acceptable method of compliance for the proposed AD. The commenter noted that certain requirements of Boeing 767200/300/
300F/400ER Airworthiness Limitations AWLs, D622T001901, dated June 2019, cannot be accomplished due to specific line number differences in configuration as a result of Material Review Board MRB actions.
The FAA agrees with the request.
However, the FAA notes that Boeing has released a newer version of the document mentioned by the commenter.
The FAA has therefore added paragraph h4 to this proposed AD to specify that revising the existing maintenance
E:FRFM24FEP1.SGM

24FEP1