DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0480; Product Identifier 2019-NM-041-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

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

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposal to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-07-09, which applies to certain The
Boeing Company Model 737-700, -700C, -800, and -900ER series airplanes,
Model 747-400F series airplanes, and Model 767-200 and -300 series
airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
by adding airplanes to the applicability. The FAA is proposing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions
would impose an additional burden over that proposed in the NPRM, the
FAA is reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to
comment on these proposed changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on June 25, 2019 (84 FR 29818), is reopened.

The FAA must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 21, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For Boeing service information identified in this SNPRM, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone 562-797-1717; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For
Intertechnique service information identified in this SNPRM, contact
Aerotechnics, 61 rue Pierre Curie BP 1, 78373 Plaisir, CEDEX, France;
phone: +33 1 6486 6964; internet http://www.zodiacaerospace.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0480.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.
gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0480;
or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this SNPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Brown, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin
Safety and Environmental Systems Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3563;
email: Eric.M.Brown@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

The FAA invites you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views about this proposal. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should submit only one copy of the comments. Send your comments to an
address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include "Docket No. FAA-
2019-0480; Product Identifier 2019-NM-041-AD" at the beginning of your
comments. Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as
described in the following paragraph, and other information as
described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received,
without change, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before
acting on this proposal, the FAA will consider all comments received by
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this SNPRM because of
those comments.

Confidential Business Information

CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this SNPRM contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this SNPRM, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission
containing CBI as "PROPIN." The FAA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this SNPRM. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Eric Brown, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and
Environmental Systems Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3563; email:
Eric.M.Brown@faa.gov. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Discussion

The FAA issued AD 2013-07-09, Amendment 39-17413 (78 FR 22178,
April 15, 2013) ("AD 2013-07-09"). AD 2013-07-09 requires actions to
address an unsafe condition on certain The Boeing Company Model 737-
700, -700C, -800, and -900ER series airplanes, Model 747-400F series
airplanes, and Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. AD 2013-07-09
requires a general visual inspection for affected serial numbers of the
crew oxygen mask stowage box units, and replacement or re-
identification as necessary.

The FAA issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to
supersede AD 2013-07-09 that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-700, -700C, -800, and -900ER series airplanes, Model 747-400F
series airplanes, and Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on June 25, 2019 (84 FR 29818) ("the
NPRM").

The NPRM was prompted by reports indicating that certain crew oxygen
mask stowage box units were possibly delivered with a burr in the inlet
fitting. The burr might break loose during test or operation, and might
pose an ignition source or cause an inlet valve to jam. The NPRM was
also prompted by a determination that the affected parts may be
installed on airplanes outside the applicability of AD 2013-07-09. The
NPRM proposed to require a general visual inspection for affected
serial numbers of the crew oxygen mask stowage box units, and
replacement or re-identification as necessary.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

Since the FAA issued the NPRM, it has been determined that the
affected parts may be installed as rotable spares on airplanes outside
of the applicability of the NPRM, thereby subjecting those airplanes to
the unsafe condition. Therefore, the applicability in this proposed AD
has been expanded to add all The Boeing Company Model 737-200, 300, -
400, -500, -600, and -900 series airplanes; Model 737-8 and 737-9
airplanes; Model 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-400, and 747-400D
series airplanes; Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series
airplanes; and Model 767-300F, and -400ER series airplanes.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

This proposed AD would require Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
35A1121, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2011; Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-35A2126, Revision 1, dated September 29, 2011; Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-35A0057, Revision 1, dated November 17,
2011; and Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2,
dated May 10, 2011; which the Director of the Federal Register approved
for incorporation by reference as of May 20, 2013 (78 FR 22178, April
15, 2013). This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Comments

The FAA gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

Aviation Partners Boeing stated that the installation of blended or
split scimitar winglets per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST00830SE on Model 737NG airplanes (Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -
900, and -900ER series airplanes), and blended winglets per STC
ST01920SE on Model 767 airplanes, does not affect the accomplishment of
the manufacturer's service instructions.

The FAA agrees with the commenter that STC ST00830SE and STC
ST01920SE do not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's
service instructions. Therefore, the installation of STC ST00830SE or
STC ST01920SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions
required by this proposed AD. The FAA has not changed this proposed AD
in this regard.

Request To Expand the Applicability of the Proposed AD

United Airlines (UAL), Delta Airlines (DAL), American Airlines
(AAL), and Boeing requested that the FAA expand the applicability of
the proposed AD to include all Boeing airplane models on which the part
could possibly be installed. Boeing noted that it permits installation
of the affected oxygen mask boxes on several of their models. The
commenters pointed out that the affected parts can be installed on more
airplane models than are specified in the applicability of the proposed
AD. AAL pointed out that adding additional airplane models on which the
crew oxygen mask stowage box units could be installed to the proposed
AD could prevent future additional regulatory action for the same part
numbers of the crew oxygen mask stowage box units.

The FAA agrees with the request to expand the applicability of the
proposed AD for the reasons provided. The FAA has revised paragraph (c)
of this proposed AD to include all The Boeing Company Model 737-200, -
300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series
airplanes; Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes; Model 747-200B, 747-200C,
747-200F, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes; Model 757-
200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes; and Model 767-200, -
300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes. This revision includes adding
paragraphs (c)(4) and (5) of this proposed AD.

Request To Remove Paragraph (i)(3) of the Proposed AD

AAL requested that paragraph (i)(3) of the proposed AD be removed.
AAL stated that it does not believe that re-installing the crew oxygen
mask stowage box units after they have been inspected in accordance
with paragraph (i)(1) of the proposed AD should be regarded as a
mandatory regulatory item. AAL maintained that paragraph (i)(3) of the
proposed AD does not appear to address any safety concern regarding the
stowage boxes. AAL reasoned that removing paragraph (i)(3) of the
proposed AD does not impact airplane safety and airworthiness and that
the removal and reinstallation of the crew oxygen mask stowage box
units can be done safely using the aircraft maintenance manual (AMM).
AAL went on to recommend that if paragraph (i)(3) of the proposed AD is
retained, it should be revised to include an option to install a new or
serviceable crew oxygen mask stowage box unit.

The FAA agrees with the commenter's request to delete paragraph
(i)(3) from this proposed AD for the reasons provided. The FAA notes
that existing regulations require maintaining airplanes in an airworthy
condition, which would include reinstalling removed parts. In addition,
reinstalling a part does not directly address the unsafe condition
identified in this AD. The FAA has deleted paragraph (i)(3) from this
proposed AD.

Request To Remove Certain Required Service Information

AAL requested that the FAA remove Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-35A1121, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2011; and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-35A0057, Revision 1, dated November 17, 2011; from
the requirements in paragraph (i) of the proposed AD. All Nippon
Airways (ANA) noted that the key point of the proposed AD is removing
the crew oxygen mask stowage boxes identified in table 1 of the
Appendix of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2,
dated May 10, 2011. ANA requested that operators be allowed to show
compliance through referencing the service information only for serial
number identification (the FAA infers ANA is requesting that the FAA
revise the proposed AD to not require doing the inspections and
replacements in accordance with the service information). AAL noted
that it does not operate any of the airplanes identified in the
effectivity of the specified service information, though the proposed
AD would apply to its fleet. AAL noted that this discrepancy could
cause confusion regarding showing compliance with the proposed AD and
may lead to several alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
approval requests. AAL stated that it does not believe that the phrase
"for airplanes other than those identified in paragraph (g) of this
AD" in paragraph (i) of the proposed AD is sufficient to address its
concerns about showing compliance with the proposed AD. AAL went on to
suggest that removing the service information would be an acceptable
change to the proposed AD because the inspection for the part number
and serial number of crew oxygen mask stowage boxes is a common and
straightforward maintenance action. AAL noted that operators remove and
replace the crew oxygen mask stowage boxes by using the instructions in
AMMs and stated that the service information specified in the proposed
AD does not contain instructions not already in the AMMs. AAL observed
that many of the work instructions in the service information require
the operator to reference its applicable AMM for additional
instructions, and the AMMs define the general visual inspection of the
crew oxygen mask stowage boxes for the serial number. Additionally, AAL
pointed out that paragraph (i) of the proposed AD would mandate
accomplishment of the general visual inspection of the crew oxygen mask
stowage boxes for the serial number.

The FAA agrees with the commenters' request. The service
information referenced in the proposed AD does not include all
airplanes on which the affected crew oxygen mask stowage units may be
installed, and operators may have difficulty determining which part of
the Accomplishment Instructions to comply with. In addition, as AAL
noted, the service information refers operators to applicable AMM tasks
for replacing affected parts. The FAA has determined that operators can
use existing accepted procedures, including AMM tasks, to perform the
inspections and replacements specified in paragraph (i) of this
proposed AD. The FAA has therefore revised the introductory text of
paragraph (i) and paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of this proposed AD to
remove the requirement to use certain service information to do the
inspections and replacements specified in this proposed AD. As noted
previously, the FAA has deleted paragraph (i)(3) from this proposed AD.

Request To Revise the Effectivity of the Service Information

DAL, ANA, and Cathay Pacific requested that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-35A1121, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2011; Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-35A2126, Revision 1, dated September 29, 2011; and
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-35A0057, Revision 1, dated November
17, 2011; be revised to correctly reflect the applicability of the
proposed AD. DAL also recommended that new service information be
released to provide instructions for any models that might be added to
the applicability of the proposed AD. ANA noted that it has airplanes
not reflected in the effectivity of the service information and added
that it cannot determine which instructions to follow for those
airplanes because the service information lists groups by airplane
variable numbers. Cathay Pacific Airways noted that it is not possible
to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (i) of the proposed AD unless
the effectivity of the service information is revised.

The FAA acknowledges the commenters' concern regarding the service
information effectivity. As noted previously, the FAA has determined
that the actions specified in the introductory text of paragraph (i)
and paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of this proposed AD can be done using
existing accepted procedures, including AMM tasks. The FAA has revised
the introductory text of paragraph (i) and paragraphs (i)(1) and (2) of
this proposed AD to remove reference to the Boeing service information.
This revision allows operators to use existing accepted procedures to
perform the specified actions, negating the need to revise existing
service information or create new service information for the models
being added to this proposed AD.

Request To Allow Installation of Certain Crew Oxygen Mask Stowage Boxes

AAL requested that the FAA allow installation of crew oxygen mask
stowage boxes if the serial number is illegible, but the date of
manufacture can be determined to be outside of the range of July 12,
2007, through November 20, 2007, inclusive. AAL requested that this
exception be included in the proposed AD, and recommended revising
paragraph (i)(1) of the proposed AD. AAL reasoned that this change to
the language in paragraph (i)(1) of the proposed AD would avoid
possible misinterpretation of the compliance requirements of the
proposed AD for airplanes on which the Boeing service information is
not effective as well as prevent unnecessary removal of crew oxygen
mask stowage boxes. AAL stated that the proposed new language would
allow it to show compliance on its Boeing Model 757-200 airplanes and
Model 737-8 airplanes, if those airplanes are added to the
applicability of the proposed AD.

The FAA agrees that crew oxygen mask stowage box units manufactured
outside of the range of July 12, 2007, through November 20, 2007,
inclusive are not subject to the unsafe condition identified in this
proposed AD. The FAA has revised paragraph (i)(1) of this proposed AD
to state that "If any crew oxygen mask stowage box unit's serial
number is unreadable or undetermined, but the manufacturing date can
conclusively be determined to be outside the range of July 12, 2007,
through November 20, 2007, inclusive, the crew oxygen mask stowage box
unit does not need to be replaced."

Request To Remove Paragraph (i)(2) of the Proposed AD

AAL requested that the FAA remove paragraph (i)(2) of the proposed
AD. AAL stated that it understands that all the crew oxygen mask
stowage box units' serial numbers included in table 2 of the Appendix
of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2, dated May
10, 2011, have been inspected and have already been determined to be
compliant. AAL reasoned that paragraph (i)(2) of the proposed AD does
not address any safety concerns and adds an undue burden on operators.
AAL pointed out that Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175,
Revision 2, dated May 10, 2011, is included in the applicable component
maintenance manual, and it is a mandatory inspection item within AAL's
component maintenance program. AAL stated that it believes it is
acceptable to re-identify the crew oxygen mask stowage box units
included in table 2 of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175,
Revision 2, dated May 10, 2011, on attrition, as these stowage box
units are removed from the airplane and sent for routine maintenance,
without any safety impact.

The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. Marking the
acceptable parts is necessary so they can be easily identified and
operators can verify that the actions specified by this proposed AD
have been done on this part. In addition, the FAA notes that not all
operators may have such a requirement in their component maintenance
program, so an AD requirement is the appropriate means to ensure this
action is done uniformly among operators. Therefore, the FAA has not
changed this proposed AD regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Parts Installation Prohibition

AAL requested that the FAA revise paragraph (j) of the proposed AD
to limit the prohibition to parts specified in table 1 of the Appendix
of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2, dated May
10, 2011, as only those parts that present a safety risk. AAL and DAL
requested that the FAA revise paragraph (j) of the proposed AD to
exclude stowage boxes that have been corrected and re-identified as
specified in Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2,
dated May 10, 2011.

The FAA agrees with the request to revise paragraph (j) of the
proposed AD. Only crew oxygen mask stowage box units with a serial
number identified in table 1 of the Appendix of Intertechnique Service
Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2 dated May 10, 2011, are prohibited
from installation on an airplane. Crew oxygen mask stowage box units
that are inspected and determined to have a serial number identified in
table 2 of the Appendix of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-
175, Revision 2, dated May 10, 2011, may be installed on an airplane,
provided they are modified as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this
proposed AD. The FAA has revised paragraph (j) of this proposed AD
accordingly, including restructuring the paragraph to add paragraphs
(j)(1) and (2) of this proposed AD.

Request To Delay Start of Parts Installation Prohibition

UAL requested that the FAA delay the start of the parts
installation prohibition specified in paragraph (j) of the proposed AD
to "within 30 days after the effective date of this AD" as opposed to
"as of the effective date of this AD." UAL stated that restricting
the installation of the crew oxygen mask box assemblies immediately
after the effective date of the AD presents a logistical challenge that
could disrupt supply chain balances. UAL pointed to the challenges
presented by previous similar rulemaking regarding crew oxygen
equipment, and argued that operators, the OEMs, and suppliers lost
considerable time, effort, and material as operators ordered an over-
abundance of parts prior to knowing the modification status of existing
parts and crew oxygen equipment needs. UAL noted that it performs a
system-wide inventory to determine its material requirements, then
allocates the appropriate resources to inspect and modify a suitable
number of components to begin its program, and that other carriers use
similar processes. UAL stated that it does not believe that delaying
the start of the parts installation prohibition would significantly
increase any level of risk in relation to the total time allowed for
operators to comply with the rest of the proposed AD.

The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. This proposed AD
specifies a parts installation prohibition with a timeline similar to
that in AD 2013-07-09. The FAA notes that in developing appropriate
compliance times for this proposed AD, the FAA considered the safety
implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for
the timely accomplishment of the proposed actions. Additionally, the
FAA notes that the number of affected parts did not increase, only the
range of airplane models on which those parts could possibly be
installed.

Request To Change to an Appliance-Based AD

Boeing requested that the FAA consider issuing an appliance-based
AD that is based on a component or appliance service bulletin. Boeing
suggested that a component or appliance service bulletin would capture
the applicability in the form of a serial number range, rather than
expanding the scope of the proposed AD to all airplane line numbers.
Boeing acknowledged the difference between the effectivity specified in
the Boeing service information and the applicability of the proposed
AD. Boeing stated it understands the FAA's concerns regarding the
possibility of parts being rotated outside the effectivity contained in
the Boeing service information. As a result, Boeing expressed its
desire to seek an alternative solution to address the concerns of the
FAA. Boeing recommended a collaboration between airline partners, other
original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and civil aviation authorities
to develop an action to implement safe, fair, and consistent policy to
address concerns on rotable parts for the industry.

The FAA does not agree with the request to issue an appliance-based
AD that applies to specific components or appliances. The FAA has
determined that the affected parts are installed only on Boeing
airplanes, so an appliance-based AD is not appropriate. In addition,
the affected parts are rotable parts, and the FAA has determined that,
regardless of operator diligence, these parts could later be installed
on Boeing airplanes that were initially delivered with acceptable
parts, thereby subjecting those airplanes to the unsafe condition.
Therefore, the FAA has not changed this proposed AD in this regard.

Request To Extend the Compliance Time

DAL, UAL, and AAL requested that the compliance time for the
inspection specified in paragraph (i) of the proposed AD be extended
from 24 months to 36 months. UAL and DAL cited concern over parts
availability due to the expansion of the applicability in the proposed
AD. DAL noted there is a long lead time to obtain replacement parts.
DAL and AAL stated that existing pre-flight checks provide a sufficient
level of safety by accomplishing regular functional checks of the
oxygen mask box assemblies, which would identify any units that are not
functioning correctly. DAL maintained that the additional compliance
time will allow sufficient time to adequately inspect all fleets. AAL
stated that an extended compliance time would allow it to perform
inspections in a main base environment where more ground time and
manpower are available. AAL also noted that some of the older crew
oxygen mask stowage boxes have parts data printed on the boxes instead
of physical data plates; the printed data is more prone to scratches
which cause difficulty in identifying the part information. AAL
reasoned that this difficulty coupled with the large amount of boxes
that must be inspected could cause operational disruptions.

The FAA does not agree with the commenters' request. In developing
an appropriate compliance time for this action, the FAA considered the
safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance
schedules for the timely accomplishment of the inspection and
replacement or re-identification as necessary. The FAA has determined
an adequate number of replacement parts will be available within the
compliance time specified in this proposed AD. Additionally, the number
of affected parts did not increase, only the range of airplane models
on which those parts could possibly be installed. In consideration of
these items, the FAA has determined that a 24-month compliance time
will ensure an acceptable level of safety. The FAA has not changed the
proposed AD in this regard.

FAA's Determination

The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM.
As a result, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the
comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment
on this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously. For information on the
procedures and compliance times, see Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
35A1121, Revision 1, dated November 7, 2011; Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-35A2126, Revision 1, dated September 29, 2011; Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-35A0057, Revision 1, dated November 17,
2011; and Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXP1/4-35-175, Revision 2,
dated May 10, 2011; at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0480.

Costs of Compliance

The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 3,723 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

Estimated Costs

The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable providing
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
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.

The FAA is 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

The FAA 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 this proposed
regulation:

(1) Is not a "significant regulatory action" under Executive
Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, 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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-07-09, Amendment 39-17413
(78 FR 22178, April 15, 2013); and

b. Adding the following new AD: