Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D Series Airplanes, 53743-53746 [05-17979]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules
No Reporting Required
(k) Although the service bulletins
referenced in this AD specify to submit
certain information to the manufacturer,
this AD does not include that
requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(l) The Manager, International Branch,
ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(m) French airworthiness directive F–
2005–084, dated May 25, 2005, also
addresses the subject of this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
24, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–17980 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–22383; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NM–102–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–
300, 747–400, and 747–400D Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD,
747–300, 747–400, and 747–400D series
airplanes; and Model 747–200B series
airplanes having a stretched upper deck.
This proposed AD would require
repetitively inspecting for cracking or
discrepancies of the fasteners in the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames at
body stations 1120 through 1220, and
related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. This proposed AD
results from new reports of severed
tension ties, as well as numerous reports
of cracked tension ties, broken fasteners,
and cracks in the frame, shear web, and
shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the
upper deck. We are proposing this AD
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:21 Sep 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
to detect and correct cracking of the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames of
the upper deck, which could result in
rapid decompression of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 27, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
proposed AD.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for the service
information identified in this proposed
AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan
Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6437;
fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Include the
docket number ‘‘FAA–2005–22383;
Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–102–
AD’’ at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in
light of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD.
Using the search function of that Web
site, anyone can find and read the
comments in any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
who sent the comment (or signed the
comment on behalf of an association,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53743
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in
person at the Docket Management
Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The Docket
Management Facility office (telephone
(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza
level of the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after the Docket
Management System receives them.
Discussion
We previously issued AD 2005–05–
08, amendment 39–13997 (70 FR 12113,
March 11, 2005). That AD applies to
certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD,
–300, –400, and –400D series airplanes.
That AD requires a one-time inspection
for discrepancies of the fuselage frame
to tension tie joints at body stations (BS)
1120 through 1220, and to determine if
steel splice plates are installed on the
fuselage frames, and related
investigative and corrective actions.
That AD was prompted by reports of
severed tension ties found at the
fuselage frame joints at BS 1120 and
1140. These severed tension ties
resulted from fatigue cracking due to an
incorrect configuration (installation of
aluminum splice plates instead of steel
splice plates during the manufacturing
process).
Since we issued AD 2005–05–08, we
have received additional reports of
severed tension ties. While these
severed tension ties were also attributed
to fatigue, the tension ties in these cases
were properly configured according to
the applicable Boeing Engineering
Drawings. We have also received
numerous reports of fatigue cracking of
tension ties, as well as broken fasteners
and cracks in the frame and shear ties
adjacent to tension ties for the upper
deck between BS 1120 and 1220. Also,
we have received reports of cracking in
the shear web between the BS 1120 and
BS 1140 tension ties. Cracking of the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames of
the upper deck; if not corrected; could
result in rapid decompression of the
airplane.
Certain Boeing 747–200B series
airplanes have been modified under a
certain Boeing-owned supplemental
type certificate to include a stretched
upper deck (SUD). These airplanes
E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM
12SEP1
53744
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules
would also be subject to the same unsafe
condition revealed on Boeing Model
747–100B SUD, –300, –400, and –400D
series airplanes.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005. The service bulletin
describes procedures for repetitive
‘‘Stage 1’’ and ‘‘Stage 2’’ inspections for
cracking or discrepancies of the
fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs,
and frames at body stations 1120
through 1220; and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary.
The procedures for Stage 1
inspections involve the following
inspections to detect cracking or broken,
loose, or missing fasteners:
• A detailed inspection of the tension
ties and steel plates from BS 1120
through BS 1220.
• A detailed inspection of the shear
web components that attach to the BS
1120 and 1140 tension ties.
• A detailed inspection of each frame
from two stringers above to two
stringers below the tension ties from BS
1120 through BS 1220.
If no severed tension tie is found
during a Stage 1 inspection, but a crack
is found in a tension tie, steel plate,
shear web component, or frame; or a
broken, loose, or missing fastener is
found; the service bulletin specifies
doing a ‘‘Structure Repair,’’ which
includes further investigative actions.
Procedures for the Structure Repair
include removing fasteners, performing
open-hole high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections for cracking,
repairing any cracking, and installing
new fasteners, as applicable. For
repairing certain conditions, the service
bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for
instructions.
If a severed tension tie is found
during a Stage 1 inspection, the service
bulletin specifies further investigative
actions that involve removing certain
fasteners and steel plates, and doing
additional open-hole HFEC inspections
and detailed inspections of certain
fastener holes, adjacent tension ties, the
frame web, the frame inner chord, the
fail-safe chord, shear ties, and fasteners
to detect cracking or broken, loose, or
missing fasteners. The service bulletin
specifies to contact Boeing for
instructions for repairing the severed
tension tie, and doing the Structure
Repair described previously for any
other cracks or broken, loose, or missing
fasteners.
Stage 2 inspections are more intensive
inspections than Stage 1 inspections
and are intended for airplanes with a
higher number of total flight cycles.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:21 Sep 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
Accomplishing the initial Stage 2
inspection eliminates the need for the
Stage 1 inspections. The procedures for
Stage 2 inspections involve the
following actions:
• Removing certain fasteners and
steel plates and performing open-hole
HFEC inspections for cracking of the
fastener holes in the tension ties,
frames, and steel plates.
• Performing surface HFEC
inspections for cracking around other
fastener locations and in other areas of
the tension ties.
• Performing a detailed inspection of
each entire tension tie and the attaching
fasteners to detect cracking or broken,
loose, or missing fasteners.
• Performing a detailed inspection of
the shear web components that attach to
the tension ties to detect cracking or
broken, loose, or missing fasteners.
• Performing a detailed inspection of
each frame from two stringers above to
two stringers below the tension ties to
detect cracking or broken, loose, or
missing fasteners.
• Performing an open-hole HFEC
inspection for cracking of any frame at
which an insulation blanket stud goes
through a hole in the frame.
If no tension tie is found severed
during a Stage 2 inspection, but a crack
is found in a tension tie, steel plate,
shear web component, or frame; or a
broken, loose, or missing fastener is
found; the service bulletin specifies
doing the Structure Repair, and
installing steel plates and new fasteners.
If a severed tension tie is found
during a Stage 2 inspection, the service
bulletin specifies further investigative
actions that involve removing certain
fasteners and steel plates, and doing
additional detailed inspections of the
frame common to the severed tension
tie; including the frame web, frame
inner chord, fail-safe chord, shear ties,
and fasteners; to detect cracking or
broken, loose, or missing fasteners. The
service bulletin specifies to contact
Boeing for instructions for repairing the
severed tension tie; and doing the
Structure Repair for any other crack or
broken, loose, or missing fasteners.
As part of the procedures for the
Structure Repair, the service bulletin
describes procedures for an ‘‘Oversize
Hole Repair,’’ which may be used to
repair a crack found in a fastener hole.
The procedures for the Oversize Hole
Repair include oversizing the hole to
remove the crack, doing an open-hole
HFEC inspection to make sure the crack
has been removed, repeating the
oversizing until the crack is removed,
and installing new fasteners. The
service bulletin specifies contacting
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Boeing for instructions if cracking is
outside specified limits.
The service bulletin also specifies
reporting findings from both Stage 1 and
Stage 2 inspections to Boeing.
Accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information is intended to
adequately address the unsafe
condition.
Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of the
service bulletin specifies a compliance
time for the initial Stage 1 inspection of
8,000 total flight cycles, 1,500 flight
cycles after the original issue date of the
service bulletin, or 4,000 flight cycles
after inspection in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2483,
whichever is later. (AD 2005–05–08,
described previously, requires
inspections in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 747–53–2483, Revision
1, dated August 28, 2003.) The
repetitive interval for Stage 1
inspections is 4,000 flight cycles. The
service bulletin specifies that Stage 1
inspections end when Stage 2
inspections apply. The service bulletin
specifies that the initial Stage 2
inspection should be done before the
accumulation of 16,000 total flight
cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after
the original issue date of the service
bulletin, whichever is later. The service
bulletin specifies a repetitive interval of
3,000 flight cycles for the Stage 2
inspections.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
We have previously issued AD 2004–
07–22, amendment 39–13566 (69 FR
18250, April 7, 2004). That AD applies
to all Boeing Model 747 series airplanes,
and requires revising the FAA-approved
maintenance or inspection program to
include repetitive inspections for
discrepancies of various structural
significant items (SSIs); as listed in
Boeing Document No. D6–35022,
‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document (SSID),’’ Revision G, dated
December 2000 (referred to after this as
‘‘the SSID’’); and repair if necessary.
The repetitive inspections of the tension
ties that would be required by this
proposed AD are approved as an
alternative method of compliance for
the inspections of SSI F–19A of the
SSID, as required by paragraphs (c) and
(d) of AD 2004–07–22. All other
provisions of AD 2004–07–22 continue
to apply.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent
information and identified an unsafe
condition that is likely to exist or
develop on other airplanes of this same
type design. For this reason, we are
E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM
12SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules
proposing this AD, which would require
accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described
previously, except as discussed under
‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the Service Bulletin.’’
Differences Between the Proposed AD
and Service Information
The service bulletin specifies that you
may contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair certain
conditions, but this proposed AD would
require you to repair 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 Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized
to make those findings.
The Accomplishment Instructions of
the service bulletin specifies reporting
inspection findings to Boeing. This
proposed AD would not require that
action. We do not need this information
from operators.
The service bulletin specifies a grace
period relative to original issue date of
the service bulletin; however, this
proposed AD would require compliance
before the specified compliance time
after the effective date of this AD.
These differences have been
coordinated with the manufacturer.
Clarification of Compliance Time for
Stage 1 Inspections
As explained previously, the
referenced service bulletin specifies a
compliance time for the Stage 1
inspections of 8,000 total flight cycles,
1,500 flight cycles after the original
issue date of the service bulletin, or
4,000 flight cycles after inspection in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
747–53–2483, whichever is later. AD
2005–05–08, described previously,
requires accomplishment of Boeing
Service Bulletin 747–53–2483 for
airplanes listed in that service bulletin.
However, we find that this proposed AD
would apply to certain airplanes not
subject to AD 2005–05–08. Thus, we
find that, for airplanes not subject to the
53745
inspection in Boeing Service Bulletin
747–53–2483, the applicable
compliance time for the Stage 1
inspections that would be required by
this proposed AD is 8,000 total flight
cycles, or 1,500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever is
later. We have added a statement to
paragraph (f)(1) of this proposed AD to
clarify this compliance time.
Interim Action
We consider this proposed AD
interim action. The manufacturer is
currently developing a modification that
will address the unsafe condition
identified in this AD. Once this
modification is developed, approved,
and available, we may consider
additional rulemaking.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 622 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The following table provides the
estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this proposed AD.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Average
labor rate
per hour
Work hours
Stage 1 Inspection, per inspection cycle *.
Stage 2 Inspection, per inspection cycle.
Cost per airplane
Number of
U.S.-registered
airplanes
Fleet cost
19
$65
$1,235, per inspection cycle .....
76
$93,860, per inspection cycle.*
83
65
$5,395, per inspection cycle .....
76
$410,020, per inspection cycle.
* Completing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive Stage 1 inspections.
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.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:21 Sep 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
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 proposed AD and placed it in the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM
12SEP1
53746
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–22383;
Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–102–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by October 27, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) Accomplishing the requirements of
paragraph (f) of this AD terminates the
corresponding inspection requirements for
the upper deck tension tie as required by
paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD 2004–07–22,
amendment 39–13566, as those paragraphs
apply to inspections of SSI F–19A, as
identified in Boeing Document No. D6–
35022, ‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document,’’ Revision G, dated December
2000. All other requirements of AD 2004–07–
22 continue to apply.
Applicability: (c) This AD applies to
Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 747–300, 747–
400, and 747–400D series airplanes; and
Model 747–200 series airplanes having a
stretched upper deck; certificated in any
category; as identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated April
21, 2005.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from new reports of
severed tension ties, as well as numerous
reports of cracked tension ties, broken
fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web,
and shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the
upper deck. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracking of the tension ties, shear
webs, and frames of the upper deck, which
could result in rapid decompression 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.
Repetitive Inspections and Corrective
Actions
(f) Do repetitive detailed and high
frequency eddy current inspections, as
applicable, for cracking or discrepancies of
the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs,
and frames at body stations 1120 through
1220, and related investigative and corrective
actions as applicable, by doing all actions in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, except
as provided by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this
AD. Do the initial and repetitive Stage 1 and
Stage 2 inspections at the applicable times
specified in Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
the service bulletin, except as provided by
paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD.
Any applicable investigative and corrective
actions must be done before further flight.
Doing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the
repetitive Stage 1 inspections.
(1) For any airplane not identified in and
subject to inspections in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2483: Do the
initial Stage 1 inspection in accordance with
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507
before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight
cycles, or within 1,500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever is later.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:21 Sep 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
(2) Where Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
the service bulletin specifies a compliance
time relative to the original issue date of the
service bulletin, this AD requires compliance
before the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.
(3) For any airplane that reaches the
applicable compliance time for the initial
Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1,
Compliance Recommendations, under
paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin) before
reaching the applicable compliance time for
the initial Stage 1 inspection: Doing the
initial Stage 2 inspection eliminates the need
to do the Stage 1 inspection.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Exception to Corrective Action Instructions
AGENCY:
(g) If any discrepancy; including but not
limited to cracking, or broken, loose, or
missing fasteners; is found during any
inspection required by this AD, and Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005, specifies to contact Boeing for
appropriate action: Before further flight,
repair the discrepancy using a method
approved in accordance with paragraph (i) of
this AD.
No Reporting Requirement
(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies
reporting inspection findings to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that
requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) 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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
24, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–17979 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007;FRL–7966–6
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; VA;
Redesignation of the City of
Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County,
and Stafford County Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and
Approval of the Area’s Maintenance
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a redesignation request and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. Virginia is requesting that the
city of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania
County, and Stafford County (the
Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area) be
redesignated as attainment for the eighthour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The
Commonwealth’s SIP revision
establishes a maintenance plan for the
Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area that
provides requirements for continued
attainment of the eight-hour ozone
NAAQS for the next 10 years. EPA is
proposing approval of the redesignation
request and revision to the Virginia SIP
in accordance with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before October 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R03–OAR–
2005–VA–0007 by one of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: https://
www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME,
EPA’s electronic public docket and
comment system, is EPA’s preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov.
Mail: R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007,
David Campbell, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM
12SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 175 (Monday, September 12, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53743-53746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17979]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2005-22383; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-102-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, 747-200B,
747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 747-100B SUD, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D
series airplanes; and Model 747-200B series airplanes having a
stretched upper deck. This proposed AD would require repetitively
inspecting for cracking or discrepancies of the fasteners in the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body stations 1120 through
1220, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary.
This proposed AD results from new reports of severed tension ties, as
well as numerous reports of cracked tension ties, broken fasteners, and
cracks in the frame, shear web, and shear ties adjacent to tension ties
for the upper deck. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
cracking of the tension ties, shear webs, and frames of the upper deck,
which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 27,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this
proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 917-6437;
fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Include the docket number ``FAA-
2005-22383; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-102-AD'' at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend the proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-
5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System
receives them.
Discussion
We previously issued AD 2005-05-08, amendment 39-13997 (70 FR
12113, March 11, 2005). That AD applies to certain Boeing Model 747-
100B SUD, -300, -400, and -400D series airplanes. That AD requires a
one-time inspection for discrepancies of the fuselage frame to tension
tie joints at body stations (BS) 1120 through 1220, and to determine if
steel splice plates are installed on the fuselage frames, and related
investigative and corrective actions. That AD was prompted by reports
of severed tension ties found at the fuselage frame joints at BS 1120
and 1140. These severed tension ties resulted from fatigue cracking due
to an incorrect configuration (installation of aluminum splice plates
instead of steel splice plates during the manufacturing process).
Since we issued AD 2005-05-08, we have received additional reports
of severed tension ties. While these severed tension ties were also
attributed to fatigue, the tension ties in these cases were properly
configured according to the applicable Boeing Engineering Drawings. We
have also received numerous reports of fatigue cracking of tension
ties, as well as broken fasteners and cracks in the frame and shear
ties adjacent to tension ties for the upper deck between BS 1120 and
1220. Also, we have received reports of cracking in the shear web
between the BS 1120 and BS 1140 tension ties. Cracking of the tension
ties, shear webs, and frames of the upper deck; if not corrected; could
result in rapid decompression of the airplane.
Certain Boeing 747-200B series airplanes have been modified under a
certain Boeing-owned supplemental type certificate to include a
stretched upper deck (SUD). These airplanes
[[Page 53744]]
would also be subject to the same unsafe condition revealed on Boeing
Model 747-100B SUD, -300, -400, and -400D series airplanes.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for
repetitive ``Stage 1'' and ``Stage 2'' inspections for cracking or
discrepancies of the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and
frames at body stations 1120 through 1220; and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary.
The procedures for Stage 1 inspections involve the following
inspections to detect cracking or broken, loose, or missing fasteners:
A detailed inspection of the tension ties and steel plates
from BS 1120 through BS 1220.
A detailed inspection of the shear web components that
attach to the BS 1120 and 1140 tension ties.
A detailed inspection of each frame from two stringers
above to two stringers below the tension ties from BS 1120 through BS
1220.
If no severed tension tie is found during a Stage 1 inspection, but
a crack is found in a tension tie, steel plate, shear web component, or
frame; or a broken, loose, or missing fastener is found; the service
bulletin specifies doing a ``Structure Repair,'' which includes further
investigative actions. Procedures for the Structure Repair include
removing fasteners, performing open-hole high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections for cracking, repairing any cracking, and installing
new fasteners, as applicable. For repairing certain conditions, the
service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for instructions.
If a severed tension tie is found during a Stage 1 inspection, the
service bulletin specifies further investigative actions that involve
removing certain fasteners and steel plates, and doing additional open-
hole HFEC inspections and detailed inspections of certain fastener
holes, adjacent tension ties, the frame web, the frame inner chord, the
fail-safe chord, shear ties, and fasteners to detect cracking or
broken, loose, or missing fasteners. The service bulletin specifies to
contact Boeing for instructions for repairing the severed tension tie,
and doing the Structure Repair described previously for any other
cracks or broken, loose, or missing fasteners.
Stage 2 inspections are more intensive inspections than Stage 1
inspections and are intended for airplanes with a higher number of
total flight cycles. Accomplishing the initial Stage 2 inspection
eliminates the need for the Stage 1 inspections. The procedures for
Stage 2 inspections involve the following actions:
Removing certain fasteners and steel plates and performing
open-hole HFEC inspections for cracking of the fastener holes in the
tension ties, frames, and steel plates.
Performing surface HFEC inspections for cracking around
other fastener locations and in other areas of the tension ties.
Performing a detailed inspection of each entire tension
tie and the attaching fasteners to detect cracking or broken, loose, or
missing fasteners.
Performing a detailed inspection of the shear web
components that attach to the tension ties to detect cracking or
broken, loose, or missing fasteners.
Performing a detailed inspection of each frame from two
stringers above to two stringers below the tension ties to detect
cracking or broken, loose, or missing fasteners.
Performing an open-hole HFEC inspection for cracking of
any frame at which an insulation blanket stud goes through a hole in
the frame.
If no tension tie is found severed during a Stage 2 inspection, but
a crack is found in a tension tie, steel plate, shear web component, or
frame; or a broken, loose, or missing fastener is found; the service
bulletin specifies doing the Structure Repair, and installing steel
plates and new fasteners.
If a severed tension tie is found during a Stage 2 inspection, the
service bulletin specifies further investigative actions that involve
removing certain fasteners and steel plates, and doing additional
detailed inspections of the frame common to the severed tension tie;
including the frame web, frame inner chord, fail-safe chord, shear
ties, and fasteners; to detect cracking or broken, loose, or missing
fasteners. The service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for
instructions for repairing the severed tension tie; and doing the
Structure Repair for any other crack or broken, loose, or missing
fasteners.
As part of the procedures for the Structure Repair, the service
bulletin describes procedures for an ``Oversize Hole Repair,'' which
may be used to repair a crack found in a fastener hole. The procedures
for the Oversize Hole Repair include oversizing the hole to remove the
crack, doing an open-hole HFEC inspection to make sure the crack has
been removed, repeating the oversizing until the crack is removed, and
installing new fasteners. The service bulletin specifies contacting
Boeing for instructions if cracking is outside specified limits.
The service bulletin also specifies reporting findings from both
Stage 1 and Stage 2 inspections to Boeing.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
Paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin specifies a
compliance time for the initial Stage 1 inspection of 8,000 total
flight cycles, 1,500 flight cycles after the original issue date of the
service bulletin, or 4,000 flight cycles after inspection in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2483, whichever is later. (AD 2005-
05-08, described previously, requires inspections in accordance with
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2483, Revision 1, dated August 28,
2003.) The repetitive interval for Stage 1 inspections is 4,000 flight
cycles. The service bulletin specifies that Stage 1 inspections end
when Stage 2 inspections apply. The service bulletin specifies that the
initial Stage 2 inspection should be done before the accumulation of
16,000 total flight cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after the
original issue date of the service bulletin, whichever is later. The
service bulletin specifies a repetitive interval of 3,000 flight cycles
for the Stage 2 inspections.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
We have previously issued AD 2004-07-22, amendment 39-13566 (69 FR
18250, April 7, 2004). That AD applies to all Boeing Model 747 series
airplanes, and requires revising the FAA-approved maintenance or
inspection program to include repetitive inspections for discrepancies
of various structural significant items (SSIs); as listed in Boeing
Document No. D6-35022, ``Supplemental Structural Inspection Document
(SSID),'' Revision G, dated December 2000 (referred to after this as
``the SSID''); and repair if necessary. The repetitive inspections of
the tension ties that would be required by this proposed AD are
approved as an alternative method of compliance for the inspections of
SSI F-19A of the SSID, as required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD
2004-07-22. All other provisions of AD 2004-07-22 continue to apply.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are
[[Page 53745]]
proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Bulletin.''
Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information
The service bulletin specifies that you may contact the
manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but
this proposed AD would require you to repair 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 Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom we
have authorized to make those findings.
The Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin specifies
reporting inspection findings to Boeing. This proposed AD would not
require that action. We do not need this information from operators.
The service bulletin specifies a grace period relative to original
issue date of the service bulletin; however, this proposed AD would
require compliance before the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.
These differences have been coordinated with the manufacturer.
Clarification of Compliance Time for Stage 1 Inspections
As explained previously, the referenced service bulletin specifies
a compliance time for the Stage 1 inspections of 8,000 total flight
cycles, 1,500 flight cycles after the original issue date of the
service bulletin, or 4,000 flight cycles after inspection in accordance
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2483, whichever is later. AD 2005-
05-08, described previously, requires accomplishment of Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53-2483 for airplanes listed in that service bulletin.
However, we find that this proposed AD would apply to certain airplanes
not subject to AD 2005-05-08. Thus, we find that, for airplanes not
subject to the inspection in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2483, the
applicable compliance time for the Stage 1 inspections that would be
required by this proposed AD is 8,000 total flight cycles, or 1,500
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later.
We have added a statement to paragraph (f)(1) of this proposed AD to
clarify this compliance time.
Interim Action
We consider this proposed AD interim action. The manufacturer is
currently developing a modification that will address the unsafe
condition identified in this AD. Once this modification is developed,
approved, and available, we may consider additional rulemaking.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 622 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwidefleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.
Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Average U.S.-
Action Work hours labor rate Cost per airplane registered Fleet cost
per hour airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage 1 Inspection, per 19 $65 $1,235, per inspection cycle........... 76 $93,860, per inspection cycle.*
inspection cycle *.
Stage 2 Inspection, per 83 65 $5,395, per inspection cycle........... 76 $410,020, per inspection cycle.
inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Completing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive Stage 1 inspections.
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 proposed AD 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):
[[Page 53746]]
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2005-22383; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
102-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October
27, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) Accomplishing the requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD
terminates the corresponding inspection requirements for the upper
deck tension tie as required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD 2004-
07-22, amendment 39-13566, as those paragraphs apply to inspections
of SSI F-19A, as identified in Boeing Document No. D6-35022,
``Supplemental Structural Inspection Document,'' Revision G, dated
December 2000. All other requirements of AD 2004-07-22 continue to
apply.
Applicability: (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-100B SUD,
747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series airplanes; and Model 747-200
series airplanes having a stretched upper deck; certificated in any
category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, dated April 21, 2005.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from new reports of severed tension ties, as
well as numerous reports of cracked tension ties, broken fasteners,
and cracks in the frame, shear web, and shear ties adjacent to
tension ties for the upper deck. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracking of the tension ties, shear webs, and frames of
the upper deck, which could result in rapid decompression 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.
Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions
(f) Do repetitive detailed and high frequency eddy current
inspections, as applicable, for cracking or discrepancies of the
fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body
stations 1120 through 1220, and related investigative and corrective
actions as applicable, by doing all actions in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, except as provided by paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD. Do the initial and repetitive Stage 1 and Stage
2 inspections at the applicable times specified in Paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin, except as provided by
paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD. Any applicable
investigative and corrective actions must be done before further
flight. Doing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive
Stage 1 inspections.
(1) For any airplane not identified in and subject to
inspections in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2483:
Do the initial Stage 1 inspection in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507 before the accumulation of 8,000 total
flight cycles, or within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever is later.
(2) Where Paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of the service
bulletin specifies a compliance time relative to the original issue
date of the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance before the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
(3) For any airplane that reaches the applicable compliance time
for the initial Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1,
Compliance Recommendations, under paragraph 1.E. of the service
bulletin) before reaching the applicable compliance time for the
initial Stage 1 inspection: Doing the initial Stage 2 inspection
eliminates the need to do the Stage 1 inspection.
Exception to Corrective Action Instructions
(g) If any discrepancy; including but not limited to cracking,
or broken, loose, or missing fasteners; is found during any
inspection required by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies to contact Boeing for
appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the discrepancy
using a method approved in accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD.
No Reporting Requirement
(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005, specifies reporting inspection findings to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) 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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 24, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-17979 Filed 9-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P