Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F Series Airplanes, 54484-54486 [05-18319]
Download as PDF
54484
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 178
Thursday, September 15, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–22437; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NM–082–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–
400F 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 747–400, 747–
400D, and 747–400F series airplanes.
This proposed AD would require
repetitive detailed inspections for
damage (degraded finish; missing, lifted,
peeling, or blistering paint; or signs of
corrosion) of the interior skin in the
forward and aft cargo compartments,
and corrective actions if necessary. This
proposed AD is prompted by reports of
skin corrosion on four Boeing Model
747 series airplanes that were delivered
between 1995 and 1999. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct
corrosion, which can penetrate the
thickness of the skin and cause
cracking, and result in rapid
decompression of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 31, 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
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590.
• By 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.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707,
Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.
You can examine the contents of this
AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of
the Nassif Building, Washington, DC.
This docket number is FAA–2005–
22437; the directorate identifier for this
docket is 2005–NM–082–AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Kusz, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6432; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2005–22437; Directorate Identifier
2005–NM–082–AD’’ in the subject line
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
submitted 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 can
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you can visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You can 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 (DMS) receives
them.
Discussion
In April 1988, a high-cycle transport
category airplane (specifically, a Boeing
Model 737) was involved in an accident
in which the airplane suffered major
structural damage during flight.
Investigation of this accident revealed
that the airplane had numerous fatigue
cracks and a great deal of corrosion.
Subsequent inspections conducted by
the operator on other high-cycle
transport category airplanes in its fleet
revealed that other airplanes had
extensive fatigue cracking and
corrosion.
Prompted by the data gained from this
accident, we sponsored a conference on
aging airplanes in June 1988, which was
attended by representatives from the
aviation industry and airworthiness
authorities from around the world. It
became obvious that, because of the
tremendous increase in air travel, the
relatively slow pace of new airplane
production, and the apparent economic
feasibility of operating older technology
airplanes rather than retiring them,
increased attention needed to be
focused on the aging airplane fleet and
maintaining its continued operational
safety.
The Air Transport Association (ATA)
of America and the Aerospace
Industries Association (AIA) of America
agreed to undertake the task of
identifying and implementing
procedures to ensure the continued
structural airworthiness of aging
transport category airplanes. An
Airworthiness Assurance Working
Group (AAWG) was established in
August 1988, with members
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
representing aircraft manufacturers,
operators, regulatory authorities, and
other aviation industry representatives
worldwide. The objective of the AAWG
was to sponsor ‘‘Task Groups’’ to:
1. Select service bulletins, applicable
to each airplane model in the transport
fleet, to be recommended for mandatory
modification of aging airplanes;
2. Develop corrosion-directed
inspections and prevention programs;
3. Review the adequacy of each
operator’s structural maintenance
program;
4. Review and update the
Supplemental Inspection Documents
(SID); and
5. Assess repair quality.
The Working Group assigned to
review Boeing Model 747 series
airplanes completed its work on Item (2)
in 1989 and developed a baseline
program for controlling corrosion
problems that may jeopardize the
continued airworthiness of the Boeing
Model 747 fleet. This program is
contained in Boeing Document Number
D6–36022, ‘‘Aging Airplane Corrosion
Prevention and Control Program—
Model 747,’’ Revision A, dated July 28,
1989. On November 5, 1990, we issued
AD 90–25–05, amendment 39–6790 (55
FR 49268, November 27, 1990). That AD
mandates Boeing Document Number
D6–36022, and requires that operators of
Boeing Model 747 series airplanes
implement a Corrosion Prevention and
Control Program (CPCP).
Since we issued AD 90–25–05, two
operators found skin corrosion on four
Boeing Model 747 series airplanes that
were delivered between 1995 and 1999.
The corrosion happened when primer
peeled off in some areas of the skin and
left the aluminum unprotected against
moisture and corrosive elements. The
operators repaired three of the airplanes
by trimming-out the damaged skin, and
one of the airplanes by blending to
remove the damage. One other operator
reported finding peeling primer, but no
corrosion, on the interior skin surface of
one airplane, below the cargo bay. The
manufacturer investigated these
incidents and found that the
manufacturing process for the skins
resulted in inadequate adhesion of the
primer to the skin. The interior surface
of the skin below the cargo bay is
susceptible to corrosion because of the
presence of moisture. If areas of
corrosion are not repaired, the corrosion
can penetrate the thickness of the skin
and cause cracking. This condition, if
not corrected, could result in rapid
decompression of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747–53A2505, dated
March 17, 2005. The service bulletin
describes procedures for doing a
detailed inspection for damage of the
interior skin in the forward and aft cargo
compartments. Damage includes a
degraded finish; missing, lifted, peeling,
or blistering paint; or signs of corrosion.
If any damage is found, the service
bulletin describes procedures for
corrective actions. The corrective
actions are restoring the finish if only
damage to the finish is found; or
repairing the affected area and restoring
the protective finish if the finish is
damaged and any corrosion is found. If
any corrosion damage exceeds limits in
the structural repair manual (SRM), the
service bulletin states that operators
should contact Boeing for repair
instructions. If no damage or corrosion
is found, the service bulletin states that
no further action is necessary until the
next inspection. The service bulletin
recommends repeating the detailed
inspection every four years until the
initial inspection threshold for the
applicable CPCP task in Boeing
Document Number D6–36022 is
reached. The service bulletin also
requests that operators send reports of
the inspection program and details of
any corrosion damage and peeling
primer to the manufacturer.
54485
Accomplishing the actions specified in
the service bulletin is intended to
adequately address the unsafe
condition.
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. Therefore, we are
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 the Service Bulletin
Although the service bulletin
referenced in this proposed AD specifies
to submit to the manufacturer a report
of the inspection program and details of
any corrosion damage and peeling paint
primer, this proposed AD does not
include those actions.
The service bulletin specifies that you
may contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair corrosion
damage that exceeds limits in the SRM,
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 Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized
to make those findings.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 260 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
Detailed inspection, per
inspection cycle.
10
$65
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,
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
Cost per airplane
Parts
N/A
Number of
U.S.-registered
airplanes
$650, per inspection
cycle.
36
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
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Fleet cost
$23,400, per inspection
cycle.
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
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
54486
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
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. 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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–22437;
Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–082–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) must receive comments on this AD
action by October 31, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
(d) This AD was prompted by reports of
skin corrosion on four Boeing Model 747
series airplanes that were delivered between
1995 and 1999. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct corrosion, which can
penetrate the thickness of the skin and cause
cracking, and 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) Within 12 months after the effective
date of this AD, do a detailed inspection for
damage (degraded finish; missing, lifted,
peeling, or blistering paint; or signs of
corrosion) of the interior skin in the forward
and aft cargo compartments. Do any
applicable corrective actions before further
flight. Except as required by paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD, do all actions in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2505, dated March 17, 2005. Repeat
the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 48 months until accomplishing task
number C53–125–01 of Boeing Document
Number D6–36022, ‘‘Aging Airplane
Corrosion Prevention and Control Program—
Model 747,’’ Revision A, dated July 28, 1989,
or until accomplishing tasks S53–520 and
S53–550 of Boeing Document Number
D621U400–MRB, ‘‘B747–400 Maintenance
Review Board Report,’’ Revision E, dated
May 2003.
Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a
detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive
examination of a specific item, installation,
or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. Available lighting is normally
supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate.
Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying
lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface
cleaning and elaborate procedures may be
required.’’
Damage that Exceeds Structural Repair
Manual Limits
(g) If any corrosion damage that exceeds
the limits specified in the structural repair
manual is found during any action required
by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2505, dated March 17, 2005
specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions: Before further flight, repair the
damage using a method approved in
accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD.
No Reporting Requirement
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747–
400, 747–400D, and 747–400F series
airplanes, certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2505, dated March 17, 2005.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
Unsafe Condition
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747–53A2505, dated March 17, 2005,
specifies to submit to the manufacturer a
report of the inspection program and details
of any corrosion damage and peeling paint
primer, this AD does not include those
actions.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
September 8, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–18319 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2004–19566; Directorate
Identifier 2004–NM–72–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model
A300 B2 and A300 B4 Series Airplanes;
and Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and
F4–600R Series Airplanes, and Model
C4–605R Variant F Airplanes
(Collectively Called A300–600 Series
Airplanes)
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier
NPRM for an airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to certain Airbus
airplanes as listed above. The original
NPRM would have required repetitively
inspecting for cracking in the web of
nose rib 7 of the inner flap on the wings,
and performing related investigative/
corrective actions if necessary. The
original NPRM was prompted by reports
of cracking in the web of nose rib 7 of
the inner flap. This action revises the
original NPRM by adding additional
inspections for cracking in the web of
nose rib 7 of the inner flap on the wings,
and revising compliance times for
certain airplanes. We are proposing this
supplemental NPRM to detect and
correct cracking in the web of nose rib
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54484-54486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18319]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 54484]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2005-22437; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-082-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and
747-400F 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 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series
airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive detailed
inspections for damage (degraded finish; missing, lifted, peeling, or
blistering paint; or signs of corrosion) of the interior skin in the
forward and aft cargo compartments, and corrective actions if
necessary. This proposed AD is prompted by reports of skin corrosion on
four Boeing Model 747 series airplanes that were delivered between 1995
and 1999. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct corrosion,
which can penetrate the thickness of the skin and cause cracking, and
result in rapid decompression of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 31,
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.
By 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.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207.
You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at
https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., room PL-
401, on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. This
docket number is FAA-2005-22437; the directorate identifier for this
docket is 2005-NM-082-AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Kusz, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
917-6432; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2005-22437;
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-082-AD'' in the subject line 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 submitted 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 can review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
can visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You can 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
(DMS) receives them.
Discussion
In April 1988, a high-cycle transport category airplane
(specifically, a Boeing Model 737) was involved in an accident in which
the airplane suffered major structural damage during flight.
Investigation of this accident revealed that the airplane had numerous
fatigue cracks and a great deal of corrosion. Subsequent inspections
conducted by the operator on other high-cycle transport category
airplanes in its fleet revealed that other airplanes had extensive
fatigue cracking and corrosion.
Prompted by the data gained from this accident, we sponsored a
conference on aging airplanes in June 1988, which was attended by
representatives from the aviation industry and airworthiness
authorities from around the world. It became obvious that, because of
the tremendous increase in air travel, the relatively slow pace of new
airplane production, and the apparent economic feasibility of operating
older technology airplanes rather than retiring them, increased
attention needed to be focused on the aging airplane fleet and
maintaining its continued operational safety.
The Air Transport Association (ATA) of America and the Aerospace
Industries Association (AIA) of America agreed to undertake the task of
identifying and implementing procedures to ensure the continued
structural airworthiness of aging transport category airplanes. An
Airworthiness Assurance Working Group (AAWG) was established in August
1988, with members
[[Page 54485]]
representing aircraft manufacturers, operators, regulatory authorities,
and other aviation industry representatives worldwide. The objective of
the AAWG was to sponsor ``Task Groups'' to:
1. Select service bulletins, applicable to each airplane model in
the transport fleet, to be recommended for mandatory modification of
aging airplanes;
2. Develop corrosion-directed inspections and prevention programs;
3. Review the adequacy of each operator's structural maintenance
program;
4. Review and update the Supplemental Inspection Documents (SID);
and
5. Assess repair quality.
The Working Group assigned to review Boeing Model 747 series
airplanes completed its work on Item (2) in 1989 and developed a
baseline program for controlling corrosion problems that may jeopardize
the continued airworthiness of the Boeing Model 747 fleet. This program
is contained in Boeing Document Number D6-36022, ``Aging Airplane
Corrosion Prevention and Control Program--Model 747,'' Revision A,
dated July 28, 1989. On November 5, 1990, we issued AD 90-25-05,
amendment 39-6790 (55 FR 49268, November 27, 1990). That AD mandates
Boeing Document Number D6-36022, and requires that operators of Boeing
Model 747 series airplanes implement a Corrosion Prevention and Control
Program (CPCP).
Since we issued AD 90-25-05, two operators found skin corrosion on
four Boeing Model 747 series airplanes that were delivered between 1995
and 1999. The corrosion happened when primer peeled off in some areas
of the skin and left the aluminum unprotected against moisture and
corrosive elements. The operators repaired three of the airplanes by
trimming-out the damaged skin, and one of the airplanes by blending to
remove the damage. One other operator reported finding peeling primer,
but no corrosion, on the interior skin surface of one airplane, below
the cargo bay. The manufacturer investigated these incidents and found
that the manufacturing process for the skins resulted in inadequate
adhesion of the primer to the skin. The interior surface of the skin
below the cargo bay is susceptible to corrosion because of the presence
of moisture. If areas of corrosion are not repaired, the corrosion can
penetrate the thickness of the skin and cause cracking. This condition,
if not corrected, could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2505, dated
March 17, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing a
detailed inspection for damage of the interior skin in the forward and
aft cargo compartments. Damage includes a degraded finish; missing,
lifted, peeling, or blistering paint; or signs of corrosion. If any
damage is found, the service bulletin describes procedures for
corrective actions. The corrective actions are restoring the finish if
only damage to the finish is found; or repairing the affected area and
restoring the protective finish if the finish is damaged and any
corrosion is found. If any corrosion damage exceeds limits in the
structural repair manual (SRM), the service bulletin states that
operators should contact Boeing for repair instructions. If no damage
or corrosion is found, the service bulletin states that no further
action is necessary until the next inspection. The service bulletin
recommends repeating the detailed inspection every four years until the
initial inspection threshold for the applicable CPCP task in Boeing
Document Number D6-36022 is reached. The service bulletin also requests
that operators send reports of the inspection program and details of
any corrosion damage and peeling primer to the manufacturer.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service bulletin is intended
to adequately address the unsafe condition.
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. Therefore, we are 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 the Service Bulletin
Although the service bulletin referenced in this proposed AD
specifies to submit to the manufacturer a report of the inspection
program and details of any corrosion damage and peeling paint primer,
this proposed AD does not include those actions.
The service bulletin specifies that you may contact the
manufacturer for instructions on how to repair corrosion damage that
exceeds limits in the SRM, 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 Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 260 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours Average labor Parts Cost per airplane registered Fleet cost
rate per hour airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed inspection, per inspection 10 $65 N/A $650, per inspection 36 $23,400, per inspection
cycle. cycle. 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
[[Page 54486]]
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. 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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2005-22437; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
082-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this AD action by October 31, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-
400F series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2505, dated March 17, 2005.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD was prompted by reports of skin corrosion on four
Boeing Model 747 series airplanes that were delivered between 1995
and 1999. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion,
which can penetrate the thickness of the skin and cause cracking,
and 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) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do a
detailed inspection for damage (degraded finish; missing, lifted,
peeling, or blistering paint; or signs of corrosion) of the interior
skin in the forward and aft cargo compartments. Do any applicable
corrective actions before further flight. Except as required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, do all actions in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2505, dated March 17, 2005. Repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 48 months until accomplishing task number
C53-125-01 of Boeing Document Number D6-36022, ``Aging Airplane
Corrosion Prevention and Control Program--Model 747,'' Revision A,
dated July 28, 1989, or until accomplishing tasks S53-520 and S53-
550 of Boeing Document Number D621U400-MRB, ``B747-400 Maintenance
Review Board Report,'' Revision E, dated May 2003.
Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''
Damage that Exceeds Structural Repair Manual Limits
(g) If any corrosion damage that exceeds the limits specified in
the structural repair manual is found during any action required by
this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2505, dated March
17, 2005 specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before
further flight, repair the damage using a method approved in
accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD.
No Reporting Requirement
(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2505, dated
March 17, 2005, specifies to submit to the manufacturer a report of
the inspection program and details of any corrosion damage and
peeling paint primer, this AD does not include those actions.
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 September 8, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-18319 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P