Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F Series Airplanes, 54668-54671 [05-18403]

Download as PDF 54668 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules Egg white lysozyme (CAS # 9001–63– 2) * * * * * L-Malic acid (CAS # 97–67–6). * * * * * Microorganisms—any food grade bacteria, fungi, and other microorganism. * * * * * (b) * * * Activated charcoal (CAS #s 7440–44– 0; 64365–11–3)—only from vegetative sources; for use only as a filtering aid in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Ammonium hydroxide (CAS # 1336– 21–6)—for use only as a boiler water additive until October 21, 2005. Restricted to handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Cyclohexylamine (CAS # 108–91–8)— for use only as a boiler water additive for packaging sterilization. Restricted to handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ Diethylaminoethanol (CAS # 100–37– 8)—for use only as a boiler water additive for packaging sterilization. Restricted to handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited for use in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Octadecylamine (CAS # 124–30–1)— for use only as a boiler water additive for packaging sterilization. Restricted to handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited for use in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS # 79–21–0)—for use in wash and/or rinse water according to FDA limitations. For use as a sanitizer on food contact surfaces. Restricted to use in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS # 7758–16–9)—for use only as a leavening VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:38 Sep 15, 2005 Jkt 205001 agent in agricultural products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * Tetrasodium pyrophosphate (CAS # 7722–88–5)—for use only in meat analog products labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s));’’ prohibited in handling agricultural products labeled ‘‘organic.’’ * * * * * 4. In § 205.681, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows: § 205.681 Appeals. * * * * * (d) * * * (1) Appeals to the Administrator must be filed in writing and addressed to: Administrator, USDA, AMS, c/o NOP Appeals Staff, Stop 0203, Room 3529–S, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– 0203 * * * * * Dated: September 12, 2005. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. 05–18381 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–02–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–22423; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–068–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747–200C and –200F Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to certain Boeing Model 747–200C and –200F series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, the existing AD also provides an optional repair/modification, which extends certain repetitive inspection intervals. This proposed AD would reduce the compliance time for all PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 initial inspections and reduce the repetitive interval for a certain inspection. This proposed AD is prompted by new reports of cracks in the upper deck floor beams occurring at lower flight cycles. We are proposing this AD to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams. Such cracking could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment hole location and could result in rapid decompression and loss of controllability 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. • 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– 22423; the directorate identifier for this docket is 2005–NM–068–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. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2005–22423; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–068–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM 16SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules 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 our docket 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 the 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 On January 29, 2004, we issued AD 2004–03–11, amendment 39–13455 (69 FR 5920, February 9, 2004), for certain Boeing Model 747–200C and –200F series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of certain upper deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, that AD also provides an optional repair/ modification, which extends certain repetitive inspection intervals. That AD was prompted by a report of fatigue cracking of the station (STA) 340 upper deck floor beam. We issued that AD to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams. Such cracking could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment hole location and could result in rapid decompression and loss of controllability of the airplane. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 2004–03–11, we have received new reports of cracks in VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:38 Sep 15, 2005 Jkt 205001 the upper deck floor beams on several airplanes. The airplanes had accumulated between 19,580 and 23,561 total flight cycles. In one case, the aft reinforcing strap of the upper chord of the floor beam at station 520 was found severed at 19,580 total flight cycles. Another airplane with 19,687 total flight cycles had significant cracks in the same area. The threshold for the initial inspection required by AD 2004–03–11 is 22,000 total flight cycles. Therefore, we have determined that the initial inspections and a certain repetitive inspection required by that AD need to be done earlier to detect cracks in the upper deck floor beams in a timely manner. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Revision 1 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 53A2439, dated March 10, 2005. The inspections, repair, and optional repair/ modification described in Revision 1 are essentially identical to those in the original issue, which is referenced in AD 2004–03–11 as the appropriate source of service information for the required actions. Revision 1 reduces the compliance time for all initial inspections and reduces the repetitive inspection interval for surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the upper deck floor beams (header beams) at STAs 440 and 520. The compliance time for accomplishing the inspection of repaired areas ranges between 5,000 and 15,000 flight cycles depending on the diameter of the fastener hole. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design that may be registered in the U.S. at some time in the future. We are proposing to supersede AD 2004–03–11. This proposed AD would continue to require repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. This proposed AD would also continue to provide, for certain airplanes, an optional repair/ modification, which extends certain repetitive inspection intervals. This proposed AD would also reduce the compliance time for all initial inspections and reduce the repetitive interval for a certain inspection. The actions would be required to be accomplished in accordance with the PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 54669 service bulletin described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.’’ Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin The service bulletin provides the following information in Note 9 of the Accomplishment Instructions: ‘‘For the purposes of this service bulletin, do not count flight-cycles with a cabin pressure differential of 2.0 psi or less. However, any flight-cycle with momentary spikes in cabin pressure differential above 2.0 psi must be included as a full-pressure flight-cycle.’’ We have determined that an adjustment of flight cycles due to a lower cabin differential pressure is not substantiated and will not be allowed for use in determining the flight cycle threshold for this proposed AD. 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. Although the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin describe procedures for submitting inspection results to Boeing, this proposed AD would not require that action. We do not need this information from operators. Change to Existing AD This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2004–03–11. Since AD 2004–03–11 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table: REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS Requirement in AD 2004–03–11 Corresponding requirement in this proposed AD Paragraph (a) ......... Paragraph (b) ......... Paragraphs (f) and (g). Paragraph (h). Costs of Compliance There are about 78 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 21 airplanes of U.S. registry. E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM 16SEP1 54670 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules The inspections that are required by AD 2004–03–11 and retained in this proposed AD take about 29 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently required inspections for U.S. airplanes is $39,585, or $1,885 per airplane, per inspection cycle. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:38 Sep 15, 2005 Jkt 205001 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 removing amendment 39–13455 (69 FR 5920, February 9, 2004) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–22423; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–068–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The Federal Aviation Administration must receive comments on this AD action by October 31, 2005. Affected ADs (b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–03–11, amendment 39–13455. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– 200C and –200F series airplanes, certificated in any category, as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, dated July 5, 2001. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD was prompted by new reports of cracks in the upper deck floor beams occurring at lower flight cycles. We are issuing this AD to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams, which could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment hole location and could result in rapid decompression and loss of controllability 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. Requirements of AD 2004–03–11 Initial Compliance Time at a New Reduced Threshold (f) At the earliest of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3) of this AD, do the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD. (1) Before the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after March 15, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004–03–11), whichever occurs later. (2) For airplanes with 17,000 or more total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Before the accumulation of 18,000 total flight cycles, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. (3) For airplanes with fewer than 17,000 total flight cycles as of the effective date of PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 this AD: Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Inspections at Reduced Intervals for Certain Floor Beams and Repair (g) Do the applicable inspection to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper deck floor beams as specified in Part 1 (Open-Hole High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspection Method) or Part 2 (Surface HFEC Inspection Method) of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, dated July 5, 2001. Do the inspections per the service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, the actions must be done per the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005. (1) If any crack is found, before further flight, repair per Part 3 (Upper Chord Repair) of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin; except where the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action, before further flight, repair according to a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or according to data meeting the certification basis of the airplane approved by an a Boeing Company Designated Engineering Representative (DER) or Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval letter must specifically reference this AD. Do the applicable inspection of the repaired area per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin at the applicable time per Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, and repeat the applicable inspection at the applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, do the applicable inspection of the repaired area per Parts 1 and 6 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin at the applicable time per Table 1 of Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, and repeat the applicable inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. (2) If no crack is found, repeat the applicable inspection per paragraph (g) of this AD at the applicable time specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (g)(2)(iii) of this AD. As an option, accomplishment of paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, before further flight, extends the threshold for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph. (i) If the open-hole HFEC inspection method was used: Repeat that inspection at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. (ii) If the surface HFEC inspection method was used at stations 340 through 420 inclusive and station 500: Repeat that inspection at intervals not to exceed 750 flight cycles. (iii) If the surface HFEC inspection method was used at stations 440 and 520: Repeat that inspection at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(iii)(A) and (g)(2)(iii)(B) of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 flight cycles. E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM 16SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules (A) Within 750 flight cycles since the last surface HFEC inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD. (B) Within 250 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. Optional Repair/Modification (h) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD is done per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, dated July 5, 2001, or Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005; and on which no cracking is found: Accomplishment of the actions specified in either paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD extends the threshold for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD. For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD is done per Part 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, dated July 5, 2001, or Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005; and on which no cracking is found: Accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD extends the threshold for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD. (1) Do the applicable repair per Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin. At the applicable time specified in Table 1 of Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, do the applicable inspection of the repaired area per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat the inspection thereafter within the applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, the actions must be done per Parts 1, 3, and 6 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005, as applicable, and repeat the applicable inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. (2) Do the modification of the attachment hole of the floor panel per Figure 5 of the service bulletin. Within 10,000 flight cycles after accomplishment of the modification, do the inspection of the modified area per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat the inspection thereafter within the applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, the actions must be done per Figure 5 and Part 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005, and repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. Determining the Number of Flight Cycles for Compliance Time (i) For the purposes of calculating the compliance threshold and repetitive intervals for actions required by paragraphs (f), (g), or (h) of this AD: As of the effective date of this AD, all flight cycles, including the number of flight cycles in which cabin differential pressure is at 2.0 pounds per square inch (psi) or less, must be counted when determining the number of flight cycles that have occurred on the airplane. No Reporting Requirement (j) Although the service bulletin referenced in this AD specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:38 Sep 15, 2005 Jkt 205001 Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (SACO), 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 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. (3) AMOCs approved previously according to AD 2004–03–11 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraphs (f) and (g) of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 7, 2005. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 05–18403 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–22427; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–263–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; British Aerospace Model BAC 1–11 200 and 400 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 all British Aerospace Model BAC 1–11 200 and 400 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to contain applicable AFM amendments, which advise the flightcrew of information pertaining to safely operating the fuel system. The proposed AD would also require revising the FAA-approved maintenance program to include certain repetitive maintenance tasks intended to improve the safety of the fuel system. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to prevent potential ignition sources inside the fuel system, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 54671 explosion and consequent loss of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 17, 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 British Aerospace, Service Support, Airbus Limited, P.O. Box 77, Bristol BS99 7AR, England, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Include the docket number ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2005– 22427; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM– 263–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 our docket 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 E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM 16SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54668-54671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18403]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-22423; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-068-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F Series 
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness 
directive (AD) that applies to certain Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F 
series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive 
inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper 
deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, the 
existing AD also provides an optional repair/modification, which 
extends certain repetitive inspection intervals. This proposed AD would 
reduce the compliance time for all initial inspections and reduce the 
repetitive interval for a certain inspection. This proposed AD is 
prompted by new reports of cracks in the upper deck floor beams 
occurring at lower flight cycles. We are proposing this AD to find and 
fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams. Such cracking could 
extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment hole location 
and could result in rapid decompression and loss of controllability 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.
     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-2005-22423; the directorate identifier for this docket is 
2005-NM-068-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. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2005-22423; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-068-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite

[[Page 54669]]

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 our 
docket 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 the 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

    On January 29, 2004, we issued AD 2004-03-11, amendment 39-13455 
(69 FR 5920, February 9, 2004), for certain Boeing Model 747-200C and -
200F series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to find 
fatigue cracking in the upper chord of certain upper deck floor beams, 
and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, that AD also provides 
an optional repair/modification, which extends certain repetitive 
inspection intervals. That AD was prompted by a report of fatigue 
cracking of the station (STA) 340 upper deck floor beam. We issued that 
AD to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams. Such 
cracking could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment 
hole location and could result in rapid decompression and loss of 
controllability of the airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2004-03-11, we have received new reports of 
cracks in the upper deck floor beams on several airplanes. The 
airplanes had accumulated between 19,580 and 23,561 total flight 
cycles. In one case, the aft reinforcing strap of the upper chord of 
the floor beam at station 520 was found severed at 19,580 total flight 
cycles. Another airplane with 19,687 total flight cycles had 
significant cracks in the same area. The threshold for the initial 
inspection required by AD 2004-03-11 is 22,000 total flight cycles. 
Therefore, we have determined that the initial inspections and a 
certain repetitive inspection required by that AD need to be done 
earlier to detect cracks in the upper deck floor beams in a timely 
manner.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Revision 1 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2439, dated March 10, 2005. The inspections, repair, and optional 
repair/modification described in Revision 1 are essentially identical 
to those in the original issue, which is referenced in AD 2004-03-11 as 
the appropriate source of service information for the required actions. 
Revision 1 reduces the compliance time for all initial inspections and 
reduces the repetitive inspection interval for surface high frequency 
eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the upper deck floor beams (header 
beams) at STAs 440 and 520. The compliance time for accomplishing the 
inspection of repaired areas ranges between 5,000 and 15,000 flight 
cycles depending on the diameter of the fastener hole. Accomplishing 
the actions specified in the service information is intended to 
adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or 
develop on other airplanes of the same type design that may be 
registered in the U.S. at some time in the future. We are proposing to 
supersede AD 2004-03-11. This proposed AD would continue to require 
repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of 
the upper deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. This proposed AD 
would also continue to provide, for certain airplanes, an optional 
repair/modification, which extends certain repetitive inspection 
intervals. This proposed AD would also reduce the compliance time for 
all initial inspections and reduce the repetitive interval for a 
certain inspection. The actions would be required to be accomplished in 
accordance with the service bulletin described previously, except as 
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service 
Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin provides the following information in Note 9 
of the Accomplishment Instructions: ``For the purposes of this service 
bulletin, do not count flight-cycles with a cabin pressure differential 
of 2.0 psi or less. However, any flight-cycle with momentary spikes in 
cabin pressure differential above 2.0 psi must be included as a full-
pressure flight-cycle.'' We have determined that an adjustment of 
flight cycles due to a lower cabin differential pressure is not 
substantiated and will not be allowed for use in determining the flight 
cycle threshold for this proposed AD.
    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.
    Although the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin 
describe procedures for submitting inspection results to Boeing, this 
proposed AD would not require that action. We do not need this 
information from operators.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2004-03-
11. Since AD 2004-03-11 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and 
certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding 
paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in 
the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Corresponding  requirement
       Requirement in AD 2004-03-11             in  this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a).............................  Paragraphs (f) and (g).
Paragraph (b).............................  Paragraph (h).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 78 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 21 airplanes of 
U.S. registry.

[[Page 54670]]

    The inspections that are required by AD 2004-03-11 and retained in 
this proposed AD take about 29 work hours per airplane, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated 
cost of the currently required inspections for U.S. airplanes is 
$39,585, or $1,885 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not 
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship 
between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed 
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this 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 removing amendment 39-13455 (69 FR 
5920, February 9, 2004) and adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2005-22423; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
068-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration must receive comments on 
this AD action by October 31, 2005.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2004-03-11, amendment 39-13455.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F series 
airplanes, certificated in any category, as listed in Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by new reports of cracks in the upper 
deck floor beams occurring at lower flight cycles. We are issuing 
this AD to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams, 
which could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment 
hole location and could result in rapid decompression and loss of 
controllability 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.

Requirements of AD 2004-03-11

Initial Compliance Time at a New Reduced Threshold

    (f) At the earliest of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1) 
through (f)(3) of this AD, do the inspection required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 1,000 flight cycles after March 15, 2004 (the effective date 
of AD 2004-03-11), whichever occurs later.
    (2) For airplanes with 17,000 or more total flight cycles as of 
the effective date of this AD: Before the accumulation of 18,000 
total flight cycles, or within 90 days after the effective date of 
this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (3) For airplanes with fewer than 17,000 total flight cycles as 
of the effective date of this AD: Before the accumulation of 15,000 
total flight cycles, or within 1,000 flight cycles after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

Inspections at Reduced Intervals for Certain Floor Beams and Repair

    (g) Do the applicable inspection to find fatigue cracking in the 
upper chord of the upper deck floor beams as specified in Part 1 
(Open-Hole High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspection Method) or 
Part 2 (Surface HFEC Inspection Method) of the Work Instructions of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001. Do 
the inspections per the service bulletin. As of the effective date 
of this AD, the actions must be done per the Work Instructions of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 
10, 2005.
    (1) If any crack is found, before further flight, repair per 
Part 3 (Upper Chord Repair) of the Work Instructions of the service 
bulletin; except where the service bulletin specifies to contact 
Boeing for appropriate action, before further flight, repair 
according to a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or according to data meeting the 
certification basis of the airplane approved by an a Boeing Company 
Designated Engineering Representative (DER) or Authorized 
Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option Authorization 
Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 
make such findings. For a repair method to be approved by the 
Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's 
approval letter must specifically reference this AD. Do the 
applicable inspection of the repaired area per Part 1 of the Work 
Instructions of the service bulletin at the applicable time per Part 
3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, and repeat the 
applicable inspection at the applicable interval per Figure 1 of the 
service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, do the 
applicable inspection of the repaired area per Parts 1 and 6 of the 
Work Instructions of the service bulletin at the applicable time per 
Table 1 of Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, 
and repeat the applicable inspection thereafter at intervals not to 
exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
    (2) If no crack is found, repeat the applicable inspection per 
paragraph (g) of this AD at the applicable time specified in 
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (g)(2)(iii) of this AD. As an option, 
accomplishment of paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, before 
further flight, extends the threshold for the initiation of the 
repetitive inspections required by this paragraph.
    (i) If the open-hole HFEC inspection method was used: Repeat 
that inspection at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
    (ii) If the surface HFEC inspection method was used at stations 
340 through 420 inclusive and station 500: Repeat that inspection at 
intervals not to exceed 750 flight cycles.
    (iii) If the surface HFEC inspection method was used at stations 
440 and 520: Repeat that inspection at the earlier of the times 
specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(iii)(A) and (g)(2)(iii)(B) of this 
AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 flight cycles.

[[Page 54671]]

    (A) Within 750 flight cycles since the last surface HFEC 
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (B) Within 250 flight cycles after the effective date of this 
AD.

Optional Repair/Modification

    (h) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD is done per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001, or Revision 
1, dated March 10, 2005; and on which no cracking is found: 
Accomplishment of the actions specified in either paragraph (h)(1) 
or (h)(2) of this AD extends the threshold for the initiation of the 
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD. For 
airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 
AD is done per Part 2 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001, or Revision 1, 
dated March 10, 2005; and on which no cracking is found: 
Accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this 
AD extends the threshold for the initiation of the repetitive 
inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Do the applicable repair per Part 3 of the Work Instructions 
of the service bulletin. At the applicable time specified in Table 1 
of Part 3 of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin, do the 
applicable inspection of the repaired area per Part 1 of the Work 
Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat the inspection 
thereafter within the applicable interval per Figure 1 of the 
service bulletin. As of the effective date of this AD, the actions 
must be done per Parts 1, 3, and 6 of the Work Instructions of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 
10, 2005, as applicable, and repeat the applicable inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
    (2) Do the modification of the attachment hole of the floor 
panel per Figure 5 of the service bulletin. Within 10,000 flight 
cycles after accomplishment of the modification, do the inspection 
of the modified area per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of the 
service bulletin. Repeat the inspection thereafter within the 
applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin. As of the 
effective date of this AD, the actions must be done per Figure 5 and 
Part 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-53A2439, Revision 1, dated March 10, 2005, and repeat the 
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight 
cycles.

Determining the Number of Flight Cycles for Compliance Time

    (i) For the purposes of calculating the compliance threshold and 
repetitive intervals for actions required by paragraphs (f), (g), or 
(h) of this AD: As of the effective date of this AD, all flight 
cycles, including the number of flight cycles in which cabin 
differential pressure is at 2.0 pounds per square inch (psi) or 
less, must be counted when determining the number of flight cycles 
that have occurred on the airplane.

No Reporting Requirement

    (j) Although the service bulletin referenced in this AD 
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD 
does not include that requirement.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 
(SACO), 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 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.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously according to AD 2004-03-11 are 
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraphs (f) 
and (g) of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 7, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-18403 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.