Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747SR Series Airplanes, 75426-75428 [05-24242]

Download as PDF 75426 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 05–24250 Filed 12–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 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 service information identified in this proposed AD. 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–23358; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–206–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747SR Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to certain 747–100, –200, and –300 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if necessary. This proposed AD would retain all the requirements of the existing AD, and add airplanes to the applicability. This proposed AD results from reports indicating that fatigue cracks were found in lower lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, which could lead to fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 3, 2006. 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, SUMMARY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:07 Dec 19, 2005 Jkt 208001 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 in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2005–23358; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–206– 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 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. Discussion On March 22, 1999, we issued AD 99– 07–12, amendment 39–11097 (64 FR 15298, March 31, 1999), for certain Boeing Model 747–100, –200, and –300 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if necessary. That AD resulted from reports indicating that fatigue cracks were found in lower lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We issued that AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, which could lead to fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 99–07–12, the manufacturer has issued new service information that expands the applicability to include 747–400 and –400D series airplanes, line numbers 696 to 1152 inclusive. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002 (the original revision of that alert service bulletin, dated April 25, 1996, was referenced as the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the required actions in AD 99–07–12). The procedures in Revision 1 of the alert service bulletin are essentially the same as the procedures in the original revision for the airplanes affected by AD 99–07–12 (identified in the service bulletin as Group 1 airplanes). These procedures include repetitive inspections to detect cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if necessary. For the 747–400 and –400D series airplanes that are added to the effectivity of the service bulletin (identified as Group 2 airplanes), the service bulletin specifies contacting the manufacturer for information about how to repair frames that have crack damage. Examining the Docket FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD 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. We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would supersede AD 99–07– 12 and would retain the requirements of the existing AD. This proposed AD also would add airplanes to the applicability and require accomplishing the actions specified in the service bulletin described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Difference Between PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table: the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.’’ Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing 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. Explanation of Change to Applicability We have revised the applicability of the AD to identify the model designations as published in the most recent type certificate data sheet for the affected model. Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Clarification of Inspection Terminology In this proposed AD, the ‘‘detailed visual inspection’’ specified in the Boeing service bulletin is referred to as a ‘‘detailed inspection.’’ We have also changed references to a ‘‘detailed visual inspection’’ in the existing AD to refer to a ‘‘detailed inspection.’’ We have included the definition for a detailed inspection in a note in the proposed AD. Explanation of Change to Certain References to Other AD Changes to Paragraph Identifiers in Existing AD This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 99–07–12. Since AD 99–07–12 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers 16:11 Dec 19, 2005 Jkt 208001 Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph (a) (b) (c) (d) ............ ............ ............ ............ Corresponding requirement in this proposed AD Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph (f). (g). (h). (i). Interim Action This is considered to be interim action only until the accomplishment of AD 2005–20–30 for Boeing Model 747– 100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747– 200B, and 747–300, and 747SR series airplanes. AD 2005–20–30 requires a detailed inspection to detect cracks in the Section 46 lower lobe frames, and repair if necessary, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2349, Revision 2, dated April 3, 2003. The initial inspection required by AD 2005– 20–30 is required prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles. We find that earlier inspection (i.e., prior to accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles) of the lower lobe frames is warranted, as proposed by this AD. This is also considered to be interim action for Boeing Model 747–400 and 747–400D airplanes only until the accomplishment of an action similar to AD 2005–20–30 for these airplanes. On September 16, 2005, we issued NPRM Docket No. FAA–2005–22526 (70 FR 56860, September 29, 2005), Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–008–AD. That NPRM proposes to require repetitive inspections for cracking of certain fuselage internal structure, and repair if necessary. Costs of Compliance AD 99–07–12 refers to AD 93–08–12 amendment 39–8559 (58 FR 27927, May 12, 1993), in the section titled ‘‘Interim Action,’’ and in paragraphs (a) and (d), and Note 3 of that AD. Since we issued AD 99–07–12 we have superseded AD 93–08–12 with AD 2005–20–30 amendment 39–14327 (70 FR 59252, October 12, 2005). Therefore, this proposed AD refers to AD 2005–20–30 rather than to AD 93–08–12. VerDate Aug<31>2005 Requrement in AD 99–07–12 There are about 681 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 99 airplanes of U.S. registry. The actions that are required by AD 99–07–12 and retained in this proposed AD take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of both the retained and proposed actions for U.S. operators is $12,870, or $130 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, PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 75427 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 75428 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules by removing amendment 39–11097 (64 FR 15298, March 31, 1999) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–23358; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–206–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 3, 2006. Affected ADs (b) This AD supersedes AD 99–07–12. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– 100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747SR series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports indicating that fatigue cracks were found in lower lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, which could lead to fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin, and consequent 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. Restatement of the Requirements of AD 99– 07–12, With Additional Information for Group 2 Airplanes Initial Inspections (f) For airplanes on which the initial detailed internal inspection of the Section 46 lower lobe frames required by paragraph (f)(2) or (i)(2) of AD 2005–20–30, amendment 39–14327, has not been accomplished: Perform a detailed visual inspection to detect cracking of the lower lobe fuselage frames from Body Station 1820 to Body Station 2100, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2408, dated April 25, 1996; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002; as applicable; at the later of the applicable times specified in paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of this AD. (1) For all airplanes: Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles; or (2) For Group 1 airplanes identified in Revision 1 of the service bulletin: Within 1,500 flight cycles or 18 months after May 5, 1999 (the effective date of AD 99–07–12), whichever occurs first. (3) For Group 2 airplanes identified in Revision 1 of the service bulletin: Within 1,500 flight cycles or 18 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. Note 1: Paragraph (f)(2) or (i)(2) of AD 2005–20–30 requires a detailed inspection to detect cracks in the Section 46 lower lobe frames, in accordance with Boeing Service VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:07 Dec 19, 2005 Jkt 208001 Bulletin 747–53–2349, Revision 2, dated April 3, 2003. The initial inspection is required prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles; or within 1,000 flight cycles after June 11, 1993 (the effective date of AD 93–08–12, amendment 39–8559), or November 16, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005–20–30), depending on previous inspections accomplished; whichever occurs later. Note 2: 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.’’ Repetitive Inspections Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. (3) 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. (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 99–07–12, amendment 39–11097, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 13, 2005. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 05–24242 Filed 12–19–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P (g) If no cracking is detected during the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Corrective Actions Federal Aviation Administration (h) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: (1) Within 20 inches of the crack location on the frame, perform a detailed inspection of the adjacent structure to detect cracking. If any cracking is detected during any detailed inspection done in accordance with paragraph (f) or (h)(1) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with paragraph (h)(1)(i) or (h)(1)(ii) of this AD, as applicable. (i) For Group 1 airplanes: Using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. The Boeing 747 Structural Repair Manual, Subject 53–10–04, Figure 67 or 90, is one approved method. (ii) For Group 2 airplanes: Using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. (2) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. 14 CFR Part 39 Optional Terminating Inspection (i) Accomplishment of the initial detailed inspection of the Section 46 lower lobe frames required by paragraph (f)(2) or (i)(2) of AD 2005–20–30 constitutes terminating action for the requirements of this AD only for airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002, as Group 1 airplanes. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (j)(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) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 [Docket No. FAA–2005–23357; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–207–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 777–200 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 777–200 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require installing a new washer between the lower wing surface and the jam nut of the sump drain valve assembly. This proposed AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to prevent energy from a lightning strike on the bushing for the sump drain valve from arcing to the inside of the center fuel tank wall, which could create an ignition source in the fuel tank and result in a fuel tank explosion. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 3, 2006. 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 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 20, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75426-75428]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24242]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-23358; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-206-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-
100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747SR 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 747-100, -200, and -300 series 
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive inspections to 
detect cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if 
necessary. This proposed AD would retain all the requirements of the 
existing AD, and add airplanes to the applicability. This proposed AD 
results from reports indicating that fatigue cracks were found in lower 
lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We are proposing this AD 
to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage 
frames, which could lead to fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin, and 
consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 3, 
2006.

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 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. Send your comments to an address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``Docket No. 
FAA-2005-23358; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-206-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 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 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

    On March 22, 1999, we issued AD 99-07-12, amendment 39-11097 (64 FR 
15298, March 31, 1999), for certain Boeing Model 747-100, -200, and -
300 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to detect 
cracking of certain lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if 
necessary. That AD resulted from reports indicating that fatigue cracks 
were found in lower lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We 
issued that AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain lower 
lobe fuselage frames, which could lead to fatigue cracks in the 
fuselage skin, and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 99-07-12, the manufacturer has issued new 
service information that expands the applicability to include 747-400 
and -400D series airplanes, line numbers 696 to 1152 inclusive.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2408, 
Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002 (the original revision of that alert 
service bulletin, dated April 25, 1996, was referenced as the 
appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the 
required actions in AD 99-07-12). The procedures in Revision 1 of the 
alert service bulletin are essentially the same as the procedures in 
the original revision for the airplanes affected by AD 99-07-12 
(identified in the service bulletin as Group 1 airplanes). These 
procedures include repetitive inspections to detect cracking of certain 
lower lobe fuselage frames, and repair if necessary. For the 747-400 
and -400D series airplanes that are added to the effectivity of the 
service bulletin (identified as Group 2 airplanes), the service 
bulletin specifies contacting the manufacturer for information about 
how to repair frames that have crack damage.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an 
unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the 
same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which 
would supersede AD 99-07-12 and would retain the requirements of the 
existing AD. This proposed AD also would add airplanes to the 
applicability and require accomplishing the actions specified in the 
service bulletin described previously, except as discussed under 
``Difference Between

[[Page 75427]]

the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.''

Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD 
would require repairing 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.

Explanation of Change to Applicability

    We have revised the applicability of the AD to identify the model 
designations as published in the most recent type certificate data 
sheet for the affected model.

Clarification of Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) Paragraph

    We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure 
for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on 
any airplane to which the AMOC applies.

Clarification of Inspection Terminology

    In this proposed AD, the ``detailed visual inspection'' specified 
in the Boeing service bulletin is referred to as a ``detailed 
inspection.'' We have also changed references to a ``detailed visual 
inspection'' in the existing AD to refer to a ``detailed inspection.'' 
We have included the definition for a detailed inspection in a note in 
the proposed AD.

Explanation of Change to Certain References to Other AD

    AD 99-07-12 refers to AD 93-08-12 amendment 39-8559 (58 FR 27927, 
May 12, 1993), in the section titled ``Interim Action,'' and in 
paragraphs (a) and (d), and Note 3 of that AD. Since we issued AD 99-
07-12 we have superseded AD 93-08-12 with AD 2005-20-30 amendment 39-
14327 (70 FR 59252, October 12, 2005). Therefore, this proposed AD 
refers to AD 2005-20-30 rather than to AD 93-08-12.

Changes to Paragraph Identifiers in Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 99-07-12. 
Since AD 99-07-12 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
         Requrement in AD 99-07-12              in this  proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a).............................  Paragraph (f).
Paragraph (b).............................  Paragraph (g).
Paragraph (c).............................  Paragraph (h).
Paragraph (d).............................  Paragraph (i).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interim Action

    This is considered to be interim action only until the 
accomplishment of AD 2005-20-30 for Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 
747-100B SUD, 747-200B, and 747-300, and 747SR series airplanes. AD 
2005-20-30 requires a detailed inspection to detect cracks in the 
Section 46 lower lobe frames, and repair if necessary, in accordance 
with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2349, Revision 2, dated April 3, 
2003. The initial inspection required by AD 2005-20-30 is required 
prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles. We find that 
earlier inspection (i.e., prior to accumulation of 15,000 total flight 
cycles) of the lower lobe frames is warranted, as proposed by this AD.
    This is also considered to be interim action for Boeing Model 747-
400 and 747-400D airplanes only until the accomplishment of an action 
similar to AD 2005-20-30 for these airplanes. On September 16, 2005, we 
issued NPRM Docket No. FAA-2005-22526 (70 FR 56860, September 29, 
2005), Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-008-AD. That NPRM proposes to 
require repetitive inspections for cracking of certain fuselage 
internal structure, and repair if necessary.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 681 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 99 airplanes of 
U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 99-07-12 and retained in this 
proposed AD take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor 
rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost 
of both the retained and proposed actions for U.S. operators is 
$12,870, or $130 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 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

[[Page 75428]]

by removing amendment 39-11097 (64 FR 15298, March 31, 1999) and adding 
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2005-23358; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
206-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by February 
3, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 99-07-12.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B 
SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747SR series 
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports indicating that fatigue cracks 
were found in lower lobe frames on the left side of the fuselage. We 
are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of 
certain lower lobe fuselage frames, which could lead to fatigue 
cracks in the fuselage skin, and consequent 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.

Restatement of the Requirements of AD 99-07-12, With Additional 
Information for Group 2 Airplanes

Initial Inspections

    (f) For airplanes on which the initial detailed internal 
inspection of the Section 46 lower lobe frames required by paragraph 
(f)(2) or (i)(2) of AD 2005-20-30, amendment 39-14327, has not been 
accomplished: Perform a detailed visual inspection to detect 
cracking of the lower lobe fuselage frames from Body Station 1820 to 
Body Station 2100, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2408, dated 
April 25, 1996; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2408, 
Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002; as applicable; at the later of the 
applicable times specified in paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of 
this AD.
    (1) For all airplanes: Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total 
flight cycles; or
    (2) For Group 1 airplanes identified in Revision 1 of the 
service bulletin: Within 1,500 flight cycles or 18 months after May 
5, 1999 (the effective date of AD 99-07-12), whichever occurs first.
    (3) For Group 2 airplanes identified in Revision 1 of the 
service bulletin: Within 1,500 flight cycles or 18 months after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

    Note 1: Paragraph (f)(2) or (i)(2) of AD 2005-20-30 requires a 
detailed inspection to detect cracks in the Section 46 lower lobe 
frames, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2349, 
Revision 2, dated April 3, 2003. The initial inspection is required 
prior to the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles; or within 
1,000 flight cycles after June 11, 1993 (the effective date of AD 
93-08-12, amendment 39-8559), or November 16, 2005 (the effective 
date of AD 2005-20-30), depending on previous inspections 
accomplished; whichever occurs later.



    Note 2: 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.''

Repetitive Inspections

    (g) If no cracking is detected during the inspection required by 
paragraph (f) of this AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.

Corrective Actions

    (h) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required 
by paragraph (f) of this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish 
paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD:
    (1) Within 20 inches of the crack location on the frame, perform 
a detailed inspection of the adjacent structure to detect cracking. 
If any cracking is detected during any detailed inspection done in 
accordance with paragraph (f) or (h)(1) of this AD, prior to further 
flight, repair in accordance with paragraph (h)(1)(i) or (h)(1)(ii) 
of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) For Group 1 airplanes: Using a method approved in accordance 
with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. The 
Boeing 747 Structural Repair Manual, Subject 53-10-04, Figure 67 or 
90, is one approved method.
    (ii) For Group 2 airplanes: Using a method approved in 
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this 
AD.
    (2) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.

Optional Terminating Inspection

    (i) Accomplishment of the initial detailed inspection of the 
Section 46 lower lobe frames required by paragraph (f)(2) or (i)(2) 
of AD 2005-20-30 constitutes terminating action for the requirements 
of this AD only for airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-53A2408, Revision 1, dated April 4, 2002, as Group 1 
airplanes.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(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) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.  
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.
    (3) 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.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 99-07-12, 
amendment 39-11097, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 
provisions of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 13, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-24242 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.