Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200F, 747-200C, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F Series Airplanes, 10605-10607 [06-1828]

Download as PDF 10605 Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 71, No. 41 Thursday, March 2, 2006 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. other things, adding gender-neutral references in the third sentence of § 319.8. However, our amendatory instruction that was intended to accomplish this change was erroneous. This document corrects that error. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319 Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rice, Vegetables. I Accordingly, 7 CFR part 319 is corrected by making the following correcting amendment: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 319 PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES [Docket No. 02–019–3] Phytosanitary Treatments; Location of Treatment Schedules and Other Requirements; Correction Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule; correction. RMAJETTE on PROD1PC67 with RULES1 AGENCY: 14:10 Mar 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, and 7781–7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. § 319.8 SUMMARY: We are correcting an error in the amendatory instructions in our final rule that removed the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual from the list of materials incorporated by reference and added treatment schedules and related requirements from that document to our phytosanitary treatments regulations. The final rule was effective and published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2005 (70 FR 33264–33326, Docket No. 02–019–1). EFFECTIVE DATE: March 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Meredith C. Jones, Regulatory Coordination Specialist, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 141, Riverdale, MD 20737–1236; (301) 734–7467. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a final rule effective and published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2005 (70 FR 33264–33326, Docket No. 02–019–1), we amended the plant health regulations by adding to 7 CFR part 305 treatment schedules and related requirements that had appeared in the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual and by removing the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual from the list of materials incorporated by reference into the regulations. In the final rule, it was our intention to amend the regulations by, among VerDate Aug<31>2005 1. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows: I [Amended] 2. In § 319.8(a), the third sentence is amended by adding the words ‘‘or she’’ immediately after the word ‘‘he’’ both times it occurs. I Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of February 2006. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 06–1941 Filed 3–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–22526; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–008–AD; Amendment 39–14499; AD 2006–05–02] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747–200F, 747–200C, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–400F Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Boeing Model 747–200F, 747–200C, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–400F series airplanes. This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking of certain fuselage internal structure, and repair if necessary. This AD results from fatigue tests and analysis that identified areas of the fuselage where fatigue cracks can occur. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of the structural integrity of the fuselage, which could result in rapid depressurization of the airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective April 6, 2006. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of April 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may examine the 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., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, for service information identified in this 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: Examining the Docket You may examine the airworthiness directive (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 street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all Boeing Model 747–200F, 747–200C, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–400F series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2005 (70 FR 56860). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracking of E:\FR\FM\02MRR1.SGM 02MRR1 10606 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 2006 / Rules and Regulations certain fuselage internal structure, and repair if necessary. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Support for the Proposed AD One commenter concurs with the contents of the proposed AD and has no additional comments. Request To Revise Compliance Time One commenter, on behalf of an airline, requests that we adjust the proposed grace period for the initial inspection to ‘‘greater than 1,000 cycles, but less than or equal to the required SSID [Supplemental Structural Inspection Document] program repetitive inspection interval’’ if no cracks were found during the SSID inspection. He provides no further justification for the request. We disagree with the request to revise the grace period. The SSID program is an exploratory program intended for revealing cracks in structure with no prior history of fatigue cracking. The SSID program was substantiated by analysis, whereas this AD was prompted by cracks found during full-scale fatigue tests, and substantiated by updated analysis by Boeing. The inspections and compliance times appropriate for this AD are shorter than those of the SSID program. Because fatigue cracking has been found at the affected structure on the Boeing fatigue test airplanes, we have concluded that the SSID program alone will not adequately prevent undetected cracking of the structure, and that the more stringent inspections and repetitive intervals required by this AD are necessary. We have not changed the final rule regarding this issue. Request To Revise Cost Estimate The same commenter requests that we revise the cost estimate in the proposed AD to reflect the work-hour estimate specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2500, dated December 21, 2004 (the source of service information cited in the proposed AD). He states that 1,984 work hours would be an appropriate estimate as this figure includes time for access and close. Because these work hours are not normally provided during scheduled heavy maintenance checks, however, he considers the 260-work-hour estimate, as provided in the proposed AD, misleading. We recognize that the work hours required for an individual operator to complete all actions associated with an AD may exceed the work hours specified in the proposed cost estimate. However, an AD cannot account for fleetwide variability. Further, the costs of compliance discussed in a proposed AD represent only the time necessary to perform the specific actions actually proposed. The cost estimate typically does not include incidental costs such as access and close. Therefore, we don’t consider it appropriate to attribute those associated costs to the AD. We have not changed the final rule regarding this issue. Explanation of Change Made to This AD We have simplified paragraph (g) of this AD by referring to the ‘‘Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)’’ paragraph of this AD for repair methods. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 706 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD. ESTIMATED COSTS [Per inspection cycle] Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Inspections ............................................ 260 $65 None required .. $16,900 107 $1,808,300 RMAJETTE on PROD1PC67 with RULES1 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:10 Mar 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 (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 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, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: I E:\FR\FM\02MRR1.SGM 02MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 2006 / Rules and Regulations AMOCs PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): I 2006–05–02 Boeing: Amendment 39–14499. Docket No. FAA–2005–22526; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–008–AD. Effective Date (a) This AD becomes effective April 6, 2006. Affected ADs (b) Inspections specified in this AD may be considered an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for certain requirements of AD 2004–07–22, amendment 39–13566, as specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Applicability (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 747–200F, 747–200C, 747–400, 747–400D, and 747–400F series airplanes; certificated in any category. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD was prompted by fatigue tests and analysis that identified areas of the fuselage where fatigue cracks can occur. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of the structural integrity of the fuselage, which could result in rapid depressurization 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. RMAJETTE on PROD1PC67 with RULES1 Inspections (f) Do initial and repetitive inspections for fuselage cracks using applicable internal and external detailed inspection methods, and repair all cracks, by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2500, dated December 21, 2004, except as required by paragraph (g) of this AD. Do the initial and repetitive inspections at the times specified in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin, except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Repair any crack before further flight after detection. Exceptions to Service Bulletin Procedures (g) If any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD, and the bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the crack using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD. (h) Where the service bulletin specifies a compliance time after the issuance of the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:10 Mar 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Accomplishment of the inspections specified in this AD is considered an AMOC for the applicable requirements of paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD 2004–07–22 under the following conditions: (i) The inspections specified in this AD must be done within the compliance times specified in AD 2004–07–22. The initial inspection specified in this AD must be done at the times specified in paragraph (d) of AD 2004–07–22, and the inspections specified in this AD must be repeated within the intervals specified in paragraph (f) of this AD. (ii) The AMOC applies only to the areas of Supplemental Structural Inspection Document for Model 747 Airplanes, Document D6–35022, Revision G, dated December 2000, that are specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2500, dated December 21, 2004. (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 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. (4) 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 Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Material Incorporated by Reference (j) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2500, dated December 21, 2004, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Room PL–401, Nassif Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go to https:// www.archives.gov/federal_register/ code_of_federal_regulations/ ibr_locations.html. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 16, 2006. Michael Zielinski, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 06–1828 Filed 3–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P PO 00000 Frm 00003 10607 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 65 [Docket No. FAA–2004–17334; SFAR No. 103] RIN 2120–AI18 Process for Requesting Waiver of Mandatory Separation Age for Certain Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Control Specialists Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule; disposition of comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: On January 7, 2005, the FAA published Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 103 establishing the procedures and some standards by which an air traffic controller in a flight service station, enroute or terminal facility, or at the David J. Hurley Air Traffic Control System Command Center may request a waiver of the mandatory separation age. The FAA requested comments on the SFAR. This action confirms that SFAR No. 103 remains in effect as adopted and disposes of the comments. ADDRESSES: You can view the complete document for the final rule by going to https://dms.dot.gov. You can also go to 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wanda Reyna, ATO Workforce Services (ATO–A) Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–3056. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 8335(a) of Title 5 of the United States Code mandates that the Secretary of Transportation, under regulations as he may prescribe, may exempt a controller having exceptional skills and experience as a controller from the automatic separation provisions or mandatory separation provisions of the statute until that controller becomes 61 years of age. The Transportation, Treasury, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004, H.R. 2673, 108th Cong. (2004) directed the Secretary to issue a regulation establishing the procedures by which an air traffic control specialist may request a waiver of the mandatory separation E:\FR\FM\02MRR1.SGM 02MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 41 (Thursday, March 2, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10605-10607]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1828]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-22526; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-008-AD; 
Amendment 39-14499; AD 2006-05-02]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200F, 747-200C, 747-
400, 747-400D, and 747-400F Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 
Boeing Model 747-200F, 747-200C, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series 
airplanes. This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking of 
certain fuselage internal structure, and repair if necessary. This AD 
results from fatigue tests and analysis that identified areas of the 
fuselage where fatigue cracks can occur. We are issuing this AD to 
prevent loss of the structural integrity of the fuselage, which could 
result in rapid depressurization of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 6, 2006.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of April 6, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the 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., Nassif Building, 
Room PL-401, Washington, DC.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this 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:

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the airworthiness directive (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 street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all Boeing Model 747-
200F, 747-200C, 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes. That 
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2005 (70 FR 
56860). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for 
cracking of

[[Page 10606]]

certain fuselage internal structure, and repair if necessary.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the 
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Support for the Proposed AD

    One commenter concurs with the contents of the proposed AD and has 
no additional comments.

Request To Revise Compliance Time

    One commenter, on behalf of an airline, requests that we adjust the 
proposed grace period for the initial inspection to ``greater than 
1,000 cycles, but less than or equal to the required SSID [Supplemental 
Structural Inspection Document] program repetitive inspection 
interval'' if no cracks were found during the SSID inspection. He 
provides no further justification for the request.
    We disagree with the request to revise the grace period. The SSID 
program is an exploratory program intended for revealing cracks in 
structure with no prior history of fatigue cracking. The SSID program 
was substantiated by analysis, whereas this AD was prompted by cracks 
found during full-scale fatigue tests, and substantiated by updated 
analysis by Boeing. The inspections and compliance times appropriate 
for this AD are shorter than those of the SSID program. Because fatigue 
cracking has been found at the affected structure on the Boeing fatigue 
test airplanes, we have concluded that the SSID program alone will not 
adequately prevent undetected cracking of the structure, and that the 
more stringent inspections and repetitive intervals required by this AD 
are necessary. We have not changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Cost Estimate

    The same commenter requests that we revise the cost estimate in the 
proposed AD to reflect the work-hour estimate specified in Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2500, dated December 21, 2004 (the source of 
service information cited in the proposed AD). He states that 1,984 
work hours would be an appropriate estimate as this figure includes 
time for access and close. Because these work hours are not normally 
provided during scheduled heavy maintenance checks, however, he 
considers the 260-work-hour estimate, as provided in the proposed AD, 
misleading.
    We recognize that the work hours required for an individual 
operator to complete all actions associated with an AD may exceed the 
work hours specified in the proposed cost estimate. However, an AD 
cannot account for fleetwide variability. Further, the costs of 
compliance discussed in a proposed AD represent only the time necessary 
to perform the specific actions actually proposed. The cost estimate 
typically does not include incidental costs such as access and close. 
Therefore, we don't consider it appropriate to attribute those 
associated costs to the AD. We have not changed the final rule 
regarding this issue.

Explanation of Change Made to This AD

    We have simplified paragraph (g) of this AD by referring to the 
``Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)'' paragraph of this AD for 
repair methods.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the 
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public 
interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously. 
We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic 
burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 706 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for 
U.S. operators to comply with this AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
                                                                 [Per inspection cycle]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Number of U.S.-
                Action                    Work hours     Average labor               Parts                 Cost per        registered       Fleet cost
                                                         rate per hour                                     airplane        airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections..........................             260              $65   None required...............         $16,900              107       $1,808,300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 AD will not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, 
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

[[Page 10607]]

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2006-05-02 Boeing: Amendment 39-14499. Docket No. FAA-2005-22526; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-008-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective April 6, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) Inspections specified in this AD may be considered an 
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for certain requirements of 
AD 2004-07-22, amendment 39-13566, as specified in paragraph (i)(2) 
of this AD.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 747-200F, 747-200C, 747-
400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes; certificated in any 
category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by fatigue tests and analysis that 
identified areas of the fuselage where fatigue cracks can occur. We 
are issuing this AD to prevent loss of the structural integrity of 
the fuselage, which could result in rapid depressurization 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.

Inspections

    (f) Do initial and repetitive inspections for fuselage cracks 
using applicable internal and external detailed inspection methods, 
and repair all cracks, by doing all the actions specified in the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2500, dated December 21, 2004, except as required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD. Do the initial and repetitive inspections at the 
times specified in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin, except as 
required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Repair any crack before 
further flight after detection.

Exceptions to Service Bulletin Procedures

    (g) If any crack is found during any inspection required by this 
AD, and the bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate 
action: Before further flight, repair the crack using a method 
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph 
(i) of this AD.
    (h) Where the service bulletin specifies a compliance time after 
the issuance of the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance 
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of 
this AD.

AMOCs

    (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the authority to approve 
AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures 
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) Accomplishment of the inspections specified in this AD is 
considered an AMOC for the applicable requirements of paragraphs (c) 
and (d) of AD 2004-07-22 under the following conditions:
    (i) The inspections specified in this AD must be done within the 
compliance times specified in AD 2004-07-22. The initial inspection 
specified in this AD must be done at the times specified in 
paragraph (d) of AD 2004-07-22, and the inspections specified in 
this AD must be repeated within the intervals specified in paragraph 
(f) of this AD.
    (ii) The AMOC applies only to the areas of Supplemental 
Structural Inspection Document for Model 747 Airplanes, Document D6-
35022, Revision G, dated December 2000, that are specified in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2500, dated December 21, 2004.
    (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 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.
    (4) 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.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2500, 
dated December 21, 2004, to perform the actions that are required by 
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the 
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this 
document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You 
may review copies at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department 
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Room PL-401, Nassif 
Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or 
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For 
information on the availability of this material at the NARA, call 
(202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 16, 2006.
Michael Zielinski,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 06-1828 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.