[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5195-5201]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2301]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 5195]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0607; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-024-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for all Model 747-100B SUD, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series
airplanes; and Model 747-200B series airplanes having a stretched upper
deck. The original NPRM would have superseded an existing AD that
currently requires repetitively inspecting for cracking or
discrepancies of the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and
frames at body stations 1120 through 1220; and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary. The original NPRM proposed to
require modifying the frame-to-tension-tie joints at body stations 1120
through 1220 (including related investigative actions and corrective
actions if necessary), which would provide a terminating action for the
repetitive inspections. The original NPRM also proposed to require new
repetitive inspections after the modification, corrective actions if
necessary, and additional modification requirements at a specified time
after the first modification. The original NPRM also proposed to remove
certain airplanes from the applicability. The original NPRM was
prompted by reports of cracked and severed tension ties, broken
fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, and shear ties adjacent
to tension ties for the upper deck. This action revises the original
NPRM by adding repetitive open hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspections for cracking in the forward and aft tension tie channels,
and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, this supplemental NPRM
also requires a one-time angle inspection to determine if the angle is
installed correctly, and re-installation if necessary; and a one-time
open hole HFEC inspection at the fastener locations where the tension
tie previously attached to the frame prior to certain modifications,
and repair if necessary. This supplemental NPRM also, for the Stage 2
inspections, reduces the initial compliance times for those
inspections. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to detect and
correct cracking of the tension ties, shear webs, and frames of the
upper deck, which could result in rapid decompression and reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by March 19,
2012.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 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, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
(206) 544-5000, extension 1; fax (206) 766-5680; email
[email protected]; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call (425) 227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone: (800) 647-5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6428; fax (425) 917-6590; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0607;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-024-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD (the
``original NPRM'') to supersede AD 2007-23-18, amendment 39-15266 (72
FR 65655, November 23, 2007). The original NPRM applied to all Boeing
Model 747-100B SUD, 747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series airplanes;
and Model 747-200B series airplanes having a stretched upper deck. The
original NPRM was published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2009
(74 FR 33377). The
[[Page 5196]]
original NPRM proposed to supersede an existing AD that currently
requires repetitively inspecting for cracking or discrepancies of the
fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body stations
1120 through 1220; and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary. The original NPRM proposed to require modifying the frame-
to-tension-tie joints at body stations (STA) 1120 through 1220
(including related investigative actions and corrective actions if
necessary), which would provide a terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. The original NPRM also proposed to require new repetitive
inspections after the modification, corrective actions if necessary,
and additional modification requirements at a specified time after the
first modification. The original NPRM also proposed to remove certain
airplanes from the applicability.
Actions Since Previous NPRM was Issued
Since we issued the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009), we
have received reports from one operator that three adjacent tension
ties were found severed on a Model 747-300 series airplane with
approximately 18,400 flight cycles. Another operator reported that two
adjacent tension ties were found cracked or severed on a 747-300 series
airplane with approximately 14,000 flight cycles. In addition,
operators have reported finding cracks in the tension ties and frames
during the inspection required by the existing AD and done in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April
21, 2005. We have received revised service information, as described
below, and included it in the supplemental NPRM as the appropriate
source of service information for accomplishing certain actions.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, was referred to as the appropriate
source of service information for accomplishing certain actions
specified in the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009). Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010,
adds procedures for the following inspections:
For all airplanes: Repetitive open hole HFEC inspections
for cracking in the forward and aft tension tie channels at 12 fastener
locations inboard of the aluminum straps at STA 1140, and repair if
necessary by doing an oversize hole repair or repairing the tension
tie.
For certain airplanes: A one-time detailed inspection to
determine if the angle is installed correctly, and re-install if
necessary.
A one-time open-hole HFEC inspection for cracks at the
fastener locations (STA 1120, 1160, 1200, and 1220) where the tension
tie previously attached to the frame, before modification to the Boeing
special freighter or Boeing converted freighter configuration, and
repair if necessary by doing an oversize hole repair or repairing the
frame.
The initial compliance times specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, for the new
inspections at STA 1140 is before the accumulation of 10,000 total
flight cycles or within 3,000 flight cycles after the issue date of
Revision 1 of the service bulletin, whichever is later; with a
repetitive interval not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
The compliance time for the new one-time inspection for mislocated
angles is within 3,000 flight cycles after the issue date of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010.
The compliance time for the new one-time inspection for tie frames
at previous tension tie locations is within 3,000 flight cycles after
the issue date of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision
1, dated January 14, 2010.
We have also reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision
1, dated August 4, 2011. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559,
dated January 8, 2009, was referred to as the appropriate source of
service information for accomplishing the actions in the original NPRM
(74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009). No more work is necessary for airplanes
on which Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8,
2009, was used to accomplish the actions. Certain procedures specified
in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4,
2011, have been clarified to provide additional instructions. We have
revised paragraph (k) of this AD to refer to Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011, and added a new
paragraph to give credit for actions done before the effective date of
the AD in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559,
dated January 8, 2009.
Comments
We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM (74
FR 33377, July 13, 2009).
Support for Proposed Actions
United Parcel Service Co. (UPS) supports mandating the Stage 2
inspections specified in the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13,
2009).
Requests To Extend the Modification Compliance Time
Lufthansa and KLM requested that we revise the original NPRM (74 FR
33377, July 13, 2009) to extend the compliance time for the proposed
modification.
Lufthansa requested a detailed explanation about the decision
making that resulted in the compliance threshold of 17,000 flight
cycles (damage tolerance analysis, calculations, findings) for the
proposed modification, which seems inconsistent in light of the Stage 2
inspection threshold of 16,000 flight cycles. Lufthansa requested that
the FAA revise the compliance threshold for the proposed modification
to 20,000 total flight cycles.
KLM also stated that AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR
65655, November 23, 2007), mandates Stage 2 inspections at 16,000 total
flight cycles, while the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009)
mandates the modification at 17,000 total flight cycles, and it does
not change the Stage 2 total flight cycles. KLM stated it believes many
other operators (in addition to KLM) have started the AD 2007-23-18
Stage 2 inspections before the 16,000 total flight cycles. KLM stated
that even though defects were found with the Stage 2 inspections, most
of the defects have not propagated to such an extent where they would
have been found with Stage 1 inspections. Furthermore, KLM stated that
the repair methods/procedures used to repair defects found during the
Stage 2 inspections have the same intent (partial frame/tension tie
replacement) as the modification, and that the only difference is that
the design of the modification is more durable, given the fact that it
has an 8,000 total flight cycle threshold.
KLM stated that the Stage 2 inspection in AD 2007-23-18 amendment
39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007) provides an acceptable level
of safety to at least 20,000 flight cycles, and therefore proposes that
the modification be an optional terminating action for the Stage 1 and
Stage 2 inspection in AD 2007-23-18. KLM stated that if the FAA still
[[Page 5197]]
wants to mandate the modification, it would like the FAA to consider
re-evaluating the modification threshold to a more realistic threshold
given the fact that the Stage 2 inspection threshold is 16,000 flight
cycles.
We agree with Lufthansa and KLM that it seems inconsistent to have
a modification threshold of 17,000 total flight cycles, which is just
1,000 cycles more than the inspection threshold. However, after
issuance of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21,
2005, the manufacturer completed additional analysis and determined the
new inspection threshold should be lowered to 10,000 total flight
cycles. The new inspection threshold can be found in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010. We
have determined this reduced compliance time is necessary to address
the identified unsafe condition and added it to paragraph (i)(2) of
this AD.
Since the issuance of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
dated April 21, 2005, further cracking in the fleet has occurred
resulting in thresholds being further reduced in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010. The
modification threshold and new inspection threshold are appropriate
given the quantity and nature of cracks found on Model 747 airplanes,
which are based on extensive analysis. Due in part to the reporting
requirement of AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November
23, 2007), the manufacturer received a significant number of inspection
findings. The findings include numerous cases of single or dual tension
tie failure and one airplane with three adjacent severed tension ties.
Because the findings constituted multiple site damage, a damage
tolerance analysis alone was no longer appropriate. Rather, a
widespread fatigue damage analysis had to be employed to properly
analyze the risk of cracked and severed tension ties, and to set
inspection and modification thresholds appropriately. The manufacturer
performed widespread fatigue analysis and the FAA accepted its
findings.
The analysis, combined with the empirical data, supported an
inspection threshold of 10,000 total flight cycles, as reflected in
Revision 1 of the Stage 2 inspection, and a modification threshold of
17,000 total flight cycles. Therefore, based upon crack reports
received, material analysis completed, and widespread fatigue damage
analysis performed, the inspection and modification thresholds
contained in this supplemental NPRM are appropriate.
Request for an Optional Modification
UPS agreed that the modification will strengthen the area and
protect against widespread fatigue damage. UPS stated that the current
Stage 2 inspections and repetitive timeline are effectively locating
and repairing the discrepant areas prior to any damages reaching a
critical length. Therefore, UPS proposed the modification specified in
paragraph (m) of the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009) not be
mandated. UPS instead recommended that paragraph (m) be offered as an
alternative to the existing Stage 2 inspections assigned per paragraph
(j). UPS stated it supports the modification of the frames and tension
ties for the upper deck as proposed in the original NPRM, but suggested
that the current Stage 2 inspections be allowed to continue as an
alternative to performing the modification.
Airlines for America (A4A), formerly known as the Air Transport
Association of America (ATA), on behalf of its member United Airlines
(UAL), and Japan Airlines (JAL) both stated that the modification is
expensive. JAL noted the expense is due to kit cost, labor cost and the
lack of warranty coverage. We infer the commenters are requesting that
the modification be made optional due to its cost. UAL also noted that
even after accomplishing the modification, the original NPRM (74 FR
33377, July 13, 2009) would still require post modification
inspections.
We disagree with the requests to make the required modification
optional. As we stated previously, the crack finding data and analysis
performed support the inspection and modification thresholds in this
supplemental NPRM. We have not changed the supplemental NPRM in this
regard.
Request for Alternative Terminating Modification
Lufthansa requested we allow alternative terminating modifications.
Lufthansa stated that it is seeking alternative solutions and intervals
for relief in view of the huge design deficiency driven modification
work necessary for its Model 747 airplanes. Lufthansa asked that an
alternative modification be allowed using new parts with existing part
numbers, instead of mandating a modification using new parts and new
part numbers. KLM noted that no alternative to the proposed
modification has been considered.
We disagree with the request for an alternative modification of the
frame-to-tension-tie joints proposed in this supplemental NPRM. An
alternative method of compliance approving a modification using new
parts with existing part numbers does not remove all of the unsafe
condition. The modification in this supplemental NPRM includes
reinforcing the fuselage frames; therefore ``* * * using new parts with
existing part numbers instead of mandating a modification using new
parts and new part numbers'' does not reinforce the fuselage tension
ties or frames, and would not address the identified unsafe condition.
We are mandating the overall reinforcement modification to achieve a
long-term acceptable level of safety. We have not changed the
supplemental NPRM in this regard.
Request To Correct Errors in Service Information
All Nippon Airways (ANA) and JAL noted that Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009, contains typographical
errors. JAL asks that these errors be corrected before an AD is issued.
ANA stated that Boeing issued Service Bulletin Information Notice 747-
53A2559 IN 01, to correct the typographical errors in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009. ANA asks that
Boeing Service Bulletin Information Notice 747-53A2559 IN 01 be
included in this supplemental NPRM.
Paragraph (m) of the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009)
refers to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8,
2009, as the appropriate source of service information for the proposed
requirements. Boeing corrected the errors in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009, by issuing Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011. We have
replaced all references to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559,
dated January 8, 2009, with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559,
Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011, in this supplemental NPRM.
JAL stated that there are also errors in the effectivity section of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009, and
added that Model 747-400 Boeing Converted Freighter (BCF) airplanes are
not identified correctly. Boeing added that the effectivity should
exclude airplane RT743, which was converted to a Large Cargo Freighter
(LCF) airplane on which the subject tension ties were removed. Boeing
stated that the airplane is therefore not subject to the unsafe
condition. Boeing also noted that there are currently no plans to
revise this
[[Page 5198]]
service bulletin to remove that airplane from the effectivity.
We do not agree to reidentify Model 747-400 BCF airplanes in the
applicability of this supplemental NPRM. BCF airplanes continue to be
modified and as such, the applicability in this supplemental NPRM
follows the group categorization of airplanes using the Group/
Configuration/Description table in paragraph 1.A., ``Effectivity'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009. We
have not changed the supplemental NPRM in this regard.
We agree to exclude airplanes that have been converted to a Model
747-400 LCF configuration from the applicability of this supplemental
NPRM. That airplane configuration no longer has the subject tension
ties to inspect or modify, so is not subject to the unsafe condition.
We have changed paragraph (c) of this supplemental NPRM to exclude
those airplanes.
Request To Clarify Additional Modification
ANA stated that paragraph (m) of the original NPRM (74 FR 33377,
July 13, 2009), proposed to require modification and post-modification
inspections in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2559, dated January 8, 2009. ANA noted that the additional
modification as specified in this service bulletin is an open-hole HFEC
inspection, not a modification. ANA asked that we revise paragraph
(m)(2) of the NPRM to clarify the term ``additional modification'' as
an open-hole inspection.
We disagree that the additional modification is an open-hole HFEC
inspection. Paragraph (m)(2) of the supplemental NPRM (also paragraph
(m)(2) of the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July 13, 2009)) requires
doing an additional modification using a method approved in accordance
with the procedures in the alternative methods of compliance (AMOC)
paragraph. At this time, we have not approved a method that meets the
conditions for the additional modification. However, under the
provisions of paragraph (s)(1) of this AD, we will consider requests
for accomplishing a modification if data are submitted to substantiate
that it would provide an acceptable level of safety.
Request To Change Cost Information
ANA stated that its work hour estimate, based on the time it took
to do a modification identical to that in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2559, dated January 8, 2009, exceeded 2,000 work hours. ANA
added that the estimated costs in the original NPRM (74 FR 33377, July
13, 2009) are based on the work hours addressed in this service
bulletin. ANA asked that the actual work hours be considered to
estimate the costs.
We disagree with the request. The cost information in this
supplemental NPRM describes only the direct costs of the specific
required actions. Based on the best data available, the manufacturer
provided the number of work hours necessary to do the required actions.
This number represents the time necessary to perform only the actions
actually required by this supplemental NPRM. We recognize that, in
doing the actions required by an AD, operators might incur incidental
costs in addition to the direct costs. But the cost analysis in AD
rulemaking actions typically does not include incidental costs such as
the time necessary for planning, airplane down time, or time
necessitated by other administrative actions. Those incidental costs,
which might vary significantly among operators, are almost impossible
to calculate. We have not changed the supplemental NPRM regarding this
issue.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this supplemental NPRM because we evaluated all
the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of these
same type designs. Certain changes described above expand the scope of
the original NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary
to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the
public to comment on this supplemental NPRM.
Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
This supplemental NPRM would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 561 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet, which includes 67 U.S.-registered airplanes. The
following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work
hour.
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage 1 inspections (required 19................. $0................. $1,615 per $108,205 per
by AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39- inspection cycle. inspection
15266 (72 FR 65655, November cycle.
23, 2007)).
Stage 2 inspections (required 83................. $0................. $7,055............ $472,685 per
by AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39- inspection
15266 (72 FR 65655, November cycle.
23, 2007)).
Modification (new proposed 257 to 263......... $341,334 to $363,179 to $24,332,993 to
action). $345,490. $367,845. $24,645,615.\1\
Post-modification inspections 6.................. $0................. $510 per $34,170 per
(new proposed action). inspection cycle. inspection
cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Depending on airplane configuration.
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
[[Page 5199]]
products identified in this rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We 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 this 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),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, 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 39-15266 (72 FR
65655, November 23, 2007) and adding the following new AD:
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2009-0607; Directorate Identifier
2009-NM-024-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by March 19, 2012.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD supersedes AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266 (72 FR
65655, November 23, 2007).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100B SUD,
747-300, 747-400, and 747-400D series airplanes; and Model 747-200B
series airplanes having a stretched upper deck; certificated in any
category; excluding airplanes that have been converted to a large
cargo freighter configuration.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53: Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD results from reports of cracked and severed tension
ties, broken fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, and
shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the upper deck. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the tension ties,
shear webs, and frames of the upper deck, which could result in
rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Restatement of Requirements of AD 2007-23-18, Amendment 39-15266
(72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), With Revised Compliance Times and New
Service Information: Repetitive Stage 1 Inspections With Reduced
Repetitive Interval
For all airplanes: Do detailed inspections for cracking or
discrepancies of the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, and
frames at body stations 1120 through 1220, and related investigative
and corrective actions as applicable, by doing all actions specified
in and in accordance with ``Stage 1 Inspection'' of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, except as provided by paragraph (k)
of this AD; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision
1, dated January 14, 2010. As of the effective date of this AD only
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January
14, 2010, may be used. Do the Stage 1 inspections at the applicable
times specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, except as
provided by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD. Accomplishment
of the initial Stage 2 inspection required by paragraph (j) of this
AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph. Any applicable
related investigative and corrective actions must be done before
further flight. Doing the modification required by paragraph (l) of
this AD terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of this
paragraph.
(1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies a
compliance time relative to ``the original issue date on this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance before the specified
compliance time after April 26, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-
06-11).
(2) For any airplane that reaches the applicable compliance time
for the initial Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1,
Compliance Recommendations, under paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005) before reaching
the applicable compliance time for the initial Stage 1 inspection:
Accomplishment of the initial Stage 2 inspection eliminates the need
to do the Stage 1 inspections.
(h) Compliance Time for Initial Stage 1 Inspection
Do the initial Stage 1 inspection at the earlier of the times
specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD.
(1) At the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005.
(ii) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or
within 250 flight cycles after November 28, 2007 (the effective date
of AD 2007-23-18, amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23,
2007)), whichever occurs later.
(2) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)
and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Before the accumulation of 12,000 total flight cycles.
(ii) Within 50 flight cycles or 20 days, whichever occurs first,
after November 28, 2007.
(i) Compliance Times for Repetitive Stage 1 Inspections
Repeat the Stage 1 inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this
AD at the time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD,
as applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 250 flight cycles, until the initial Stage 2 inspection
required by paragraph (j) of this AD has been done.
(1) For airplanes on which the initial Stage 1 inspection has
not been accomplished as of November 28, 2007: Do the next
inspection before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or
within 250 flight cycles after the initial Stage 1 inspection done
in accordance with paragraph (j) of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(2) For airplanes on which the initial Stage 1 inspection has
been accomplished as of November 28, 2007: Do the next inspection at
the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(2)(i) or (i)(2)(ii)
of this AD.
(i) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 12,000 total
flight cycles as of November 28, 2007: Do the next inspection before
the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or within 250 flight
cycles after November 28, 2007, whichever occurs later.
(ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 12,000 total flight
cycles or more as of November 28, 2007: Do the next inspection at
the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(ii)(A) and
(i)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD.
(A) Within 250 flight cycles after accomplishment of the initial
Stage 1 inspection.
(B) Within 50 flight cycles or 20 days, whichever occurs first,
after November 28, 2007.
(j) Repetitive Stage 2 Inspections With Reduced Initial Compliance Time
For all airplanes: Do detailed and high frequency eddy current
inspections for cracking or discrepancies of the fasteners in the
tension ties, shear webs, and frames at body stations 1120 through
1220, and related investigative and corrective actions as
[[Page 5200]]
applicable, by doing all actions specified in and in accordance with
``Stage 2 Inspection'' of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005; or Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010; except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD. Do the initial
inspections at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. Repeat the Stage 2 inspection
thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated
April 21, 2005. As of the effective date of this AD only Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010, may be used. Any applicable related investigative and
corrective actions must be done before further flight.
Accomplishment of the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the repetitive
Stage 1 inspections. Doing the modification required by paragraph
(m) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of
this paragraph.
(1) Before the accumulation of 16,000 total flight cycles, or
within 1,000 flight cycles after November 28, 2007; whichever occurs
later.
(2) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles, or
within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(k) Exception to Corrective Action Instructions
If any discrepancy including but not limited to any crack,
broken fastener, loose fastener, or missing fastener is found during
any inspection required by paragraph (g), (h) or (i) of this AD, and
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, dated April 21, 2005; or
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January
14, 2010; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before
further flight, repair the discrepancy using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (s) of this
AD.
(l) Reporting Requirement
At the applicable time specified in paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2)
of this AD, submit a report of the findings (both positive and
negative) of each Stage 1 inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD to Boeing Commercial Airplanes; Attention: Manager, Airline
Support; P.O. Box 3707 MC 04-ER; Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; fax
(425) 266-5562. The report must include the inspection results, a
description of any discrepancies found, the inspections performed,
the airplane serial number, and the number of total accumulated
flight cycles on the airplane. Under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements
contained in this AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
(1) For any inspection done after November 28, 2007: Submit the
report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) For any inspection done before November 28, 2007: Submit the
report within 30 days after November 28, 2007.
(m) New Requirements of This AD: Modification
Except as provided by paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD:
At the times specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011,
modify the frame-to-tension-tie joints at body stations (STA) 1120
through 1220; do all related investigative and applicable corrective
actions; do the repetitive post-modification detailed inspections
for cracking of the tension tie and frame structure and all
applicable corrective actions; and do the additional modification.
Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4,
2011. Modifying the frame-to-tension-tie joints at body stations
1120 through 1220 terminates the repetitive inspection requirements
of paragraphs (g) and (j) of this AD.
(1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2011, specifies a
compliance time relative to ``the original issue date of this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, Revision 1, dated
August 4, 2011, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions
or additional modification requirements: Before further flight,
repair the cracking or do the modification using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (s) of this
AD.
(n) Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information
Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2559, dated January 8,
2009, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions
required by this AD.
(o) Stage 2 Inspection: Additional Work at STA 1140
For all airplanes: Except as provided by paragraph (r) of this
AD; at the time specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January
14, 2010; do an open hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for cracking in the forward and aft tension tie channels
at 12 fastener locations inboard of the aluminum straps at STA 1140,
and before further flight do all applicable repairs. Do all actions
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010.
Repeat the inspections thereafter at the time specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance.''
(p) One-Time Inspection for Mis-Located Angles
For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes as identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14,
2010: Except as provided by paragraph (r) of this AD; at the time
specified in paragraph 1.E, ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, do a
detailed inspection to determine if the angle is installed
correctly, and before further flight re-install all angles installed
incorrectly. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision
1, dated January 14, 2010.
(q) One-Time Inspection for Cracks in Frames at Previous Tension Tie
Locations
For Group 1, Configuration 2 airplanes; and Group 2 and 3
airplanes; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010: Except as provided by
paragraph (r) of this AD; at the time specified in paragraph 1.E,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507,
Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, do an open hole HFEC inspection
for cracks at the fastener locations (STA 1120, 1160, 1200, and
1220) where the tension tie previously attached to the frame prior
to modification to the Boeing special freighter or Boeing Converted
Freighter configuration, and before further flight do all applicable
repairs. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision
1, dated January 14, 2010.
(r) Exception to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1,
Dated January 14, 2010
Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2507, Revision 1, dated January 14, 2010, specifies
a compliance time relative to ``the Revision 1 date of this service
bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
(s) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(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 the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
[[Page 5201]]
Designation Authorization (ODA) that 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) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2007-23-18,
amendment 39-15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and
(i) of this AD.
(t) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Nathan Weigand,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-6428; fax: (425) 917-6590; email:
[email protected].
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
(206) 544-5000, extension 1; fax (206) 766-5680; email
[email protected]; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(3) You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call (425) 227-1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 12, 2012.
Michael J. Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-2301 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P