[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68277-68280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26027]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2004-19678; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-62-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400F Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for certain Boeing Model 747-400F series airplanes. This proposed AD 
would require initial detailed and open-hole high frequency eddy 
current inspections for cracking of the web, upper chord, and upper 
chord strap of the upper deck floor beams, and repair of any cracking. 
This proposed AD also would require a preventive modification of the 
upper deck floor beams, and repetitive inspections for cracking after 
accomplishing the modification. This proposed AD is prompted by reports 
of fatigue cracking found on the upper deck floor beam to frame 
attachment points. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks 
in the upper chord, upper chord strap, and the web of the upper deck 
floor beams and resultant failure of the floor beams. Failure of a 
floor beam could result in damage to critical flight control cables and 
wire bundles that pass through the floor beam, and consequent loss of 
controllability of the airplane. Failure of the floor beam also could 
result in the failure of the adjacent fuselage frames and skin, and 
consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 10, 
2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
    <bullet> DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.

[[Page 68278]]

    <bullet> Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
    <bullet> Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
    <bullet> By fax: (202) 493-2251.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207.
    You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at 
http://dms.dot.gov, or at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Room PL-401, on 
the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Technical information: 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.
    Plain language information: Marcia Walters, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#402d21322329216e37212c34253233002621216e272f36"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="167b7764757f773861777a627364655670777738717960">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Docket Management System (DMS)

    The FAA has implemented new procedures for maintaining AD dockets 
electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new AD actions are posted on DMS 
and assigned a docket number. We track each action and assign a 
corresponding directorate identifier. The DMS AD docket number is in 
the form ``Docket No. FAA-2004-99999.'' The Transport Airplane 
Directorate identifier is in the form ``Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-
999-AD.'' Each DMS AD docket also lists the directorate identifier 
(``Old Docket Number'') as a cross-reference for searching purposes.

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2004-19678; 
Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-62-AD'' in the subject line of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments submitted by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of 
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You can review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
can visit http://dms.dot.gov.
    We are reviewing the writing style we currently use in regulatory 
documents. We are interested in your comments on whether the style of 
this document is clear, and your suggestions to improve the clarity of 
our communications that affect you. You can get more information about 
plain language at http://www.faa.gov/language and http://www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://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 DMS receives them.

Related Rulemaking

    On January 29, 2004, we issued AD 2004-03-11, amendment 39-13455 
(69 FR 5920, February 9, 2004). That AD applies to certain Boeing Model 
747-200C and -200F series airplanes, and requires repetitive 
inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper 
deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, that 
AD also provides an optional repair/modification, which defers certain 
repetitive inspections.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rulemaking

    Since issuance of AD 2004-03-11, we have received reports 
indicating that additional fatigue cracking was found on the upper deck 
floor beam to frame attachment points, on certain Model 747-200F series 
airplanes. The upper deck floor beams on certain 747-400F series 
airplanes are similar to those on the affected 747-200F series 
airplanes. In light of these reports, we have determined that it is 
necessary to issue the proposed AD at this time to ensure the continued 
operating safety of the affected airplane fleet. Therefore, all of 
these models may be subject to the same unsafe condition. Failure of a 
floor beam due to fatigue cracking could result in damage to critical 
flight control cables and wire bundles that pass through the floor 
beam, and consequent loss of controllability of the airplane. Failure 
of the floor beam also could result in the failure of the adjacent 
fuselage frames and skin, and consequent rapid decompression of the 
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2443, dated 
May 9, 2002. The service bulletin describes procedures for a detailed 
inspection for cracking of the web, upper chord and upper chord strap 
of body stations 340 through 520 inclusive, of the upper deck floor 
beams; an open-hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for 
cracking of the fastener holes of the web, upper chord, and upper chord 
strap; and repair of any cracking. If any cracking is found, the 
procedures in the service bulletin include repairing the cracking and 
accomplishing a preventive modification before further flight, or 
contacting the manufacturer for repair instructions if the cracking 
exceeds certain limits.
    If no cracking is found, the procedures in the service bulletin 
include two options: Modifying the upper chord of the upper deck floor 
beams before further flight, or repeating the detailed and open-hole 
inspections before the accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles, then 
accomplishing the preventive modification before further flight. 
Accomplishing the preventive modification extends the compliance time 
for the next detailed and open-hole or surface HFEC inspections of the 
upper deck floor beams to 15,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the 
modification.
    For the post-modification inspection, the service bulletin gives 
the option of either repeating the detailed and surface HFEC 
inspections every 1,000 flight cycles, or repeating the detailed and 
open-hole HFEC inspections every 5,000 flight cycles.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is 
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

[[Page 68279]]

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an 
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes 
of this same type design. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which 
would require initial detailed and open-hole HFEC inspections for 
cracking of the web, upper chord, and upper chord strap of the upper 
deck floor beams, and repair of any cracking. The proposed AD also 
would require a preventive modification of the upper deck floor beams, 
and repetitive inspections for cracking after accomplishing the 
modification. The proposed AD would require you to use the service 
information described previously to perform these actions, except as 
discussed under ``Differences Between the Alert Service Bulletin and 
This Proposed AD.''

Differences Between the Alert Service Bulletin and This Proposed AD

    The service bulletin specifies that the manufacturer may be 
contacted for disposition of certain repair conditions, but this 
proposed AD would require the repair of those conditions to be 
accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the FAA, or in 
accordance with data meeting the type certification basis of the 
airplane approved by a Boeing Company Designated Engineering 
Representative who has been authorized by the FAA to make such 
findings.
    The service bulletin refers to a ``detailed visual inspection'' for 
cracking of the web, upper chord, and strap of the upper deck floor 
beams. We have determined that the procedures in the service bulletin 
should be described as a ``detailed inspection.'' Note 1 has been 
included in this proposed AD to define this type of inspection.
    Although the service bulletin does not list a grace period in the 
compliance times for the initial inspections and the preventive 
modification, this proposal adds a grace period to those compliance 
times. We find that such a grace period will keep airplanes from being 
grounded unnecessarily.

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 53 airplanes worldwide and 13 
airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated 
costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, depending on 
the airplane configuration:

                                                                                         Estimated Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                   Number of
                                                                            Average                                                                 affected
               Action                             Work hours               labor rate                Parts                   Cost per airplane       U.S.-                 Fleet cost
                                                                            per hour                                                               registered
                                                                                                                                                   airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-modification/inspections........  11................................          $65  $0...............................  $715..................           13  $9,295.
Modification/Inspections done during  498 or 524........................           65  13,554 or 14,874.................  45,924 or 48,934......           13  597,012 or 636,142.
 modification.
Post-modification inspections.......  66................................           65  0................................  4,290, per inspection            13  55,770.
                                                                                                                           cycle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2004-19678; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-
62-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive 
comments on this AD action by January 10, 2005.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model 747-400F series airplanes, 
certificated in any category; as listed in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-53A2443, dated May 9, 2002.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking found on 
the upper deck floor beam to frame attachment points. We are issuing 
this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the upper chord, upper chord 
strap, and web of the upper deck floor beams and the resultant 
failure of the floor beams. Failure of a floor beam could result in 
damage to critical flight control cables and wire bundles that pass 
through the floor beam, and consequent loss of controllability of 
the airplane. Failure of the floor beam also could result in the 
failure of the adjacent fuselage frames and 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.

[[Page 68280]]

Service Bulletin Reference

    (f) For the purposes of this AD, the term ``service bulletin'' 
means the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-53A2443, dated May 9, 2002.

Inspections/Repair/Modification

    (g) Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever is later: Accomplish detailed and open-hole high frequency 
eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking of the web, upper 
chord, and upper chord strap of the upper deck floor beams, by doing 
all the applicable actions in accordance with Part 3.B.1. of the 
service bulletin.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: 
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or 
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available 
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good 
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as 
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning 
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

    (h) If any crack is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, accomplish the 
actions required by paragraph (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Repair in accordance with the service bulletin; except where 
the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate 
action, before further flight, repair in accordance with a method 
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), FAA; or according to data meeting the type certification 
basis of the airplane approved by a Boeing Company Designated 
Engineering Representative (DER) who has been authorized by the 
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a repair method to 
be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this 
paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference 
this AD.
    (2) Accomplish the inspections and preventive modification of 
the floor beams by doing all the actions in accordance with Part 
3.B.2. or Part 3.B.3. of the service bulletin, as applicable. If any 
crack is found during any inspection, before further flight, repair 
as required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.
    (i) If no crack is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD: Accomplish the actions required by either 
paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, at the time specified.
    (1) Before further flight: Accomplish the inspections and 
preventive modification of the floor beam by doing all the actions 
in accordance with Part 3.B.2 or Part 3.B.3. of the service 
bulletin, as applicable. If the preventive modification is performed 
concurrently with the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 
AD, the upper chord straps must be removed when performing the open-
hole HFEC inspection. If any crack is found during any inspection, 
before further flight, repair as required by paragraph (h)(1) of 
this AD.
    (2) Before the accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever is later: Accomplish the inspections and preventive 
modification of the upper deck floor beams, by doing all the actions 
in accordance with Part 3.B.2. or 3.B.3. of the service bulletin, as 
applicable. If any crack is found during any inspection, before 
further flight, repair as required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.

Post-Modification Inspections

    (j) Within 15,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the 
applicable preventive modification required by paragraph (h)(2), 
(i)(1), or (i)(2) of this AD: Accomplish the inspections required by 
either paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD; if any crack is found 
during any inspection, before further flight, repair as required by 
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.
    (1) Accomplish detailed and surface HFEC inspections for 
cracking of the web, upper chord, and upper chord strap of the upper 
deck floor beams, by doing all the applicable actions in accordance 
with Part 3.B.4. of the service bulletin. If no crack is found, 
repeat the inspections at intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight 
cycles.
    (2) Accomplish detailed and open-hole HFEC inspections for 
cracking of the web, upper chord, and strap of the upper deck floor 
beams, by doing all the applicable actions in accordance with Part 
3.B.5. of the service bulletin. If no crack is found, repeat the 
inspections at intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles.

    Note 2: There is no terminating action currently available for 
the repetitive inspections required by this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(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) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by a 
Boeing Company DER who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the 
approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 10, 2004.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-26027 Filed 11-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>