536 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

October 23, 2012, for related information. 

You may examine the MCAI in the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=FAA-2013-0208-0002. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference may 

be obtained at the addresses specified in 

paragraph (o)(3) and (o)(4) of this AD. 

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–55–1034, 

including Appendices 1 and 2, dated August 

19, 2011. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–55–1042, 

Revision 01, dated June 29, 2012. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 

93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@

airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. 

(4) You may view copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 4, 2013. 

John P. Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–31527 Filed 1–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0540; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–185–AD; Amendment 

39–17721; AD 2013–26–12] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009–14– 

02 for certain The Boeing Company 

Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B 

SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 

747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, 747– 

400F, 747SR, and 747SP series 

airplanes. AD 2009–14–02 required 

repetitive inspections for wear damage 

and cracks of the fuselage skin in the 

interface area of the vertical stabilizer 

seal and fuselage skin, a detailed 

inspection for wear damage and cracks 

of the surface of any skin repair doubler 

in the area, and corrective actions if 

necessary. For airplanes on which the 

fuselage skin has been blended to 

remove wear damage, AD 2009–14–02 

also required repetitive external detailed 

inspections or high frequency eddy 

current inspections for cracks of the 

blended area of the fuselage skin, and 

corrective actions if necessary. This new 

AD reduces the repetitive inspection 

interval, changes certain corrective 

actions, and expands the applicability. 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

wear through the fuselage skin that 

occurred sooner than the previous 

repetitive inspection interval. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

wear damage and cracks of the fuselage 

skin in the interface area of the vertical 

stabilizer seal and fuselage skin in 

sections 46 and 48, which could cause 

in-flight depressurization of the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective February 10, 

2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of February 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P. O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. 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 by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– 

0540; 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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill 

Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6432; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: Bill.Ashforth@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to supersede AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, 

June 29, 2009). AD 2009–14–02 applied 

to the specified products. The NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 3, 2013 (78 FR 40050). The NPRM 

proposed to continue to require 

repetitive inspections for wear damage 

and cracks of the fuselage skin in the 

interface area of the vertical stabilizer 

seal and fuselage skin, a detailed 

inspection for wear damage and cracks 

of the surface of any skin repair doubler 

in the area, and corrective actions if 

necessary. For airplanes on which the 

fuselage skin has been blended to 

remove wear damage, AD 2009–14–02 

also required repetitive external detailed 

inspections or high frequency eddy 

current inspections for cracks of the 

blended area of the fuselage skin, and 

corrective actions if necessary. That 

NPRM also proposed to reduce the 

repetitive inspection interval, change 

certain corrective actions, and expand 

the applicability. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal (78 FR 40050, 

July 3, 2013) and the FAA’s response to 

each comment. 

Request To Modify Paragraph Title 

Boeing requested we revise the 

terminating action title of paragraph (i) 

of the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013) 

by removing the word ‘‘Optional.’’ 

Boeing stated that Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011, specifies that if 

any crack is found or if wear damage is 

greater than the limit allowed, rub strips 

must be installed in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011. 

Boeing commented that in this case, the 

terminating action is not optional. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 537 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request. We agree that in cases where 

any damage is found outside the limits 

allowed by Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011, rub strips are 

required to be installed as described in 

that service bulletin. 

We disagree with removing the word 

‘‘optional’’ in the title of paragraph (i) of 

this final rule, because the current 

wording in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this 

final rule requires the operators to do all 

applicable corrective actions in 

accordance with, and at the compliance 

times specified in, Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011. This wording in 

paragraphs (g) and (h) of this final rule 

requires installing rub strips as 

described in Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53–2721, Revision 2, dated March 

17, 2011, before further flight if the 

damage is found to be outside the limits 

permitted as described in the service 

repair manual (SRM). Paragraph (i) of 

this final rule is provided to give the 

operators the option to install the rub 

strips as described in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53–2721, Revision 2, dated 

March 17, 2011, at any time. Doing the 

installation of the rub strips in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53–2721, Revision 2, dated March 

17, 2011, is a terminating action for the 

work given in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011, at the locations 

of the rub strip installation only. We 

have not changed this final rule in this 

regard. 

Requests To Reference Revised Service 

Information and Add Credit for 

Previous Actions 

Boeing and All Nippon Airways 

(ANA) requested we revise paragraphs 

(i) and (j)(3) of the NPRM (78 FR 40050, 

July 3, 2013) to reference the latest 

revision level of the referenced service 

information, which is Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53–2721, Revision 3, dated 

June 25, 2013. 

Boeing requested we revise paragraph 

(k)(2) of the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 

3, 2013) to give credit for actions done 

prior to the effective date of this AD 

using Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53– 

2721, Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011. 

We agree with the commenters’ 

requests. Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53–2721, Revision 3, dated June 25, 

2013, clarifies the post-modification and 

post-repair inspection requirements and 

transfers post-repair inspection 

instructions from the SRM and repair 

assessment guidelines to this service 

bulletin for airplanes that have the zone 

1 full length repair installed. We have 

changed paragraphs (i) and (j)(3) of this 

final rule to reference Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53–2721, Revision 3, dated 

June 25, 2013. 

We also have added Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53–2721, Revision 2, dated 

March 17, 2011, to paragraph (k) of this 

final rule to provide credit for the 

actions specified in paragraph (i) of this 

final rule, if the corresponding actions 

were performed before the effective date 

of this final rule using this service 

bulletin. We revised paragraph (k) by 

adding subparagraphs (k)(2)(i) through 

(iii). 

Request To Withdraw the NPRM (78 FR 

40050, July 3, 2013) 

Qantas Airways Limited (QAN) 

requested that we allow it to continue 

with the inspection program mandated 

in AD 2009–14–02, Amendment 39– 

15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), as 

an alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) to the actions specified in the 

NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013). The 

FAA interprets this as a request to 

withdraw the NPRM and not supersede 

AD 2009–14–02. QAN commented that 

it understands the FAA’s concern over 

the report of wear damage at earlier 

times than the AD 2009–14–02 

inspection mandates. QAN stated that 

its fleet utilization and related extensive 

service experience with robust data 

collection on repetitive inspection 

results since the AD 2009–14–02 

compliance period commenced support 

the adequacy of the repetitive 

inspection interval of 7,500 flight hours 

in AD 2009–14–02. QAN also stated that 

minor wear damage in its fleet remains 

under SRM-allowable rework limits. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request. The service and analytical data 

from the airplane manufacturer do not 

support the request to keep the current 

mandated repetitive inspection 

thresholds required by AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, 

June 29, 2009). An operator has reported 

wear through the fuselage skin between 

body station (STA) 2598 and STA 2638, 

stringers S–2L to S–3L. The wear 

developed in less than 3,657 flight 

hours since the previous inspection, 

which was less than the repetitive 

inspection interval given in Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 2, dated July 15, 2010. The 

wear occurred through both the Teflonfilled coating and the full thickness of 

the 0.050-inch-thick skin to create a 

hole approximately 16 inches in length. 

In developing the compliance times 

for this final rule, we considered not 

only the safety implications of the 

identified unsafe condition, but the 

average utilization rate of the affected 

fleet and the practical aspects of an 

orderly inspection, repair, and 

modification of the fleet during regular 

maintenance periods. We have 

considered the commenter’s request, 

and we have concluded that the 

proposed repetitive compliance times 

remain appropriate. However, under the 

provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD, 

we may consider requests for approval 

of an AMOC if sufficient data are 

submitted to substantiate that an 

alternative inspection plan would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have not changed this final rule in 

this regard. 

Request for Clarification of Compliance 

Time 

QAN requested clarification on the 

rate of wear damage and the compliance 

times specified in the NPRM (78 FR 

40050, July 3, 2013). QAN noted that on 

the airplanes that have not started the 

inspections described in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 

2, dated July 15, 2010, the compliance 

time for the initial inspection is 20,000 

total flight hours. QAN also noted that, 

on the airplanes that have started the 

inspections described in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 

2, dated July 15, 2010, the initial 

inspection compliance time is reduced 

to 2,000 or 3,000 flight hours, 

depending on the condition. QAN stated 

that, based on the inspection program in 

AD 2009–14–02, Amendment 39–15951 

(74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), it 

understands that the rate at which the 

wear damage develops is a primary 

concern to the FAA. 

We agree to clarify. We agree with 

QAN that the AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, 

June 29, 2009), inspection program rate 

at which the wear damage developed is 

a primary concern because at least one 

operator has reported wear through the 

fuselage skin in less than 3,657 flight 

hours after a mandatory inspection, but 

before the specified repetitive 

inspection interval of 7,500 flight hours 

or 6,000 flight hours. However, we do 

not agree with the commenter that the 

20,000-total-flight-hour threshold is 

reduced. Rather, the initial inspection 

threshold of 2,000 flight hours is not a 

reduced threshold as the commenter 

implied, but is instead a required time 

by which additional inspections must 

resume if any inspection has already 

been accomplished. With the service 

and analytical data from the airplane 

manufacturer, a new repetitive 

inspection program is required, as 

specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011. The compliance 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
538 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

time depends on when operators have 

previously inspected their airplanes and 

the condition of the fuselage skin. 

We disagree with QAN that AD 2009– 

14–02, Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 

30919, June 29, 2009), has an adequate 

mandated repetitive interval because 

service history has shown defects 

reported before the AD 2009–14–02 

mandatory repetitive inspection 

interval. We have not changed this final 

rule in this regard. 

Additional Change to This AD 

We have revised the Exceptions to 

Service Information, paragraph (j)(3) of 

this final rule, to include Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 

3, dated October 17, 2011. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 

40050, July 3, 2013) for correcting the 

unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 40050, 

July 3, 2013). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 917 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators 

Inspection [actions retained from AD 2009–14– 

02, Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, 

June 29, 2009)].

12 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $1,020.

$0 $1,020 .......................... $935,340. 

Inspection and application of BMS 10–86 Teflonfilled coating [actions retained from AD 2009– 

14–02, Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, 

June 29, 2009)].

8 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $680 per inspection cycle.

$0 $680 per inspection 

cycle.

$623,560 per inspection 

cycles. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this AD. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this AD may be covered 

under warranty, thereby reducing the 

cost impact on affected individuals. We 

do not control warranty coverage for 

affected individuals. As a result, we 

have included all costs in our cost 

estimate. 

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), 

(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. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2009–14–02, Amendment 39–15951 (74 

FR 30919, June 29, 2009), and adding 

the following new AD: 

2013–26–12 The Boeing Company: 

Amendment 39–17721; Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0540; Directorate Identifier 

2012–NM–185–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective February 10, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, June 

29, 2009). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747– 

100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 

747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, 747–400F, 

747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, 

certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report of wear 

through the fuselage skin that occurred 

sooner than the previous repetitive 

inspection interval. We are issuing this AD 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 539 

to detect and correct wear damage and cracks 

of the fuselage skin in the interface area of 

the vertical stabilizer seal and fuselage skin 

in sections 46 and 48, which could cause inflight depressurization of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Detailed Inspection 

At the applicable compliance time 

specified in paragraph 1.E., ’’Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, except as 

specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD: Do 

a detailed inspection of the fuselage skin and 

any skin repair doubler surface for wear 

damage and cracking at the vertical stabilizer 

seal interface, apply Boeing Material 

Specifications (BMS) 10–86 Teflon-filled 

coating, and do all applicable corrective 

actions, except as specified in paragraph 

(j)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011. Do all applicable 

corrective actions at the applicable 

compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

’’Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, dated 

October 17, 2011. Repeat the detailed 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed the applicable repetitive interval 

specified in paragraph 1.E., ’’Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, except as 

specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. The 

effective date of AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, June 

29, 2009), is August 3, 2009. Doing the 

installation of the rub strips in accordance 

with Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, is a 

terminating action for the work given in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, at the 

locations of the rub strip installation only. 

(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current 

(HFEC) Inspections 

For airplanes on which the skin is blended 

forward of station 2360 without external 

reinforcement: At the applicable compliance 

time specified in Table 4 in paragraph 1.E., 

’’Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, dated 

October 17, 2011, do an external surface 

HFEC inspection of the blended area of the 

fuselage skin and the surface of any repair 

doubler for cracks, apply BMS 10–86 Teflonfilled coating, and do all applicable 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, 

dated October 17, 2011. Do all applicable 

corrective actions at the applicable 

compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

’’Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 3, dated 

October 17, 2011. Repeat the HFEC 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed the compliance time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ’’Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. The 

effective date of AD 2009–14–02, 

Amendment 39–15951 (74 FR 30919, June 

29, 2009) is August 3, 2009. Doing the 

installation of the rub strips in accordance 

with Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, is a 

terminating action for the work given in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, at the 

locations of the rub strip installation only. 

(i) Optional Terminating Action 

Installation of corrosion resistant steel 

(CRES) rub strips in accordance with Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, Revision 3, 

dated June 25, 2013, except as specified in 

paragraph (j)(3) of this AD, is terminating 

action for the inspections specified in 

paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD at the 

locations of the CRES rub strip installations 

only. 

(j) Exceptions to Service Information 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 

2011, specifies a compliance time after the 

‘‘Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(2) Part 3 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 

2011, is not a requirement of this AD. 

(3) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53– 

2721, Revision 3, dated June 25, 2013, and 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, specify 

to contact Boeing for a modification or for 

instructions: Before further flight, contact the 

FAA for instructions using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, and 

accomplish those instructions. 

(k) Credit for Previous Actions 

(1) This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, 

if the corresponding actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, 

Revision 1, dated March 27, 2008; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 2, 

dated July 15, 2010. This service information 

is not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(2) This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, 

if the corresponding actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using the 

service bulletins specified in paragraph 

(k)(2)(i), (k)(2)(ii), or (k)(2)(iii) of this AD. 

(i) Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

dated May 28, 2009, which is not 

incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 1, dated June 24, 2010, which is not 

incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, which is 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(l) 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 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9–ANM-Seattle-ACO–AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

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) Installation of CRES rub strips approved 

as AMOCs for AD 2009–14–02, Amendment 

39–15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), are 

approved as AMOCs for this AD. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Bill Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6432; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: Bill.Ashforth@faa.gov. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference may 

be obtained at the addresses specified in 

paragraph (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD. 

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. 

(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2721, 

Revision 3, dated June 25, 2013. 

(3) For Boeing service information 

identified in this AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & 

Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 

2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766– 

5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
540 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 20, 2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–31312 Filed 1–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1108; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–283–AD; Amendment 

39–17700; AD 2013–25–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 

190 airplanes. This AD was prompted 

by reports of failures of the emergency 

slide on the forward passenger door, 

which prevented the door from opening. 

This AD requires repetitive re-packing 

of certain forward door escape slides. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

failure of the emergency slide, which 

can prevent the forward passenger door 

from opening, and which could result in 

impeded emergency evacuation and 

possible subsequent injury to passengers 

and flightcrew. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

February 10, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of February 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2012-1108; or in 

person at the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

For Embraer service information 

identified in this AD, contact Embraer 

S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 

060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170— 

Putim—12227–901 Sa ̃o Jose dos 

Campos—SP—BRASIL; telephone +55 

12 3927–5852 or +55 12 3309–0732; fax 

+55 12 3927–7546; email distrib@

embraer.com.br; Internet http://

www.flyembraer.com. For Goodrich 

service information identified in this 

AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, 

Aircraft Interior Products, ATTN: 

Technical Publications, 3414 South 

Fifth Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85040; 

telephone 602–243–2270; email 

george.yribarren@goodrich.com; Internet 

http://www.goodrich.com/TechPubs. 

You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2768; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. The 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on October 25, 2012 (77 FR 

65144). The NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The Ageˆncia Nacional de 

Aviac ̧a ̃o Civil (ANAC), which is the 

aviation authority for Brazil, has issued 

Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 

2011–12–01 and 2011–12–02, both 

effective December 27, 2011 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. MCAI 

Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2011– 

12–01 states: 

During operational checks of escape slide P/ 

N [part number] 4A4030–5, some operators 

have reported failure in the escape slide 

preventing the forward passenger door 

opening. This [Brazilian] AD is being issued 

to prevent failure of this system which could 

impede an emergency evacuation and 

increase the chance of injury to passengers 

and flight crew. 

* * * * * 

MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 

2011–12–02 states: 

During scheduled deployment tests of escape 

slide P/N 104003–2, some operators have 

reported failure in the escape slide 

preventing the forward passenger door 

opening. This [Brazilian] AD is being issued 

to prevent failure of this system which could 

impede an emergency evacuation and 

increase the chance of injury to passengers 

and flight crew. 

* * * * * 

The required action is repetitive repacking of certain forward door escape 

slides. You may examine the MCAI in 

the AD docket on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov/

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2012-1108- 

0002. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

Request to Reference Newer Revisions 

of Service Information 

Embraer requested that paragraphs 

(h), (j)(1)(i), and (j)(1)(ii) of the NPRM 

(77 FR 65144, October 25, 2012) 

reference newer revisions of the 

maintenance review board reports. 

These new revisions are EMBRAER 170/ 

175 Maintenance Review Board Report, 

MRB–1621, Revision 8, dated August 

20, 2012; and EMBRAER 190/195 

Maintenance Review Board Report, 

MRB–1928, Revision 6, dated August 

20, 2012. 

We agree to revise paragraph (h) of 

this final rule to also reference the 

newer revisions. However, paragraphs 

(j)(1)(i) and (j)(1)(ii), along with 

paragraphs (j)(1)(iii), (j)(1)(iv), and (j)(2) 

of the NPRM (77 FR 65144, October 25, 

2012), were removed from this final rule 

and are identified in the Incorporation 

by Reference section (paragraph (k) of 

this final rule). 

Request To Add Alternative 

Maintenance Instructions for Model 

ERJ 190–100 ECJ Airplanes 

Embraer requested that the NPRM (77 

FR 65144, October 25, 2012) reference 

Task 25–65–01–001, Emergency 

Evacuation Slide Assembly, in 

EMBRAER Lineage 1000 Maintenance 

Planning Guide, MPG–2928, Revision 3, 

dated September 28, 2012 (for Model 

ERJ 190–100 ECJ airplanes), instead of 

Section 1, ‘‘System and Powerplant 

Maintenance Requirements,’’ of 

EMBRAER 190 Maintenance Review 

Board Report, MRB–1928, Revision 5, 

dated November 11, 2010. Task 25–65– 

01–001 of the EMBRAER 190/195 

Maintenance Review Board Report, 

MRB–1928, Revision 6, dated August 

20, 2012; and Task 25–65–01–001 of 

Section 1, ‘‘System and Powerplant 

Maintenance Requirements,’’ of 

EMBRAER 190 Maintenance Review 

Board Report, MRB–1928, Revision 5, 

dated November 11, 2010; are not 

applicable to the ERJ 190–100 ECJ 

model. 

We agree. Since operators of Model 

ERJ 190–100 ECJ airplanes are not able 

to comply with the requirements of this 

final rule using EMBRAER 190/195 

Maintenance Review Board Reports, we 

have added paragraph (h)(2) to this final 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES