Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 60303 

plan that reflects maximum practicable 

opportunities for small businesses in the 

performance of the contract as 

subcontractors or suppliers at all tiers of 

performance. * * * 

* * * * * 

(v) The contractor must assign to the 

solicitation and the resulting 

subcontract the NAICS code and 

corresponding size standard that best 

describes the principal purpose of the 

subcontract (see § 121.410 of this 

chapter). The prime contractor may rely 

on a subcontractor’s electronic 

representations and certifications, if the 

solicitation for the subcontract contains 

a clause which provides that the 

subcontractor verifies by submission of 

the offer that the size or socioeconomic 

representations and certifications are 

current, accurate and complete as of the 

date of the offer for the subcontract. 

Electronic submission may include any 

method acceptable to the prime 

contractor including, but not limited to, 

size or socioeconomic representations 

and certifications made in SAM (or any 

successor system). A prime contractor or 

subcontractor may not require the use of 

SAM (or any successor system) for 

purposes of representing size or 

socioeconomic status in connection 

with a subcontract; 

* * * * * 

(x) The prime contractor must require 

all subcontractors (except small 

business concerns) who receive 

subcontracts in excess of $1,500,000 in 

the case of a subcontract for the 

construction of any public facility, or in 

excess of $650,000 in the case of all 

other subcontracts, and which offer 

further subcontracting possibilities, to 

adopt a subcontracting plan of its own 

consistent with this section, and must 

ensure at a minimum that all 

subcontractors required to maintain 

subcontracting plans pursuant to this 

paragraph, will review and approve 

subcontracting plans submitted by their 

subcontractors; monitor subcontractor 

compliance with their approved 

subcontracting plans; ensure that 

subcontracting reports are submitted by 

their subcontractors when required; 

acknowledge receipt of their 

subcontractors’ reports; compare the 

performance of their subcontractors to 

subcontracting plans and goals; and 

discuss performance with 

subcontractors when necessary to 

ensure their subcontractors make a good 

faith effort to comply with their 

subcontracting plans; and 

(xi) The prime contractor must recite 

the types of records the prime will 

maintain to demonstrate procedures 

which have been adopted to ensure 

subcontractors at all tiers comply with 

the requirements and goals set forth in 

the plan established in accordance with 

paragraph (c)(1)(x) of this section, 

including the establishment of source 

lists of small business concerns, small 

business concerns owned and 

controlled by veterans, small business 

concerns owned and controlled by 

service-disabled veterans, qualified 

HUBZone small business concerns, 

small business concerns owned and 

controlled by socially and economically 

disadvantaged individuals, and small 

business concerns owned and 

controlled by women, and the efforts to 

identify and award subcontracts to such 

small business concerns. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 28, 2015. 

Maria Contreras-Sweet, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–25234 Filed 10–5–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3983; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–141–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 747–100, 

747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 

747–300, 747SR, and 747SP series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the upper chords of the 

upper deck floor beams are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This 

proposed AD would require repetitive 

inspections for cracks at the floor panel 

attachment fastener holes; repetitive 

inspections for cracks in the upper and 

lower chords of the upper deck floor 

beams at permanent fastener locations; 

repetitive inspections for cracks in 

certain repaired and modified areas; and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary. This proposed AD 

would also require repetitive 

replacement of the upper chords of the 

upper deck floor beams, including prereplacement inspections and corrective 

action if necessary; and postreplacement repetitive inspections and 

repair if necessary. We are proposing 

this AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the upper chords of the 

upper deck floor beams. Undetected 

cracking could result in large deflection 

or deformation of the upper deck floor 

beams, resulting in damage to wire 

bundles and control cables for the flight 

control system, and reduced 

controllability of the airplane. Multiple 

adjacent severed floor beams could 

result in rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 20, 

2015. 

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: Deliver to Mail 

address above 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, 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. It is also available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3983. 

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–2015– 

3983; 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 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60304 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, 

Technical Operations Center, ANM– 

100D, FAA, Denver Aircraft 

Certification Office, 26805 East 68th 

Avenue, Room 214, Denver, CO 80249; 

phone: 303–342–1086; fax: 303–342– 

1088; email: roger.caldwell@faa.gov. 

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–2015–3983; Directorate Identifier 

2015–NM–141–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 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). As an airplane ages, 

WFD will likely occur, and will 

certainly occur if the airplane is 

operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

structural failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this action is 

necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

An evaluation by the DAH indicated 

that the upper chords of the upper deck 

floor beams are subject to WFD. The 

inspections and replacement in this 

proposed AD were developed to support 

the airplane’s LOV of the engineering 

data that support the established 

structural maintenance program. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the upper chords of 

the upper deck floor beams. Undetected 

cracking could result in large deflection 

or deformation of the upper deck floor 

beams, resulting in damage to wire 

bundles and control cables for the flight 

control system, and reduced 

controllability of the airplane. Multiple 

adjacent severed floor beams could 

result in rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

Other Relevant Rulemaking 

On September 28, 2005, we issued AD 

2005–20–29, Amendment 39–14326 (70 

FR 59246, October 12, 2005), for certain 

Boeing Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747– 

100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 747SP, 

and 747SR series airplanes. AD 2005– 

20–29 requires repetitive inspections to 

detect cracks in various areas of the 

upper deck floor beams, and repair if 

necessary. AD 2005–20–29 resulted 

from fatigue testing that revealed 

severed upper chords of the upper deck 

floor beams due to fatigue cracking. We 

issued AD 2005–20–29, to detect and 

correct cracking in the upper chords of 

the upper deck floor beams. Undetected 

cracking could result in large deflection 

or deformation of the upper deck floor 

beams, resulting in damage to wire 

bundles and control cables for the flight 

control system, and reduced 

controllability of the airplane. Multiple 

adjacent severed floor beams could 

result in rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

AD 2005–20–29, Amendment 39– 

14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005), 

refers to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, as 

the appropriate source of service 

information for certain inspections. This 

proposed AD would require new 

inspections at reduced compliance 

times, which would end the inspections 

done using Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2452, dated April 3, 

2003. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed the following service 

information. This service information is 

reasonably available because the 

interested parties have access to it 

through their normal course of business 

or by the means identified in the 

ADDRESSES section of this NPRM. 

• Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012. This service information describes 

procedures for repetitive open hole or 

surface high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC) inspections, as applicable, for 

cracks at the floor panel attachment 

fastener holes in certain areas and 

stations; repetitive surface HFEC 

inspections for cracks in the upper and 

lower chords of the upper deck floor 

beams at permanent fastener locations 

in certain areas and stations; and related 

investigative and corrective actions. 

This service information also describes 

procedures, for airplanes on which 

certain repairs or modifications are 

done, for repetitive open hole or surface 

HFEC inspections, as applicable, for 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 60305 

cracks in the repaired and modified 

areas; and repair. 

• Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2852, dated June 22, 2012. This 

service information describes 

procedures for repetitive replacement of 

the upper chords of the upper deck floor 

beams, including pre-replacement 

inspections and corrective action, and 

post-replacement repetitive inspections 

and repair. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this AD and the 

Service Information.’’ For information 

on the procedures and compliance 

times, see this service information at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3983. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ are actions that correct or 

address any condition found. Corrective 

actions in an AD could include, for 

example, repairs. 

For any repair #10 or repair #13 done 

as specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2452, paragraph (i)(2) 

of this proposed AD would require that 

post-repair inspections be done before 

further flight using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. 

Operators must contact the FAA or 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Organization Designation Authorization 

(ODA) before further flight so that the 

type of actions and intervals for the 

post-repair inspections can be 

determined. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2852, dated June 22, 2012; 

specify to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes ODA whom we 

have authorized to make those findings. 

Explanation of Compliance Time 

The compliance time for the 

installation specified in this proposed 

AD for addressing WFD was established 

to ensure that discrepant structure is 

replaced before WFD develops in 

airplanes. Standard inspection 

techniques cannot be relied on to detect 

WFD before it becomes a hazard to 

flight. We will not grant any extensions 

of the compliance time to complete any 

AD-mandated service bulletin related to 

WFD without extensive new data that 

would substantiate and clearly warrant 

such an extension. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 67 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

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

Inspections specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747-53A2452, Revision 1, 

dated July 16, 2012.

Up to 884 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $75,140, per inspection cycle.

$0 $75,140, per inspection cycle $5,034,380, per inspection 

cycle. 

Replacement specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated 

June 22, 2012.

Up to 696 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $59,160, per replacement.

0 [1] $59,160, per replacement ...... $3,963,720, per replacement. 

Post-replacement inspections 

specified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 

747-53A2852, dated June 

22, 2012.

Up to 586 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $49,810, per inspection cycle.

0 $49,810, per inspection cycle $3,337,270, per inspection 

cycle. 

[1]We currently have no specific cost estimates associated with the parts necessary for the proposed replacement. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60306 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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), 

(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. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2015–3983; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–141–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by November 20, 2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD affects AD 2005–20–29, 

Amendment 39–14326 (70 FR 59246, October 

12, 2005). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 

747–200B, 747–300, 747SR, and 747SP series 

airplanes; certificated in any category; as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2852, dated June 22, 2012. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the upper chords of the upper deck floor 

beams are subject to widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 

upper chords of the upper deck floor beams. 

Undetected cracking could result in large 

deflection or deformation of the upper deck 

floor beams, resulting in damage to wire 

bundles and control cables for the flight 

control system, and reduced controllability of 

the airplane. Multiple adjacent severed floor 

beams could result in rapid decompression of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections of the Upper 

Chords of the Upper Deck Floor Beams 

At the applicable times specified in Tables 

1 through 7 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, 

except as required by paragraph (l)(1) of this 

AD: Do the inspections specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, and 

do all applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, Revision 1, 

dated July 16, 2012, except as required by 

paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Repeat the 

inspections specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and 

(g)(2) of this AD thereafter at the applicable 

times specified in Tables 1 through 7 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, 

Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. Do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. Doing 

the inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1) 

and (g)(2) of this AD terminates the 

inspections required by paragraphs (m) and 

(n) of AD 2005–20–29, Amendment 39– 

14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005). 

(1) Do an open hole or surface high 

frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection, as 

applicable, for cracks at the fastener holes of 

the floor panel attachment in the applicable 

areas and stations identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, Revision 1, 

dated July 16, 2012. 

(2) Do a surface HFEC inspection for cracks 

in the upper and lower chords of the upper 

deck floor beams at permanent fastener 

locations in the applicable areas and stations 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012. 

(h) Terminating Modification and Repair for 

the Inspection Specified in Paragraph (g)(1) 

of This AD 

A fastener hole modification or a fastener 

hole repair in Area 1 or Area 2 as described 

in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, 

terminates the inspection of the fastener 

holes of the floor panel attachment required 

by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for the repaired 

or modified area only, provided the 

modification and repair, including related 

investigative and corrective actions, are done 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) 

of this AD. 

(i) Post Mod/Repair Repetitive Inspections 

(1) For airplanes on which any fastener 

hole modification or any fastener hole repair 

was done as specified in Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2452: Except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, at the applicable 

times specified in Tables 8 and 9 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, 

Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, or within 

1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of 

this AD, whichever occurs later, do an open 

hole or surface HFEC inspection, as 

applicable, for cracks in the repaired and 

modified areas, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, Revision 1, 

dated July 16, 2012. If any cracking is found, 

before further flight, repair using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat 

the applicable inspections thereafter at the 

times specified in Tables 8 and 9 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, 

Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. Doing an 

inspection required by this paragraph 

terminates the inspections required by 

paragraph (p) of AD 2005–20–29, 

Amendment 39–14326 (70 FR 59246, October 

12, 2005). 

(2) For any repair #10 or repair #13 done 

as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452: Before further flight, do postrepair inspections using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures specified 

in paragraph (o) of this AD. 

(j) Replacement of the Upper Chords of the 

Upper Deck Floor Beams (Includes PreReplacement Inspections) 

Replace the upper chords of the upper 

deck floor beams by doing the actions 

required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this 

AD at the times specified in those 

paragraphs. Accomplishing the replacement 

required by this paragraph terminates the 

inspections required by paragraphs (g) and (i) 

of this AD. 

(1) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total 

flight cycles, or within 3,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later, do an open hole HFEC 

inspection for cracks at certain fastener 

locations in the floor beam webs and side of 

body frames, and do a detailed inspection for 

cracks of any removed part that will be reinstalled, and do all applicable corrective 

actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2852, dated June 

22, 2012, except as required by paragraph 

(l)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective 

actions before further flight. 

(2) Before further flight after accomplishing 

the inspections required by paragraph (j)(1) 

of this AD, install new upper chords of the 

upper deck floor beams and reinforcing 

straps or angles, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2852, dated June 

22, 2012, except as required by paragraph 

(l)(2) of this AD. 

(k) Post-Replacement Repetitive Inspections 

For airplanes on which any replacement 

required by paragraph (j) or (k)(2)(ii) of this 

AD is done: At the applicable times specified 

in Tables 2 through 4 in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 60307 

Bulletin 747–53A2852, dated June 22, 2012, 

do HFEC inspections for cracks at the 

permanent fastener holes and the upper 

chords of the upper deck floor beams, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012. 

(1) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (k) or 

(k)(2)(i) of this AD, before further flight, 

repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (o) of this AD. 

(2) If no cracking is found during any 

inspection required by the introductory text 

of paragraph (k) or (k)(2)(i) of this AD, do the 

actions required by paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and 

(k)(2)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Repeat the inspections specified in 

paragraph (k) of this AD thereafter at the 

applicable times specified in Tables 8 and 9 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, 

Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. 

(ii) Within 10,000 flight cycles after 

accomplishing the initial HFEC inspections 

required by paragraph (k) of this AD, replace 

the upper chords of the upper deck floor 

beams by doing the actions specified in 

paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. 

(l) Exceptions to Service Information 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 

2012; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2852, dated June 22, 2012; specifies to 

contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before 

further flight, repair using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. 

(m) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and 

(i) of this AD, if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2452, 

dated April 3, 2003, which was incorporated 

by reference in AD 2005–20–29, Amendment 

39–14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005). 

(n) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

(o) 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 (p)(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. 

(p) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, 

Technical Operations Center, ANM–100D, 

FAA, Denver Aircraft Certification Office, 

26805 East 68th Avenue, Room 214, Denver, 

CO 80249; phone: 303–342–1086; fax: 303– 

342–1088; email: roger.caldwell@faa.gov. 

(2) 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 27, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–25272 Filed 10–5–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3982; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–098–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 717–200 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by multiple reports of the 

vertical stabilizer leading edge showing 

signs of fastener distress. This proposed 

AD would require a detailed inspection 

for any distress of the vertical stabilizer 

leading edge skin, and related 

investigative and corrective actions, if 

necessary. This proposed AD would 

also require, for certain airplanes, 

repetitive detailed inspections of the 

spar cap for any loose and missing 

fasteners, repetitive high frequency 

eddy current (HFEC) and radiographic 

testing (RT) inspections of the spar cap 

for any crack, and related investigative 

and corrective actions, if necessary. We 

are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct any crack in the vertical 

stabilizer leading edge and front spar 

cap, which may result in the structure 

becoming unable to support limit load, 

and may lead to the loss of the vertical 

stabilizer. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 20, 

2015. 

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: Deliver to Mail 

address above 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, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, 

Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; telephone: 

206–544–5000, extension 2; fax: 206– 

766–5683; 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. It is also available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3982. 

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–2015– 

3982; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS