Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 52907 

EF = BOH QIN + (POH ¥ BOH)QPR + (8760 

¥ POH) Qoff,R

Where: 

BOH = average number of burner operating 

hours = 104 h 

POH = average number of pool operating 

hours = 4464 h 

QIN = rated fuel energy input as defined 

according to section 2.10.1 or section 

2.10.2 of ANSI Z21.56 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3), as appropriate. 

QPR = average energy consumption rate of 

continuously operating pilot light, if 

employed, = (QP/1 h) 

QP = energy consumption of continuously 

operating pilot light, if employed, as 

measured in section 4.2, in Btu 

8,760 = number of hours in one year 

Qoff,R = average off mode fossil fuel energy 

consumption rate = Qoff/(1 h) 

Qoff = off mode energy consumption as 

defined in section 4.3 of this appendix 

5.3 Average annual auxiliary electrical 

energy consumption for pool heaters. The 

average annual auxiliary electrical energy 

consumption for pool heaters, EAE, is 

expressed in Btu and defined as: 

(1) EAE = EAE,active + EAE,standby,off

(2) EAE,active = BOH * PE 

(3) EAE,standby,off = (POH ¥ BOH) Es,aux + (8760 

¥ POH) Eoff,aux

Where: 

EAE,active = auxiliary electrical consumption 

in the active mode 

EAE,standby,off = auxiliary electrical 

consumption in the standby and off 

mode 

PE = 2Ec, if heater is tested according to 

section 2.10.1 of ANSI Z21.56 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3), 

in Btu/h 

= 3.412 PErated, if heater is tested according 

to section 2.10.2 of ANSI Z21.56, in 

Btu/h 

Ec = electrical consumption of the heater 

(converted to equivalent unit of Btu), 

including the electrical energy to the 

recirculating pump if used, during the 

30-minute thermal efficiency test, as 

defined in section 2.10.1 of ANSI Z21.56, 

in Btu per 30 min. 

2 = conversion factor to convert unit from per 

30 min. to per h. 

PErated = nameplate rating of auxiliary 

electrical equipment of heater, in Watts 

BOH = as defined in 5.2 of this appendix 

POH = as defined in 5.2 of this appendix 

Es,aux = electrical energy consumption rate 

during standby mode = 3.412 Es/(1 h), 

Btu/h 

Es = as defined in 4.2 of this appendix 

Eoff,aux = electrical energy consumption rate 

during off mode = 3.412 Eoff/(1 h), Btu/ 

h 

Eoff = as defined in 4.3 of this appendix 

5.4 Integrated thermal efficiency. 

5.4.1 Calculate the seasonal useful output 

of the pool heater as: 

EOUT = BOH[(Et/100)(QIN + PE)] 

Where: 

BOH = as defined in 5.2 of this appendix 

Et = thermal efficiency as defined in 5.1 of 

this appendix 

QIN = as defined in 5.2 of this appendix 

PE = as defined in 5.3 of this appendix 

100 = conversion factor, from percent to 

fraction 

5.4.2 Calculate the annual input to the 

pool heater as: 

EIN = EF + EAE

Where: 

EF = as defined in 5.2 of this appendix 

EAE = as defined in 5.3 of this appendix 

5.4.3 Calculate the pool heater integrated 

thermal efficiency (TEI) (in percent). 

TEI = 100(EOUT/EIN) 

Where: 

EOUT = as defined in 5.4.1 of this appendix 

EIN = as defined in 5.4.2 of this appendix 

100 = conversion factor, from fraction to 

percent 

[FR Doc. 2010–21363 Filed 8–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0107; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–087–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; 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 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain 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. The original NPRM 

would have required inspections for 

scribe lines in affected lap and butt 

splices, wing-to-body fairings locations, 

and external repair and cutout 

reinforcement areas; and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. The original NPRM resulted 

from reports of scribe lines found at lap 

joints and butt joints, around external 

doublers and antennas, and at locations 

where external decals had been cut. 

This action revises the original NPRM 

by revising certain compliance times 

including reducing the compliance time 

for certain repetitive inspections. This 

supplemental NPRM also proposes to 

add inspections for certain airplanes. 

We are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct scribe lines, which can develop 

into fatigue cracks in the skin and cause 

sudden decompression of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by September 

24, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124– 

2207; telephone 206–544–5000, 

extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail 

me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicholas Han, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6449; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
52908 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2008–0107; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–087–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) (the ‘‘original 

NPRM’’) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to 

include an airworthiness directive (AD) 

that would apply to certain 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. That 

original NPRM was published in the 

Federal Register on January 31, 2008 

(73 FR 5768). That original NPRM 

proposed to require inspections for 

scribe lines in affected lap and butt 

splices, wing-to-body fairing locations, 

and external repair and cutout 

reinforcement areas; and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. 

Actions Since Original NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the original NPRM, 

Boeing has issued Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 3, dated June 11, 

2009; and Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010. The procedures in Revision 3 are 

essentially the same as those in Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

2, dated January 3, 2008, which we 

referred to as the appropriate source of 

service information for accomplishing 

the actions proposed in the original 

NPRM. However, Revision 3 of this 

service bulletin changes the initial 

threshold for the inspection at certain 

lap joints and changes the repeat 

inspection intervals (including some 

reductions in inspection intervals) for 

many lap joint inspection areas. 

Revision 3 of this service bulletin also 

adds more work for airplanes that were 

previously inspected in Area 1 and Area 

2 in accordance with Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, dated 

March 29, 2007; Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 1, 

dated November 8, 2007; or Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

2, dated June January 3, 2008. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010: 

• Revises the repeat inspection 

interval data for lap joint and butt joint 

areas that have scribe damage which are 

inspected under the Limited Return to 

Service (LRTS) inspection program. 

• For airplanes identified as Group 2, 

Group 3 Configuration 2, Group 4, 

Group 6, and Group 8 airplanes in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010: Adds 

detailed inspections for scribe lines of 

the S–18L lap splice from station (STA) 

1780 to STA 1920 (on the main deck 

side cargo door) to inspection area 3. 

• For airplanes identified as Group 1 

and Group 2 airplanes in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010: Adds detailed 

inspections for scribe lines of the S34R 

lap splice from STA 1810 to STA 1920 

(on the aft lower lobe cargo door). 

• For airplanes identified as Group 3 

and Group 4 airplanes in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010: Adds detailed 

inspections for scribe lines of the S–6L 

and S–6R lap splice from STA 1000 to 

1220 to inspection area 3. 

• Adds general repair instructions for 

lap joint locations with scribe lines, but 

no cracks in Paragraph 3.B. of Part 17 

in the work instructions and in a new 

Appendix F. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, adds 

more work for Group 1, Group 2, Group 

3, Group 4, Group 6, and Group 8 

airplanes that were previously inspected 

in Area 3 in accordance with the 

original issue, dated March 29, 2007; 

Revision 2, dated January 3, 2008; or 

Revision 3, dated June 11, 2009; of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, specifies 

that at the time given in Table 29 of 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

4, dated May 6, 2010, certain lap splices 

are inspected in accordance with 

Paragraph 3.B., Work Instructions, 

PART 19. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010, specifies that no more work is 

necessary on Group 5, Group 7, and 

Group 9 airplanes that were inspected 

in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 3, 

dated June 11, 2009. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010, states that if scribe lines were 

found previously and are being 

inspected as part of the LRTS program, 

the repeat inspections are done in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010. 

Requests To Delay AD Issuance 

Pending Revised Service Information 

Japan Airlines (JAL) reports that 

certain structures prevented the 

accomplishment of the inspection 

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2563, Revision 2, dated January 

3, 2008. JAL therefore believes that more 

detailed information in the service 

bulletin is necessary to prevent operator 

inconvenience. We infer that the 

commenter is requesting that we delay 

issuing the final rule until Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

2, dated January 3, 2008, is revised to 

address these concerns. 

KLM reports that some of the 

nondestructive test (NDT) inspections 

could not be performed according to the 

procedures specified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008, without 

modifying the process itself. KLM adds 

that the inspection areas and details are 

vague, ambiguous, and subject to 

misinterpretation. KLM requests that, to 

eliminate requests for alternative 

methods of compliance (AMOCs) 

related to this matter, we delay issuing 

the final rule until these matters are 

resolved. 

We agree that clarification may be 

necessary. While the commenters did 

not provide specific details of the 

difficulties they encountered, Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

4, dated May 6, 2010, clarifies multiple 

steps and procedures as described 

previously. We have revised this 

supplemental NPRM to refer to Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 

4, dated May 6, 2010. 

Request To Delay AD Issuance Pending 

Repair Instructions 

JAL states that the NPRM would 

require operators to contact the 

manufacturer for a method to repair 

discrepancies. (Although Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, specifies this 

directive, the original and this 

supplemental NPRM propose to require 

operators to contact the FAA for a repair 

method.) JAL anticipates many such 

inquiries from operators, resulting in 

delayed responses from the 

manufacturer. The commenter requests 

that we delay issuing the final rule until 

a typical repair is incorporated into the 

structural repair manual (SRM). 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 52909 

We do not agree with the commenter 

to delay the final rule until a typical 

repair can be incorporated into the 

SRM. Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010, provides procedures for an 

inspection to determine the extent of 

scribe lines on the airplanes. This 

service bulletin refers to several SRMs 

as a source of information for repairing 

cracks. For certain repair instructions, 

this service bulletin also specifies to 

contact Boeing for repair instructions; 

however, paragraph (i) of this 

supplemental NPRM would require that 

operators repair in a manner approved 

by the FAA. In addition, Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, provides a LRTS 

inspection program for scribe lines 

found during the required inspections. 

We note the existing Model 747 SRMs 

referenced in Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010, have lap splice repairs that are 

acceptable to repair scribe line damage. 

We have not changed the supplemental 

NPRM regarding this issue. 

Request To Delay AD Issuance Pending 

Revised Inspection Interval 

JAL notes that the inspection interval 

is the same from butt joint to butt joint 

or lap joint to lap joint. JAL states that 

it understands that the stress value can 

be provided (i.e., the stress value can 

vary) from stringer to stringer or frame 

to frame. Therefore, JAL requests that 

we wait to issue the final rule until 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 2, dated January 3, 2008, is 

revised to incorporate more detailed 

inspection intervals. 

We infer that the commenter is asking 

if the repetitive inspection intervals 

along a lap splice from butt joint to butt 

joint, or along a butt joint from lap 

splice to lap splice, may be extended in 

certain areas if the local stresses are 

used to determine the repetitive 

intervals. We do not find any benefit in 

variable repetitive inspection intervals 

for a lap splice or butt splice. The 

repetitive inspection intervals have been 

determined after a review of the specific 

stresses the commenter notes, and then 

the stress that provided the lowest 

repetitive interval was used to simplify 

the inspection along a lap or butt splice. 

If each stringer or frame bay stress were 

used along the entire joint, the work 

instructions would become too large to 

manage and accomplish in a reasonable 

manner. Also, Boeing has released 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, and this 

revision includes improved data for the 

repeat inspection interval for lap joint 

and butt joint areas. We have not 

changed the supplemental NPRM in 

regard to this issue. 

Request To Revise Inspection 

Threshold for Certain Airplanes 

British Airways (BA) requests that we 

revise the inspection threshold for 

certain airplanes. BA states that the 

proposed inspection thresholds penalize 

operators of airplanes with lower flight 

cycles. BA recommends that we review 

Boeing’s Fleet Team Resolution Process 

Item 04134, which discusses the check 

level required to accomplish the Area 1 

inspections. According to the 

commenter, operator consensus 

indicates these inspections will require 

a D check. BA suggests that airplanes 

with fewer than 17,500 flight cycles be 

assigned a threshold of the earlier of the 

next D check following 15,000 total 

flight cycles, or 19,000 total flight 

cycles, whichever is sooner. 

We do not agree to revise the 

inspection threshold for certain 

airplanes. We reviewed the Boeing Fleet 

Team Resolution Process Item 04134, 

which suggests that a D check would be 

the suitable opportunity to accomplish 

the scribe line inspections. We do not 

specify compliance times in terms of 

‘‘letter checks.’’ Since maintenance 

schedules vary among operators, we 

have determined that the compliance 

times as proposed are appropriate. The 

minimum grace period for compliance 

with this AD is 1,500 flight cycles for 

airplanes with fewer than 17,500 total 

flight cycles, which corresponds to 

approximately 3 years based on a 

typical utilization of 500 flight cycles 

per year for long-haul airplanes. A 3- 

year grace period is sufficient for 

operators to plan for the scribe line 

inspections, and will allow for timely 

data collection for use in developing 

final action and determining whether 

this AD should be revised in the future. 

We have not changed the supplemental 

NPRM regarding this issue. However, 

operators may request an AMOC in 

accordance with the procedures in 

paragraph (m) of this AD. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

for Certain Inspection Locations 

Boeing requests that we extend the 

compliance time for certain inspection 

locations. Boeing reports that recent 

engineering analysis has revealed 

slightly reduced stresses in the STA 

1283 butt joint. The resulting greater 

analytical threshold and interval value 

would allow for longer compliance 

times to inspect this location on certain 

airplanes. Boeing therefore requests that 

we add the following new paragraph as 

an additional exception to the service 

bulletin specifications in the proposed 

AD: 

(i) This AD required performing the 

inspections of the STA 1283 butt joint on 

Groups 3 and 4 from STR–4.6 to STR–6 per 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563 Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008, except allows this 

location to be treated as Area 2 rather than 

Area 1 for the initial inspection threshold 

and allows a LRTS inspection interval of 

1500 flight cycles rather than 500. 

Boeing states that this change would be 

reflected in a future revision to the 

service bulletin. 

We agree with the request. However, 

since the time that Boeing submitted its 

comments, Boeing released Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, which incorporates 

the inspection and compliance times 

described above. Because the inspection 

and times are included in Revision 4 of 

this service bulletin and we propose to 

mandate the requirements contained in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, this 

inspection is no longer a difference 

between the service bulletin 

specification and this supplemental 

NPRM. We have not changed the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Revise Reporting 

Requirement 

Boeing requests that we revise the 

reporting requirement, which is 

paragraph (i) in the NPRM (now 

identified as paragraph (j) in this 

supplemental NPRM), to require 

operators to also report the maximum 

scribe depth on each airplane. Boeing 

states that this pertinent information 

would allow Boeing to better assess the 

accuracy of the 747 inspection program, 

and is necessary for Boeing to reevaluate the accuracy of the overall 

scribe analysis methodology. 

We agree with the request to revise 

the reporting requirement. The scribe 

depths must be determined during the 

mandated inspections, and this intent 

was included in the phrase in paragraph 

(i) of the original NPRM that reads 

‘‘description of any discrepancies 

found.’’ However, we have included 

additional language to clarify the 

reporting requirement by specifying that 

scribe depths are to be included in the 

required report. Including the depth 

information with the required report, 

therefore, would create no additional 

burden to operators. We have revised 

paragraph (j) of this supplemental 

NPRM to clarify this requirement. 

Request To Limit Data Collection 

BA requests that we limit the data 

collection. BA questions the need for 

the reporting requirement specified in 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
52910 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

the NPRM. BA claims that the reports, 

as they are being submitted, would soon 

provide Boeing with adequate data to 

reassess the proposed actions and 

compliance times (based on the number 

of affected airplanes). BA recommends 

that provisions be included in the 

NPRM to ensure that Boeing and the 

FAA will reassess the data in a timely 

manner, after a statistically significant 

number of data points have been 

collected—with a view to revising the 

service bulletin and AD compliance 

times based on actual data. 

We infer that BA is requesting that we 

eventually remove the reporting 

requirement from the AD. We partially 

agree. We do not agree to remove the 

reporting requirements from this 

supplemental NPRM. The original 

NPRM and this supplemental NPRM 

clearly note that this AD is considered 

interim action. Data received from the 

required reporting will be evaluated to 

help determine whether further 

rulemaking will be necessary or whether 

the inspection requirements can be 

relaxed. We have not changed the 

supplemental NPRM in this regard. 

Request To Provide Additional Detail in 

the Service Bulletin 

KLM notes that Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008, provides for 

some relief for un-inspectable locations, 

but states that this relief is insufficient 

for several structural details, and no 

alternative inspection method is 

available. The commenter provides no 

further information. 

We infer that KLM is requesting that 

we delay issuance of the final rule until 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 2, dated January 3, 2008, is 

revised to provide the structural details. 

Boeing has released Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, which provides 

more information regarding inspections. 

We have revised this supplemental 

NPRM to refer to Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, as the appropriate 

source of service information in this 

supplemental NPRM. 

Request To Stipulate Credit Conditions 

Boeing states that paragraph (j) of the 

NPRM indicated that operators could 

receive credit for inspections done 

before the effective date of the AD 

according to the Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, dated March 29, 

2007. But, as Boeing notes, operators 

who inspected using Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, dated 

March 29, 2007, would not likely have 

inspected STA 1283, a new area of 

inspection added in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008, and included in 

the original NPRM. Boeing therefore 

requests that we revise paragraph (j) of 

the NPRM (which is now paragraph (l) 

of the supplemental NPRM) to include 

the following provisions related to this 

inspection area: 

• Required inspection for scribe 

damage of the STA 1283 butt joint on 

Groups 3 and 4 from STR–4.5 to STR– 

6 in accordance with Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008; 

• A compliance time within 1,500 

flight cycles after the effective date of 

this AD or before the threshold cycle 

limit corresponding to the Area 2 

inspection, whichever occurs later; and 

• Repair of scribe damage as specified 

in paragraph (f) of the NPRM (which is 

now paragraph (g) of the supplemental 

NPRM). 

We agree, for the reasons provided by 

the commenter. However, since the time 

that Boeing submitted its comments, it 

issued Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, which 

incorporates the inspection and 

compliance times described above along 

with other inspections required for 

airplanes that were previously inspected 

in accordance with earlier issues of this 

service bulletin. Because the referenced 

inspection and times are included in 

Revision 4 of this service bulletin and 

we propose to mandate the 

requirements contained in Revision 4 of 

this service bulletin, there is no need to 

state this requirement specifically. 

Rather, we have added a new paragraph 

(k) to this supplemental NPRM to 

require certain actions done in 

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 

2010, for airplanes that were previously 

inspected in accordance with Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, 

dated March 29, 2007; Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 2, 

dated January 3, 2008; or Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 3, 

dated June 11, 2009. 

Request To Add Exception to Inspection 

Requirements 

BA notes that the Relevant Service 

Information section of the NPRM 

describes conditions under which 

certain inspections would not be 

required. BA requests that we revise that 

section to include the following 

additional exception: 

Where the airplane has been delivered 

without fillet sealed lap joints (i.e., is not 

included in the listing in the SB appendix E), 

and the operator has not applied sealant to 

the lap joints during any maintenance or 

paint input, then lap joint inspections are not 

required. 

The commenter adds that this condition 

is provided in Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2563, Revision 2, dated January 

3, 2008. 

We do not agree with the request. 

Appendix E of this service bulletin 

identifies airplanes that had fillet seals 

installed during production. Several 

operators subsequently removed the 

fillet seals, and a listing was needed to 

ensure that those airplanes delivered 

with fillet seals would be inspected. In 

addition, fillet seals might have been 

applied to lap joints at various times 

and subsequently removed, and 

maintenance records might not contain 

sufficient detail for such an exclusion. 

We have not changed the supplemental 

NPRM regarding this issue. 

FAA’s Determination and Proposed 

Requirements of the Supplemental 

NPRM 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all 

pertinent information and determined 

an unsafe condition exists and is likely 

to exist or develop on other products of 

these same type designs. Certain 

changes described above expand the 

scope of the original NPRM. As a result, 

we have determined that it is necessary 

to reopen the comment period to 

provide additional opportunity for the 

public to comment on this supplemental 

NPRM. 

Explanation of Change to Costs of 

Compliance 

Since issuance of the original NPRM, 

we have increased the labor rate used in 

the Costs of Compliance from $80 per 

work-hour to $85 per work-hour. The 

Costs of Compliance information, 

below, reflects this increase in the 

specified hourly labor rate. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 1,038 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

The following table provides the 

estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this supplemental NPRM. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 52911 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work 

hours 

Average 

labor rate 

per hour 

Cost per 

airplane 

Number of 

U.S.- 

registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Detailed inspections ........... 1,020 to 1,140 ..... $85 $86,700 to $96,900 ........ 219 $18,987,300 to $21,221,100. 

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 determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

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– 

2008–0107; Directorate Identifier 2007– 

NM–087–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

September 24, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– 

100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 

747–200C, 747–200F, 747–300, 747–400, 

747–400D, 747–400F, 747SP, and 747SR 

series airplanes, certificated in any category; 

as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from reports of scribe 

lines found at lap joints and butt joints, 

around external doublers and antennas, and 

at locations where external decals had been 

cut. We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct scribe lines, which can develop into 

fatigue cracks in the skin and cause sudden 

decompression of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Inspection 

(g) At the applicable times specified in 

Tables 1 through 21 and Table 25 in 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, except as provided in 

paragraph (h) of this AD, do detailed 

inspections for scribe lines of affected lap 

and butt splices, wing-to-body fairing 

locations, and external repair and cutout 

reinforcement areas, and do all applicable 

related investigative and corrective actions, 

by accomplishing all actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, except as provided by 

paragraph (i) of this AD. 

Note 1: The inspection exemptions noted 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, apply to this AD provided 

that the operator meets the requirements 

stated in each applicable exemption. 

Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications 

(h) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, 

specifies a compliance time after the date on 

that revision or any previous issue of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, this AD 

requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563 states that airplane flight-cycle time 

shall be calculated after the ‘‘issue date on 

this service bulletin,’’ this AD requires the 

airplane flight-cycle time to be calculated as 

of the effective date of this AD. 

(i) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 4, dated May 6, 2010, 

specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate 

action, accomplish applicable actions before 

further flight using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (m) of this AD. 

Report 

(j) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD: Submit 

a report of the findings (both positive and 

negative) of the inspections required by 

paragraphs (g) and (k) of this AD. Send the 

report to Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. 

Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. 

The report must contain, at a minimum, the 

inspection results, a description of any 

discrepancies including maximum scribe 

depth, the airplane serial number, and the 

number of flight cycles and flight hours on 

the airplane. Under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq.), the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has approved the information 

collection requirements contained in this AD 

and has assigned OMB Control Number 

2120–0056. 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
52912 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Actions Accomplished According to 

Previous Issues of Service Bulletin 

(k) For airplanes that have been inspected 

before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with the service information 

specified in Table 1 of this AD: At the 

applicable times specified in Tables 22 

through 24 and Tables 26 through 29 of 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, except as provided in 

paragraph (h) of this AD, do detailed 

inspections for scribe lines of affected lap 

splices, butt splices and cargo door lap 

splices; and do detailed and surface high 

frequency eddy current or ultrasonic 

inspections of scribe lines, and do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, by accomplishing all the 

applicable actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2563, Revision 4, 

dated May 6, 2010, except as provided by 

paragraph (i) of this AD. 

TABLE 1—CREDIT SERVICE BULLETINS

Document Revision Date 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2563 ................................................................................................................ Original March 29, 2007. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563 ......................................................................................................................... 2 January 3, 2008. 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2563 ......................................................................................................................... 3 June 11, 2009. 

Note 2: Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 1, dated November 8, 

2007, was published with omitted 

information. Actions accomplished according 

to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2563, Revision 1, dated November 8, 

2007, are not considered acceptable for 

compliance with this AD. 

(l) Actions accomplished before the 

effective date of this AD according to the 

service information identified in Table 1 of 

this AD are considered acceptable for 

compliance with the corresponding actions 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, except 

as required by paragraph (k) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(m)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Nicholas Han, 

Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM– 

120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

917–6449; fax (425) 917–6590. Or, e-mail 

information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authority (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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

13, 2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21523 Filed 8–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0866; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–SW–065–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada Limited 

Model 427 Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

Tail rotor driveshaft hanger bearing bracket 

part number (P/N) 427–044–223–101 has 

been found cracked due to fatigue. It has 

been determined that the fatigue cracking 

was initiated by a tooling mark left during 

manufacture. 

The existence of tooling marks on the 

bracket could lead to bracket failure, loss of 

tail rotor drive and, consequently, loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 14, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sharon Miles, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137; telephone: (817) 222–5122; fax: 

(817) 222–5961. 

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–2010–0866; Directorate Identifier 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS