25990 Federal Register/Vol. 73, No, gO/Thursday, May B, 200B/Rules and Regulations

Revisi'.ln to Airworthiness Limitations

(AWl.sl Sediun

(g) Cl",forp.j)p.cfJmber18, 2()08, riOvisethe

AWLs s••.<;Iilloof 111"l!J~lructions 1'01'

Continued Air'worlhiu"'$~ (IC1'\) by

incorporating into Ihe MPD the inl'ormatioD

in L11esubsections specilled iu paJ'ugn'[.dls

(gJ(l), (15)(2).and [g](3) of this AD; Hxcept thal

thA initial inspection requi,ed by pantgraph

(h) or this AD mu,t be done at tbe appli.cable

(;omplicUlcelime specified in lhal p~r<lgr<l.ph.

l\ccompli,hillg the r••.vision in u(;(;0rd>Ulce

with i\ 1atfJrre"ision of the MI'D is an

acceptable Ilwlh'od or complirJ.nCOif thu

l'I~visi()nis appl'oved by Ibo Mandger. Seelile

Aircrdfl Certificalion 01Ticu(ACOJ, F/\A.

(1) S"bsection E, ·'.'\mWUKJ'HIN!;;SS

LtMlTATlONS-FUl::L SYS'l'r:MS," of

Kevision March 2008 of th8 MI'D.

(2) Subs,!Clioll F. "Pl\GE FORMAT: FUEL

SYSTEM AIl{WUKI'HtNt::SSLlMlTA'I'IONS,"

of Revision March 2008 uf ll1(1MPD.

(31SlIbsl}clion G, "l\lRWOKI'HtNESS

LlMITAT[ONS-FLJ~;L SYSTt::MAWLs,"

A"'VL~No. 2B-AWL-01 lhrough No. 28-

AWL-22 inclusive. Ill'Revision M~rch 2008

of the MrD. As au optiDIlal action, AWLs No,

2fJ-AVVL-23and No. 28-AWL-24, a8

idEJoUfi'Jdill SubsectiDll G of !{1O"isionM~rch

2008 orth(, Mi'D, also rnuy b••irll:Orp(Jruled

into Ih" AWL.ssection or the ICA.

lnitialln;;pedion and Repair if Necl}ssary

(h) At IIII.!1H.IEJr of thHcompliance time~

specified in pcr.ragrapbs(h)(l) und [h)[2) of

thb AD, du a special detailed inspectioIl 01'

lh" lightlling shield to ground lermination Oll

lhe oUI-ol'-tank 1'1l",1quantity indication

syslem (FQIS) wiring to verify functional

integrity, in ~t.:t.:orda!H;ewith AWL No. 28-

IIWL-03 of S"bsection G of Kcvisi[)n Mill'ch

2008 [)flh(; MI'IJ_II',lOYdiscrepaucy is round

during the inspllclioll, fHpair thB discrepallCy

bel'ore Illrther flight ill accllrdallce with AwL

No. 28-AWL-0:J of SubsBction G of Revi~i(Jll

March 2008 olthe MPIJ, ACGomplishing the

action$ rllqu.ired by lhi~ [;Jdragrdphin

accordance wilh a l~ler 1'l>l'i5iOIlof the MPO

is all acceptable method of compli,illce if the

revision 1$UPPl'Ov.)dby the Mclllager. Seattle

I\CO. Act:umplisbing AWL No. 28-AWL-0~

as P()rt Or;j[] FAA-,lpproved maintenance

program before the appliGabJe comp1ianclO

lime SjJlO(;iliedill jJufdgnlj)h (h)[l) or (h)[2) or

thi5 AD consLitut"s complifl.Ilce with the

requirements of this pdlUgnLph,

Not" 3; For the P"rpO$'.JSoj' tbi~ AD, a

special detailed imp'Jction is: "'An intfJllSlvl:l

eXiolmin~ti()nof ~ spedlk itr.m. in$lnllaLion.

or flssembly lOdetect damage, l'aiIlll"e.or

irregularity, The exumio;ltiOll is likoly to

mdk~ extellsive use uf speci~li;oed inspedion

tschlli'lu';$ ,md/or oqLliprnulll. IOlric(lle

cleaning and ,ub~l,mtial ~ccess or

disa,sembly procedure may be requirlOd."

(1) Within 120 months sinc[) the data 01

issuaucu oj' thu original slllnrlard

airworthiness cf:I't.iTicatiollOfthe date 01

issuance of the original ",xjJort G"rtilklltc oj'

airwortbiJle~s.

[2) Within 24 mUllth~ ililer the eiTfJctive

date uf lhb AIJ.

No Ait"rnative Inspe(;tions, Inspection

Intervals, or Critical Design Configuration

Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

(i) After accomplishing lhe actions

specifi~d ill paragraphs (g) illld (h) of this AD.

no ulternaUve inspections, inspection

intervals, or CDCCLs m«y be llf;(!dunless the

lll~pections. inlervals. or CDCCLs am part of

~ later I'evision of J{evi$ioDMal'ch 2008 of Ule

MPO lb~11i$ approved by the Manager, S",<lttle

ACO; or unless the in'p"'ctions, inlcf\.'fll$. or

CDCCLs are HjJpl"Ovedas an AMOC in

accordance wltb the procedures specified in

par;:,graph (II ollhis AD.

Credit for Actions Don" A(:cording tu

Prrwious Revisions of the MPD

(j) Actions done before th!:!el'feGlivedrIll)01"

this AD in ilccorc!dllce with tb" followiog

MPDs are aLceptublc ror GOnlrli~IlCewith lhe

8orrfJ$pondiog rBqllirements of pamgraphs [g)

aud (h) of this AD, Section 9 of the Llocing

737-liOO/700/700C/700IGW 1800/900 MPD

Document, D625A001~CMR Revision March

2006: Kevi~i()nMay 2006; Revision October

200B;Kevision November 20ot3;01'Kevbion

Nowrnber 2006 R1; and SeGtion 9 or the

Boeing 737-600/700/ilUO!900 MPD

Document. DI:\Z6A001-CMR,!(evi$ion March

Z007: J{evisiUllMarch 2D07 R1; K<Jvision

March 2007 1{2:or l{evision Febmary 2008.

Terminating Action for AU 2008"'()6-{)3.

Amendment 39-15415

[k) tncorporating AWLs No. 28-AWL~21,

No, 28-AWL-22. and No. 23-AWL-24 into

the AWL$ section of tbe ICA in ,lccord,mce

wilh paragrJph (g) of lhis AD terminates the

action required by paTHgraph [h)(l) oj' AD

200B-D6-03,

Altel'llafive Methuds of Compliance

(AMOCsl

(lj[l] 'l'hB Mdnllger, Se,ittlAACO. has tbe

authorily to approvu AMOCs for lhi~ AD, ir

requested in accorduIl'ce with th,~procedures

found iJl14 CFJ{39.1D.

(2)"1'0rHCjI'est<J diJferent method of

Lompli<lIlC",or <1ditTel'eut l:OnlplianLe time

I'orthis AD. I"o)[owthe proctldlm,s in 14 CFJ{

39_19.BfJfore[Ising ailY o.pproved AMOC on

allYail'P1aufJto which the AMOC applies,

uotify your appropriate principii1 in$p"'clol'

[PI] in the FAA Flight Standards DistTict

Oifice (FSDO). or lacking a PI. yOLLrIOG<11

FSDO,

Materiallncorpurat"d by Reference

(m) Yoo mu~t u~e ClueingTemporary

Revision 09-020, dalBd MUTCh2008. tu the

Boeing 731-600/700/800/900 MaintenanC\l

PIHllJlingData (MPD) DOCllIllfJnl.1J6251\001-

CM1{,to do the o.ctions mqllired by this AD,

unless thfJAD opeciJ'ies lltllerwise. Hoeing

Temporary Ke"ision 09-020 is published a$

Section 9 of the Boeiug 737-600/700lilOo/900

MaintfJnance Planning Data [MPD)

Document. D626AQ01--eMR, Kevision March

2008.

(I) The DimLtor of thO:!!-"edsrd1Kegister

,1ppl'()vedthe incorpor~tioo by reference of

this ~ervice inl'ormati.oll lllldcl' 5 U,S.C.

552(a) llnd 1 CFX pari 51

(2) For service info,malion idenlified in

this AD. ~;ontacl CloeingCOllllllerGlal

il.irplanc>s,P.D.Box 3707, Sealli!:!,

Washington 98't24-2207.

[3J You may revi."", copies of the ~ervice

information inGOrpofated by reference al the

FAA, 'j"r~n~porl Airplarw Direl:tllfate, 1601

Lind i\ vellue SW., I{euton, Wesbington; or al

the National !\rchive~ and Kecords

Admillistration [NAKA). For information on

the availability of this Ill~lerial al NAKA. eil!

2D2-741-6030, or go 10:

h1I p:l hVWVi. (JrciJiW!s.gov I[UdVIU IJugisle rl

code_iJLfedemJ JeguJ()lio(),~1

ibr _Iocation.>.hlmi

Issued in J{eutou, Wa~hingIOIl.Of]Apri.1Z9,

;woa.

Ali Hahrami,

,!1;Jum18c'f. "l'r{1n~porlAirpfrl!w lJircdo!"u!r<.

Airvru[t CvrUj'icutioll 8(1f\ll£:r,'.

iJ'1{ DOl:. ~B-991g Filed 5-7-UB; H:4S ;;lrnl

BilliNG COOE' 4910-13-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28386; Direclorate

Identifier 2006~NM~162-AD; Amendment

39-15512; AD 2008--10-06]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747-400, -400D, and -400F

Series Airplanes

AGENCY;Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:Final rule.

SUMMARY: We rlrP. adopting!1 new

airwortbiness directive (AD] for certain

Boeing Model 747--400, ~4000, rind

-400F series airplanes. This AD requires

revising the FAA-approved maintenance

program by incorporating llew

airworthiness limitations (AWLs) for

fuel tank systems to satisfy Special

Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88

requirenIent$. This AD (Ilso requires the

initial inspection of certain repetilive

AWL inspections to phas(j in those

inspections, and repelir if necessary.

This AD results from a design review of

the fuel tank systems. We are issuing

this AD to prevent the potentiuJ for

ignition sources inside fud tanks caused

by latenll'ailures, altcmt'ions, repairs, or

m<lintenance actions, which, in

combination with f1aIumable fuel

vi;ipors, could result in a fltel tank

explosion and consequent loss of the

airplane.

DATES:This AD is effective June 12.

2003.

The Director of the Federal Register

approved the incOl'pOl'alion by referenc(~

of a certain publication listed ill this AD

as of June 12,2008.

ADDRESSES:For sen'ice information

identified in this AD, contact Boeing
federal Register/Vol. 73, No, 90/ThlUsday, May 8, 2008/Rnles and Regulations 25991

Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707.

Seattle, Woshington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD !Jo(:ket

You may examine the AD docket on

the Internet at http://

www.regufations.gov; or in person at Lhe

Docb;t Managemeot facility between 9

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

Friday, except F'ederill holidays, The AD

docket conlains this AD. the regulatory

evalui;ltion, any comments received. and

other informatiOll. The address for the

Dac;kelOffice (telephone 800-547-5527)

is the Document Managemenl F<:lcility,

U,S. Department ofTmnsportation.

Docket Opf;\ratiolls, M-,lO, West

Building Ground Floor. Room W12-140,

1200 New Jersey Avenue. SE.,

Washington. DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sulmo Mal'ianu, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsioll Branch, ANM-140S, fAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1501 Lind i\venLle, 5W., Renton,

Washingtoo 98057-·3355; telephone

(425)917---6501; fax (425J 917-5590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMAnON:

Discussion

We issued Hnolice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) to amcnd 14 CFR

part 39 to include an airworthines~

directivo [AD) that would apply to

certain Boeing Model 747--400. --4000,

Hnd -400f ~()riesairplanes. That NPRM

was pllblished in the Federal Regisler

on July 3, 2007 [72 fl~ 35385). That

NPRM proposed to require rflvising the

FAA-approved maintenance program by

incorporating new airworthiocss

limitHtion-s(AWLs) for fuel taok svstems

to satisfy Special Federal AviatiOl;

Regulation No. 88 requirements. Tbat

NPRM also proposed to require the

initial inspection of certain repetitive

AWL inspectiolls to phase in those

inspections. ami repair if necessary.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

Since we issued the NPRM, Boeing

has issued Temporary Revision (TR) 09-

010, dated March ZOOt!.Boeing TR 09-

010 is published as Section Dofthe

80eing 747-400 Mainh~llallr;e Plarming

Data (MPDJ Document, D621U400-9.

Revision M<lrch200B (hereafter referred

to as "Revision. March 200B uf tbe

MPD"). The NPRM referred to Revision

Marcil 2005 of the MPD as the

appropriate source of service

information for accomplishing the

proposed actions. Revision March 2008

of the MPD, amoog other actions.

includes the following changes:

~ Removes the repetitive task interval

of 35,000 Hight hours from AWLs No.

28-AWL-Ol. No. 28-AWL-03. and No.

28-AWL-I0.

~ Revises AWL No. 28-A WL-03 to

reflect the new maximum loop

rcsistance values associated with the

lightning protect ion of the

unpressurized fuel quantity illdic:atiug

system (fQIS) wire bundle installations.

~ Adds new AWLs No, 28-i\WL-30,

No. 28-AWL-31, and No. 28-AWL-32

to incorpornte new critical design

configuration control limitations

(CDCCLs)for the electronic fuel level

indication system [EfLl) for Modnl 747-

400 snrins airplanes equipped with an

auxiliary fuel tank.

Accordingly, we have rDvised

paragmphs (t), (g), and (h) ofthis AD to

refer to I~evision March 2008 of the

MPD. We also have removed reference

to 35.000 lntaillight cycles from Tahle

1 of this AD and revised tho initi<:ll

threshold for accomplishing AWLs No,

28-AWL-01, No. 28-AWL-03, and No,

28-AWL-I0 to within 144 months since

the date of issuance of the original

stand'J.r(l airworthiness certificate or the

dale oj' issuance of the original export

certificate of airVl'orthiness. (the NPRM

incorrectly specified 36,000 lolal "flight

cycles" instead of "l1ight hours.")

We also have added a new paragraph

(k) to this AD specifying that actions

done hefure lhe effective date of this AD

in accordance with Revisions March

2006 through November 2007 of the

MPD are acceptable for compliance wilh

the corresponding requirements of

paragniphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

Operators should note that we have

revised paragraph (g)(3) of this AD to

require incorporating only AWLs No.

28-I\WL-Ol through No. 28-AWL-23

indusive ..A,WLsNo. 28-AWL-24, No.

28-A WL-25, No, 28-A WL-26, No, 28-

AWL-27, No. 28-AWL-28, and No. 28-

AWL-29 were added in other revisions

of the MPD after March 2005 and before

March 2008. We have issoed a separate

NPRM that proposes to incorporate

AWL No. 28-AWL-25 into the Ff'\Aappl'Oved maintenance program, We

have also issued a separCiteNPRM that

proposes to incorporate AWL No. 28-

AWL-27 into the FAA-approved

maintenance pI'Dgram.Those NPRMs

were published in the Federal Register

on ]HntWry31, 2008 (73 FR 5770 and

5773, respectivelyJ We might issue

additional rulemaking to require the

incorporation of AWLs No. 28-,\ WI,-

24, No. 28-AWL-26, No. 28-AWL-28.

and No. 28-AWL-2':;l. However, as Oil

optional action, operatots may

iocorporate thosD AWLs as specified in

paragraph (g](3) ofthis AD.

Further. we have added a new

paragraph (i) to this AD. which requires

the incorporation of AWLs No. 28-

AWL-30, No. 28-,AWL-31, and No. 28-

i\WL-32 on Model 747--400 series

airplanes equipped with an iJuxilillry

fuel tank. Since none of these airplanes

am on the U.S. Register, this change

does not impose an addition'll burden

00 any U.S. operators.

Olher Changes Made 10This AD

We have revised paragraph (h) of this

AD to clarify that the actions identified

in Table 1 of this AD mLlstbe done at

the compliance time specified in that

table. Also, for standardization

purposes. we have revised this 1\0 in

the following ways:

'" We have added a nelNpariJgraph (j]

to this AD to specify that no alternativ(J

inspections, inspection intervnls, or

CDCCLs may be used unless they are

part of a later approved revision of

Revision March 2008 of the MPD, or

unless they are approved as an

alternative metbod of compliance

(AMOC). lnc!usion of this pmagraph in

the /\0 is intended to ensure that the

'!\D·rnandated airworthiness limitations

chaoges are treated the same as the

airworthiness limitations issued wilh

the original type certificate.

o We have revised Note 2 of this AD

to clarify thnt an oper<ltor must request

approval 1'01'an AMOC if the operator

canllot accomplish the required

inspections because ~n airplane has

been previously modified, altered, or

repaired in the areas addressed by the

required in-spections.

Comments

We gave the pLlblic the opporlunity to

participate in developing this AD. We

considered the comments recci ved from

the six commenters,

Requcsi To Allow Inspections Done

Acwl'ding to il Mainlenance Program

Japan Airlines (JAL)requests that I,ve

revise paragraph (hJ afthe NPRM to

nllaw an operator to update its FAAapproved m,lintenance program to

include the initi,d inspections und

repair for certain AWLs. JAL states that

tbe NPRM would requi.re accomplishing

the initial inspectioo and repair of

certnin AWLs, which would reqLlire JAL

lo estahlish a special inspection and

spedal record keeping for the proposed

requirement,

The compliance times specified in

pal'flgraph (h) of this AD arc intended to

provide a grace period for those

airplanes that have already exceeded the

specified threshold in the MPD. To be

in compliance with the recording

requirements of this AD. opera! ors IIlust

record their compliauce with the initial

iospection for those airplanes over Ib,:

specified threshold. We have revised

paragraph (bJ of this 1\Olo specify thiJl

accomplishing the <Ipplicable AWLs as
25992 Federal Register! Vol. 73, No. 90 (Thursday, May 8, 2008/ Rules and Regulations

part of an fAA-approved maintendllce

program before the applicable

(;Qmplianc~ lime constitutes cOlllpli<lllce

with the applic(lble requirements of that

paragmph.

Request To Revise Intervals fOIr Certain

AWL Inspections

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (KLMj, on

behalf of ,mvf:rai operators, requests that

we review a 45-pClge proposal to align

certain airworthiness limitation item

(ALl) intervals with the applicahle

mainlena[]ce significant item (MSl) and

enhanced ;conal analysis procedure

(EZAP) intervals for Model 737. 747.

757,767, and 777 airplalles. The

recommendations in that proposal

ensure that the ALl intervals align with

the maintenance schedules of the

operi:ltors. Among other changes. the

proposal recommends revising certain

AWL inspection intervals from 12 year$!

36,000 flight hOUIS to only 12 years for

Model 747-400, -4000, and -400F

series airplanes.

Qantas Airwi;lys abo requosts Lhat the

36.000-f1ight-hour parameter be

removed from the inspection tllterval [or

AWL No. 28-AWL---{ll, No. 2$-AWL03, and No. 28-AVVL-10. The

commenter stales lhal the flight-hour

parameter does not adequately take into

account actual airplane usage, and that

the long haul utilization ot' the airplane

is 5,000 lo 6,000 flight hours per year.

Based on lhis number. the commenter

states that the AWL tasks would be

reqllired at 6 years instead of 12 years.

Qalltas Airw8Ys and Lufthansa both

note an inconsistency between the

inspection inlerval specifiod in Revisio<1

March 2006 of the MPD and the

compliance threshold specified in Table

1 of the NPRM. Table 1 of the NPRM

specifies accomplishing the initial

inspection within 36,000 total night

cycles or 144 months since the date of

issuance ofthe original standard

airworthiness certificate or the date of

iSSllance of the original export

certificate of airv'iOl"lhiness, whichever

occurs first. Qantas Airways would

welcome the ch,lllge from "Hight hours"

to "flight cycles." if the Hight-hour

parameter is not deleted trom the

inspection intervals sper.ified in

Revision March 2006 of the MPD.

We have reviewed the commenter's

requests, and we agree lo revise the

compliance threshold for certain AWLs

identified by t.he commenters. As stated

previollsly. Revision March 2008 ofthe

MPD specifies a repetitive interval of

144 months. "Ve have revised the

threshold specified in Table 1 of this AD

accordingly.

Request To Harmonize Task

Descriptions

IAL states tbat. in Revision March

2006 of the MPD, tbe task descriptions

del"ining the applicable area are different

for AWLs Nos. 28-AWL-01 and 28-

AWL-02. (AWL No. 28-AWL-01 is a

repetitive inspection of the external

wires over the center fuel tank, and

AWL No. 28-A WL-02 is a CDCCL to

maintain the original design features for

the extemal \""ires over the center fuel

tank.) JAL believes that the task

descriptions for these AWLs should

match, JAL presumes that. if one

purpose for the inspection is to prevent

a spark in the Fuel vapor over tbe center

fuel tank, then the applicable area

should have a certain tolerance instead

of defining t.he area by exact station

number

We agree that the task descriptions for

AWL Nos. 28-AWL--ol and ~8-AWL02 should be harmonized. Revision

March 2005 of the MPD includes a

revised task description ef AWL No. 28-

A WL-Ol, which addresses JAL's

comments. f\S stated previously, we

have revised this AD to refer to Revision

March 2008 of the MPD.

Request To Revise the Loop ResistanCl;l

Values for AWL No. 28-AWL--o:1

Hoeing, KLM, Lufthansa, and Qantas

Airwoys state that the loop resistance

values for AWL No. 28-A WL-03

spec:ified in Revision March 2006 of the

MPD are going to be revised, since those

valUes are relnvant for production

airplanes. The comrnenters also state

that the revised values will be more

represenlati ve of the expect.ed values for

ill-service airplanes. Boeing points out

that, acr.ording to paragraph (hl of the

NPRM, the revised values should he

able to be used in accordance with a

later revision of the MPD if the revision

is approved by Lhe Seattle Aircrait

Certification Office (ACO], FAA.

\'Ve agree that operators may use the

revised loop resistance values for AWL

No. 2S-AWL-03 in accordum:e with

Revision March 2.008 of the MPD. As

st<lted previously. we have revised this

AD according Iy.

Requesl To Revise Estimated Costs

Qantas Airways states that the workhour estimates provided in the NPRM

seem too small. The comrneoter has

submitted its estimates for AWLs No.

28-AWL-Ol, No. 28-AWL-03, No. ~8-

AWL-10. No. 28-AWL-17. and No. 28-

AWL-21.

We infer the COllllllenter requests that

we revise the "Costs of Compliance"

ser.tioll 01'this AD to rellect its

estimates. We agree to indude the workhour estimates I'or the initial

accomplishment of AWLs No. 28-AWI.-

01, No. 28-AWL-03, and No. 28·-AWL10 in this AD, We h,lve not included tho

estimate for AWL No. 28-A WL-17.

sillce this AD does not oeed to require

the initial inspection oflhat AWL to

phase in the inspection. The initial

inspection of AWL No, 28-A WL-17

should have been previously

accomplished as part of the existing

FAA-approved m[tinten'lIlCe program.

We also have not included the estimate

for A WI.. No. 28-AWL-21 hecause

incorporation ofthat AWL has been

postponed, as specified i.llRevision 24,

dated June 2006, of the MI'D.

Request To Clnify Use of Equivalenl

Tools and Chemicals

JAL requests that \ve provide

guidelines for using equivalent tools

and chemical materials according to tlw

component maintenance manuals

(CMMs). JAL slates that normally

operators can use equivalents withDut

FAA approval when the CMM specifies

that equivalents may be used. JAL also

stutes that it has receIved further

clarification I'rom Boeing specifying thut

unless a CDCCL refers lo a certain tool

by part number or certain chemicals by

118me, all operator can continue to use

equivalent tools or materials according

to the CMMs,

We acknowledge the commenter"s

request and are \\,:orking with Boeing to

provide appropriate flexibility while

still ensuring thot it.ems critical for

maintaining safety continue to be

specifically identified in the CMMs.

However, to delay issuance of this AD

would be inapprupriate.

We agree that when the CMMs allow

use of equivalent tools or chemical

materi<lls, operators and repair stations

may use equivalents. We h:;lVealready

approved the use of the CMMs at the

revision levels specified ill Revision

March 2008 of the MPD, induding the

use of equivalent tools or chemicals

where the CMMs slate equiv<llents are

allowed. If the CMM does not allow use

of an equivalent, none may be tlsed No

"hange to this AD is necessary in this

regard.

Request To R~vislil Appendix 1

Boeing requests that we revise

Appendix 1 at' the NPRM as follows: (1)

Heference an additional AT}\. section for

AWL No. 28-AWL-02, (2) correct the

airplane maintenance manual (AMM)

task titles and numbers for AWL No.

28-A WL-09, [3) correct the i\MM task

number for AWL No. 23-A WL--J 0, (4)

delete certain information from the ATA

section for AWL No. ~8·-A WL-21 , and
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. gO/Thursday, May 8, 2008/Rules and ReguJatioils 25993

(4) add AMM task titles 'lod [lumbers for

AWL No. 21:l-AWL-23.

)A1.requests that we update

Appendix 1 of the NPRM to i[lclude aU

AWLs specified ill the MPD, and that

we indicate how to maintain the latest

version of Appendix 1. jA.Lalso

requests that we correct the following

error in Appeudix 1 ofthe NPRM: For

AWL No. 21:l-AWL-0'l, change '"SWPM

20-10-15" to "SWPM 20-10-13,"

We dis<lgreewilh revising the AMM

references, since we have deleted

A.ppendix·J from this AD. The purpose

of Appendix 1 was to assist operator~ in

identifying the AMM lasks that could

affect compliance with a CUCCL.

However, we have also received several

similar comments regardiog the

appendices in other NPRMs that address

the same unsafe condition on other

Boeing ,lirplanes_ Those comments

indicate that induding non-required

information in those NPRMs has caused

confusion. Further, Revision March

2008 of the MPO contains most of the

updated information that is listed in

Appendix 1 of the NPRM. ThereforR, we

haVE:removed Appendix 1 from this AD.

Request To Extend the Grace Period [oJ'

AWL No. 28-A WL--03

Lufthansa and KLM expect to have

problems accomplishing the initial

inspection of AWL No. 28-A WL-03

within the 2'1-month grace period_ The

commellters slate that if they do the

check ;)nd do not reach the specilled

values, then tank entry outside of heavy

maiutenancc would be lleCeSSary,The

COlllmcnters also state that it would be

hdpful to plao to do this iuspection

durillg an overh(lUI.

We infer that the cummcnters Wqll(lst

that we extend the grace period fur AWL

No, 28-AWI,-03 in Table 1 of this AD

to allow accomplishing th8 initial

inspection during <lregularly schedlded

"D" check (about,Byears]. We disagree

with extending the grace Veriod to 6

years. In developing an appropriate

compliance time for this <lction, WA

considered the safety implications. the

rate of lightning strikes in the tleet, and

the average age of the fleet. In

consideration of these items, we have

determined thilt au initiill compliance

time of 1'14months (<IS discussed

previollsly) with a grace period of 24

mouths will ensure ao acceptable level

01'safety, We have not r.hanged the grace

period for AWL No. 2B-AWL-03 in this

regal-d.

Requesl To Extend '-he EXcOolplional

Short·Term Extension

Qantas Airways requests that we

allow exceplional short-term extensions

of 10 percent of the task interval or 6

months, whichever is less, for AWL

tasks. The commenter believes that the

exceptional short-term extension of 30

days, which is specified ill Revision

March 200B of the MPD, is too small for

AWL tasks having 12-year intervals, The

cornmenter states that. as part of the

Boeing 747 Corrosion Prevention and

Control Program mandated by AD 90-

25-05, amendment 39-6790 (5.')FR

'19268, November 27, 1990). operators

were givell a provision to invoke

exceptional short-term extensions of 1lJ

percent of the task interval or 6 months,

whichever is less. The commenter st.ates

that this is a more appropriate

magnitude because operators are often

permitted onn-time exceptional

extensions to maintenance checks aDd

tasks of this proportion. The commenteI'

also states th<ltlimiting the extension

period to ,lOdays means that a "0"

check can never be extended by more

than 3Ddays, which would force

operators to do certain AWI. inspections

outside ol'a "0" check,

We disilgree with thl:!commenter's

request because exceptional short-term

extensions are, in essence, pre-approved

extensions without Seattle ACO review

of the specifics of the situation, We

consider that the ability to extend the

interval without further approval for 30

days should be suflicicnt for most

circumstances. However, if an operator

find~ that it needs an extension longeI'

than 30 day~. with appropriate

justification one may be requested from

the Seattle ACO, or governing regulatory

authority. Longer extemions may be

granted on a case-by-case basis because,

as Qantas Airways points out. the tusk

interval is long, and the FAA is

interested in limiting out-of-sequence

work. We have not changed this AD in

this regard.

Request To Add Applicability to Table

1

Lufthall5fl states that the applicability

of AWL inspections should be included

in Table 1 of the AD.

We disagree because the AWL

inspections listed in Tahle 1 of this AD

are applicable to all airplanes identified

in paragraph (cl of this AD. \'Vehave not

changed this AD in this regard,

Requesl To Require Latest Revision of

the AMM

JAL requests that we revise the NPRM

to require incorporation of the latest

revision of the manufacturer's AMM.

JAL asserts that we have allowed Boeing

to inclLlde statements in the Boeing

AMM allowing operators lo use certain

CMM revision levels or later revisions.

JAL states that, with the exception of the

CMM, operators cannot find what

revision level of the AMM needs to be

incorporated into the operator's AMM

in order to comply with thl:!proposed

requirements of the NPRM, )1\1,aho

states that it Gould take several weeks to

incorporate the llumul'acturer's AMM.

)AL further requests that we clarify

whether it is acceptable to change the

procedures in the AMM with 8oeing's

acceptance, JAL states that the MPD

notes that any use ofparl's, methods,

techniques, or pmctices not contained

in the applicable CDCCLand AWL

inspection must be approved by the

FAA onice that is responsible for the

airplaoe model type certificate, or

applicable regulatory agency. )AL also

states that the Boeing AMM or CMM

notes to obey the manufacturer's

procedures when doing maintenance

that affects a COCeL or AWL inspection.

However, JAL believes that acr.:ording to

thl:!NPRM it is acceptable to change the

AMM procedures with Boeing's

accl:!ptance.

We disagree with the changes

proposed by the commenter. This AD

does not require revising the AMM. This

AD does require revising YOUI'

maintenance program to incorporate llll:!

AWLs identified in Revision March

2008 of the MPD. However, complying

with the AWL inspections or CDCCLs

will require other actions by operators

induding AMM revisions. In the U.S"

operators are not reqllil'ed to use

original equipment manufacturer (OEM]

mnintenanr;e manuals. Operators may

develop their own manuals, which are

review(~d ilnd accepted by the FAA

Flight Standards Service_ In order to

maintain that flexibility for operators,

most of the AWLs contain all of the

critical information, such as maximum

bonding resistances aud minimum

separation requirements. The FAA

Flight Standards Service will only

accept operator manuals that contain all

of the information specified in the

AWLs, so there is no need to require

operators to use the OEM maintenance

ma'nuals.

Reg;uding JAL's request for

clarification of approval of AWL

changes, we infer JAL is referring to the

following sentence located in the

"Changes to AMMs Referenced in fuel

Tank System AWLs" section of the

NPRM: "A maintenance mnnual change

to these tasks mav he made without

approval by the Manager, Seattle ACO,

through an appropriate FAA principal

maintenauce inspector [PMJ) or

principal avionics inspector (P.!\l), by

the governing regulatory authority, or by

using the operalor's standard process fOI

revising maintenance maIluals_" If

changes Deed to be made to tasks

associated with aD AWL, they may be
25994 Federal. Registe.rlVol. 73, No. gO/Thursday, May 8, Z008/Rulos iUld Regulations

m<ldeusing an operator's normal

proce~~ without approval of the Seattle

ACO. as long a~ the change mai.ntains

the information specified in the AWL.

For some CUCCLS,it was berleficial to

not put all the critical information into

the MPD. This avoids duplication of'a

large alllount of informiltion. In these

cases, the COCCI.refers to <I ~pecific:

revision of the CMM, U.S. operators are

required to use those CMMs. Any

changf~sto the CMMs must be approved

by the Seattle 1\CO.

Request To Revise Nole 2

HOl;lingrl;lqueststhat wrJrevise Note 2

orthe NPRM to clarify the need for an

AMOC. Boeing states that the current

wording is difficult to follow, and that

the note is meant to inform operators

that an AMOC to the required MPD

,\ WLs might be roquired iJ'al) operator

has previously modified, altered, or

repaired the areas addressed by the

limitations. Boeing requests that we

revise Notl;l2 as follows:

",Add th(1words "according to

paragraph (g)" at the end of the first

sentenCl;l.

.•Replace the words "revision to"

with "deviation from" in the last

sentence.

"'Delete tbe words "(g) or" and "as

applicabh~" from the last sentence,

As stntod previously, we have

clarified the lauguagl;lin Notl;l2 of this

AD for standardization with other

similar ADs. The language the

r;ommerrter requests that we ch,mgo

does not appear in the revised note.

Therefore, no additional change to this

AD is necessary in this regard.

Request To Delete RlJ1erence 10Task

Cards

All Nippon Airways [ANA] requests

that we delete the words "and task

cards," unless the task card references

are listed in Subsection D of the MFO

or Appendix 1 of the AD, Those words

ale located in thl;!following sentence in

the "Ensuring Compliance with Fuel

Tank Systern AWLs" section ot the

NPRM: "Operators thaI do not lIse

80eing's revision service should revise

their maintenance manuals alld task

cards to highlight actions tied to

CDCCLsto ensure that maintenance

personnel are complying with the

CDCCLs." ANA believes that if a task

card refors to the AMM, which includes

the CDCCLnote, then highlighting the

COCCLiLemsis not necessary because

they are already highlighted in the

AMM and maintenance personnel

always refer to the AMM, ANA further

states that the applic<lble task card

references are not listed in Subsection 0

of the MPD, or in Appendix 1 of the

NPRM; they refer only to the AMM.

ANA, therefore, slates that it is difficult

to find out or distinguish the affected

task card.

JAL believes that tbe proposed

requirement regarding the CDCCLsis to

incorporate the manufacturer's

maintenance manuals into an operator's

maintenance manual. If the description

of a COCCLis missing from the

manufacturer's AMM, tben JALbelieves

that operators p.renol responsible for the

requirements of the 1\0.

We agree that the task cards might not

need to be revised becallse an operator

might find that the AMM notes are

sufficient. However, we disagree with

deleting the reference to the task cards

since some operHtors might need to add

notes 10their task cards This A.Ddoes

not require any changes to the

maintenance manuaLs 01' task cards. The

AD requires im:orporating naw AWLs

into tho operator's maintenance

program. It is up to the operator to

determine how best to ellsure

compliance with the new AWLs. In the

"Ensuring Compliance with Fuel Tank

System i\WLs" section of the NPRM, we

were only suggesting, not requiring.

ways that an operator could implement

CDCCLsLntoits maintenance program.

We have not changed this AD in this

I'egard.

Request-To Clarify Meaning of Task

Cards

JAL requests thaI we clarify whether

"task cards," as found in the "Recording

Compliance with Fuel Tank System

AWLs" section of the NPRM, flleans

Boeing task cards only or if they also

include an operator's unique task cards.

'vVeintended that "tilsk cards" me<ln

both Boeing and an operator's unique

task cards, as applicable. The intent is

to addre% whatever type of task cards

are used by mechanics 1'01'nHlinlenance,

This AD would not require any c:hanges

to the AMMs 0,' task cards relative to the

CDCCLs.WE!are only suggesting ways

an operator mighl implement CDCCLs

into its maintenance program. No

change to this AD is necessary in this

regard,

Request Tu Delete Reference to Parts

Manufat:lurer Approval (PMA) ParIs

ANA rGquests that we delete the

words "Any use of parts (including the

use ofpmts manufacturer approval

(PMl\) approved parts)," llllless a

continuous supply ofCMM specified

parts is v'iflrranted or tbe FAA is open

24 hours to approve alternative parts for

in-house repair by the operator. Those

words are located in the following

sentence in the "Changes to CMMs

Cited i.nVueI Tank System AWLs"

section orthe NPl{M: 'Any usu of parts

(inclliding the use of parts manufacturer

approvaL [PMA) approved parts).

mp,thods, techniques, and practices not

contained in thu CMMs needs to be

approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO,

or governing regulatory authoriLy."

ANA states tbat in some cases the

parts specified in the CMMs canIlot be

obtained from the parts market or

directly from the component vendor, so

an operator is forced into using

altemalive parts to kllep its schedule.

ANA requests that we direct the

component vendor to ensure a

continuous supply of CMM parLs and to

direct the component vendor to remedy

Cllack of parts if parts arc not promptly

supplied. ANA further requests that I,ve

direct the component vendor to

promptly review the standard parts and

allow use of alternative fasteners and

vvashers listed in Boeing D590. ANA

asserts that, in some cases, a component

vfmdor specifies an unr.ommon part to

preserve its monopoly.

We disagn~e with revising the

"Changes to CMMs Cited ill Fllel Tank

System AWLs" section of'the NPRM.

We make every effort to identify

potential problems with the parts

supply, and we are noLaware ohm)!

problems at this time, The impetus to

declare overhaul and repair of certain

t'uellank system components as CDCCLs

arose from in-service pUlIlp failures th,lt

resulted Fromrepairs not dOlle

<lccording to OEM procedures. We hLive

approved the use of the CMMsincluding parts. methods, techniques,

and practices-at the revision levels

specified in Revision March 2008 of the

MPD. Tbird·party spare parts. such as

parts approved by PMA. have not been

reviewed.

Au operator tIlClYsubmit a request to

the Seattle ACO, or governiug regulatory

authority, [or Clpprovalof an AMOC if

sufficient data are submitted to

substantiate thaLuse of an alternative

part would provide an acceptable level

of safety. The CDCCLsdo not restrict

where repairs can be performed, so an

operator may do the work in-house as

long as Lheapproved CMMs Clre

followed, [f operators 1NOU ld Iike to

change those procedures, they can

request approval of the changes_ The

FAA makes every effort to respond to

operators' requests in a timely manner.

It'there is a potential for disrupting the

night schedule, the operator should

include that information in it"srequest.

Operators should request approval for

thl;!use of PMA parts and alternative

procedures from the FAA or tbe

governing regulatory authority in

advance in order to limit"schedule
Federal Register 1VoL 73, No. 90 I Thursday, May 8, 20081 Rules and Regulations 25995

disruptions. We have not changed this

AD ill this regard.

Requesl To Identify Olher Test

I::quipment

IAt states that certain test equipment

is designated in the l\1POand that

additional equipment should also be

designated. For example, AWL No. 28-

AWL-03 would require using loop

resistance tester. part rnnnber (PIN)

906-10246-2 or -3. Therefore, jAL

requests that we also identify alternative

test equipment, so that opl;lrators do not

need to seek an AMOC to use other

equipment.

We disagree with identifying other

test equipment. We cannot identify

every possihle piece of test equipment.

We el\stll'e thaI some arc listed as

recollllllended by tile manufHcturer.

With substantiating data, operators C;lll

request approval of an alternati ve tester

from the Seattle ACO, or the governing

regulatory agency. We have not changed

this AD in this regard.

Request To Clarify AWL No. 28-AWL02

JAL requests that we clarify the intent

of AWL No. 28-AWL-02. JALstates that

Chapters 53-21 and 53-{)1 of the Boeing

AMM specify doing an inspection of the

external wires over the center fuel tank

according to AMM 28-11-{)O before

installing the floor panel over the center

wing tank based on AWL No. 28-AWL~

02. JALalso stales that according to

Revision March 2005 of the MPD, AWL

No. 2/l-AWL-02 contains two

limitations: maintaining the existing

wire bundle routing and clamping, and

installing any new wire bundle per the

Boeing standard wiring practices

manual (SWPM). Therefore, JAL

believes it is not necessary to inspect

the external wires over the center fuel

tank according to AMM 28-11-00

before installing the floor panel over the

center wing tank, unless thaI wire

bundle routing and clamping are

changed.

We point out that AWL No. 28-A WL02 also contains a third limitation:

verifying that all wire bundles over the

center fuel lank are inspected according

to AWL No. 28-AWL-01, which refers

to I\MM 28-11-00 for accomplishing

the inspectiofl. We do not llgree that the

inspection should be 1'8quired oilly if

the wim bundle fUuling and r:lamping

are changed while rlIilintenance is

accomplished in t.he area. If any of the

other bundles have a clamp or routing

failure, it must be detected and

corrected. After accomplishing the

inspection required by AWL No. 28-

AWL-01, an operator would not need to

repeat the inspection for another 12

years_ No change to this AD is necessary

in this regard.

Request for Clarification for Recording

Compliance With mCCLs

jAL requests that we clarify the

following sentence: "All entry into an

operator's existing maintenance record

system for corrective action is sufficient

for recording compliance wilh CDCCLs,

as long as the applicable maintenance

manual and task cards identify actions

that are CDCCLs."'That sentence is

ESTIMATED COSTS

located in the "Recording Compliancl:!

with Fuel Tank Svstem AWLs" section

of the NPRM. Spe'cificall y, jAL asks

whether an operator must indicate the

CDCCLin their recording documents or

whether it is sufficient for the recording

document to callout the applicable

AJ.\1Msthat are tied to the COCCLs.

We have coordinated with the FAA

Hight Standards Service and it agrees

that. for U.S.-registered airplanes, if the

applicable AMMs and task cards

identify the COCCl, then the entry into

thn recording documents does not !leed

10identify Ihe CDCCL.However. if the

applicable AMMs and tasks cards do not

identify the COCCL,then they musl be

identi ried. OthDr lIlelhods may be

accepted by the appropriate FAA PM! nr

PAL or governing regulatory aulhorily.

No change to this AD is nC(;(Jssaryin

this regard,

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data,

considered the commcnts received, and

determined that air safety and the

public interest require adopting the AD

with the changes described previously.

We also determined that these changes

w.ill not increase the economic burden

on any operator or increase the scope of

the AD.

Casls of Compliance

There are about 596 airplanes ofthe

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The following table provides the

estimated costs, at an average labor rHte

of SBOper work hour, for U.S. operHtors

to comply with this AD.

Cost per

Numberof

Action Workhours Parts U,S.-registered Fleetcost airplane airplanes

Maintenanceprogramrevision. 8 None $640 57 536.480

initialaccomplishmentofAWL28-AWL-Q1.. 6 None ....... - . 480 57 27,360

InitialaccomplishmentofAWL28-AWL-Q3.. 32 None 2,560 57 145,920

InitialaccomplishmentofAWL28-AWL-10... ...... 2 None ........ 180 57 9.120

Autbority for Tbis RlIlcmakillg

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 VJl:

Aviation Programs:' describes in more

detail the scope oftbe Agency's

authority.

We are issuing this rulernaking under

lhe authority described j[] "Subtitle VII,

Part A, Subpart III. Section 44701:

GenerHIrequirements," Under that

section, Congress charges the FAA with

promoting safe flight of civil aircnd't 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 rulcmaking

action.

Regulatory Findings

This AD will not have federalism

implications under Executive Order

13132. This AD will not have a

substantial direct I:!ITecton the Slates, on

the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

dislribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above. r

certify that this AD:

(1)ls not a "significaot regulatory

action" under Executive Order 12866.

(2) Is not a "significant rule" under

DOT Regulatory Policies Hnd Procedures

[44 FR 11034. February 26. 1979), aud

(3) Will not' have 11 significant

economic impact, positive or negative.

on a substantia! number of smllil entities
25996 Federal Register/Val. 73, No. 90/Thursday. May 8, 200S/Rules and Regulations

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

You can find our regulatory

evaluation and the estimated cos!s of

complianr.;e in the AD lJackeL

List of Subjccls in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation. Aircraft. Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safely.

Adoption of the Amendmenl

E!I Accordingly. under the authority

delegatt:ld to me by the Administrator.

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as

follows:

PART 39-A!RWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

Etll. Thn RUlhority citation for pfll"13!J

(;ontinu()s to fCi:ld as follows:

Authurity, 49 U.S.c. 106(g), 40113, 44701,

§39.13 [Amended]

E:I2. The FAA amends §39.13 by adding

the following new AD:

2008-10-06 Hoeing: Amendment 39-15512.

Do(;ketNo. FAA-2007-28386;

Diredoratc Identifier 2006-NM-162-AD.

Effeclive Date

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is

crft.'l.:liveJune 12, 2008.

Atreded AUs

Ib) None.

Applit:abilily

Ie) This AD applies to Boeing Muuel 747-

400. ---400D.<lnd--400F series airplanes,

(;ertiric<ltetiin ilny category; with an origin,l1

standurd airworthiness (;ertifica!a or ol'igill<ll

l:lXpOI"l ~;()I'IifiG<llu01airworlhioess issLlmi

bet'urt:April 12, 2005.

Note 1: AirplHnes witb an original stiJl'ldill"d

ail'worthine% certi.ficate or crigi [Juloxpol'l

curlificattl of ail"w()rlhilles~issued Onor ul\or

April 12, 20U[;,mli~t bO:!i:lll"fladyin

r.:omplii:ln(;cwith the i:lirworthinllSS

limitations specified in this AD bt:cauSII

thosc limit<ltions were appLicabln as part of

the airworthiness l:crtHi(;ation of those

airplanes.

Note 2: This AD requires revisions to

certain operator maintenance documents to

include new inspections. Compliance with

these inspections is required by 14 CFK

91.403(c). For airpLalles that have been

previously modified. altert.-d.or repaired in

the areas addressed by these inspections. tbe

operator Illay not be able to accomplish the

inspections described in the revisions. In this

situation. to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c).

the operator must reqliest approval for an

a1lernative method of compliance (AMOC]

according to paragraph (I) nf this AD. The

request should include a description of

changes 10thl! required inspections that will

enSlire the cootinued operational safely of

the airphllle.

Unsafe Condiliun

(d) This AD results from i:ldesign f(!view

uf the fllel tank systems. We an, issuing this

AD to pl'Bventthe potenlial fur ignitiun

SOllrcu~inside fueltunh t.:illl~l:Idby li:llent

lililul'es, allerations. repairs, 01'maintewlIlce

actiuns, which, in cornLJinlllionwilh

l1ummable fuel vapors. (;QllidrElsultin a fllel

tank explosion und (;onsequent luss of the

airpLfm,,-

Compliance

(el You are responsible for having the

lu;tions reqliired by this AD perrorml:!dwithin

the compliance times specified. unless the

actions havl:!aLready bl:!l:!ndone.

Service Information Reference

[0 The term '·N.evision March 200Bof the

MPD," as used in this AD, means Boeing

Temponrry Kevision (TN.)09-010. dated

Man:h 2008. Boeing TK 09-010 is published

as Section 9 or the lJoeing 747-400

MaintenanClJ Planning Data [MPDl

DoclUIlent.D621U400-9. Revision March

2008.

Maintenance Program Revision

[g) Before De(;ember 15, 200B.revise the

FAA.approved m~illienunce program by

incorporating Ihe illronnalion in the

subsections specified In paragraphs [g][l).

[g)(2).ilnd (g)[3) 01"lhi~ AD; [)xcept t.hat the

initial inspm;tions spl:lcii'itJe!in Table 1 of this

AD mu~t be done atthu compliancE:'times

specified in TabLa1. Accomplishing the

revision in ur;cordall(;e with a later revision

of the MPD is an acceptable method of

compliance if the revision is approved by the

Mall1l8",r,Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO).FAA.

TABLE l.-INITIAL INSPECTIONS

{lJ Subsection 11.'·AIRWOKT!IlNESS

LIMITATIONS [AWLs)-SYSTEMS," of

!{c"ision March 2008 of!.h", MPO.

12)Subst.'CtiollC, "PAGE FORMAT: I'UEL

SYSTEMS AtKWOKTHINESS

UMITATIONS,·' of Kwisioll March 2008 of

thll MPD.

(3) Snbsection D, ··AIl{WOlfI'HINESS

LlMITATlONS--FUEL SY3TEMS." AWLs

No. 2~A WL-G1 through No. 28-A WL-23

indusive. nf Kevision March 2008 of the

MPD. As an oplionalllctiOIl, AWls No_28-

AWL-24 through No_2B-AWL-29 indusivu.

as idcntifitld in Subsection D of Kevision

March 2.008of the MPD, also may be

incurpurawd into the FAA-approved

maintenanco prognmL

Iniliallnslle(;tiuns ilnd Repair ifNcce.~sary

[h) Do the inspections Spf:lCifi'Jdin Table 1

of this AD ill the cu,npliant:e lillie spedl'ieri

in Tabl!! 1 of this AD. Hud repair allY

disc;rcpllnl:y, i,l accordance with Subs[)ctiw)

D of l{evision MardI 2008 uf the MPD. Tilf:l

repair must be dOlle befure furthtJr !light.

I\ccomplishillg the uctions required by this

paragraph in a(;cordance with a later r!!I'ision

of the MPD is an acceptable method of

compliall(;l:!if thc revisinll is approved by the

MaTlllgllt,Seattle ACO_Ac(;ompLishing the

inspections identified in Table 1 of this AD

as part of an FAA-approved mainlenanco

prOgl"'"dmbefore the applicable complia.nce

time specifiud in Table t of this AD

constitutes compLiance with the

requirem[)nts of this paragraph.

Notc 3: For the purposes of this AD, ,I

detailed inspection is: ·'An intcnsive

examination of a specific lIem, installatiul),

or assembly to detect damage. failure. or

irreglilarity. AVllilllblelighting is Jlormally

supplclllented with a dirp,clsource of gum'!

lighting ut an intensity deum•.•d appruprialu.

Inspection <lidssuch as mirror, magnifying

hmses, IItC.. may be llecessary. Surfac[)

cItlaning and elaborate procedures m~y b~

[·l'Iqui]"()d."

Nute 4: I,'o!"tJw p"rposuS of this AD. a

special dehliled InSpl:!c1ionis: "All ilJten~il'(I

[)xaminatioll ofa sp[)(;illc item, installation,

or ilssembly to detect damage. faiJuJ"[).or

irrcgulilrity. Th" examination is likely to

make extlln~ive liStlof sp(Jr.::ializedinspection

techniques audlor equipment. Inlricat[)

c1l1aningllnd ~ubstantial access or

disassembly pro(;ee!um may be required."

Grace period

Compliance time

(whichever occurs later)

---'-c:-----

Threshold

AWL No. Description

28-AWL-Q1

28-AWL-Q3

A detaited inspection of external wires

over the center fuel tank for damaged

or loose clamps, wire chafing. and

wire bundles in contact with the suriace 01the center fuel tank.

A special detailed inspeclion of the

lightning shield to ground termination

on the out·ol·tank luel quantity indicating system to verify functional in·

tegrity,

Within 144 monlhs since the dale of

issuance 0' the original standard airworthiness certificate or the date 01

issuance of the original expon certilicate 01airworthiness.

Wilhin 144 months since the dEte of

issuance of the original standard air·

worthiness certificate 01' the date 01

issuance of the original export certifi·

cate of airworlhiness.

Within 72 months after the ellective

dale of !his AD.

Within 24 months alter the etlective

date of this AD.
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. gO/Thursday, May B, 200B/Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1.-INrTlAL INSPECTIONS-Continued

25997

Compliance lime

AWL No. Description (whichever occurs later)

Threshold Grace period

28-AWL-l0 ....... A special detailed inspection of the fault Within 144 months since the date 01 Within 60 months after 1h, effective

current bornj 01 Ih. fueling shutoff issuance of the original standard air- date of this AD_

valve actuator of the center wing lank worthiness certificate or the date of

to verify electrical bond. issuance of the original export certifi·

cate of airworthiness_

Incufllunllion of Additional AWLs for

Certain Airplanes

OJ For Model 747-400 series airplanes

oquipplld with an auxiliary fuel tank: Uei"un:l

Df:lctlmbcr 1l). 2008. revise the l'AA.approv"d

IllainLunUlIcllprogram by im;orporalinl;l AWL:;

Nu. 2B-AWL-:-lO. No. 28-AWL-31. find No,

28-AWL-32 "i' Subsection 0 01"I{llvisiun

M~lI'chzoot! ul"the tv1PO.Ar;compJiHhing the

revision in m;r;ordilnce with a later revision

01'thl:!Ml'n is an acclll-'tabll:!method (II"

t;olllpliance if the revision is ,-,ppruved by the

Milnagllr. Seatlle ACO.

No Alternative Inspections, inspection

Intervals, ur Critical Design Configurat.ion

Control Limitations (mCel.sj

(j) After au:ollll-'lishiog the applicable

actions specified in paragraphs (gJ. (h). and

(i) of thb; An. no alternative inspedions.

inspection inlervals. OfCOCCLs lllilYbe used

unh ..'Ss the inspections. inlervals. or COCCLs

are part of il laler revision of }{cvision March

2008 of the MPD that is approved by the

Manager. Seallle ALU: or unless tha

illSp",ctiollS, intervws. or CI)(:CLs uro

upprovt!rl as an AMOC in ilccorrlance with

thlJ procedures specified in panlgraph (I) of

this All

Credit for Actions Done According to

Previous Revisions of the I\1PD

(k) Actions dOlll::!beforo tho erl"et:tiv,,"d<lle

DI"Ihis AD ill ac(;ol·dance wilh Section iJ 01'

tho U()lling i'47--400 MPD Docullllml.

D521U400-9. j{evision 23, dated Man:h 2005:

Kevisiull 24. dated June Z006: Revision

November 2000: Revision U"e(Jmber 2005;

I{evision De':emblOr2006 1{1:}(~lVisionMay

2007: i{evlsion O(;tober 2007; Of I{evision

November 2007; are acceptable for

complian(;e with the corresponding

rt!qu.irements of paragr-dphs Ig) and (h) of this

AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(AMOCs)

(1)(1)The Manager. Seattle ,\CO. h(ls the

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD. if

requesled in accordance with the procedures

found in 14 CFJ.t 39.19.

(2) To ft.'quesl ~ different method of

compliance or a dilIerent compliance time

fur Ihis AD. follow the procedures in 14 CFJ.t

3'1.19, I:lcfore using any approved AMOC on

any ~irplan" tll which the AMOC ~ppJil:ls.

nOlify your appropriate principal inspnctor

[I'll in thu FAA Flight Standards Oistril;t

OITicl:l{I,'SODL01"liickiug a PI, your 10l;al

I'SUO.

Mall:lrial Incorporated by Referenl:1':

(m) You musl use Uoeing Temporary

Revision 09-010, dllted March 2008. to the

Hoeing 747-400 Maintenanl;l:l Planning Datil

[MPD) Document. DG21U400-9. 10 do the

actions required by lhis AD, LLfilesHthe AD

specifies othl:lrwls~. LJouing'I'Hll1pOr,uy

Revision 09-010 is PLlblish",d as Se(;lion !) u1"

the Boeiog 747-400 Mainlellance Planning

Oala (MPD) Docullll;ul. D621U400-9.

I{evlslon March 2008.

(1) The Director of th!~Federal Kegister

approved the incorporation by reference of

this service information under 5 U.S.c.

552(aJ and 1 CFR purtSt.

(2) For service information identified in

this AD. contact Hoeing Commercial

Airpfanes, 1'.0_ Box 3707. 5eaule,

Washington 98124-2207.

{3JYou may review cupies oflhe service

information incorporatlld by rderence at the

FAA. Tmllsport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue SW.. Renton. Washington; or at

the Nalion'll Archives and Records

Administration (NAI{A). For Information on

the ilv<lilability of this material at NARA, call

202-741-6030, or go to: hllp:/1

""''lv.uTChi vcs.govlfcdmtll jegislerl

cod~_ofJederul J08uloi iOllS/

ib,._/ocaJions.h/11Jl.

Issued in Kenton. Washington. Oil April 2B.

2008.

Ali Hahrami,

,'vluJluge1", Transport AirpicllliJ Directoratc,

Aircrajl CVl'lijication Sel'vice.

[F}{Oor;. E8-9897 Filer!S-7-08; B:45 ami

BILLING COOE 4'Jle--13-f'

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Dockel No. FAA-2007-Q1J45; DIrectorate

Identifier 2007-NM-169-AD; Amendment

39-t5501; AD 2008-09-201

RIN 212Q-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400,

and 747-400D Series Airplanes

AGENCY;Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:Final rule.

SUMMARY;We are adopting a new

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain

Boeing Model 747-200F, 747-300. 747-

400, and 747-400D series airplanes.

This AD requires a detailed inSpllctiun

to detect missing fasteners from the

sheOr dip 1:Ita cert[)in stub frunliJ 10

auxiliary sill joint, and ~lpplicable

related illvesligative and corrective

actions. This AD results from repOrts of

missing fllsteners from the shear clip of

the stub frame to auxiliary sill joiut and

cracking of the adjacent exlerior skill

and internal doubler. We are issuing

this AD to ensure that fasteners are

installed in the sbear dip oflhe stub

frame to auxiliary sill joint. Missing

fasteners could result in cracks in Ihe

adjacent exterior skin and internal

doubler, which can propagate and result

in loss of structural integrity and

sudden in-flight decompression of the

airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective June 12,

2008.

The Director of the Federal Register

approved the incorporalion by reference

ofa cert<lin publication listed in this AD

as of June 12, 2008_

ADDRESSES: For serviC(J inforrnalion

identified ill this AD, contact Boeing

C0n1111erciul Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707,

SeCittle, Washington 98124--2207.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on

the Internet at http://

wLVw.regulolions_gov; or in persoll at the

DOl:ket Management Facility between 9

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

!·'riday, except Federnl holidays. The AD

docket contains this AD, lhe regulatory

evaluation. any comments received. and

other information_ The address for tht!

Docket Office (telephone B0D-647-5527)

is the Document Management Vacilily.

U.S. Department. of Trans pori at ion.

Docket Operations, M-30, Wesl

Building Ground Floor. Room W12-140,

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE..

Wl1shington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT:Ivan

Li. Aerospace Engineer. Airframe

Branch, ANM-120S, FAA. Scutt In

Aircraft Cert.ificalion OUice. 1601 Lind