Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 73457 

proposed revisions in a subsequent final 

rule. Absent significant modifications to 

the proposed revisions requiring 

republication, the NRC will not initiate 

a second comment period on this action 

in the event the direct final rule is 

withdrawn. 

A significant adverse comment is a 

comment where the commenter 

explains why the rule would be 

inappropriate, including challenges to 

the rule’s underlying premise or 

approach, or would be ineffective or 

unacceptable without a change. A 

comment is adverse and significant if: 

(1) The comment opposes the rule and 

provides a reason sufficient to require a 

substantive response in a notice-andcomment process. For example, a 

substantive response is required when: 

(a) The comment causes the NRC staff 

to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position 

or conduct additional analysis; 

(b) The comment raises an issue 

serious enough to warrant a substantive 

response to clarify or complete the 

record; or 

(c) The comment raises a relevant 

issue that was not previously addressed 

or considered by the NRC staff. 

(2) The comment proposes a change 

or an addition to the rule, and it is 

apparent that the rule would be 

ineffective or unacceptable without 

incorporation of the change or addition. 

(3) The comment causes the NRC staff 

to make a change (other than editorial) 

to the rule, CoC, or TS. 

For additional procedural information 

and the regulatory analysis, see the 

direct final rule published in the Rules 

and Regulations section of this issue of 

the Federal Register. 

III. Plain Writing 

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. 

L. 111–274) requires Federal Agencies 

to write documents in a clear, concise, 

and well-organized manner. The NRC 

has written this document to be 

consistent with the Plain Writing Act as 

well as the Presidential Memorandum, 

‘‘Plain Language in Government 

Writing,’’ published June 10, 1998 (63 

FR 31883). The NRC requests comment 

on the proposed rule with respect to the 

clarity and effectiveness of the language 

used. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Criminal penalties, 

Manpower training programs, Nuclear 

materials, Occupational safety and 

health, Penalties, Radiation protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, Spent 

fuel, Whistleblowing. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble and under the authority of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; 

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 

as amended; the Nuclear Waste Policy 

Act of 1982, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 

553; the NRC is proposing to adopt the 

following amendments to part 72 of 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR). 

PART 72—LICENSING 

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 

INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT 

NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL 

RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND 

REACTOR-RELATED GREATER THAN 

CLASS C WASTE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 72 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Atomic Energy Act secs. 51, 53, 

57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 

187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 

2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 

2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2273, 

2282, 2021); Energy Reorganization Act sec. 

201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 

5846, 5851); National Environmental 

Protection Act sec. 102 (42 U.S.C. 4332); 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act secs. 131, 132, 133, 

135, 137, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 

10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 

1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); 

Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109– 

58, 119 Stat. 549 (2005). 

Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act 142(b) and 148(c), 

(d) (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c), (d)). 

Section 72.46 also issued under Atomic 

Energy Act sec. 189 (42 U.S.C. 2239); Nuclear 

Waste Policy Act sec. 134 (42 U.S.C. 10154). 

Section 72.96(d) also issued under Nuclear 

Waste Policy Act sec. 145(g) (42 U.S.C. 

10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act secs. 117(a), 141(h) 

(42 U.S.C. 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subpart K is 

also issued under sec. 218(a) (42 U.S.C. 

10198). 

■ 2. In § 72.214, Certificate of 

Compliance 1014 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel 

storage casks. 

* * * * * 

Certificate Number: 1014. 

Initial Certificate Effective Date: May 

31, 2000. 

Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: 

July 15, 2002. 

Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: 

June 7, 2005. 

Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: 

May 29, 2007. 

Amendment Number 4 Effective Date: 

January 8, 2008. 

Amendment Number 5 Effective Date: 

July 14, 2008. 

Amendment Number 6 Effective Date: 

August 17, 2009. 

Amendment Number 7 Effective Date: 

December 28, 2009. 

Amendment Number 8 Effective Date: 

May 2, 2012, as corrected on November 

16, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML12213A170). 

Amendment Number 9 Effective Date: 

February 19, 2014. 

SAR Submitted by: Holtec 

International, Inc. 

SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis 

Report for the HI–STORM 100 Cask 

System. 

Docket Number: 72–1014. 

Certificate Expiration Date: May 31, 

2020. 

Model Number: HI–STORM 100. 

* * * * * 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day 

of December, 2013. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Michael R. Johnson, 

Acting Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29160 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–1023; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–042–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede 

airworthiness directive (AD) 84–19–01, 

which applies to certain The Boeing 

Company Model 747–100, 747–200B, 

747–200F series airplanes. AD 84–19–01 

requires repetitive inspections for 

cracking of certain tension ties, and 

repair and certain modifications if 

necessary. Since we issued AD 84–19– 

01, the upper deck tension ties have 

been identified as structure that is 

susceptible to widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD), and additional action is 

necessary for certain airplanes to 

adequately address the identified unsafe 

condition on the fleet. This proposed 

AD is intended to complete certain 

mandated programs intended to support 

the airplane reaching its limit of validity 

(LOV) of the engineering data that 

support the established structural 

maintenance program. For certain 

airplanes, this proposed AD would add 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
73458 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

inspections for cracking of the tension 

tie at body station (BS) 760 or 780, 

corrective action if necessary, and 

eventual modification of the tension 

ties. For all airplanes, this proposed AD 

would require repetitive postmodification inspections for cracking of 

the tension tie at BS 760 or 780, and 

corrective action if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

tension tie cracking, which could 

eventually result in in-flight 

depressurization of the airplane and the 

inability to withstand current regulatory 

failsafe loads. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by January 21, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

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 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, 

Denver Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, 26805 East 68th Avenue, Denver, 

CO 80249; phone: 303–342–1086; fax: 

303–342–1088; email: roger.caldwell@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2013–1023; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–042–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 

On September 4, 1984, we issued AD 

84–19–01, Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 

35365, September 17, 1984), for certain 

Boeing Model 747–100, 747–200B, and 

747–200F series airplanes. AD 84–19–01 

requires repetitive inspections for 

cracking of certain tension ties, and 

repair and certain modifications if 

necessary. AD 84–19–01 resulted from a 

crack in the body station 760 tension tie 

as a result of bending due to cabin 

pressurization. We issued AD 84–19–01 

to detect and correct tension tie 

cracking, which could eventually result 

in in-flight depressurization of the 

airplane and the inability to withstand 

current regulatory failsafe loads. 

Actions Since AD 84–19–01, 

Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 35365, 

September 17, 1984), Was Issued 

As described in FAA Advisory 

Circular 120–104 (http://www.faa.gov/

documentLibrary/media/Advisory_

Circular/120-104.pdf), several programs 

have been developed to support 

initiatives that will ensure the 

continued airworthiness of aging 

airplane structure. The last element of 

those initiatives is the requirement to 

establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the 

engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program under 

14 CFR 26.21. This proposed AD is the 

result of an assessment of the previously 

established programs by design 

approval holder during the process of 

establishing the LOV for Model 747– 

100, 747–200B, and 747–200F series 

airplanes. The actions specified in this 

proposed AD are necessary to complete 

certain programs to ensure the 

continued airworthiness of aging 

airplane structure and to support an 

airplane reaching its LOV. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2088, Revision 4, 

dated January 11, 2013. For information 

on the procedures and compliance 

times, see this service information at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for Docket No. FAA–2013–1023. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

Although this proposed AD does not 

explicitly restate the requirements of AD 

84–19–01, Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 

35365, September 17, 1984), this 

proposed AD would retain all of the 

requirements of AD 84–19–01. Those 

requirements are referenced in the 

service information identified 

previously, which, in turn, is referenced 

in paragraphs (g) and (i) of this 

proposed AD. Paragraph (h) of this 

proposed AD would mandate the 

previously optional modification of the 

tension ties. This proposed AD would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

identified previously, except as 

discussed under ‘‘Differences Between 

the Proposed AD and the Service 

Information.’’ 

This proposed AD would require that 

requests for approval of alternative 

methods of compliance (AMOCs) be 

directed to the Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ might 

be used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Corrective actions’’ correct or address 

any condition found. Corrective actions 

in an AD could include, for example, 

repairs. 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

The service bulletin specifies to 

contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 73459 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Explanation of Compliance Time 

The compliance time for the 

modification specified in this proposed 

AD for addressing WFD was established 

to ensure that discrepant structure is 

modified before WFD develops in 

airplanes. Standard inspection 

techniques cannot be relied on to detect 

WFD before it becomes a hazard to 

flight. We will not grant any extensions 

of the compliance time to complete any 

AD-mandated service bulletin related to 

WFD without extensive new data that 

would substantiate and clearly warrant 

such an extension. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 24 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 

estimate the following costs to comply 

with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Number of 

U.S. 

airplanes 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspection .................. 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 per 

inspection cycle.

$0 $255 per inspection 

cycle.

Up to 24 ... $6,120 per inspection cycle. 

Modification ............... 32 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,720 ... $672 $3,392 ...................... Up to 24 ... $81,408. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

individuals. We do not control warranty 

coverage for affected individuals. As a 

result, we have included all costs in our 

cost estimate. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This proposed 

regulation is within the scope of that 

authority because it addresses an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on products identified in this 

rulemaking action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety,Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

84–19–01, Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 

35365, September 17, 1984), and adding 

the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2013–1023; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–042–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by January 21, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 84–19–01, 

Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 35365, 

September 17, 1984). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 747–100, 747–200B, and 747–200F 

series airplanes, certificated in any category, 

as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated January 11, 

2013. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

cracking in the body station (BS) 760 tension 

tie as a result of bending due to cabin 

pressurization. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct tension tie cracking, which 

could result in in-flight depressurization of 

the airplane and the inability to withstand 

current regulatory failsafe loads. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections: Unmodified 

Airplanes 

For airplanes that have not been modified 

as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53–2088: At the applicable time specified in 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2088, 

Revision 4, dated January 11, 2013, except as 

required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, do 

detailed (close visual) and surface high 

frequency eddy current inspections for 

cracking of the tension tie at BS 760 or 780, 

as applicable, and do all applicable 

corrective actions, in accordance with Part I 

of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2088, 

Revision 4, dated January 11, 2013, except as 

required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Do all 

applicable corrective actions before further 

flight. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the 

applicable time specified in Table 1 or Table 

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


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
73460 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2088, 

Revision 4, dated January 11, 2013, until 

accomplishment of the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of this AD. 

(h) Modification 

For airplanes that have not been modified 

as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53–2088: At the applicable time specified in 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2088, 

Revision 4, dated January 11, 2013, except as 

required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, 

modify the tension ties, including doing an 

open-hole high frequency eddy current 

inspection for cracks, as applicable, and all 

applicable corrective actions, in accordance 

with Part III of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated January 11, 

2013, except as required by paragraph (j)(2) 

of this AD. All applicable corrective actions 

must be done before further flight. This 

modification terminates the repetitive 

inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of 

this AD. 

(i) Post-Modification Repetitive Inspections 

For airplanes that have been modified as 

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53– 

2088: At the applicable time in Table 2 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2088, 

Revision 4, dated January 11, 2013, do a 

detailed inspection for cracking of the 

tension tie at BS 760 or 780, and do all 

applicable corrective actions, in accordance 

with Part I of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated January 11, 

2013, except as required by paragraph (j)(2) 

of this AD. Do all applicable corrective 

actions before further flight. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at the applicable time in 

Table 2 specified in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated 

January 11, 2013. Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated 

January 11, 2013, notes that additional postmodification inspections are specified in 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2502; those 

post-modification inspections are required by 

AD 2006–01–07, Amendment 39–14446 (71 

FR 1947, January 12, 2006). 

(j) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated January 11, 

2013, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 4 date of this service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 4, dated January 11, 

2013, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (m) of this AD. 

(k) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions specified in this AD, if those actions 

were performed before the effective date of 

this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2088, Revision 3, dated September 

8, 1994. 

(l) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may 

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

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved for AD 84–19–01, 

Amendment 39–4913 (49 FR 35365, 

September 17, 1984), are approved as 

AMOCs for the corresponding requirements 

of paragraph (g) (the retained detailed 

inspections) and paragraph (i) of this AD, but 

not as AMOCs for the high frequency eddy 

current inspections required by paragraph (g) 

of this AD. 

(n) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer, 

Denver Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

26805 East 68th Avenue, Denver, CO 80249; 

phone: 303–342–1086; fax: 303–342–1088; 

email: Roger.Caldwell@faa.gov. 

(2) For information about AMOCs, contact 

Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

phone: 425–917–6428; fax: 425–917–6590; 

email: Nathan.P.Weigand@faa.gov. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may view this referenced service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 29, 2013. 

John P. Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29128 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0978; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–120–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 767–400ER 

series airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by reports of turbine wheel 

bursts in the air driven pump (ADP) 

turbine gearbox assembly (TGA), which 

resulted in the release of high energy 

fragments. This proposed AD would 

require replacing the existing ADP TGA 

with an improved ADP TGA. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent fragments 

from an uncontained turbine wheel 

burst penetrating the fuselage and 

striking passengers, or penetrating the 

wing-to-body fairing and striking 

ground handling or maintenance 

personnel, causing serious injury. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by January 21, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS