Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38797 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0430; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–083–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 all The 

Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes. 

This proposed AD was prompted by a 

report of a rotary actuator for the trailing 

edge (TE) flap that had slipped relative 

to its mating reaction ring, which is 

attached to the flap support rib. This 

proposed AD would require repetitive 

inspections for corrosion of the fixed 

ring gear and reaction ring splines of the 

rotary actuator assembly for each 

support position, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct reaction ring gears 

and rotary actuator gears from becoming 

disengaged with flaps extended and 

causing an uncommanded roll due to 

flap blowback, overload, or flap 

departure from the airplane, which 

could compromise safe flight and 

landing of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 25, 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 by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0430; 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: 

Allen Rauschendorfer, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6487; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Allen.Rauschendorfer@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0430; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–083–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 have received a report of a TE flap 

rotary actuator that had slipped relative 

to its mating reaction ring, which is 

attached to the flap support rib. This 

occurred on a Model 767–300ER 

airplane that was delivered in June 1997 

and had accumulated approximately 

79,000 total flight hours and 14,000 total 

flight cycles in service. Removal of the 

reaction ring and actuator revealed that 

the mating splines were severely 

corroded. The manufacturer determined 

that, if the corrosion were to affect the 

mating splines on either surface 

(actuator or ring) to the point where 

they could no longer effectively engage, 

the actuator would be prone to possible 

slippage. Due to the similarity of the 

design, the potential condition could 

develop at multiple flap supports. 

Should degradation reach the point 

where both actuators on a single flap 

were unable to react to the torsion 

created by air loads, an uncommanded 

flap retraction, or blowback could occur. 

The condition of uncommanded roll 

with flaps extended, due to flap 

blowback, overload, or flap departure 

from the airplane, could compromise 

safe flight and landing of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–27A0229, dated March 4, 

2014. For information on the procedures 

and compliance times, see this service 

information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0430. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the repetitive inspections 

for corrosion of the fixed ring gear and 

reaction ring splines of the rotary 

actuator assembly for each support 

position, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary, specified 

in the service information described 

previously. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ are actions that correct or 

address any condition found. Corrective 

actions in an AD could include, for 

example, repairs. 

Explanation of ‘‘RC’’ Steps in Service 

Information 

The FAA worked in conjunction with 

industry, under the Airworthiness 

Directive Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee, to enhance the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38798 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

AD system. One enhancement was a 

new process for annotating which steps 

in the service information are required 

for compliance (RC) with an AD. 

Differentiating these steps from other 

tasks in the service information is 

expected to improve an owner’s/

operator’s understanding of crucial AD 

requirements and help provide 

consistent judgment in AD compliance. 

The actions specified in the service 

information described previously 

include steps that are labeled as RC 

(required for compliance) because these 

steps have a direct effect on detecting, 

preventing, resolving, or eliminating an 

identified unsafe condition. 

As noted in the specified service 

information, steps labeled as RC must be 

done to comply with the proposed AD. 

However, steps that are not labeled as 

RC are recommended. Those steps that 

are not labeled as RC may be deviated 

from, done as part of other actions, or 

done using accepted methods different 

from those identified in the service 

information without obtaining approval 

of an alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC), provided the steps labeled as 

RC can be done and the airplane can be 

put back in a serviceable condition. Any 

substitutions or changes to steps labeled 

as RC will require approval of an 

AMOC. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 389 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

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

Inspection ............ 60 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$5,100 per inspection cycle.

$0 $5,100 per inspection cycle. ........ $1,983,900 per inspection cycle. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary repairs that would be 

required based on the results of the 

proposed inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these repairs: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

Actuator repair ............................. 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 per actuator ........................... $0 $340 per actuator. 

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), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0430; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–083–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by August 25, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 767–200, –300, –300F, and 

–400ER series airplanes, certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 57, Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report of a 

trailing edge (TE) flap rotary actuator that 

had slipped relative to its mating reaction 

ring, which is attached to the flap support 

rib. We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct reaction ring gears and rotary actuator 

gears from becoming disengaged with flaps 

extended and causing an uncommanded roll 

due to flap blowback, overload, or flap 

departure from the airplane, which could 

compromise safe flight and landing of the 

airplane. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38799 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections, Related 

Investigative Actions, and Corrective 

Actions 

Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this 

AD, at the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 767–27A0229, dated 

March 4, 2014: Do a detailed inspection for 

corrosion of the rotary actuator assembly 

fixed ring gear and reaction ring splines for 

each support position; and do all applicable 

related investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–27A0229, dated March 

4, 2014. Do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions before 

further flight. Repeat the inspection of the 

rotary actuator assembly fixed ring gear and 

reaction ring splines for each support 

position thereafter at the applicable intervals 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–27A0229, 

dated March 4, 2014. 

(h) Exception to the Requirements of 

Paragraph (g) of This AD 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–27A0229, 

dated March 4, 2014, specifies a compliance 

time ‘‘after the original issue date of this 

service bulletin,’’ this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time ‘‘after the effective date of this AD.’’ 

(i) 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 (j) 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) If the service information contains steps 

that are labeled as RC (Required for 

Compliance), those steps must be done to 

comply with this AD; any steps that are not 

labeled as RC are recommended. Those steps 

that are not labeled as RC may be deviated 

from, done as part of other actions, or done 

using accepted methods different from those 

identified in the specified service 

information without obtaining approval of an 

AMOC, provided the steps labeled as RC can 

be done and the airplane can be put back in 

a serviceable condition. Any substitutions or 

changes to steps labeled as RC require 

approval of an AMOC. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Allen Rauschendorfer, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6487; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: Allen.Rauschendorfer@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

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

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

may view this referenced service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 26, 

2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16004 Filed 7–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0429; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–039–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 747–400 

and 747–400F series airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by reports 

of cracking in the main equipment 

center (MEC) drip shield and exhaust 

plenum. This proposed AD would 

require installing a fiberglass reinforcing 

overcoat on the MEC drip shield. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent water 

penetration into the MEC, which could 

result in an electrical short and 

potential loss of several functions 

essential for safe flight. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 25, 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 by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0429; 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: 

Francis Smith, Aerospace Engineer, 

Cabin Safety and Environmental 

Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone: 425–917–6596; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Francis.Smith@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS