This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

22596 

Vol. 79, No. 78 

Wednesday, April 23, 2014 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES 

SAFETY BOARD 

10 CFR Part 1703 

Proposed FOIA Fee Schedule Update 

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Board’s 

regulations, the Defense Nuclear 

Facilities Safety Board is publishing its 

proposed Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) Fee Schedule Update and 

solicits comments from interested 

organizations and individual members 

of the public. 

DATES: To be considered, comments 

must be mailed or delivered to the 

address listed below by 5:00 p.m. on or 

before May 23, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed 

fee schedule should be mailed or 

delivered to the Office of the General 

Counsel, Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., 

Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004–2901. 

All comments will be placed in the 

Board’s public files and will be 

available for inspection between 8:30 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday (except on federal holidays), in 

the Board’s Public Reading Room at the 

same address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark T. Welch, General Manager, 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 

625 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700, 

Washington, DC 20004–2901, (202) 694– 

7060. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FOIA 

requires each Federal agency covered by 

the Act to specify a schedule of fees 

applicable to processing of requests for 

agency records. 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)(i). 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1703.107(b)(6) of the 

Board’s regulations, the Board’s General 

Manager will update the FOIA Fee 

Schedule once every 12 months. 

Previous Fee Schedule Updates were 

published in the Federal Register and 

went into effect, most recently, on July 

23, 2012, 77 FR 41258. The Board’s 

proposed fee schedule is consistent with 

the guidance. The components of the 

proposed fees (hourly charges for search 

and review and charges for copies of 

requested documents) are based upon 

the Board’s specific cost. 

Board Action 

Accordingly, the Board proposes to 

establish the following schedule of 

updated fees for services performed in 

response to FOIA requests: 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FOIA SERVICES

[Implementing 10 CFR 1703.107(b)(6)] 

Search or Review Charge ........................................................................ $83.00 per hour. 

Copy Charge (paper) ................................................................................ $.05 per page, if done in-house, or generally available commercial rate 

(approximately $.10 per page). 

Electronic Media ....................................................................................... $5.00 per electronic media. 

Copy Charge (audio and video cassette) ................................................ Actual commercial rates. 

Duplication of DVD ................................................................................... $25.00 for each individual DVD; $16.50 for each duplicate DVD. 

Copy Charge for large documents (e.g., maps, diagrams) ..................... Actual commercial rates. 

Dated: April 17, 2014. 

Mark T. Welch, 

General Manager. 

[FR Doc. 2014–09199 Filed 4–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3670–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0253; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–257–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 747–100B 

SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 747–400, 

747–400D series airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by an 

evaluation by the design approval 

holder (DAH) indicating that the upper 

deck tension ties are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This 

proposed AD would require repetitive 

inspections for cracking in the upper 

deck tension ties, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary; tension tie replacement; and 

post-replacement repetitive inspections 

for cracking in the upper deck tension 

ties, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the upper deck 

tension ties. Severed or disconnected 

tension ties at multiple locations could 

result in rapid decompression and loss 

of structural integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by June 9, 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 78 / Wednesday, April 23, 2014 / Proposed Rules 22597 

& 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, Washington. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0253; 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: 

Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6428; fax: 

425–917–6590; email: 

nathan.p.weigand@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– 

2014–0253; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–257–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

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

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as WFD. As an 

airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, 

and will certainly occur if the airplane 

is operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

catastrophic failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

design approval holders (DAHs) 

establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the 

engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this approach 

is necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

The identified unsafe condition is at 

airplane body station locations 880 to 

1100 where the floor beams were 

replaced with tension ties during 

airplane conversion to special freighter 

or Boeing converted freighter. Tension 

ties have been determined to be 

structure that is susceptible to WFD. 

WFD could cause multiple adjacent 

tension ties to become severed or 

disconnected from the frames, which 

could result in rapid decompression and 

loss of structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2866, dated December 

4, 2013. For information on the 

procedures and compliance times, see 

this service information at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0253. 

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 applies to current 

and future Model 747–100B SUD, 747– 

200B, 747–300, 747–400, 747–400D 

series airplanes converted to special 

freighter or Boeing converted freighter 

configuration. 

This proposed AD would require 

repetitive inspections for cracking in the 

upper deck tension ties, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary; tension tie replacement; and 

post-replacement repetitive inspections 

for cracking in the upper deck tension 

ties, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary; as 

specified in the service information 

identified previously, except as 

discussed under ‘‘Difference Between 

this Proposed AD and the Service 

Information.’’ 

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’’ correct or address any 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
22598 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 78 / Wednesday, April 23, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

condition found. Corrective actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

repairs. 

The FAA worked in conjunction with 

industry, under the Airworthiness 

Directives Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee, to enhance the 

AD system. One enhancement was a 

new process for annotating which steps 

in the service information are required 

for compliance 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. 

Difference Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2866, dated December 4, 2013, 

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 

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 76 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product Cost on U.S. operators 

Inspections (pre-modification and 

post-modification).

Up to 164 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $13,940 per inspection 

cycle.

$0 Up to $13,940 per inspection cycle.Up to 1,059,440 per inspection cycle. 

Modification ....................................... 366 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$31,110.

$0 $31,110 ......................... $2,364,360. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We 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– 

2014–0253; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–257–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by June 9, 

2014. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 78 / Wednesday, April 23, 2014 / Proposed Rules 22599 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 

747–400, and 747–400D series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, as identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, 

dated December 4, 2013. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the upper deck tension ties are subject 

to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the upper deck tension ties. 

Severed or disconnected tension ties at 

multiple locations could result in rapid 

decompression and loss of structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspections, Related Investigative 

Actions, and Corrective Actions 

For airplanes identified as Group 1, 

Configuration 2; and Group 2; in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, dated 

December 4, 2013: Before the accumulation 

of 10,000 flight cycles after conversion to 

special freighter or Boeing converted 

freighter configuration, or within 2,000 flight 

cycles after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later, do the actions 

specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this 

AD, and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2866, dated December 4, 2013, 

except as provided by paragraph (h) of this 

AD. Do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions before further flight. 

Repeat the inspection of the forward and aft 

tension tie channels thereafter at the 

applicable time and intervals specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, dated 

December 4, 2013. 

(1) At each tension tie station from 880 to 

1100: Do a detailed inspection for cracks in 

the forward and aft tension tie channels. 

(2) At each tension tie station from 880 to 

1100: Do a detailed inspection for cracks in 

the forward and aft tension tie channels, and 

do a surface high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC) inspection for cracks around 

fasteners in the tension tie channels. 

(h) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

If, during accomplishment of the related 

investigative action or inspections required 

by this AD, any cracking is found, and 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, 

dated December 4, 2013, specifies to contact 

Boeing for repair instructions: Before further 

flight, do the repair using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures specified 

in paragraph (k) of this AD. 

(i) Tension Tie Replacement 

After the accumulation of 13,000 total 

flight cycles; but before the accumulation of 

22,000 flight cycles after conversion to 

special freighter or Boeing converted 

freighter configuration, or within 2,000 flight 

cycles after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later: Do the tension tie 

replacement, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, dated 

December 4, 2013, except as provided by 

paragraph (h) of this AD. Accomplishment of 

the actions required by this paragraph 

terminates the inspection requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(j) Post-tension Tie Replacement Inspections, 

Related Investigative Actions, and 

Corrective Actions 

After accomplishing the actions required 

by paragraph (i) of this AD: At the applicable 

time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2866, dated December 4, 

2013, do the actions specified in paragraph 

(j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD; and do all applicable 

related investigative and corrective actions; 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2866, dated December 4, 2013, 

except as provided by paragraph (h) of this 

AD. Do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions before further flight. 

Repeat the applicable inspection of the 

forward and aft tension tie channels 

thereafter at the applicable time and intervals 

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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2866, 

dated December 4, 2013. 

(1) At each tension tie station from 880 to 

1100: Do a detailed inspection for cracks in 

the forward and aft tension tie channels. 

(2) At each tension tie station from 880 to 

1100: Do a detailed inspection for cracks in 

the forward and aft tension tie channels, and 

do a surface HFEC inspection for cracks 

around fasteners in the tension tie channels. 

(k) 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 the 

paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. Information may 

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

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO 

to make those findings. For a repair method 

to be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(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. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Nathan Weigand, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057– 

3356; phone: 425–917–6428; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: nathan.p.weigand@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, Washington. 

For information on the availability of this 

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 14, 

2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–09243 Filed 4–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0252; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–213–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 The 

Boeing Company Model 707 airplanes, 

Model 720 and 720B series airplanes, 

Model 727 airplanes, and Model 737– 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS