43648 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–2464; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–195–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) 2013–22– 

11, which applies to certain The Boeing 

Company Model 747–400 and –400D 

series airplanes. AD 2013–22–11 

currently requires repetitive inspections 

to detect cracks in the floor panel 

attachment fastener holes of certain 

upper deck floor beam upper chords, 

repetitive inspections, corrective actions 

if necessary, and replacement of the 

upper deck floor beam upper chords. 

Since we issued AD 2013–22–11, we 

received a report that certain fastener 

holes in the upper deck floor beam 

upper chords may not have been 

inspected in accordance with AD 2013– 

22–11. This proposed AD would add 

additional repetitive inspections for 

cracks for certain airplanes, and 

corrective actions if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking in certain upper chords 

of the upper deck floor beam, which 

could become large and cause the floor 

beams to become severed and result in 

rapid decompression or reduced 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 8, 2015. 

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. It is also available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

2464. 

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–2015– 

2464; 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 

(ACO), 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 proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2015–2464; Directorate Identifier 

2014–NM–195–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 widespread fatigue 

damage (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 

structural 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 (DAH) 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 action 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Proposed Rules 43649 

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. 

On October 17, 2013, we issued AD 

2013–22–11, Amendment 39–17643 (78 

FR 66254, November 5, 2013), for 

certain The Boeing Company Model 

747–400 and –400D series airplanes. AD 

2013–22–11 requires repetitive 

inspections to detect cracks in the floor 

panel attachment fastener holes of the 

Section 41 upper deck floor beam upper 

chords, and corrective actions if 

necessary; repetitive post-repair and 

post-modification inspections, and 

corrective actions if necessary; 

repetitive inspections of Section 44 

upper deck floor beam upper chords, 

and corrective actions if necessary; 

repetitive post-repair and postmodification inspections, and corrective 

actions if necessary; and replacement of 

the upper deck floor beam upper 

chords. AD 2013–22–11 superseded AD 

2009–10–06, Amendment 39–15901 (74 

FR 22424, May 13, 2009). AD 2013–22– 

11 resulted from an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that certain upper chords of 

the upper deck floor beam are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We 

issued AD 2013–22–11 to detect and 

correct fatigue cracking in certain upper 

chords of the upper deck floor beam, 

which could become large and cause the 

floor beams to become severed and 

result in rapid decompression or 

reduced controllability of the airplane. 

Actions Since AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013), Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013), an evaluation by the 

DAH indicated that certain fastener 

holes in the upper deck floor beam 

upper chords in Section 41, that were 

plugged or re-used during the 

conversion to a Boeing Converted 

Freighter, may not have been inspected 

in accordance with the requirements of 

AD 2013–22–11, because the locations 

may be hidden and not recognized as 

inspection locations. We have 

determined that, for certain airplanes, it 

is necessary to add additional repetitive 

inspections for cracks in the Section 41 

upper deck floor beam upper chords 

and repair if necessary. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014. The service 

information describes procedures for 

upper deck floor beam upper chord 

inspection and repair at floor panel 

attachment fastener holes in section 41 

and section 42. This service information 

is reasonably available because the 

interested parties have access to it 

through their normal course of business 

or by the means identified in the 

ADDRESSES section of this NPRM. It is 

also available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

2464. 

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 

2013–22–11, Amendment 39–17643 (78 

FR 66254, November 5, 2013), this 

proposed AD would retain all of the 

requirements of AD 2013–22–11. Those 

requirements are referenced in the 

service information identified 

previously, which, in turn, is referenced 

in paragraphs (g) through (k) of this 

proposed AD. This proposed AD would 

add new actions. This proposed AD 

would require accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information identified previously, 

except as discussed under ‘‘Differences 

Between this Proposed AD and the 

Service Information.’’ Refer to this 

service information for information on 

the procedures and compliance times. 

In addition, the phrase ‘‘corrective 

actions’’ might be 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. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014, 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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 84 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 (retained actions 

from AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 

FR 66254, November 5, 

2013)).

Up to 309 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $26,265 per inspection cycle.

$0 Up to $26,265 per inspection 

cycle.

Up to $2,206,260 per inspection cycle. 

New Inspections ..................... Up to 241 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $20,485.

$0 Up to $20,485 per inspection 

cycle.

Up to $1,720,740 per inspection cycle. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide a cost 

estimate for the repair or modification 

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, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

43650 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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 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) 

2013–22–11, Amendment 39–17643 (78 

FR 66254, November 5, 2013), and 

adding the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2015–2464; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–195–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by September 8, 2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013). 

(c) Applicability 

(1) This AD applies to The Boeing 

Company Model 747–400 and –400D series 

airplanes, certificated in any category, as 

identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014. 

(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 certain upper chords of the upper deck 

floor beam are subject to widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). This AD was also prompted 

by reports that certain fastener holes in the 

upper deck floor beam upper chords in 

Section 41, may not have been inspected in 

accordance with AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013). We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct fatigue cracking in 

certain upper chords of the upper deck floor 

beam, which could become large and cause 

the floor beams to become severed and result 

in rapid decompression or reduced 

controllability of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Section 41—Repetitive Inspections, and 

Corrective Actions 

At the applicable time specified in table 1 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, do open 

hole or surface high frequency eddy current 

inspections for cracking of the floor panel 

attachment holes in the upper deck floor 

beam upper chords, in accordance with Part 

1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014. If any 

crack is found during any inspection, before 

further flight, repair in accordance with Part 

2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, or repair 

using a method approved in accordance with 

procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this 

AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the 

applicable time specified in table 1 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, until an 

action specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) 

of this AD is done. 

(1) Doing a repair as a hole modification in 

accordance with Part 2 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (m)(2) of this AD, terminates the 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD for the modified hole only. 

(2) Doing a modification in accordance 

with Figure 5 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014, except as required by paragraph (m)(2) 

of this AD, terminates the inspections 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD for the 

modification only. 

(h) Section 41—Repetitive Inspection of 

Repaired or Modified Holes, and Corrective 

Actions 

For airplanes on which a repair specified 

in Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2688 is done or a modification specified 

in Figure 5 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688 is done: At the applicable time 

specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (m)(3) of this AD, do open hole or 

surface high frequency eddy current 

inspections for cracking of repaired or 

modified floor panel attachment holes in the 

upper deck floor beam upper chords, in 

accordance with Part 1 or Part 3, as 

applicable, of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014. If any crack is found during any 

inspection required by this paragraph, before 

further flight, repair using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat 

the inspections thereafter at the applicable 

time specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014. 

(i) Section 44—Repetitive Inspection, and 

Corrective Actions 

For airplanes identified in Group 1 in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014: At the 

applicable time specified in table 3 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (m)(4) of this AD, do 

open hole or surface high frequency eddy 

current inspections of the floor panel 

attachment holes in the upper deck floor 

beam upper chords, in accordance with Part 

4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014. If any 

crack is found during any inspection 

required by this paragraph, before further 

flight, repair in accordance with Part 5 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (m)(2) of this AD. Repeat the 

inspections thereafter at the applicable time 

specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014, until an action specified in 

paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD is done. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Proposed Rules 43651 

(1) Doing a repair as a hole modification in 

accordance with Part 5 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (m)(2) of this AD, terminates the 

inspections required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD for that modified hole only. 

(2) Doing a modification in accordance 

with Figure 21 of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (m)(2) of this AD, terminates the 

inspections required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD for that modified hole only. 

(j) Section 44—Repetitive Inspection of 

Repaired or Modified Holes, and Corrective 

Actions 

For airplanes identified in Group 1 in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, on which 

a repair specified in Part 5 of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688 is done or a 

modification specified in Figure 21 of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688 is done: 

At the applicable time specified in table 4 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (m)(3) of this AD, do 

open hole or surface high frequency eddy 

current inspections of repaired or modified 

floor panel attachment holes in the upper 

deck floor beam upper chords, in accordance 

with Part 4 or Part 6, as applicable, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014. If any crack is found 

during any inspection by this paragraph, 

before further flight, repair using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat 

the inspections thereafter at the applicable 

time specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014. 

(k) Section 41 and 44—Replacement and 

Post-Replacement Repetitive Inspections 

At the applicable time specified in table 5 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014: Replace 

all upper deck floor beam upper chords, in 

accordance with Part 7 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014. Within 20,000 flight 

cycles after doing the replacement, do the 

inspections specified in paragraphs (g) and (i) 

of this AD, as applicable. Thereafter, repeat 

the inspections required by paragraphs (g) 

and (i) of this AD, as applicable, at the times 

specified in paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD. 

(l) Section 41—Repetitive Inspection of 

Plugged or Re-Used Holes, and Corrective 

Actions 

For airplanes identified in Group 2 in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014: At the 

applicable time specified in table 6 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (m)(1) of this AD, at 

all plugged or re-used floor panel attachment 

holes in the affected floor beam upper 

chords, do a surface high frequency eddy 

current inspection of the upper deck floor 

beam upper chords and detailed inspection 

for cracks on the vertical flange, in 

accordance with Part 8 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, 

dated August 21, 2014. If any crack is found 

during any inspection required by this 

paragraph, before further flight, repair using 

a method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this 

AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the 

applicable time specified in table 6 of 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 2, dated August 21, 2014. 

(m) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 2 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 

747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated August 21, 

2014; specifies to contact Boeing for certain 

procedures: Do the specified actions before 

further flight using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (o) of this AD. 

(3) Where table 2 or table 4 of paragraph 

1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, Revision 2, dated 

August 21, 2014, specifies to contact Boeing 

for inspections and compliance times: Before 

further flight, contact the Manager, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), for 

inspections and compliance times and 

accomplish the inspections at the given 

times. 

(4) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 

19, 2012, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after 

the Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,’’ 

this AD requires compliance within the 

specified compliance time after December 10, 

2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013)). 

(n) Credit for Previous Actions 

(1) This paragraph restates the 

requirements of paragraph (o) of AD 2013– 

22–11, Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013), with new paragraph (h). 

This paragraph provides credit for the actions 

required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before 

December 10, 2013 (the effective date of AD 

2013–22–11) using Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2688, dated August 21, 

2008. 

(2) This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraphs (g) through (k) 

of this AD, if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2688, 

Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012, which 

is not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(o) 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 (p)(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) AMOCs approved for AD 2013–22–11, 

Amendment 39–17643 (78 FR 66254, 

November 5, 2013), are approved as AMOCs 

for the corresponding provisions of 

paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD. 

(p) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

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. 

(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; phone: 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 July 15, 

2015. 

Suzanne Masterson, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–17932 Filed 7–22–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS