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

58901 

Vol. 73, No. 196 

Wednesday, October 8, 2008 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1072; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–109–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B 

SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 

747–300, 747–400, 747SR, and 747SP 

Series 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 

Boeing Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747– 

100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747– 

200F, 747–300, 747–400, 747SR, and 

747SP series airplanes. This proposed 

AD would require inspecting for skin 

cracks at the shear tie end fastener 

locations of the fuselage frames, and 

repair if necessary. This proposed AD 

results from a wide-spread fatigue 

damage assessment of Model 747 

airplanes. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct cracks in the fuselage 

skin that can propagate and grow, 

resulting in a loss of structural integrity 

and a sudden decompression of the 

airplane during flight. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 24, 

2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

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 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan 

Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6437; 

fax (425) 917–6590. 

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–2008–1072; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–109–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 

As part of a recent wide-spread 

fatigue damage (WFD) assessment of 

Boeing Model 747 airplanes, the 

manufacturer revealed that an 

inspection for skin cracks at certain 

shear tie end fastener locations of the 

fuselage frames is necessary. This is one 

of the structural areas determined by 

analysis and fleet history to be 

susceptible to WFD and requires service 

action in the form of inspections and/or 

a modification. Cracks in the fuselage 

skin can propagate and grow, resulting 

in loss of structural integrity and a 

sudden decompression of the airplane 

during flight. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2682, dated 

May 8, 2008. The service bulletin 

describes procedures for an external 

detailed inspection, or an alternative 

external high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC) inspection, for skin cracks at the 

shear tie end fastener locations of the 

fuselage frames between Station (STA) 

540 to 980 (STA 780 on 747SP 

airplanes), Stringers 23 through 47 on 

the left and right sides, and repair if 

necessary. If no skin crack is found, the 

applicable inspection is repeated. If any 

skin crack is found, the crack must be 

repaired, as specified in the 747 

Structural Repair Manual (SRM). If any 

crack is found in an SRM skin repair, 

the service bulletin recommends 

contacting Boeing for repair data. 

The compliance time for the external 

detailed inspections and the alternative 

external HFEC inspections is before 

22,000 total flight cycles or within 2,000 

flight cycles after the date on the service 

bulletin, whichever occurs later. If no 

skin crack is found during the external 

detailed inspection, the inspection is 

repeated within 3,000 flight cycles after 

the initial inspection is done, and 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 

3,000 flight cycles. If no skin crack is 

found during the alternative external 

HFEC inspection, the inspection is 

repeated within 6,000 flight cycles after 

the initial inspection is done, and 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 

6,000 flight cycles. If any crack is found 

in the skin or skin repair during any 

inspection, the repair is done before 

further flight. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all relevant information and 

determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 


dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
58902 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

develop in other products of the same 

type designs. This proposed AD would 

require accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information 

described previously, except as 

discussed under ‘‘Differences Between 

Proposed AD and Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between Proposed AD and 

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: 

• Using a method that we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Delegation Option Authorization 

Organization whom we have authorized 

to make those findings. 

Although the service bulletin 

specifies that the repetitive inspections 

are optional, this proposed AD requires 

the repetitive inspections. We find 

repeating the inspections at regular 

intervals will ensure an acceptable level 

of safety for all airplanes affected by the 

proposed AD. This difference has been 

coordinated with Boeing. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 147 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 30 work-hours for the 

detailed inspection, or 49 work hours 

for the HFEC inspection, per product, to 

comply with this proposed AD. The 

average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. 

Based on these figures, we estimate the 

cost of this proposed AD to the U.S. 

operators to be $352,800 or $576,240, or 

$2,400 or 3,920 per product. 

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), and 

3. 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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, 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 AD: 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–1072; 

Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–109–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

November 24, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– 

100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 

747–200C, 747–200F, 747–300, 747–400, 

747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, 

certificated in any category; as identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2682, 

dated May 8, 2008. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a wide-spread 

fatigue damage assessment of Model 747 

airplanes. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct cracks in the fuselage skin that 

can propagate and grow, resulting in a loss 

of structural integrity and sudden 

decompression of the airplane during flight. 

Compliance 

(e) Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

Inspections/Repair 

(f) Except as provided by paragraphs (g) 

and (h) of this AD: At the applicable 

compliance times specified in paragraph 1.E. 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2682, dated May 8, 2008, do an external 

detailed inspection or external high 

frequency eddy current inspection for skin 

cracks at the shear tie end fastener locations 

of the fuselage frames, and repair any skin 

cracks before further flight, by accomplishing 

all of the applicable actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. Repeat the applicable inspection 

thereafter at the applicable interval specified 

in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin. 

Exceptions to the Service Bulletin 

(g) Where paragraph 1.E. of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2682, dated May 8, 

2008, specifies counting the compliance time 

from ‘‘* * * the date on this service 

bulletin,’’ this AD requires counting the 

compliance time from the effective date of 

this AD. 

(h) If any crack is found in a structural 

repair manual skin repair during any 

inspection required by paragraph (f) of this 

AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2682, dated May 8, 2008, specifies to 

contact Boeing for repair: Before further 

flight, repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Ivan 

Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, 

ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6437; fax (425) 917–6590; has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(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 an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 


dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules 58903 

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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 26, 2008. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–23821 Filed 10–7–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1071; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–093–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to certain 

Boeing Model 747 airplanes. The 

existing AD currently requires repetitive 

inspections to detect evidence of wear 

damage in the area at the interface 

between the vertical stabilizer seal and 

fuselage skin, and corrective actions, if 

necessary. The existing AD also 

provides for an optional terminating 

action for the repetitive inspections. For 

all airplanes, this proposed AD would 

require doing repetitive inspections for 

wear damage and cracks of the fuselage 

skin in the interface area of the vertical 

stabilizer seal and fuselage skin, doing 

a detailed inspection for wear damage 

and cracks of the surface of any skin 

repair doubler in the area, and doing 

corrective actions. For airplanes on 

which the fuselage skin has been 

blended to remove wear damage, this 

proposed AD would require doing 

repetitive external detailed inspections 

or high frequency eddy current 

inspections for cracks of the blended 

area of the fuselage skin, and corrective 

actions if necessary. This proposed AD 

results from reports of wear damage on 

airplanes with fewer than 8,000 total 

flight cycles. In addition, there have 

been three reports of skin wear damage 

on airplanes that applied BMS 10–86 

Teflon-filled coating (terminating action 

per AD 2002–26–15). We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct wear 

damage and cracks of the fuselage skin 

in the interface area of the vertical 

stabilizer seal and fuselage skin in 

sections 46 and 48, which could cause 

in-flight depressurization of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 24, 

2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

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 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan 

Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6437; 

fax (425) 917–6590. 

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–2008–1071; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–093–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 December 24, 2002, we issued AD 

2002–26–15, amendment 39–13003 (68 

FR 476, January 6, 2003), for certain 

Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. That 

AD requires repetitive inspections to 

detect evidence of skin wear damage in 

the interface area of the vertical 

stabilizer seal and fuselage skin, and 

corrective actions, if necessary. The 

existing AD also provides for an 

optional terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections. That AD resulted 

from reports of wear damage at the 

interface area of the vertical stabilizer 

seal and fuselage skin in sections 46 and 

48. We issued that AD to detect and 

correct wear damage of the fuselage 

skin, which could result in thinning and 

cracking of the fuselage skin, and 

consequent in-flight depressurization of 

the airplane. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2002–26–15, we 

have received several reports of skin 

wear damage on airplanes with less than 

8,000 total flight cycles. As a result, 

Boeing has revised the initial inspection 

threshold of the repetitive inspections to 

20,000 total flight hours. In addition, 

there have been three reports of skin 

wear damage on airplanes that have 

received the Boeing Material 

Specifications (BMS) 10–86 Teflonfilled coating application (terminating 

action per AD 2002–26–15). We have 

concluded that the one-time Teflonfilled coating application does not 

provide the necessary skin wear 

resistance; therefore, the terminating 

action no longer terminates the 

repetitive inspections. The requirements 

of 2002–26–15 do not adequately 

address the identified unsafe condition 

of that AD. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2478, Revision 

1, dated March 27, 2008. The service 

bulletin describes the following 

procedures: 

• For all airplanes: Do repetitive 

external inspections for wear damage 

and cracks of the fuselage skin at the 

interface area of the vertical stabilizer 


dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS