Document ID: FAA-2013-0304-0010
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Company Airplanes
Posted Date: 2013-12-30T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 250 (Monday, December 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79289-79292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30469]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0304; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-005-AD; 
Amendment 39-17713; AD 2013-26-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 
The Boeing Company Model 747-400, -400D, and -400F series airplanes. 
This AD was prompted by a report of water leakage into the main deck 
cargo wire integration unit (WIU). The water flowed from the main deck 
floor panels, through disbonded seams in the aft main equipment center 
(MEC) drip shield gutter, then onto the WIU. This AD requires cleaning 
the aft MEC drip shield gutter; and doing a one-time general visual 
inspection for disbonded seams, and repair if necessary. This AD also 
requires installing a fiberglass reinforcement overcoat to the 
underside of the bonded seams of the aft MEC drip shield gutters. We 
are issuing this AD to prevent water penetration into the MEC, which 
could result in the loss of flight critical systems.

DATES: This AD is effective February 3, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 3, 
2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P. 
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 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.

[[Page 79290]]

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0304; 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 AD, the 
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. 
The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket 
Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

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; phone: (425) 917-6596; fax: (425) 917-6590; email 
francis.smith@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to the specified products. The 
NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2013 (78 FR 21571). 
The NPRM proposed to require removing the cargo liner support; cleaning 
the aft MEC drip shield gutter; and doing a one-time general visual 
inspection for disbonded seams, and repair if necessary. The NPRM also 
proposed to require installing a fiberglass reinforcement overcoat to 
the top surface of the aft MEC drip shield gutters and installing the 
cargo liner support.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 
(78 FR 21571, April 11, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Clarify Area for Installing Fiberglass Reinforcement 
Overcoat

    United Airlines (UAL), British Airways (BAB), and Boeing asked that 
the area for installing the fiberglass reinforcement overcoat, as 
specified in paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM (78 FR 21571, April 11, 
2013), be changed for clarification. Boeing stated that the description 
of the area is not accurate. UAL stated that the location for 
installing the fiberglass reinforcement overcoat ``to the top surface'' 
of the aft main equipment center (MEC) drip shield gutters, as 
specified in paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM, is different than the area 
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 
2012. UAL noted that the referenced service information specifies 
installing the fiberglass reinforcement overcoat ``to the underside 
surface'' of the aft MEC drip shield gutters. BAB stated that Figure 4, 
Sheets 2 and 3 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 
22, 2012, show the installation from underneath the aft MEC drip shield 
gutter; and added that Figure 4, Step 3, Note (c) specifies to 
``Install the prepared BMS 9-3 fiberglass impregnated fabric to the 
underside of the bonded seams.''
    We agree with the commenters' requests to clarify the location for 
installing the fiberglass reinforcement overcoat. Figure 4, Sheets 2 
and 3 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 
2012, provide clarity. Therefore, we have changed the SUMMARY section 
and paragraph (g)(2) of this final rule to specify the location in 
Figure 4, Step 3, Note (c) for installation of the fiberglass 
reinforcement overcoat to ``the underside of the bonded seams.''

Request To Clarify the Unsafe Condition

    Boeing asked that we clarify the second sentence of the reason for 
the unsafe condition, as specified in the SUMMARY section and paragraph 
(e) of the NPRM (78 FR 21571, April 11, 2013), from ``The water flowed 
from the drip shield through disbonded floor seams into the aft . . .'' 
to ``The water flowed from the main deck floor panels, through 
disbonded seams in the aft . . ..'' Boeing stated that, as specified, 
the description is not accurate based on reports received from 
operators.
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We 
have clarified the reason for the unsafe condition in the SUMMARY 
section and paragraph (e) of this final rule accordingly.

Request To Add a Note Allowing Different Access for Different 
Structural Configurations

    UAL asked that we include a note specifying that accessing certain 
areas to accomplish the actions proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 21571, 
April 11, 2013) may vary due to configuration differences. UAL stated 
that including such a note would save operators a lot of time dealing 
with variances in the quantity of fasteners called out in the service 
information versus those on the airplane. UAL noted that for AD 2012-
15-10, Amendment 39-17139 (77 FR 46943, August 7, 2012), regarding the 
MEC drip shield, it already has six alternative methods of compliance 
(AMOCs) due to these variances.
    We agree with the commenter's request. Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 2012, does not identify all 
possible structural configurations of the affected airplanes when 
gaining access to the repair area. The resulting AMOC requests and 
review of those requests creates a high volume of work and time, which 
impacts both operators and the FAA. These deviations do not directly 
impact the specified corrective actions.
    We have changed the language in the SUMMARY and Costs of Compliance 
sections, as well as paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this final rule, 
to remove the reference to the cargo liner support. We have also added 
a sentence to the introductory text of paragraph (g) of this AD to 
specify that accomplishing paragraphs 3.B.1. and 3.B.4. of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
25A3613, dated June 22, 2012, is optional.

Request To Ground All Affected Airplanes

    One anonymous commenter reiterated the actions proposed by the NPRM 
(78 FR 21571, April 11, 2013), and stated that he found it troubling 
that we are asking the public ``(presumably experts)'' to comment on a 
safety issue with a Boeing design, yet these airplanes have not been 
grounded until the notice and comment period ends. The commenter added 
that The Boeing Company must comply with strict FAA guidelines, as 
outlined by the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. App. 1301 et 
seq.). The commenter noted that, crucial to this particular 
airworthiness directive, the FAA encourages the development of ``next 
wave'' civil aeronautics, new aviation technology, and continued safety 
enhancements of all domestically flown commercial airplanes. The 
commenter also added that participation in the notice and comment 
period is in line with the FAA's mission. The commenter concluded that 
Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil airplanes 
in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and 
procedures.
    We infer that the commenter finds we lack sufficient information to 
determine a compliance time for correcting this unsafe condition before 
receiving public comment. We also infer the commenter concluded that 
affected airplanes are exposed to an unacceptably high risk requiring 
immediate action to remove

[[Page 79291]]

them from service until more information is obtained through public 
comments. We do not agree. Before posting an NPRM for public comment, 
we must perform an investigative review of the subject concern or 
unsafe condition first obtained from operator reports. After gathering 
this information from operators and the manufacturer, we make a 
determination on the associated risk of the unsafe condition and 
coordinate with the manufacturer on a compliance time and corrective 
action for all affected airplanes. Airplanes are grounded in rare cases 
where it is determined that the unsafe condition has an immediate risk 
to public safety. The unsafe condition in this AD does not meet these 
criteria.
    Additionally, agencies welcome and consider all relevant rulemaking 
comments received from the public. The purpose of public participation 
is more to obtain comments from interested parties, not necessarily 
``experts'' in the aviation industry. This is in line with the 
democratic, legal, and management principles behind good government and 
effective rulemaking. Further information on these principles can be 
found on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov, under ``docs/
Factsheet--Public--Comments--Make--a--Difference.pdf.'' We have made no 
change to this final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that 
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or 
increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 79 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clean gutter, inspect.................  1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85          $6,715
                                         hour = $85.
Install fiberglass reinforcement......  1 work-hour x $85 per                100             185          14,615
                                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this 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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 
13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2013-26-04 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17713; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0304; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-005-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 3, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-400, -400D, and 
-400F series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified 
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 2012.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association 
(ATA) of America Code 25: Equipment/Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of water leakage into the main 
deck cargo wire integration unit (WIU). The water flowed from the 
main deck floor panels, through disbonded seams in the aft main 
equipment center (MEC) drip shield gutter, then onto the WIU. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent water penetration into the MEC, which 
could result in the loss of flight critical systems.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Removal/Cleaning/Inspection/Repair if Necessary/Installations

    Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD: Do the 
actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 2012. Accomplishing 
paragraphs 3.B.1. and 3.B.4. of the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 2012, is 
optional.

[[Page 79292]]

    (1) Clean the aft MEC drip shield gutter, and do a general 
visual inspection for disbonded seams; repair before further flight 
if any seam disbonding is found.
    (2) Install a fiberglass reinforcement overcoat to the underside 
of the bonded seams of the aft MEC drip shield gutters.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
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 (i) of this AD. Information may be 
emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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.

(i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, 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; phone: (425) 917-6596; fax: (425) 
917-6590; email francis.smith@faa.gov.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3613, dated June 22, 
2012.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this 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.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 13, 2013.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-30469 Filed 12-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P