Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F Series Airplanes

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 26 (Monday, February 9, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5920-5922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2584]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-278-AD; Amendment 39-13455; AD 2004-03-11]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Boeing Model 747-200C and -200F series airplanes, 
that requires repetitive inspections to find fatigue cracking in the 
upper chord of the upper deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For 
certain airplanes, this amendment also provides an optional repair/
modification, which extends certain repetitive inspection intervals. 
This action is necessary to find and fix cracking in certain upper deck 
floor beams. Such cracking could extend and sever floor beams at a 
floor panel attachment hole location and could result in rapid 
decompression and consequent loss of controllability of the airplane. 
This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective March 15, 2004.
    The incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of March 15, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules 
Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of 
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Kawaguchi, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
917-6434; fax (425) 917-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 747-200C and 
-200F series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on July 
24, 2003 (68 FR 43688). That action proposed to require repetitive 
inspections to find fatigue cracking in the upper chord of the upper 
deck floor beams, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, that 
action also proposed an optional repair/modification, which would 
extend certain repetitive inspection intervals.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Request To Allow an Additional Adjustment to the Compliance Time

    One commenter requests that adjustments to the compliance time in 
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD should apply not only to the actions 
described in paragraph (a), but also to those described in paragraph 
(b).
    The FAA concurs. We find that relief of the cabin pressure 
differential should be applicable to the compliance thresholds and 
repetitive inspections for the optional action described in paragraph 
(b) as well as those required by paragraph (a). Paragraph (c) of this 
final rule has been changed accordingly.

Request To Expand Provisions for Optional Repair/Modification

    One commenter suggests that paragraph (b) of the proposed AD be 
revised to provide that, if the inspection required by paragraph (a) of 
the proposed AD were done per Part 2 Surface High Frequency Eddy 
Current (HFEC) Inspection Method of the Work Instructions of Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, then accomplishment of the optional 
repair or modification specified in paragraph (b)(1) of the proposed AD 
could be performed. The commenter indicates that repair per paragraph 
(b)(1) of the proposed AD already requires open-hole HFEC inspection of 
the floor panel hole and reworking of the hole, until any cracking is 
removed. It should, therefore, be acceptable to accomplish repair 
following inspection per Part 2 of the Work Instructions of the service 
bulletin.
    The FAA agrees that repair per paragraph (b)(1) of the proposed AD 
requires open hole HFEC inspection of the floor panel hole and re-
working of the hole, until any cracking is removed. We find, therefore, 
that following inspection per Part 2 of the Work Instructions of the 
service bulletin, the repair may be accomplished per paragraph (b)(1). 
We have revised paragraph (b) of the final rule accordingly.

Request To Clarify Location of Fatigue Cracking

    One commenter asks that the Discussion section of the proposed AD 
be revised to refer to STA 420, rather than STA 340. The commenter also 
asks that the language in the Discussion section and in the third 
paragraph of the introduction of the proposed AD be changed from ``* * 
* could extend and sever floor beams adjacent to the body frame * * *'' 
to ``* * * could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel hole 
location * * *.''
    The commenter notes that the Background section of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2439 indicates that fatigue cracking was 
reported at STA 420 rather than at STA 340. The commenter also notes 
that the applicable inspections and possible repair or modification is 
at the upper deck floor beam floor panel attachment holes, which exist 
throughout the span of the floor beams, not just adjacent to where the 
floor beam joins the body frame.
    The FAA partially concurs with the comment. No change is needed in 
the Discussion section, since that section is not restated in this 
final rule. In terms

[[Page 5921]]

of the location where the floor beams can sever, the suggested change 
has been made in the summary section and in the regulatory text of this 
final rule.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public 
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously 
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Change to Labor Rate Estimate

    We have reviewed the figures we have used over the past several 
years to calculate AD costs to operators. To account for various 
inflationary costs in the airline industry, we find it necessary to 
increase the labor rate used in these calculations from $60 per work 
hour to $65 per work hour. The cost impact information, below, reflects 
this increase in the specified hourly labor rate.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 78 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 21 airplanes of U.S. registry 
will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 30 work 
hours per airplane to accomplish the required inspections, and that the 
average labor rate is $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $40,950, or 
$1,950 per airplane, per inspection.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD 
action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (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); 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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of 
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive:

2004-03-11 Boeing: Amendment 39-13455. Docket 2001-NM-278-AD.

    Applicability: Model 747-200C and -200F series airplanes, as 
listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 
2001; certificated in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To find and fix cracking in certain upper deck floor beams, 
which could extend and sever floor beams at a floor panel attachment 
hole location and could result in rapid decompression and consequent 
loss of controllability of the airplane, accomplish the following:

Inspections and Repair

    (a) Before the accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever is later: Do the applicable inspection to find fatigue 
cracking in the upper chord of the upper deck floor beams as 
specified in Part 1 (Open-Hole High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) 
Inspection Method) or Part 2 (Surface HFEC Inspection Method) of the 
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, 
dated July 5, 2001. Do the inspections per the service bulletin.
    (1) If any crack is found, before further flight, repair per 
Part 3 (Repair) of the Work Instructions of the service bulletin; 
except where the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for 
appropriate action, before further flight, repair according to a 
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification 
Office (ACO), FAA; or according to data meeting the type 
certification basis of the airplane approved by a Boeing Company 
Designated Engineering Representative (DER) who has been authorized 
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings. For a repair 
method to be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by 
this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically 
reference this AD. Do the applicable inspection of the repaired area 
per Part 1 of the service bulletin at the applicable time per Part 3 
of the service bulletin. Repeat the applicable inspection at the 
applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin.
    (2) If no crack is found, repeat the applicable inspection per 
paragraph (a) of this AD within the applicable interval per Figure 1 
of the service bulletin. As an option, accomplishment of paragraph 
(b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD, before further flight, extends the 
threshold for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required 
by this paragraph.

Optional Repair/Modification

    (b) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(a) of this AD is done per Part 1 of the Work Instructions of Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated July 5, 2001; and on which 
no cracking is found: Accomplishment of the actions specified in 
either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD extends the threshold 
for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required by 
paragraph (a)(2) of this AD. For airplanes on which the inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD is done per Part 2 of the Work 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, dated 
July 5, 2001; and on which no cracking is found: Accomplishment of 
the actions specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this AD extends the 
threshold for the initiation of the repetitive inspections required 
by paragraph (a)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Do the repair per Part 3 of the service bulletin. At the 
applicable time specified in Table 1 of Part 3 of the service 
bulletin, do the inspection of the repaired area per Part 1 of the 
service bulletin. Repeat the inspection thereafter within the 
applicable interval per Figure 1 of the service bulletin.
    (2) Do the modification of the attachment hole of the floor 
panel per Figure 5 of the service bulletin. Within 10,000 flight 
cycles after accomplishment of the modification, do the inspection 
of the modified area per Part 1 of the service bulletin. Repeat the 
inspection thereafter within the applicable interval per Figure 1 of 
the service bulletin.

Adjustments to Compliance Time: Cabin Differential Pressure

    (c) For the purposes of calculating the compliance threshold and 
repetitive intervals for actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) 
of this AD: The number of flight cycles

[[Page 5922]]

in which cabin differential pressure is at 2.0 pounds per square 
inch (psi) or less need not be counted when determining the number 
of flight cycles that have occurred on the airplane, provided that 
flight cycles with momentary spikes in cabin differential pressure 
above 2.0 psi are included as full pressure cycles. For this 
provision to apply, all cabin pressure records must be maintained 
for each airplane. No fleet-averaging of cabin pressure is allowed.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Seattle 
ACO, is authorized to approve alternative methods of compliance 
(AMOCs) for this AD.
    (2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by a 
Boeing Company DER who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 
ACO, to make such findings.

Incorporation by Reference

    (e) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be 
done in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2439, 
dated July 5, 2001. This incorporation by reference was approved by 
the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing 
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. 
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.

Effective Date

    (f) This amendment becomes effective on March 15, 2004.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 29, 2004.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-2584 Filed 2-6-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

The complete text was extracted from the official GovInfo HTML edition for this publication. Acquired 2026-10-09T04:08:01.327276+00:00. Text extraction preserves the recorded source wording; it does not determine current requirements.

Open the captured official edition

Source SHA-256

de40547b7146c64152a4d3f8853d13017ee66d2f1aa2064b3d21ef9a19a074e4

Text SHA-256

d31d87202d7d68143fc905f5e46beceaa9a0798bcea4d0d77ecdd3d500af2188