[Federal Register: February 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 21)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5361-5365]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02fe05-2]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NM-279-AD; Amendment 39-13957; AD 2005-03-01]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to all Boeing Model 747 series airplanes, that requires
repetitive inspections of the nacelle strut-to-wing attachment
structure, and repetitive overhaul of the diagonal brace and spring
beam load paths, to maintain damage tolerance requirements and ensure
long-term structural integrity; and follow-on and corrective actions if
necessary. This action is necessary to ensure the structural integrity
of the strut-to-wing load path and prevent separation of the strut and
engine from the airplane. This action is intended to address the
identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Effective March 9, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of March 9, 2005.
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 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
.
[[Page 5362]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425)
917-6421; 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 all Boeing Model 747 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on September 18, 2003
(68 FR 54680). That action proposed to require repetitive inspections
of the nacelle strut-to-wing attachment structure, and repetitive
overhaul of the diagonal brace and spring beam load paths, to maintain
damage tolerance requirements and ensure long-term structural
integrity; and follow-on and corrective actions if necessary.
Actions Since Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Was Issued
Since the NPRM was issued, the FAA has reviewed Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-54A2182, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2004. Revision 1 of
the service bulletin describes procedures that are essentially the same
as the procedures described in the original issue of the service
bulletin, which was referenced in the NPRM as the appropriate source of
service information. For certain airplanes, Revision 1 extends
repetitive intervals for the baseline inspections. For certain other
airplanes, Revision 1 revises the inspection method for the
supplemental inspection of a certain structure, and reduces threshold
and/or repetitive intervals of the supplemental inspections. Revision 1
also adds repetitive torque checks of the fasteners of lower spar
fitting for Groups 1 and 2 airplanes.
We find that the additional work in Revision 1 of the service
bulletin is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this AD.
Therefore, we have added new paragraph (f) to this AD to specify that,
as an option, the required actions in paragraphs (b) through (e) of
this AD may be accomplished in accordance with Revision 1. However,
operators should note that if any action specified in this AD is done
in accordance with Revision 1, then all of the actions in this AD and
the additional actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD must also
be done in accordance with Revision 1 at the applicable compliance
times specified in that service bulletin.
Also since the NPRM was issued, Boeing has received a Delegation
Option Authorization (DOA). We have revised this final rule to delegate
the authority to approve an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for
any repair required by this AD to the Authorized Representative for the
Boeing DOA Organization rather than the Designated Engineering
Representative (DER).
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 Issue a Supplemental NPRM
One commenter requests that we issue a supplemental NPRM after
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2004,
is published. The commenter states that changes to the service bulletin
will have a direct impact on the requirements of the proposed AD, and
that ``if this AD is deemed necessary, the AD should not be released
until it incorporates that revision.'' The commenter also states that
since Revision 1 has not yet been published, the commenter does not
fully understand the changes made to the service bulletin.
We do not agree with the request to issue a supplemental NPRM. As
discussed previously, we have reviewed Revision 1 of the service
bulletin, which was published after issuance of the NPRM. We agree that
Revision 1 of the service bulletin is acceptable for compliance with
the requirements of this AD and have added Revision 1 to this final
rule as an option for accomplishing the requirements of paragraphs (b)
through (e) of this AD. Therefore, it is not necessary to reopen the
comment period by issuing an supplemental NPRM. No other change to the
final rule is necessary in this regard.
Request To Include Changes to Revision 1 in This Final Rule
Another commenter requests that we include all changes to Revision
1 of the service bulletin in this final rule, since the changes
significantly affect fleet maintenance and operations. The commenter
states that the changes in Revision 1 are based on comments received
from operators through telex traffic and meetings, and that the Boeing
Designated Engineer Representative (DER) has recommended that the FAA
approve Revision 1.
We partially agree with the commenter. For the reasons discussed
previously, we have added Revision 1 of the service bulletin to this
final rule as an option for accomplishing the requirements of
paragraphs (b) through (e) of this AD. No other change to the final
rule is necessary in this regard.
Request To Remove Detailed Inspection
One commenter considers unwarranted the detailed inspection ``to
verify correct installation anytime a fuse pin or secondary pin joint
is disassembled within 1,200 flight-cycles or 18 months, whichever is
earlier.'' The commenter states that installation instructions ``in the
appropriate airplane maintenance manuals when followed and signed for
by licensed maintenance personnel should not require a special
subsequent inspection at future set time to verify correct
installation.'' The commenter also asserts that a required inspection
item at the time of installation may be more effective and appropriate.
We infer that the commenter requests that we remove the above-stated
detailed inspection from the proposed AD.
We partially agree with the inferred request to remove the above-
stated detailed inspection from this final rule. Although the original
issue of the service bulletin recommends accomplishing that detailed
inspection, Revision 1 does not recommend its accomplishment for
compliance with this final rule. Therefore, the commenter may choose to
accomplish Revision 1, which has been added as an alternative source of
service information for this final rule as discussed previously. If the
commenter chooses to accomplish the original issue of the service
bulletin, under the provisions of paragraph (h) of this final rule, we
may consider requests for approval of an AMOC if sufficient data are
submitted to substantiate that such a design change would provide an
acceptable level of safety. Therefore, no further change to the final
rule is necessary in this regard.
Request To Revise Corrective Action
One commenter requests that we revise paragraph (e) of the proposed
AD, so that defects found during the baseline inspections may be
repaired in accordance with an FAA-acceptable method. The commenter
states that, while Parts 1 through 9 of the service bulletin specify to
contact Boeing for rework requirements and additional inspections if
any damage is found or structural integrity is not verified, paragraph
(e) of the proposed AD would require that these corrective actions be
repaired per a method approved by the FAA, or per data approved by a
Boeing DER. The commenter considers the method of repair specified in
paragraph (e) of the proposed AD unnecessarily burdensome, especially
for correcting relatively simple defects such as
[[Page 5363]]
missing or broken fasteners. Furthermore, the commenter believes that
the corrective action for a defect found during a normal maintenance
period should not require AMOC approval.
We do not agree with the request to revise paragraph (e) of this
final rule because of the known, possible consequences of discrepancies
found in the nacelle strut-to-wing attachment structure. We also do not
agree with the request because the damage allowables and corrective
action are undefined in the service bulletin. We retain approval
authority for repair according to a method approved by the Manager,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, or according to data
meeting the certification basis of the airplane approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make those findings. Therefore, no change to the final
rule is necessary in this regard.
Request for Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) Approval
One commenter requests that we revise the proposed AD to allow
approval for changes in compliance time ``through the operators Flight
Standards District Office as per their established procedures,'' rather
than by the Manager of the Seattle ACO. The commenter states that the
repetitive baseline inspections, and possibly the supplemental
inspections, should be given the same flexibility as any other
maintenance program requirement. The commenter also asserts that, in
order for operators to integrate the proposed AD into their FAA-
approved maintenance program, the approval of inspection escalation
should be made through the operator's Flight Standards District
Offices.
We do not agree. The inspection interval of the supplemental
inspection is based on complex engineering analysis that meets the
damage tolerance requirements of Section 25.571 (``Damage--tolerance
and fatigue evaluation of structure'') of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR 25.571) as upgraded in the Type Certificate Data
Sheet for Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. If that inspection
interval is changed, the damage tolerance requirements may not be met.
Separation of the strut and engine from the airplane prior to strut
modification resulted in two accidents with fatalities on Model 747
series airplanes. In addition, there have been numerous structural
issues even after strut modification. Under the provisions of paragraph
(h) of this final rule, we may approve requests for adjustments to the
compliance time if data are submitted to substantiate that such an
adjustment would provide an acceptable level of safety. Therefore, no
change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.
Consideration for a Change to the Maintenance Program
Two commenters consider the proposed AD an inappropriate use of an
airworthiness directive. One commenter states that the recommendations
specified in the original issue of the service bulletin appear better
suited for implementation via Maintenance Review Board (MRB) and
associated Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) documents, with the
exception of the check for the part number of the side link fuse pins.
Another commenter states that the service bulletin/AD process is an
inappropriate method for enacting changes to the required maintenance
programs. The commenter also states that the FAA should work together
with manufacturers and operators to develop a better method of revising
the maintenance, inspection, and overhaul requirements for large,
transport category aircraft. Furthermore, the commenter believes ``that
appropriate revisions to the Maintenance Review Board Document, the
Maintenance Planning Document and/or the Aircraft Limitation
Instruction are warranted.'' The commenter also notes that the proposed
AD would be applicable to all future Model 747 series airplanes that
are yet to be built with the current strut design.
We do not agree that the proposed AD is an inappropriate use of an
airworthiness directive. We are requiring the post strut modification
inspections in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, dated July
12, 2001; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, Revision 1, dated
January 8, 2004; to meet the upgraded certification basis of the strut-
to-wing attachments as listed in the Type Certificate Data Sheet for
Model 747 series airplanes. The certification basis was upgraded to a
higher level of safety due to accidents involving the strut-to-wing
attachments. To adequately address the unsafe condition, we are
mandating the post strut modification inspections as recommended in the
service bulletin by the airplane manufacturer to meet the new
certification basis.
Furthermore, certain airplanes have been delivered with MPD
documents that do not require accomplishing these inspections, so we
are mandating the inspections with an AD. Note that an operator is only
required to accomplish inspections included in the MPD delivered with
the airplane; inspections added in subsequent revisions to the MPD are
not mandatory until we mandate them with an AD. Therefore, we find that
this final rule is the least complex and most timely method to mandate
new inspections, if the inspections were not included in the MPD
delivered with an airplane. For commonality, we have mandated the
inspections for all Model 747 series airplanes through a service
bulletin developed by the manufacturer. We may consider revising the
applicability of the AD if the inspections in the service bulletin are
incorporated in the airworthiness limitation section of the MPD, which
is provided with the airplane upon delivery from the production line
for future airplanes. Therefore, no change to the final rule is
necessary in this regard.
Additional Change to This AD
Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment
Instructions of the referenced service bulletins specify to report
damaged or cracked fuse pins to the manufacturer, this AD would not
require those actions. We do not need this information from operators.
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.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 991 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 187 airplanes of U.S. registry
will be affected by this AD.
It will take approximately 280 work hours per airplane to
accomplish the repetitive baseline, supplemental, and fuse pin
inspections at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on
these figures, the cost impact of the inspections, per inspection
cycle, on U.S. operators is estimated to be $3,403,400 for the fleet,
or $18,200 per airplane.
It will take approximately 48 work hours per airplane to overhaul
the diagonal brace, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the overhaul, per overhaul
cycle, on U.S. operators is
[[Page 5364]]
estimated to be $583,440 for the fleet, or $3,120 per airplane.
It will take approximately 40 work hours per airplane overhaul the
spring beam, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on
these figures, the cost impact of the overhaul, per overhaul cycle, on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $486,200 for the fleet, or $2,600 per
airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are 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.
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
This rulemaking is promulgated 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 AD.
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:
2005-03-01 Boeing: Amendment 39-13957. Docket 2001-NM-279-AD.
Applicability: All Model 747 series airplanes, certificated in
any category.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To ensure the structural integrity of the strut-to-wing load
path and prevent separation of the strut and engine from the
airplane, accomplish the following:
Compliance Times
(a) Where the compliance times for the initial and repetitive
baseline and supplemental inspections in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, dated
July 12, 2001; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, Revision 1,
dated January 8, 2004; specify a compliance time interval calculated
``from the release of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the interval specified in the service bulletin
``after the effective date of this AD.''
Inspections/Follow-On Actions
(b) Do the initial and repetitive baseline and supplemental
inspections of the nacelle strut-to-wing attachment structure for
discrepancies (including cracks, corrosion, or damage; and loose,
missing, or broken fasteners), and do the applicable follow-on
actions; by doing all the actions in Part 1 through Part 9 of the
Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2182,
dated July 12, 2001. Do the inspections (including inspections for
correct installation of hardware and part numbers) and follow-on
actions at the applicable times specified in Figure 1 of the service
bulletin.
(c) Do the initial and repetitive overhauls of the diagonal
brace and spring beam load paths by doing all the actions in Part 10
and Part 11 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-54A2182, dated July 12, 2001. Do the initial and
repetitive overhauls at the applicable times specified in Part 10
and Part 11 of the service bulletin.
(d) Do the initial and repetitive inspections of the fuse pins
and secondary pins of the strut-to-wing attachment by doing all the
actions in Part 12 of the Work Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-54A2182, dated July 12, 2001. Do the inspections at the
times specified in Part 12 of the service bulletin.
Corrective Actions
(e) If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required
by this AD: Before further flight, do all applicable corrective
actions specified in Part 1 through Part 12 of the Work Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2182, dated July 12, 2001.
Do the applicable corrective actions per the service bulletin. If
the service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for
appropriate action: Before further flight, repair per a method
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, or per data meeting the type certification basis of the
airplane approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such findings.
Optional Service Bulletin
(f) As an option, paragraphs (b) through (e) of this AD may be
done in accordance with Part 1 through Part 12, as applicable, of
the Work Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-54A2182,
Revision 1, dated January 8, 2004, at the applicable times specified
in the service bulletin. If any action specified in paragraphs (b)
through (e) of this AD is done in accordance with Revision 1 of the
service bulletin, do all of the actions specified in paragraphs (b)
through (e) of this AD and the additional actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, in accordance with Revision 1 of the
service bulletin. If the service bulletin specifies to contact the
manufacturer for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair
per a method approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, or per data
meeting the type certification basis of the airplane approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make such findings.
Additional Actions for Optional Service Bulletin
(g) If, as an option, any action specified in paragraphs (b)
through (e) of this AD is done in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-54A2182, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2004, of the
service bulletin, do a detailed inspection of all strut-to-wing
attach joints to determine the part number of any dual side link
fuse pin; and install the correct fuse pin
[[Page 5365]]
if any incorrect fuse pin is found; by doing all of the actions
specified in the ``Initial Base Line Inspection Requirements'' of
the Work Instructions of Revision 1 of the service bulletin. Do
these actions at the applicable times specified in Revision 1 of the
service bulletin.
Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''
No Reporting Requirement
(h) Although the service bulletins referenced in this AD specify
to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not
include that requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)
(i)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Seattle
ACO, FAA, is authorized to approve AMOCs for this AD.
(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for a repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Seattle ACO, to make such findings.
Incorporation by Reference
(j) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be
done in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2182,
dated July 12, 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 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
.
Effective Date
(k) This amendment becomes effective on March 9, 2005.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 18, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-1724 Filed 2-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P