AD 2000-11-07 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-200, -300, and -400 Series Airplanes

Models named: 747-200, -300, -400 series. Read the applicability below — it usually turns on serial or part numbers too.

Model 747-200, -300, and -400 series airplanes; up to and including line number 744; certificated in any category. Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it.

Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.” Request To Revise Cost Impact Information One commenter requests that the FAA revise the estimated number of work hours stated in the cost impact section of the preamble of the proposed rule from 8 work hours to 48 work hours per airplane. The commenter points out that the manufacturer estimates 48 work hours per airplane in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2298, Revision 3, dated January 7, 1999. The commenter states that, based on its experience, the proposed actions take approximately 48 work hours. The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request. The estimate of 48 work hours given in the service bulletin includes time for gaining access and closing up. The cost analysis in AD rulemaking actions, however, typically does not include incidental costs, such as the time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other administrative actions. Because incidental costs may vary significantly from operator to operator, they are almost impossible to calculate. The number of work hours necessary to accomplish the required actions, specified as 8 in the cost impact information in the proposal and restated below, represents the time necessary to perform only the actions actually required by this AD (that is, the inspection). No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. Request To Clarify “Terminating Action” Statement in Paragraph (b) One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, states that one operator was confused by the statement in paragraph (b) of the proposed rule that, “Accomplishment of the HFEC inspection constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.” The operator was confused because paragraph (a) of the proposed rule specifies repetitive inspections at intervals not to exceed 1,400 landings. The operator found these statements contradictory. The commenter makes no specific request for a change to the proposed rule. The FAA infers that the operator to whom the commenter refers does not understand the meaning of “terminating action.” Paragraph (a) of this AD states that the inspection in that paragraph is to be performed “at the time specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, * * * until accomplishment of the requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD.” As stated previously, paragraph (b) of this AD states that “Accomplishment of the HFEC inspection constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.” Once the initial inspection in accordance with paragraph (b) of this Ad has been accomplished, the repetitive inspections in paragraph (a) of this Ad are no longer necessary and need not be accomplished. The repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (b) of this AD must be accomplished at intervals not to exceed 1,400 landings (as stated in that paragraph). The FAA finds that no further clarification is necessary, and no change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. Request To Revise AD Referencing Supplemental Structural Inspection Items One commenter requests that the FAA revise AD 94-15-18, amendment 39-8989 (59 FR 41233, August 11, 1994), to exclude Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID) Items W-3A and W-3B on SSID-candidate airplanes that are included in the effectivity listing of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-57A2298. The commenter states that the SSID inspections allow detailed visual and surveillance inspections of the front spar web at “D”-check intervals using sampling methods. This AD requires HFEC inspections of the front spar web at intervals not to exceed 1,400 landings for all airplanes included in the applicability of this AD. The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request. The commenter's request is not relevant to this proposed rule. In the future, should the FAA consider further rulemaking to revise AD 94-15-18, the issue raised by the commenter would be appropriate to address. No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. 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 485 Model 747-200, -300, and -400 series airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 105 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD. The inspections that are currently required by AD 97-05-01 and retained in this AD, take approximately 8 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the currently required actions on U.S. operators is estimated to be $50,400, or $480 per airplane, per inspection cycle. 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. 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 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 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. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9945 (62 FR 8613, February 26, 1997), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD), amendment 39-11755, to read as follows: 2000-11-07 Boeing: Amendment 39-11755. Docket 99-NM-30-AD. Supersedes AD 97-05-01, Amendment 39-9945.