[Federal Register: May 18, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 96)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 28046-28051]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18my04-5]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NM-297-AD; Amendment 39-13636; AD 2004-10-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727-100 and -200; 737-100,
-200, -200C, -300, -400 and -500; and 747 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Boeing Model 727-100 and -200; 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400 and -500; and 747 series airplanes. This amendment
requires, among other things, preparation of the electrical bonding
faying surfaces for the tubing penetrations of the hydraulic heat
exchanger on the forward and aft surfaces of the rear spars of the fuel
tanks of the left and right wings, a one-time measurement of the
electrical bonding resistances, and follow-on actions. This action is
necessary to ensure adequate electrical bonding between the penetration
fittings of the hydraulic heat exchanger and the rear spars of the fuel
tanks. Inadequate electrical bonding, in the event of a lightning
strike, could cause electrical arcing and ignition of fuel vapor in the
wing fuel tank, which could result in a fuel tank explosion. This
action is
[[Page 28047]]
intended to address the identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Effective June 22, 2004.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of June 22, 2004.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, PO 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
.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sulmo Mariano, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone
(425) 917-6501; 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 727-100 and -
200; 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400 and -500; and 747 series
airplanes, was published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2003 (68
FR 43040). That action proposed to require, among other things,
preparation of the electrical bonding faying surfaces on the forward
and aft surfaces of the rear spars of the fuel tanks of the left and
right wings, a one-time measurement of the electrical bonding
resistances, and follow-on actions.
Clarification of the Description of Electrical Bonding Faying Surfaces
The FAA has clarified the description of the electrical bonding
faying surfaces in the final rule. We have added ``for the tubing
penetrations of the hydraulic heat exchanger'' after ``electrical
bonding faying surfaces'' in the ``Summary'' paragraph of the preamble
of the final rule and in paragraph (a) of the final rule.
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 Withdraw the Proposed AD
Two commenters request to withdraw the proposed AD. The commenters
point out that the unsafe condition addressed by the proposed AD is
inadequate electrical bonding of the hydraulic heat exchangers to the
rear spar, which could cause electrical arcing and subsequent ignition
of fuel vapors in the wing fuel tank. The commenters note that Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-29A1096, dated June 7, 2001, does not contain any
reports where the non-bonded penetration fittings have resulted in
arcing. The commenters believe this proposed AD for wing fuel tanks
need not be mandated.
We do not agree with the request to withdraw the proposed AD.
Although there have been no reports where the non-bonded penetration
fittings have resulted in arcing for the Model 737 series airplanes
mentioned by the commenter, we find sufficient data exists to
demonstrate that such potential remains. In addition, unless a fire or
explosion results from an arcing event, there will not necessarily be
evidence that such arcing occurred. Three catastrophic accidents have
occurred when transport airplanes were struck by lightening: a Model
707 series airplane at Elkton, Maryland, in 1963; a Boeing Model KC-135
airplane in Spain in 1974; and a Model 747 series airplane in Madrid,
Spain, in 1976. In one of those accidents, holes in metal debris from
the accident pointed to a lightning strike that ignited fuel vapors
inside a fuel tank. In the other two cases, observers from the ground
confirmed that the airplanes had been struck by lightning and were in
flames before crashing. These accidents have led us to require using
conservative lightning safety design practices to preclude ignition
sources in fuel tanks due to lightning. Laboratory lightning tests in
conjunction with analyses conducted by the airplane manufacturer
demonstrate the potential for in-tank arcing associated with a high
electrical bonding resistance between the hydraulic heat exchangers and
the airplane structure. Such high bonding resistances are expected to
exist on these airplanes because of the details of the original design
and production practices. In addition, lightning strikes are expected
to occur several times in the life of each airplane. Data collected by
the airplane manufacturer indicates that Model 737 and 747 series
airplanes are struck by lightning approximately once per year. We and
the airplane manufacturer are in agreement that a potential for arcing
at the hydraulic line penetrations and at the heat exchanger exists in
the event of a lightning strike to the engine or the wing for the
Boeing Model 727, 737, and 747 series airplanes listed in Table 1 of
the AD. We also considered the aging of the fleet of these Boeing
airplanes in determining the severity of the unsafe condition.
Therefore, we do not find it necessary to change the final rule in this
regard.
Request To Extend Compliance Time
Several commenters request that the proposed AD be revised to
extend the compliance time specified in paragraph (a) of the proposed
AD. One commenter suggests extending the compliance time for the
initial actions from within 5 years (as proposed) to within 8 years or
20,000 flight hours. Another commenter suggests extending the initial
compliance time to within 6 years. That commenter also notes that there
have not been any reported cases of arcing occurring at the heat
exchanger to wing spar area on any of the affected fleet and some of
the fleets have been in service over 40 years. Given those facts, that
commenter believes an equivalent level of safety can be maintained over
the 6-year compliance time. The commenters contend that extending the
compliance time will allow affected operators to perform the inspection
during a regularly scheduled maintenance interval while adoption of the
proposed compliance time of within 5 years would require operators to
schedule special times to do the inspection, at additional expense.
We do not agree with the request to extend the compliance time
specified in paragraph (a) of the final rule. The commenters provide no
technical justification for revising the compliance time. The
manufacturer has done a risk assessment analysis related to lightning
strikes on the Model 727, 737, and 747 fleets and determined that an
acceptable level of safety would be provided by a compliance time of
five years for accomplishing the actions in the service bulletins
(specified as the appropriate source of service information for the
final rule). We concur with the manufacturer's assessment. We also
considered the Air Transportation Association's (ATA's) guidelines of
using an interval of five years for significant modifications when an
acceptable level of safety is provided. Therefore, we have determined
that the initial compliance time of within five years after the
effective date of the AD, as specified in paragraph (a) of the final
rule, is appropriate. We do not find it necessary to change the final
rule in this regard. However, if operators care to provide technical
justification, they may
[[Page 28048]]
request an approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) from
the FAA, in accordance with paragraph (e) of the final rule.
Request To Revise Compliance Time for Corrective Action for Incorrect
Bonding Resistance
Two commenters request that paragraph (a) of the proposed AD be
revised by changing the compliance time to accomplish corrective action
for any incorrect bonding resistances from ``Before further flight'' to
``within 5 years after the effective date of this AD.'' The commenters
are concerned that an inability to attain the specified electrical
bonding resistances will delay return to service of the airplane which
in turn could cause operational disruptions.
We do not agree with the request to change the compliance time to
accomplish corrective action for any incorrect bonding resistances. Our
general policy is to require repair of known identified unsafe
conditions before further flight (though we may make exceptions to this
policy in certain cases of unusual need). Because of the safety
implications and consequences associated with electrical resistances
beyond a certain threshold, resistances below the threshold must be met
before further flight. In addition, since the fuel tanks are open,
there should be no undue burden to operators when they accomplish the
corrective action for incorrect bonding resistances that is required by
paragraph (a) of the final rule. We do not find it necessary to change
the final rule in this regard.
Request To Revise Applicability for Boeing Model 747 Series Airplanes
One commenter, the manufacturer, requests to revise the
applicability in Table 1 of the proposed AD for Boeing Model 747 series
airplanes. The manufacturer states that the effectivity listed for
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, dated July 19, 2001, is
``All 747 airplanes from line numbers 1 through 1271.'' The
manufacturer points out that, at line number 1272, it incorporated a
design change into Model 747 production that is equivalent to the
change defined in the service bulletin. The manufacturer recommends
changing the applicability for 747 series airplanes in Table 1 of the
AD from ``as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, dated
July 19, 2001,'' to ``line numbers 1 thru 1271.''
We agree that the applicability of the final rule should be revised
for Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. For the reasons specified by the
commenter, we have revised the ``Applicability'' for the 747 series
airplanes in Table 1 of the final rule to ``Line Number 1 through 1271
inclusive.'' The number of Model 747 series airplanes affected by the
final rule has not changed.
Request To Allow Operator Equivalent Procedures for Draining and Access
to the Fuel Tanks
Two commenters request that operator equivalent procedures (OEPs)
be allowed for draining and gaining access to the fuel tanks. The
commenters contend that the wording in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD
will prevent operators from using their own procedures for draining
fuel tanks and preparing them for entry unless they request an AMOC.
The commenters feel the intent of the proposed AD is to prepare and
measure the electrical bond of the hydraulic heat exchangers and not to
mandate how the fuel tanks are drained.
We agree that OEPs may be allowed for draining and gaining access
to the fuel tanks provided those procedures are FAA-accepted
procedures. The use of OEPs for draining and gaining access to the fuel
tank does not directly affect the means of correcting the unsafe
condition. The use of OEPs may also reduce the costs of implementing
the AD. Therefore, we have added paragraph (b) to the final rule
stating: ``Operators may use their own FAA-accepted equivalent
procedures for draining the fuel tanks and gaining access to the fuel
tanks.'' We also revised paragraph (a) of the final rule by adding
``except as provided by paragraph (b) of this AD'' and we revised the
paragraph numbering following paragraph (b) of the final rule.
Request To Use Latest Revision of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
29A1096
Several commenters request that Revision 1 of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-29A1096, dated July 31, 2003, be referenced in the
proposed AD instead of the original version of the service bulletin,
dated June 7, 2001. The commenters point out that the manufacturer has
issued Revision 1 of the service bulletin and it contains changes to
the parts and procedures. The commenters also suggest that
modifications accomplished per the original issue of the service
bulletin be considered acceptable for compliance with the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenters. We have reviewed and approved Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096, Revision 1, dated July 31, 2003, as
the appropriate source of service information for the actions specified
in the final rule. The changes in Revision 1 of the service bulletin
clarify the parts and procedures described in the original version of
the service bulletin. No additional work is specified in Revision 1 of
the service bulletin. Accordingly, the final rule has been revised to
reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096, Revision 1, dated
July 31, 2003. In addition, paragraph (d) has been added to the final
rule to allow actions accomplished before the effective date of the
final rule per the original version of the service bulletin, dated June
7, 2001, to be considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding action specified in this final rule.
Request To Use Latest Revision of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
29A2104
Two commenters request that Revision 1 of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-29A2104, dated March 7, 2002, be referenced in the
proposed AD instead of the original version of the service bulletin,
dated July 19, 2001. The commenters point out that the proposed AD
references the original version of the service bulletin and that
Revision 1 of the service bulletin was issued on March 7, 2002.
We agree with the commenters. We have reviewed and approved Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, Revision 1, dated March 7, 2002, as the
appropriate source of service information for the actions specified in
the final rule. The actions in Revision 1 of the service bulletin are
almost identical to the actions described in the original version of
the service bulletin. No additional work is specified in Revision 1 of
the service bulletin. Accordingly, the final rule has been revised to
reference Boeing Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, Revision 1, dated March
7, 2002. In addition, the original version of the service bulletin,
dated July 19, 2001, has been added to paragraph (d) of the final rule
to allow actions accomplished before the effective date of the final
rule per the original version of the service bulletin to be considered
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding action specified in
this final rule.
Request To Approve Future Revisions of Service Bulletins
Two commenters request that approval be added for the
accomplishment of future revisions of the service bulletins listed in
Tables 1 and 2 of the proposed AD as being acceptable for compliance
with the proposed AD. One commenter noted that there have been
revisions to the
[[Page 28049]]
service bulletins listed in Tables 1 and 2 of the proposed AD.
We do not agree with the request to approve accomplishment of
future revisions of the service bulletins as being acceptable for
compliance with the final rule. When referencing a specific service
bulletin in a final rule, using a phrase such as, ``or later FAA-
approved revisions,'' violates Office of the Federal Register
regulations for approving materials that are incorporated by reference.
To allow operators to use later revisions of the referenced document
(issued after publication of the final rule), either we must revise the
final rule to reference specific later revisions, or operators must
request approval to use later revisions as an AMOC with the final rule,
under the provisions of paragraph (e) of the final rule. As stated
previously, we have revised the final rule to specify the use of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096, Revision 1, dated July 31, 2003;
and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, Revision 1, dated March 7,
2002. We do not find it necessary to make any additional changes to the
final rule in this regard.
Request To Remove Reference to Service Bulletin for Incorrect Bonding
Resistance Corrective Action
Two commenters request that paragraph (a) of the proposed AD be
revised by removing the reference to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
29A1096 listed in Table 2 for corrective action for any incorrect
bonding resistance. One commenter notes that there are no specific
corrective work instructions for incorrect electrical bonding
resistances in the service bulletin.
We agree that the reference for corrective action for any incorrect
bonding resistances should be revised in paragraph (a) of the final
rule. All the service bulletins listed in Table 2 of the final rule do
not contain any instructions for correcting incorrect bonding
resistances. We have revised the last sentence in paragraph (a) of the
final rule to provide instructions for correcting incorrect bonding
resistances as follows: ``If the bonding resistance is incorrect,
before further flight, repeat the preparation of the electrical bonding
faying surface on the forward and aft surfaces of the rear spar of the
fuel tanks of the left and right wings as necessary to achieve a
bonding resistance below the threshold specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin listed in Table 2 of
this AD.''
Request To Remove Reference to Service Bulletin for Leak Repairs
Two commenters request that paragraph (b) of the proposed AD be
revised by removing the reference to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
29A1096 for the repair of any leaks. One commenter notes that there are
no leak repair instructions in the service bulletin. The commenter does
agree that leakage should be repaired before further flight.
We do not agree with the request to revise paragraph (c) of the
final rule (specified in paragraph (b) of the proposed AD) by removing
the reference to the service bulletin for repair of any leaks. While
the service bulletin does not contain specific leak repair
instructions, it does cite the appropriate airplane maintenance manuals
for repair of any leaks. We do not find it necessary to change the
final rule in this regard.
Request To Remove Identification of Rear Spar With Service Bulletin
Number
Two commenters request to remove the requirement to identify the
rear spar with the service bulletin number as specified in Figure 8,
Step 5, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096. One commenter
believes there is no real benefit to this action and that it creates
additional exterior markings that must be maintained. The commenter
contends that tracking accomplishment of the service bulletin via
aircraft records should be sufficient.
We do not agree with the request to remove the requirement to
identify the rear spar with the service bulletin number. The airplane
manufacturer has studied this matter and concluded that the best method
for identifying the accomplishment of the measurement and follow-on
actions is to mark the service bulletin number on an appropriate
airplane component. We concur with the manufacturer. We do not find it
necessary to change the final rule 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.
Changes to 14 CFR part 39/Effect on the AD
On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a new version of 14 CFR part 39
(67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA's airworthiness
directives system. The regulation now includes material that relates to
altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of
compliance. However, for clarity and consistency in this final rule, we
have retained the language of the NPRM regarding that material.
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 5,085 airplanes of the affected design in
the worldwide fleet. We estimate that 2,251 airplanes of U.S. registry
will be affected by this AD. The following table shows the estimated
cost impact to do the required actions for airplanes affected by this
AD. The average labor rate is $65 per work hour. The estimated maximum
total cost for all airplanes affected by this AD is $6,827,860.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.- Work hours Labor cost Maximum fleet cost
Model registered airplanes (estimated) (estimated) (estimated)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
727............................................................. 910 44 $2,860 $2,602,600
737............................................................. 1,091 44 2,860 3,120,260
747............................................................. 250 68 4,420 1,105,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 28050]]
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:
2004-10-06 Boeing: Amendment 39-13636. Docket 2001-NM-297-AD.
Applicability: This AD applies to the airplanes listed in Table
1 of this AD, certificated in any category:
Table 1.--Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
727-100 and -200 series airplanes........ As listed in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 727-
29A0067, dated June 7, 2001.
737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400 and -500 As listed in Boeing Alert
series airplanes. Service Bulletin 737-
29A1096, Revision 1, dated
July 31, 2003.
747 series airplanes..................... Line Numbers 1 through 1271
inclusive.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (e) 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.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To ensure adequate electrical bonding between the penetration
fittings of the hydraulic heat exchanger and the rear spars of the
fuel tanks of the left and right wings, accomplish the following:
Prepare Electrical Bonding Faying Surfaces/Measure Electrical Bonding
(a) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD:
Prepare the electrical bonding faying surfaces for the tubing
penetrations of the hydraulic heat exchanger on the forward and aft
surfaces of the rear spars of the fuel tanks of the left and right
wings, and do a one-time measurement of the electrical bonding
resistances between the penetration fittings of the hydraulic heat
exchanger and the rear spars, and between the heat exchanger tube
and the lower wing stringer surfaces, per the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable Boeing service bulletin listed in
Table 2 of this AD, except as provided by paragraph (b) of this AD.
The procedures include the following: Depressurize the hydraulic
systems; drain the fuel from the fuel tanks; disconnect the inlet
and outlet tubes of the heat exchangers and remove the heat
exchangers; prepare the faying surface by sanding the surface areas
down to bare metal and apply alodine protective coating on the
surfaces, and re-install the heat exchangers. If the bonding
resistance is incorrect, before further flight, repeat the
preparation of the electrical bonding faying surface for the tubing
penetrations of the hydraulic heat exchanger on the forward and aft
surfaces of the rear spar of the fuel tanks of the left and right
wings as necessary to achieve a bonding resistance below the
threshold specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin listed in Table 2 of this AD.
Table 2.--Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Boeing service bulletin Revision level Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
727-100 and -200................. 727-29A0067 Original................. June 7, 2001.
737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400 737-29A1096 Revision 1............... July 31, 2003.
and -500.
747.............................. 747-29A2104 Revision 1............... March 7, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Operators may use their own FAA-accepted equivalent
procedures for draining the fuel tanks and gaining access to the
fuel tanks.
Follow-On Actions
(c) Before further flight after accomplishment of paragraph (a)
of this AD: Apply fillet sealant and protective finishes around the
penetration fittings of the hydraulic heat exchanger per the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable Boeing service
bulletin listed in Table 2 of this AD (per Figure 4 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 727-29A0067; per Figure 8 of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-29A1096, Revision 1; or per Figure 4 of Boeing Service
Bulletin 747-29A2104, Revision 1; as applicable); then service and
pressurize the hydraulic systems and examine for signs of hydraulic
fluid leakage; and service the fuel tank and examine for signs of
fuel leakage per the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin listed in Table 2 of this AD. Repair any leaks
found before further flight, per the applicable service bulletin
listed in Table 2 of this AD.
Actions Accomplished Per Previous Issue of Service Bulletin
(d) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD
per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096, dated June 7, 2001;
and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-29A2104, dated July 19, 2001;
as applicable, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding action specified in this AD.
[[Page 28051]]
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(e) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA. Operators shall submit their requests through an
appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add
comments and then send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
Special Flight Permit
(f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
Incorporation by Reference
(g) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be
done in accordance with the applicable service bulletins listed in
Table 3 of this AD:
Table 3.--Applicable Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service bulletin Revision level Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727-29A0067.. Original......................... June 7, 2001.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-29A1096.. Revision 1....................... July 31, 2003.
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-29A2104........ Revision 1....................... March 7, 2002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
(h) This amendment becomes effective on June 22, 2004.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 5, 2004.
Ali Bahrami,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-10906 Filed 5-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P