[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23235-23239]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-10727]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-67-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747SP, 747SR, 747-100, 
747-200, and 747-300 Series Airplanes; Equipped with Pratt & Whitney 
Model JT9D-3, -7, and -7Q Series Engines and Model JT9D-7R4G2 Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of 
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This document revises an earlier proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD), applicable to certain Boeing Model 747SP, 747SR, 747-
100, 747-200, and 747-300 series airplanes, that would have superseded 
an existing AD that currently requires repetitive operational tests of 
the reversible gearbox pneumatic drive unit (PDU) or the reversing air 
motor PDU to ensure that the unit can restrain the thrust reverser 
sleeve, and correction of any discrepancy found. The proposed AD also 
would have required installation of a terminating modification, and 
repetitive functional tests of that installation to detect 
discrepancies, and repair if necessary. This new action revises the 
proposed rule by removing airplanes from the applicability and adding 
new requirements. The actions specified by this new proposed AD are 
intended to ensure the integrity of the fail-safe features of the 
thrust reverser system by preventing possible failure modes in the 
thrust reverser control system that can result in inadvertent 
deployment of a thrust reverser during flight. This action is intended 
to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by May 27, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-67-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location 
between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. Comments 
may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: [email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must contain 
``Docket No. 99-NM-67-AD'' in the subject line and need not be 
submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 
Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Kinney, Aerospace Engineer, 
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone 
(425) 917-6499; fax (425) 917-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
    [sbull] Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
    [sbull] For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
    [sbull] Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 99-NM-67-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and 
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 99-NM-67-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR part 39) to add an airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to 
certain Boeing Model 747SP, SR, -100, -200, and -300 series airplanes, 
was published as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 
Register on January 26, 2000 (65 FR 4179). That NPRM proposed to 
supersede AD 95-16-02, amendment 39-9321 (60 FR 39631, August 3, 1995), 
which is applicable to certain Boeing Model 747SP, SR, -100, -200, and 
-300 series airplanes. That NPRM would have continued to require 
repetitive operational tests of the reversible gearbox pneumatic drive 
unit (PDU) or the reversing air motor PDU to ensure that the unit can 
restrain the thrust reverser sleeve, and correction of any discrepancy 
found. That NPRM also would have added installation of a terminating 
modification, and repetitive functional tests of that installation to 
detect discrepancies, and repair, if necessary. That NPRM was prompted 
by the results of a safety review of the

[[Page 23236]]

thrust reverser systems on Model 747 series airplanes. The integrity of 
the fail-safe features of the thrust reverser system, if not 
maintained, could result in possible failure modes in the thrust 
reverser control system and inadvertent deployment of a thrust reverser 
during flight.

New Relevant Service Information

    Since the issuance of that NPRM, the FAA has reviewed and approved 
Boeing Service Bulletins 747-78-2152, Revision 5, dated June 14, 2001; 
and Revision 6, dated October 24, 2002 (Boeing Service Bulletins 747-
78-2152, Revision 1, dated December 12, 1996; Revision 2, dated 
December 18, 1997; and Revision 3, dated August 26, 1999; were 
referenced in the original NPRM as the appropriate sources of service 
information for the accomplishment of certain actions). Revision 4 of 
the service bulletin describes procedures for additional rework for 
airplanes that have a three-step clutch assembly pack located in the 
flight deck control stand. Those airplanes must be reworked to a two-
step clutch in order for the microswitch pack, as specified in 
Revisions 1, 2, and 3 of the service bulletin, to function correctly. 
Revision 5 of the service bulletin describes further rework procedures 
for airplanes previously modified, and removes two airplanes from the 
effectivity. Revision 6 of the service bulletin describes additional 
procedures for modifying the sync lock by adding a new bolt, washer, 
and nut to the clamp-up. Accomplishment of the actions specified in 
Revision 5 or Revision 6 of the service bulletin is intended to 
adequately address the unsafe condition.

Comments

    Due consideration has been given to the comments received in 
response to the NPRM. Certain comments have resulted in changes to the 
NPRM that are reflected in this supplemental NPRM. Certain other 
comments that are still relevant but have not resulted in any change to 
the NPRM will also be addressed in this supplemental NPRM.

Request To Delay Release of Final Rule

    One commenter asks that the FAA delay the release of the final 
rule. The commenter states that it started doing the modification 
specified in the proposed AD but had some problems implementing the 
procedures specified in Revisions 1, 2, and 3 of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 747-78-2152. The commenter adds that airplanes having old 
microswitch packs and thrust lever clutch pack two-step cams cannot be 
modified per the procedures in these service bulletins.
    The FAA delayed release of the final rule until the service 
bulletin was revised, reviewed, and approved, and we are now issuing 
this supplemental NPRM to require Revisions 5 and 6 of the service 
bulletin, which contain the correct procedures for airplanes having the 
old microswitch packs and thrust lever clutch pack two-step cams. 
Paragraph (c)(3) of this supplemental NPRM has been changed to require 
Revisions 5 and 6 for accomplishment of the installation of an 
additional locking system on each thrust reverser.

Request To Change Compliance Time

    One commenter asks that the compliance time specified in paragraph 
(c) of the NPRM be extended from 36 to 48 months. The commenter states 
that previous accomplishment of AD 94-10-10, amendment 39-8917 (59 FR 
26105, June 20, 1994), and AD 95-16-02 has provided interim protection 
against in-flight deployment of the thrust reversers. The commenter 
adds that, taking into account the accomplishment of those ADs and the 
``increased controllability'' of the Model 747 airplane, the compliance 
time should be increased to 48 months to match the time that was 
required to accomplish similar ADs on Model 767 series airplanes.
    We acknowledge that accomplishment of the actions required by AD 
94-10-10 and AD 95-16-02 provides an added level of protection against 
in-flight deployment of the thrust reversers, and substantiating data 
from the manufacturer indicate that extending the compliance time from 
36 to 48 months will have a minimal, but acceptable, impact on safety. 
Therefore, we agree that the compliance time for paragraph (c) of this 
supplemental NPRM may be extended to 48 months, to maintain an adequate 
level of safety in the fleet. We have revised paragraph (c) of this 
supplemental NPRM accordingly.

Request To Change Applicability

    One commenter states that the applicability paragraph in the NPRM 
omits references to Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7A and -7J engine models, and 
asks if this is an oversight.
    We infer that the commenter wants us to specifically identify JT9D-
7A and -7J engine models in the applicability section of the NPRM. We 
do not agree that such a specification is necessary. The applicability 
statement of this supplemental NPRM refers to airplanes powered by 
Pratt & Whitney engines as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-78-
2152, and the service bulletin clearly identifies all affected 
airplanes, including those having JT9D-7A and -7J engines. We have, 
however, clarified the applicability section to show that the -7 and -
7Q series engines encompass the engine series that includes the -7A and 
-7J engine models.

Request To Change Cost Impact Section

    One commenter, the manufacturer, asks that the Cost Impact section 
in the NPRM be updated. The commenter states that this section 
specifies that required parts for the wiring modifications would be 
provided by the manufacturer at no cost to the operators, but this was 
valid only until December 31, 1999. As of January 1, 2000, there is a 
charge for the kits required to do the modifications. For the 
modification specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-78-2134, the kit 
cost is approximately $21,600 per airplane. For the modification 
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-78-2152, the kit cost is 
approximately $166,000 per airplane. The commenter adds that these 
costs are approximate because the actual costs vary with engine model 
and airplane effectivity.
    We agree with the commenter, and we have revised the Cost Impact 
section in this supplemental NPRM accordingly.

Request To Remove Certain Requirements

    One commenter asks that the ``Restatement of Requirements of AD 95-
16-02'' and paragraph (c)(2) of the NPRM be removed. The commenter 
states that paragraph (c)(2) is a restatement of the requirements in AD 
94-10-10. The commenter notes that the NPRM would require work 
currently mandated by those ADs, and repeating those requirements is 
redundant. The commenter prefers that the NPRM simply reference that 
those ADs must be complied with. Additionally, the commenter suggests 
that, after those sections are removed, paragraph (c) of the NPRM be 
changed to state, ``Accomplishment of the actions required by 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(3) of this AD, along with accomplishment of 
the actions required by AD 94-10-10, constitutes terminating action for 
AD 95-16-02.''
    We partially agree with the commenter. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
the NPRM--the ``Restatement of Requirements of AD 95-16-02''--merely 
repeat the actions that were previously mandated by AD 95-16-02, which 
this supplemental NPRM proposes to supersede. The intent of including 
these paragraphs is to ensure

[[Page 23237]]

that the currently required repetitive tests continue to be done until 
the terminating modifications specified in paragraph (c) of this 
supplemental NPRM are installed. We have, however, added a new Note 2 
to this supplemental NPRM for clarification.
    Paragraph (c)(2) of the supplemental NPRM, to be done per Revision 
5 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-78-2152, does restate the requirements 
for the modification required by AD 94-10-10, which is to be done per 
Revision 3 of the service bulletin. However, as specified in the 
revised service information section above, airplanes having old 
microswitch packs and thrust lever clutch pack two-step cams cannot be 
modified per the procedures in Revision 3 of the service bulletin. If 
the modification has already been done on airplanes that do not have 
the old microswitch packs and thrust reverser clutch pack two-step 
cams, it does not have to be repeated.

New Dispatch Limitations

    Paragraphs (e) and (f) have been added to this supplemental NPRM 
and would allow the option to dispatch an airplane with one thrust 
reverser deactivated and operate the airplane for up to 10 days with 
one thrust reverser deactivated. This option would be allowed in the 
event of unsuccessful accomplishment of the repetitive inspections and 
tests specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD or installation of 
a spare thrust reverser assembly with a different configuration than 
that installed on the other engines of the airplane.

Explanation of Requirements of Supplemental NPRM

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, this 
supplemental NPRM would supersede AD 95-16-02 to continue to require 
repetitive operational tests of the reversible gearbox pneumatic drive 
unit (PDU) or the reversing air motor PDU to ensure that the unit can 
restrain the thrust reverser sleeve, and correction of any discrepancy 
found. This supplemental NPRM also would add installation of a 
terminating modification, and repetitive functional tests of that 
installation to detect discrepancies, and repair, if necessary. The new 
action would require accomplishment of the installation of an 
additional locking system on each thrust reverser, as specified in the 
service bulletins described previously, except as discussed below.

Differences Between Supplemental NPRM and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
78-2152

    The service bulletin recommends no specific compliance time for 
accomplishment of the additional locking system installation, but we 
have determined that an unspecified compliance time would not address 
the identified unsafe condition in a timely manner. In developing an 
appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered not only the 
manufacturer's recommendation, but the degree of urgency associated 
with addressing the subject unsafe condition, the average utilization 
of the affected fleet, the time necessary to perform the installation, 
and comments received. In light of all of these factors, we find a 48-
month compliance time for completing the required actions to be 
warranted, in that it represents an appropriate interval of time 
allowable for affected airplanes to continue to operate without 
compromising safety.
    Although the service bulletin does not specify repetitive 
functional testing of the additional lock installation following 
accomplishment of that installation, we have determined that repetitive 
functional tests of the additional lock installation on each thrust 
reverser, at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours, will support 
continued operational safety of thrust reversers with actuation system 
locks.

Conclusion

    Since these changes expand the scope of the originally proposed 
rule, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment 
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 455 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 218 airplanes of U.S. registry 
would be affected by this proposed AD.
    The operational tests that are currently required by AD 95-16-02, 
and retained in this AD, take approximately 16 work hours (4 per 
engine) 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 is estimated to be $960 per airplane, per test cycle.
    It would take approximately 544 work hours per airplane, to 
accomplish the proposed wiring modifications, at an average labor rate 
of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost approximately $21,600 
per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the wiring 
modifications proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$11,824,320, or $54,240 per airplane.
    It would take approximately 104 work hours (26 per engine) per 
airplane to accomplish the proposed removal of the thrust reverser 
sequencing mechanism and installation of a solenoid-operated shutoff 
valve, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. The cost of 
required parts is minimal. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
the removal and installation proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $1,360,320, or $6,240 per airplane.
    It would take approximately 568 work hours per airplane to 
accomplish the proposed sync lock hardware installation, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost 
approximately $166,000 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost 
impact of the installation proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $43,617,440, or $200,080 per airplane.
    It would take approximately 8 work hours (2 per engine) per 
airplane to accomplish the functional test, at an average labor rate of 
$60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
functional test proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to 
be $104,640, or $480 per airplane, per test cycle.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 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 proposed herein would 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 proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
regulation (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT

[[Page 23238]]

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 
and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9321 (60 FR 
39631, August 3, 1995), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

Boeing: Docket 99-NM-67-AD. Supersedes AD 95-16-02, amendment 39-
9321.

    Applicability: Model 747SP, 747SR, 747-100, 747-200, and 747-300 
series airplanes; equipped with Pratt & Whitney Model JT9D-3, -7, 
and -7Q series engines and Model JT9D-7R4G2 engines; 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 (g)(1) 
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 the integrity of the fail-safe features of the thrust 
reverser system by preventing possible failure modes in the thrust 
reverser control system that can result in inadvertent deployment of 
a thrust reverser during flight, accomplish the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 95-16-02

Operational Test

    (a) Within 90 days after September 5, 1995 (the effective date 
of AD 95-16-02, amendment 39-9321), perform an operational test of 
the reversible gearbox pneumatic drive unit (PDU) or the reversing 
air motor PDU to ensure that the unit can restrain the thrust 
reverser sleeve, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-78A2131, dated September 15, 1994. Repeat the test thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours until accomplishment of 
paragraph (c) of this AD.

    Note 2: Paragraph (a) of this AD merely restates the 
requirements of paragraph (a) of AD 95-16-02. The intent of 
including this paragraph is to ensure that the currently required 
repetitive tests continue to be done until the terminating 
modifications specified in paragraph (c) of this AD are installed.

Corrective Action

    (b) If any of the tests required by paragraph (a) of this AD 
cannot be successfully performed, or if any discrepancy is found 
during those tests, accomplish either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of 
this AD.
    (1) Prior to further flight, correct any discrepancy found, in 
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-78A2131, dated 
September 15, 1994. Or
    (2) The airplane may be operated in accordance with the 
provisions and limitations specified in an operator's FAA-approved 
Minimum Equipment List (MEL), provided that no more than one thrust 
reverser on the airplane is inoperative.

New Requirements of This AD

Modifications

    (c) Within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, 
accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) 
of this AD. Accomplishment of the actions required by this paragraph 
constitutes terminating action for the repetitive tests required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD.
    (1) Install provisional wiring for the additional locking system 
on the thrust reversers, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-78-2134, Revision 3, 
dated March 19, 1998.
    (2) Remove the thrust reverser sequencing mechanism and install 
a solenoid-operated shutoff valve in accordance with Boeing Service 
Bulletin 747-78-2052, Revision 5, dated February 22, 1996.
    (3) Install an additional locking system on each thrust reverser 
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service 
Bulletin 747-78-2152, Revision 5, dated June 14, 2001; or Revision 
6, dated October 24, 2002.

Repetitive Tests

    (d) Within 3,000 flight hours after accomplishment of paragraph 
(c) of this AD: Perform a functional test to detect discrepancies of 
the additional locking system on each thrust reverser in accordance 
with the procedures described in the Boeing 747 Airplane Maintenance 
Manual (AMM), Section 78-34-11, dated October 25, 1997. Prior to 
further flight, correct any discrepancy detected and repeat the 
functional test of that repair in accordance with the procedures 
described in the AMM. Repeat the functional tests thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours.

Dispatch Limitations

    (e) If, after incorporation of the modification required by 
paragraph (c)(3) of this AD on any airplane, it becomes necessary to 
install a thrust reverser assembly that does not have the additional 
locking system installed, dispatch of the airplane is allowed in 
accordance with the provisions and limitations specified in the 
operator's FAA-approved Master Minimum Equipment List, provided that 
the thrust reverser assembly that does not have the additional 
locking system installed is deactivated in accordance with Section 
78-1 of Boeing Document D6-33391, ``Boeing 747-100/-200/-300/SP 
Dispatch Deviations Procedures Guide,'' Revision 25, dated July 26, 
2002. No more than one thrust reverser on any airplane may be 
deactivated under the provisions of this paragraph. Within 10 days 
after deactivation of the thrust reverser, install a thrust reverser 
assembly that has the additional locking system installed and 
reactivate the thrust reverser.
    (f) If, prior to incorporation of the modification required by 
paragraph (c)(3) of this AD on any airplane, it becomes necessary to 
install a thrust reverser assembly that has the additional locking 
system installed, dispatch of the airplane is allowed in accordance 
with the provisions and limitations specified in the operator's FAA-
approved Master Minimum Equipment List, provided that the thrust 
reverser assembly that has the additional locking system installed 
is deactivated in accordance with Section 78-1 of Boeing Document 
D6-33391, ``Boeing 747-100/-200/-300/SP Dispatch Deviations 
Procedures Guide,'' Revision 25, dated July 26, 2002. No more than 
one thrust reverser on any airplane may be deactivated under the 
provisions of this paragraph. Within 10 days after deactivation of 
the thrust reverser, install a thrust reverser assembly that does 
not have the additional locking system installed and reactivate the 
thrust reverser.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g)(1) 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.
    (2) Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously in 
accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 95-16-02, amendment 39-
9321, are approved as alternative methods of compliance with the 
corresponding paragraphs in this AD.

    Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of

[[Page 23239]]

compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Seattle 
ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (h) 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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 25, 2003.
Ali Bahrami,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-10727 Filed 4-30-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P