[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64263-64265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28089]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2003 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 64263]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2003-NM-173-AD; Amendment 39-13364; AD 2003-23-01]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400, -400D, and -400F 
Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Boeing Model 747-400, -400D, and -400F series 
airplanes, that requires reviewing airplane maintenance records; 
inspecting the yaw damper actuator portion of the upper and lower 
rudder power control modules (PCM) for cracking, and replacing the PCMs 
if necessary; and reporting airplane maintenance records review and 
inspection results to the manufacturer. This action is necessary to 
detect and correct cracking in the yaw damper actuator portion of the 
upper and lower rudder PCMs, which could result in an uncommanded left 
rudder hardover, consequent increased pilot workload, and possible 
runway departure upon landing. This action is intended to address the 
identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective December 18, 2003.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of December 18, 2003.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Tsuji, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-
4056; telephone (425) 917-6487; fax (425) 917-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 747-400, -
400D, and -400F series airplanes was published in the Federal Register 
on August 28, 2003 (68 FR 51735). That action proposed to require 
reviewing airplane maintenance records; inspecting the yaw damper 
actuator portion of the upper and lower rudder power control modules 
(PCM) for cracking, and replacing the PCMs if necessary; and reporting 
airplane maintenance records review and inspection results to the 
manufacturer.

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.

Agreement With the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

    Two commenters state that they agree with the NPRM.

Request To Revise Paragraph (f) of the NPRM

    One commenter requests that paragraph (f) of the NPRM be revised to 
permit installation of the components without continuing inspections at 
each installation of the components. The commenter states that it does 
not believe that is the intent of the applicable service bulletin. The 
commenter further states that, without specific relief, paragraph (f) 
of the NPRM will eventually require inspections on parts with fewer 
total flight hours or total flight cycles than the thresholds specified 
by the NPRM.
    The FAA notes that the requirements of paragraph (f) of the final 
rule to prohibit units that have reached the thresholds specified in 
paragraph (f) of the final rule (15,000 total flight hours or more or 
2,000 total flight cycles or more) may impose a burden to the affected 
operators. However, as noted in the ``Interim Action'' section of the 
NPRM, we consider the actions specified in this final rule to be 
interim actions, since the root cause of the fatigue cracking has not 
been determined. We are trying to gain better insight into the nature, 
cause, extent of the cracking, and to develop a final action for the 
unsafe condition. However, to prevent continuing inspections upon each 
installation, we acknowledge that some relief should be provided. 
Therefore, we have revised paragraph (f) of the final rule to specify 
that a rudder PCM with 15,000 total flight hours or more or 2,000 total 
flight hours or more may not be installed ``unless it has been 
inspected within the previous 15,000 flight hours or 2,000 flight 
cycles'' of the PCM. We have determined that the relief provided by 
revising paragraph (f) of the final rule will continue to provide an 
acceptable level of safety for the fleet.

Request To Clarify the Term Power Control Modules ``PCMs''

    One commenter, the airplane manufacturer, requests that use of the 
term ``PCM'' in the NPRM be clarified by adding the following words: 
``with a main manifold.'' The commenter notes that the 15,000 total 
flight hours and 2,000 total flight cycle thresholds are based on the 
life of the PCM main manifold.
    We agree that clarification is necessary, and have revised the 
final rule accordingly.

Request To Extend the Compliance Time

    One commenter requests that the compliance time be extended from 
``within 3 months after the effective date of the AD'' to ``within 1 
year after the effective date of the AD'' for the following reasons:
    [sbull] Tool Availability--The commenter notes that Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 24, 2003, states that no 
special tools are needed to perform the proposed ultrasonic inspection. 
However, the commenter points out that two special tools are actually 
needed and that it was only recently able to obtain them.

[[Page 64264]]

    [sbull] Accessibility--The commenter states that hangar 
availability will cause a problem, since the hangars available for 
inspecting airplanes affected by the NPRM are always occupied by 
airplanes undergoing heavy maintenance. The commenter states that it 
will lose valuable time for its fleet if it has to inspect within the 
proposed 3-month compliance time.
    [sbull] Inspection Criteria--The commenter notes that the 
applicable service bulletin does not specify repetitive inspections or 
any terminating action. The commenter thinks that the inspection is 
mainly to collect data and, therefore, cannot understand the urgency of 
the 3-month compliance time.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. As stated previously 
in this final rule, the root cause of the fatigue cracking has not been 
determined. Because the root cause is unknown, we do not know if the 
fatigue cracking that was reported is a random event or if it may 
indicate that the structural life of the PCMs with a main manifold is 
shorter than expected. We agree with the referenced service bulletin 
that special tools are not necessary to perform the ultrasonic 
inspection. However, the manufacturer has advised that other tools used 
as aids in performing the inspection are available to operators. 
Additionally, we acknowledge that the commenter may lose time for its 
fleet if it has to inspect within the proposed 3-month compliance time. 
However, because of the severe consequences of the unsafe condition 
existing and the fact that there were apparently no indications of a 
crack developing, we have determined that the 3-month compliance time 
is prudent and appropriate. No change is necessary to the final rule in 
this regard. However, under the provisions of paragraph (g) of the 
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.

Request To Revise Criterion for Applicable Airplanes

    One commenter requests that the criterion for airplanes specified 
to perform the proposed inspections be revised from 15,000 total flight 
hours or more or 2,000 total flight cycles or more to 55,000 total 
flight cycles or 7,500 total flight cycles, as specified by Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 24, 2003. The commenter 
states that its service experience supports the criterion specified in 
the applicable service bulletin.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. We acknowledge that 
the applicable service bulletin does specify that the reported incident 
occurred on a rudder PCM with approximately 55,000 flight hours and 
7,500 flight cycles, and that the airplanes that were chosen for the 
investigation had accumulated at least 55,000 flight hours and 7,500 
flight cycles. However, the Accomplishment Instructions (paragraph 
3.B.1 of the applicable service bulletin) clearly states that, ``If 
your records show that the upper and lower rudder PCMs each have a main 
manifold with less than 15,000 flight hours or 2,000 flight cycles: It 
is not necessary to do the inspections* * *'' We have evaluated these 
criteria and conclude that the appropriate criterion for applicable 
airplanes to be inspected is those airplanes with PCMs that have 
accumulated 15,000 total flight hours or 2,000 total flight hours. No 
change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request To Revise Sensitivity Level of Dye Penetrant Inspection

    One commenter, the PCM manufacturer, requests that the sensitivity 
level of the dye penetrant inspection for PCMs that are cracked and 
returned to the manufacturer be revised. The commenter notes that, 
after the issuance of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, it 
increased the inspection sensitivity level from Level 3 to Level 4 for 
those PCMs that were returned.
    We recognize the commenter's expertise and appreciate the 
information it has provided. This final rule requires PCMs with any 
cracking to be returned to the PCM manufacturer, but does not specify 
the inspection process to be used by the PCM manufacturer. Therefore, 
the change in sensitivity level of the dye penetrant inspection on PCMs 
returned to the PCM manufacturer does not directly affect the 
requirements of this AD. No change to this final rule is necessary in 
this regard.

Request for Industry To Provide Operational Procedures

    One commenter states that industry must develop a set of 
operational procedures to allow flight crews to deal with a flight 
situation such as the one described in the NPRM. The commenter agrees 
with the actions proposed in the NPRM, but specifies that additional 
procedures for flight crews are necessary.
    We acknowledge the commenter's concern. As previously explained, we 
consider this final rule to be interim action. Based on the findings of 
the reports to be submitted and any other pertinent information, we may 
consider further rulemaking actions. However, until such findings are 
made known and further actions developed, we consider the actions 
specified in the final rule to provide an acceptable level of safety. 
Therefore, 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 final rule.

Interim Action

    We consider this final rule interim action. The inspection reports 
that are required by this final rule will enable the manufacturer and 
the FAA to obtain better insight into the nature, cause, and extent of 
the cracking, and eventually to develop final action to address the 
unsafe condition. Once final action has been identified, we may 
consider further rulemaking.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 180 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 13 airplanes of U.S. registry 
will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 1 work 
hour per airplane to accomplish the airplane maintenance records 
review, and that the average labor rate is $65 per work hour. Based on 
these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated 
to be $845, or $65 per airplane.
    Should an operator be required to accomplish the inspection, it 
will take approximately 4 work hours per airplane, at an average labor 
rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
the inspection is estimated to be $260 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.

[[Page 64265]]

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:

2003-23-01 Boeing: Amendment 39-13364. Docket 2003-NM-173-AD.

    Applicability: Model 747-400, -400D, and -400F series airplanes, 
as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 
24, 2003; certificated in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct cracking in the yaw damper actuator 
portion of the upper and lower rudder power control module (PCM) 
main manifolds, which could result in an uncommanded left rudder 
hardover, consequent increased pilot workload, and possible runway 
departure upon landing, accomplish the following:

Review of Airplane Maintenance Records

    (a) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD: Review 
the airplane maintenance records to determine if each PCM has a main 
manifold with less than 15,000 total flight hours or fewer than 
2,000 total flight cycles, or do the inspection required by 
paragraph (c) of this AD.

Follow-on Actions: PCMs With a Main Manifold Having Less Than 15,000 
Total Flight Hours or Less Than 2,000 Flight Cycles

    (b) If it can be positively determined from the review of the 
airplane maintenance records that each rudder PCM has a main 
manifold that is below either of the thresholds specified in 
paragraph (a) of this AD: Submit a report to the manufacturer in 
accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.

Follow-on Actions: PCMs With a Main Manifold Having 15,000 Total Flight 
Hours or More and 2,000 Flight Cycles or More

    (c) If it cannot be positively determined that each rudder PCM 
has a main manifold that is below either of the thresholds specified 
in paragraph (a) of this AD: Within 3 months after the effective 
date of this AD, do an ultrasonic inspection of the yaw damper 
actuator portion of the upper and lower rudder PCM main manifold in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions specified in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 24, 2003. After 
completing the actions required by paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of 
this AD, as applicable, submit a report to the manufacturer in 
accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.
    (1) If no cracking is found: Apply sealant and a torque stripe 
and install a lockwire on the applicable rudder PCM per Figure 1 or 
Figure 2, as applicable, and the Accomplishment Instructions 
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 
24, 2003.
    (2) If any cracking is found: Before further flight, replace the 
affected PCM with a PCM with a main manifold having less than 15,000 
total flight hours and less than 2,000 total flight cycles, or a PCM 
with a main manifold that has been inspected by the supplier (Parker 
Hannifin Corporation) or ultrasonically inspected in accordance with 
the Accomplishment Instructions specified in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 24, 2003.

Reporting Requirements

    (d) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (d)(1) or 
(d)(2) of this AD, accomplish paragraph (e).
    (1) If the inspection was done after the effective date of this 
AD: Submit the report and PCM, if applicable, within 20 days after 
the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective 
date of this AD: Submit the report and PCM, if applicable, within 20 
days after the effective date of this AD.
    (e) Do the requirements of paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this 
AD. Information collection requirements contained in this regulation 
have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
    (1) Submit a report of the airplane maintenance records review 
or the inspection findings (positive and negative) to: The Boeing 
Company, Service Engineering--Mechanical Systems, Attn: R. Adams, 
fax: (425) 342-5224. The report must contain the airplane and rudder 
PCM serial numbers, the total flight hours and flight cycles for 
each rudder PCM (and rudder PCM main manifold, if known), and a 
description of any damage found. Submission of the Inspection Report 
Form (Figure 3 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated 
July 24, 2003) is an acceptable method of complying with this 
requirement.
    (2) Send parts to Parker Hannifin Corporation in accordance with 
the shipping instructions specified in Appendix A of the service 
bulletin.

Parts Installation

    (f) As of the effective date of this AD, no person shall install 
on any airplane a rudder PCM with a main manifold having 15,000 
total flight hours or more, or 2,000 total flight cycles or more, 
unless it has been ultrasonically inspected (either by the operator 
or the supplier) within the previous 15,000 flight hours or 2,000 
flight cycles, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions 
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated July 
24, 2003.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Seattle 
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, is authorized to approve 
alternative methods of compliance for this AD.

Incorporation by Reference

    (h) Unless otherwise specified, the actions shall be done in 
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-27A2397, dated 
July 24, 2003. 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 
Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. 
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.

Effective Date

    (i) This amendment becomes effective on December 18, 2003.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 3, 2003.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-28089 Filed 11-12-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P