[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 536-540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31312]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0540; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-185-AD; 
Amendment 39-17721; AD 2013-26-12]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009-14-02 for 
certain The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-
200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, 
and 747SP series airplanes. AD 2009-14-02 required repetitive 
inspections for wear damage and cracks of the fuselage skin in the 
interface area of the vertical stabilizer seal and fuselage skin, a 
detailed inspection for wear damage and cracks of the surface of any 
skin repair doubler in the area, and corrective actions if necessary. 
For airplanes on which the fuselage skin has been blended to remove 
wear damage, AD 2009-14-02 also required repetitive external detailed 
inspections or high frequency eddy current inspections for cracks of 
the blended area of the fuselage skin, and corrective actions if 
necessary. This new AD reduces the repetitive inspection interval, 
changes certain corrective actions, and expands the applicability. This 
AD was prompted by a report of wear through the fuselage skin that 
occurred sooner than the previous repetitive inspection interval. We 
are issuing this AD to detect and correct wear damage and cracks of the 
fuselage skin in the interface area of the vertical stabilizer seal and 
fuselage skin in sections 46 and 48, which could cause in-flight 
depressurization of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective February 10, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of February 10, 
2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P. 
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, 
extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information 
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0540; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket 
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and 
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6432; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, 
June 29, 2009). AD 2009-14-02 applied to the specified products. The 
NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2013 (78 FR 40050). 
The NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive inspections for 
wear damage and cracks of the fuselage skin in the interface area of 
the vertical stabilizer seal and fuselage skin, a detailed inspection 
for wear damage and cracks of the surface of any skin repair doubler in 
the area, and corrective actions if necessary. For airplanes on which 
the fuselage skin has been blended to remove wear damage, AD 2009-14-02 
also required repetitive external detailed inspections or high 
frequency eddy current inspections for cracks of the blended area of 
the fuselage skin, and corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also 
proposed to reduce the repetitive inspection interval, change certain 
corrective actions, and expand the applicability.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal 
(78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Modify Paragraph Title

    Boeing requested we revise the terminating action title of 
paragraph (i) of the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013) by removing the 
word ``Optional.'' Boeing stated that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, specifies that if any 
crack is found or if wear damage is greater than the limit allowed, rub 
strips must be installed in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 
747-53-2721, Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011. Boeing commented that in 
this case, the terminating action is not optional.

[[Page 537]]

    We do not agree with the commenter's request. We agree that in 
cases where any damage is found outside the limits allowed by Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, 
rub strips are required to be installed as described in that service 
bulletin.
    We disagree with removing the word ``optional'' in the title of 
paragraph (i) of this final rule, because the current wording in 
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this final rule requires the operators to do 
all applicable corrective actions in accordance with, and at the 
compliance times specified in, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. This wording in paragraphs 
(g) and (h) of this final rule requires installing rub strips as 
described in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, dated 
March 17, 2011, before further flight if the damage is found to be 
outside the limits permitted as described in the service repair manual 
(SRM). Paragraph (i) of this final rule is provided to give the 
operators the option to install the rub strips as described in Boeing 
Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, at any 
time. Doing the installation of the rub strips in accordance with 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, 
is a terminating action for the work given in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, at the 
locations of the rub strip installation only. We have not changed this 
final rule in this regard.

Requests To Reference Revised Service Information and Add Credit for 
Previous Actions

    Boeing and All Nippon Airways (ANA) requested we revise paragraphs 
(i) and (j)(3) of the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013) to reference the 
latest revision level of the referenced service information, which is 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 3, dated June 25, 2013.
    Boeing requested we revise paragraph (k)(2) of the NPRM (78 FR 
40050, July 3, 2013) to give credit for actions done prior to the 
effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, 
Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011.
    We agree with the commenters' requests. Boeing Service Bulletin 
747-53-2721, Revision 3, dated June 25, 2013, clarifies the post-
modification and post-repair inspection requirements and transfers 
post-repair inspection instructions from the SRM and repair assessment 
guidelines to this service bulletin for airplanes that have the zone 1 
full length repair installed. We have changed paragraphs (i) and (j)(3) 
of this final rule to reference Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, 
Revision 3, dated June 25, 2013.
    We also have added Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, 
dated March 17, 2011, to paragraph (k) of this final rule to provide 
credit for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this final rule, 
if the corresponding actions were performed before the effective date 
of this final rule using this service bulletin. We revised paragraph 
(k) by adding subparagraphs (k)(2)(i) through (iii).

Request To Withdraw the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013)

    Qantas Airways Limited (QAN) requested that we allow it to continue 
with the inspection program mandated in AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-
15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), as an alternative method of 
compliance (AMOC) to the actions specified in the NPRM (78 FR 40050, 
July 3, 2013). The FAA interprets this as a request to withdraw the 
NPRM and not supersede AD 2009-14-02. QAN commented that it understands 
the FAA's concern over the report of wear damage at earlier times than 
the AD 2009-14-02 inspection mandates. QAN stated that its fleet 
utilization and related extensive service experience with robust data 
collection on repetitive inspection results since the AD 2009-14-02 
compliance period commenced support the adequacy of the repetitive 
inspection interval of 7,500 flight hours in AD 2009-14-02. QAN also 
stated that minor wear damage in its fleet remains under SRM-allowable 
rework limits.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. The service and 
analytical data from the airplane manufacturer do not support the 
request to keep the current mandated repetitive inspection thresholds 
required by AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 
2009). An operator has reported wear through the fuselage skin between 
body station (STA) 2598 and STA 2638, stringers S-2L to S-3L. The wear 
developed in less than 3,657 flight hours since the previous 
inspection, which was less than the repetitive inspection interval 
given in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 2, dated 
July 15, 2010. The wear occurred through both the Teflon-filled coating 
and the full thickness of the 0.050-inch-thick skin to create a hole 
approximately 16 inches in length.
    In developing the compliance times for this final rule, we 
considered not only the safety implications of the identified unsafe 
condition, but the average utilization rate of the affected fleet and 
the practical aspects of an orderly inspection, repair, and 
modification of the fleet during regular maintenance periods. We have 
considered the commenter's request, and we have concluded that the 
proposed repetitive compliance times remain appropriate. However, under 
the provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD, we may consider requests 
for approval of an AMOC if sufficient data are submitted to 
substantiate that an alternative inspection plan would provide an 
acceptable level of safety. We have not changed this final rule in this 
regard.

Request for Clarification of Compliance Time

    QAN requested clarification on the rate of wear damage and the 
compliance times specified in the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013). QAN 
noted that on the airplanes that have not started the inspections 
described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 2, 
dated July 15, 2010, the compliance time for the initial inspection is 
20,000 total flight hours. QAN also noted that, on the airplanes that 
have started the inspections described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-53A2478, Revision 2, dated July 15, 2010, the initial inspection 
compliance time is reduced to 2,000 or 3,000 flight hours, depending on 
the condition. QAN stated that, based on the inspection program in AD 
2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), it 
understands that the rate at which the wear damage develops is a 
primary concern to the FAA.
    We agree to clarify. We agree with QAN that the AD 2009-14-02, 
Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), inspection program 
rate at which the wear damage developed is a primary concern because at 
least one operator has reported wear through the fuselage skin in less 
than 3,657 flight hours after a mandatory inspection, but before the 
specified repetitive inspection interval of 7,500 flight hours or 6,000 
flight hours. However, we do not agree with the commenter that the 
20,000-total-flight-hour threshold is reduced. Rather, the initial 
inspection threshold of 2,000 flight hours is not a reduced threshold 
as the commenter implied, but is instead a required time by which 
additional inspections must resume if any inspection has already been 
accomplished. With the service and analytical data from the airplane 
manufacturer, a new repetitive inspection program is required, as 
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, 
dated October 17, 2011. The compliance

[[Page 538]]

time depends on when operators have previously inspected their 
airplanes and the condition of the fuselage skin.
    We disagree with QAN that AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 
30919, June 29, 2009), has an adequate mandated repetitive interval 
because service history has shown defects reported before the AD 2009-
14-02 mandatory repetitive inspection interval. We have not changed 
this final rule in this regard.

Additional Change to This AD

    We have revised the Exceptions to Service Information, paragraph 
(j)(3) of this final rule, to include Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition; 
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 40050, July 3, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 917 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection [actions retained from  12 work-hours x $85              $0  $1,020.............  $935,340.
 AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-       per hour = $1,020.
 15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29,
 2009)].
Inspection and application of BMS  8 work-hours x $85               $0  $680 per inspection  $623,560 per
 10-86 Teflon-filled coating        per hour = $680                      cycle.               inspection cycles.
 [actions retained from AD 2009-    per inspection
 14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR   cycle.
 30919, June 29, 2009)].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be 
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected 
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected 
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost 
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), and adding 
the following new AD:

2013-26-12 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17721; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0540; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-185-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 10, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 
30919, June 29, 2009).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 
747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated 
in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of wear through the fuselage 
skin that occurred sooner than the previous repetitive inspection 
interval. We are issuing this AD

[[Page 539]]

to detect and correct wear damage and cracks of the fuselage skin in 
the interface area of the vertical stabilizer seal and fuselage skin 
in sections 46 and 48, which could cause in-flight depressurization 
of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Detailed Inspection

    At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
''Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, 
Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, except as specified in paragraph 
(j)(1) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of the fuselage skin and 
any skin repair doubler surface for wear damage and cracking at the 
vertical stabilizer seal interface, apply Boeing Material 
Specifications (BMS) 10-86 Teflon-filled coating, and do all 
applicable corrective actions, except as specified in paragraph 
(j)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 
3, dated October 17, 2011. Do all applicable corrective actions at 
the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
''Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, 
Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. Repeat the detailed inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed the applicable repetitive 
interval specified in paragraph 1.E., ''Compliance,'' of Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 
2011, except as specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. The 
effective date of AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, 
June 29, 2009), is August 3, 2009. Doing the installation of the rub 
strips in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, 
Revision 2, dated March 17, 2011, is a terminating action for the 
work given in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, 
dated October 17, 2011, at the locations of the rub strip 
installation only.

(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspections

    For airplanes on which the skin is blended forward of station 
2360 without external reinforcement: At the applicable compliance 
time specified in Table 4 in paragraph 1.E., ''Compliance,'' of 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 
17, 2011, do an external surface HFEC inspection of the blended area 
of the fuselage skin and the surface of any repair doubler for 
cracks, apply BMS 10-86 Teflon-filled coating, and do all applicable 
corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 
3, dated October 17, 2011. Do all applicable corrective actions at 
the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 
''Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, 
Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. Repeat the HFEC inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed the compliance time specified 
in paragraph 1.E., ''Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 
747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011. The effective date 
of AD 2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009) is 
August 3, 2009. Doing the installation of the rub strips in 
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, 
dated March 17, 2011, is a terminating action for the work given in 
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 
17, 2011, at the locations of the rub strip installation only.

(i) Optional Terminating Action

    Installation of corrosion resistant steel (CRES) rub strips in 
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 3, 
dated June 25, 2013, except as specified in paragraph (j)(3) of this 
AD, is terminating action for the inspections specified in 
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD at the locations of the CRES rub 
strip installations only.

(j) Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, 
dated October 17, 2011, specifies a compliance time after the 
``Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires 
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective 
date of this AD.
    (2) Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, is 
not a requirement of this AD.
    (3) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 3, dated 
June 25, 2013, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, 
Revision 3, dated October 17, 2011, specify to contact Boeing for a 
modification or for instructions: Before further flight, contact the 
FAA for instructions using a method approved in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, and accomplish 
those instructions.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in 
paragraph (g) of this AD, if the corresponding actions were 
performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 1, dated March 27, 2008; or 
Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 2, dated July 15, 
2010. This service information is not incorporated by reference in 
this AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in 
paragraph (i) of this AD, if the corresponding actions were 
performed before the effective date of this AD using the service 
bulletins specified in paragraph (k)(2)(i), (k)(2)(ii), or 
(k)(2)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, dated May 28, 2009, 
which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 1, dated June 
24, 2010, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (iii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 2, dated 
March 17, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local 
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending 
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 
attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. 
Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding 
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization 
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make 
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must 
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Installation of CRES rub strips approved as AMOCs for AD 
2009-14-02, Amendment 39-15951 (74 FR 30919, June 29, 2009), are 
approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Bill Ashforth, 
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone: 425-917-6432; fax: 425-917-6590; email: 
[email protected].
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified 
in paragraph (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2478, Revision 3, dated 
October 17, 2011.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2721, Revision 3, dated June 
25, 2013.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD, 
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; 
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet 
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.


[[Page 540]]


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 20, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-31312 Filed 1-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P