Discussion \n\n\n\tWe issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2008-08-25, Amendment 39-15479 (73 FR 21240, April 21, 2008). AD 2008-08-25 applied to certain The Boeing Company Model 747-400 and 747-400F series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 6, 2012 (77 FR 54854). The NPRM was prompted by reports of continued water damage to diode fire card 285U0072-1 in the M826 automatic fire overheat logic test system cardfile following a false FWD CARGO FIRE message, with no change in frequency, which resulted in an air turn back. The NPRM proposed to require installing drain tubes, relocating wire bundle routing, installing a new drip shield and drip shield deflectors, and replacing insulation blankets. For certain airplanes, the NPRM also proposed to concurrently require sealing the drain slot, installing spuds, and installing drain tubes. We are issuing this AD to prevent water from exiting over the edge of the existing drip shield and contaminating electrical components in the M826 cardfile, which could result in an electrical short and potential loss of several functions essential for safe flight. \n\nRelevant Service Information \n\n\n\tSince we issued the NPRM (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012), we have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3580, Revision 2, dated May 13, 2013. We referred to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3580, Revision 1, dated July 14, 2011, as an appropriate source of service information for accomplishing certain actions specified in the NPRM. \n\tBoeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3580, Revision 2, dated May 13, 2013, among other changes, revises line number 1087 to 1332 for group 1 airplanes to account for airplanes that had the drain tubes installed in production, adds figures to account for actions required by certain groups, adds brackets and rivets, and changes certain part numbers of certain brackets. \n\tBoeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, among other things, clarifies wire routing, allows for trimming of parts, and adds parts to the top kit. \n\tWe have added a new paragraph (i) to this final rule to allow for credit for \n\n((Page 17404)) \n\nactions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3580, Revision 1, dated July 14, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs accordingly. \n\nComments \n\n\n\tWe gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012) and the FAA's response to each comment. \n\nRequest To Use Latest Service Information \n\n\n\tUnited Parcel Service (UPS) and Boeing requested that we revise the NPRM (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012) to replace Boeing Alert Service Bulletin747-25A3581, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2011, with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012. UPS explained that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, revises the effectivity, and includes changes, corrections, and clarifications to the work instructions. UPS reasoned that in order to avoid additional efforts of applying for, approving, and documenting alternative methods of compliance for using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, we should instead revise the NPRM to incorporate Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, which, according to Boeing, would change paragraphs (c)(2), (g), and (h) of the NPRM. \n\tWe partially agree. We disagree with the request to change paragraphs (c)(2) and (h) of this AD. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, adds one new airplane to the effectivityand would require resubmittal of the NPRM (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012) for public comment on this change, which would delay the publication of this final rule. To delay this action would be inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe condition exists and that the required actions must be conducted to ensure continued safety. We might consider further rulemaking at a later time to address the additional airplane. However, we do agree to revise paragraph (g) of this AD by also referring to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3581, Revision 2, dated September 11, 2012, as an appropriate method of compliance for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD. \n\nConclusion \n\n\n\tWe reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment 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: \n\tAre consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012) for correcting the unsafe condition; and \n\tDo not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 54854, September 6, 2012). \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tWe estimate that this AD affects 38 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: \n\n\n\tEstimated Costs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tAction Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Installation, relocation, and Up to 23 work- Up to $8,887..... Up to $10,842.... Up to $411,996. \n\treplacement. hours x $85 per \n\thour = $1,955. Concurrent installation....... 8 work-hours x $1,801........... $2,481........... $94,278.$85 per hour = \n\t680. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\n\n\tAccording 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. \n\nAuthority for This Rulemaking \n\n\n\tTitle 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. \n\tWe 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. \n\nRegulatory Findings \n\n\n\tWe 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. \n\tFor the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: \n\t(1) Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, \n\t(2) Is not a ''significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), \n\t(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and \n\t(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. \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.