Airworthiness directives: McDonnell Douglas,

[Federal Register: November 4, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 213)]

[Proposed Rules]

[Page 60134-60136]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr04no99-19]

Proposed Rules Federal Register

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

[[Page 60134]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98-NM-135-AD]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series airplanes. For certain airplanes, this proposal would require inspection(s) to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners and follow-on actions. For certain other airplanes, this proposal would require installation of a preventative modification; an inspection to detect cracks at the corners of the doorjambs of the passenger and service doors; and follow-on actions. This proposal is prompted by reports indicating that fatigue cracks were found in the fuselage skin and doublers at the corners of the doorjambs of the passenger and service doors. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to detect and correct such fatigue cracking, which could result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 20, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-NM-135-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from The Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical Publications Business Administration, Dept. C1-L51 (2-60). This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg DiLibero, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5231; fax (562) 627-5210.

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 notice may be changed in light of the comments received.

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 filedin the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket Number 98-NM-135-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. 98-NM-135-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received reports of fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin and doublers at the corners of the doorjambs of the passenger and service doors on McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series airplanes. These cracks were discovered during inspections conducted as part of the Supplemental Inspection Document (SID) program, required by AD 93-01- 15, amendment 39-8469 (58 FR 5576, January 22, 1993). Investigation revealed that such cracking was caused by fatigue related stress. Fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin or doublers at the corners of the doorjambs of the lower cargo doors, if not detected and corrected in a timely manner, could result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995. For certain airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures for various inspection(s) to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners and follow-on actions. The follow-on actions include either performing repetitive inspections or installing a preventative modification, and repairing cracks, if necessary. For certain other airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures for installation of a preventative modification; an inspection to detect cracks at the corners of the doorjambs of the passenger and service doors; and follow-on actions similar to those described above. Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletin is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions

[[Page 60135]]

specified in the service bulletin described previously, except as discussed below.

Difference Between the Relevant Service Information and the Proposed AD

Operators should note that, although the service bulletin specifies that the manufacturer must be contacted for disposition of certain conditions, this proposal would require the repair of those conditions to be accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the FAA.

For Group 3 airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures for accomplishing a preventative modification, an inspection of the corners of the doorjamb of the passenger and service doors, and follow- on actions (i.e., repetitive inspections or contact manufacturer for disposition instructions for cracked doors, as applicable). ``Group 3 airplanes'' in the service bulletin is defined as aircraft with Douglas approved permanent repairs other than those outlined in the Structural Repair Manual or SR0850021. The service bulletin recommends that operators contact Douglas Aircraft Company two years prior to the accumulation of 17,000 total landings after accomplishment of the permanent repair, and that the inspection be conducted after accomplishment of the preventative modification. However, the proposed AD would require a revision of the FAA-approved maintenance or inspection program to include an inspection program for the doorjamb corners identified in the service bulletin. The proposed compliance for this revision is within 6 years following accomplishment of the permanent repair or 3 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. The new inspection program shall be approved by the FAA.

After review of the average utilization rates for U.S. operators of Model DC-8 series airplanes, the FAA has determined that a compliance time of prior to the accumulation of 17,000 landings would not provide an acceptable level of safety. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this action, the FAA considered the safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for timely accomplishment of the revision of the FAA-approved maintenance or inspection program. In consideration of these items, as well as the thresholds established in the repair assessment program (RAP), the FAA has determined that the proposed compliance time represents an appropriate interval of time wherein the requirements of the proposed AD can be accomplished during scheduled maintenance intervals for the majority of affected operators, and an acceptable level of safety can be maintained.

Operators also should note that, although the service bulletin specifies that the result of inspections be reported to the manufacturer, this proposal would not require a reporting requirement.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 294 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 251 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD.

Should an operator be required to accomplish the proposed inspection(s), it would take 48 (Group 1 airplanes) and 74 (all other groups of airplanes) work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the inspection(s) proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $2,880 (Group 1 airplanes) and $4,440 (all other groups of airplanes) per airplane, per inspection cycle.

Should an operator be required or elect to accomplish the proposed preventative modification, it would take approximately 1,440 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost approximately $2,000 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the preventative modification proposed by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $88,400 per airplane.

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.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct effects 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, in accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

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 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive:

    McDonnell Douglas: Docket 98-NM-135-AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-8 series airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995; 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) 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 detect and correct fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin and doublers at the corners of the doorjambs of the passenger and service doors, which could result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following:

    Note 2: Where there are differences between the service bulletin and the AD, the AD prevails.

    Note 3: The words ``repair'' and ``modify/modification'' in this AD and in the

    [[Page 60136]]

    referenced service bulletin are used interchangeably.

    Note 4: This AD is related to AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469, and will affect Principal Structural Elements (PSE) 53.08.038, 53.08.039, 53.08.040, and 53.08.041 of the DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID), Report L26-011, Volume I, Revision 3, dated March 1991.

    (a) For airplanes identified as Group 1 in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995: Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, perform the applicable inspection(s) to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners in accordance with the service bulletin.

    (1) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, repeat the applicable inspection(s) required by paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at intervals specified for Group 1 airplanes in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin; or accomplish the preventative modification in accordance with the service bulletin. Accomplishment of the preventative modification constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this paragraph.

    (2) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD.

    (b) Within 17,000 landings following accomplishment of the modification/repair required by either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, perform an inspection to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8- 53-075, dated August 17, 1995.

    (1) If no crack is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,400 landings.

    (2) If any crack is detected, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD.

    (c) For airplanes identified as Group 2 in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995: Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, accomplish the preventative modification in accordance with the service bulletin. Within 17,000 landings following accomplishment of the preventative modification, perform an inspection to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners, in accordance with the service bulletin.

    (1) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (c) of this AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,400 landings.

    (2) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (c) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair it in accordance the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD.

    (d) For airplanes identified as Group 3 in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995: Within 6 years following accomplishment of the permanent repair or within 3 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, revise the FAA-approved maintenance or inspection program to include an inspection program for the doorjamb corners identified in the service bulletin. The new inspection program shall be approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

    Note 5: Requests for approval of inspection procedures of the permanent repairs that are proposed for inclusion in the FAA- approved maintenance or inspection program, as required by this AD, should include a damage tolerance assessment.

    (e) For airplanes identified as Group 4 in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995: Within 17,000 landings following accomplishment of the modification specified in the service bulletin, perform an inspection to detect cracks of the doorjamb corners, in accordance with the service bulletin.

    (i) If no crack is detected during any inspection required paragraph (e) of this AD, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,400 landings.

    (ii) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (e) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with the service bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (f) of this AD.

    (f) Where McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-075, dated August 17, 1995, specifies that the manufacturer may be contacted for disposition of certain repair conditions, this AD requires the repair of those conditions to be accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

    (g) 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, Los Angeles ACO. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

    Note 6: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

    (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 October 29, 1999. D.L. Riggin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

    [FR Doc. 99-28849Filed11-3-99; 8:45 am]

    BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT