[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 637-640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-262]



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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94-NM-195-AD]


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 and C-9 
(Military) Series Airplanes

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directive (AD), which would have superseded an existing AD that is 
applicable to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 and C-9 (military) series 
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires the implementation of a 
program of structural inspections to detect and correct fatigue 
cracking in order to ensure the continued airworthiness of these 
airplanes as they approach the manufacturer's original fatigue design 
life goal. The previously proposed action would have required, among 
other things, revision of the existing program to require additional 
visual inspections of additional structure. The previously proposed 
action was prompted by new data submitted by the manufacturer 
indicating that certain revisions to the program are necessary in order 
to increase the confidence level of the statistical program to ensure 
timely detection of cracks in various airplane structures. This action 
revises the proposed rule by deleting the requirement to perform 
certain visual inspections of Fleet Leader Operator Sampling (FLOS) 
Principal Structural Elements (PSE). The actions specified by this 
proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue cracking that could 
compromise the structural integrity of these airplanes.

DATES: Comments must be received by January 29, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 94-NM-195-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 

[[Page 638]]
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, P.O. Box 1771, Long Beach, 
California 90846-1771, Attention: Business Unit Manager, Contract Data 
Management, C1-255 (35-22). 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: Sol Davis or David Hsu, Aerospace 
Engineers, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 
Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (310) 627-5233 
for Mr. Davis, or (310) 627-5323 for Mr. Hsu; fax (310) 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 filed in 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 94-NM-195-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-103, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 94-NM-195-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 
McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 and C-9 (military) series airplanes, was 
published as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 
Register on May 16, 1995 (60 FR 26007). That NPRM would have required 
implementation of a program of structural inspections to detect and 
correct fatigue cracking in order to ensure the continued airworthiness 
of these airplanes as they approach the manufacturer's original fatigue 
design life goal. That NPRM was prompted by new data submitted by the 
manufacturer indicating that certain revisions to the program were 
necessary in order to increase the confidence level of the statistical 
program to ensure timely detection of cracks in various airplane 
structures. That condition, if not corrected, could result in fatigue 
cracking that could compromise the structural integrity of these 
airplanes.
    Since the issuance of that NPRM, the FAA has received a comment 
from the manufacturer that has caused the FAA to reconsider its 
position on certain aspects of the proposed rule.
    McDonnell Douglas requests a revision of paragraph (b)(1) of the 
proposal for clarification purposes. The manufacturer notes that the 
proposal states that operators are required to inspect airplanes before 
the threshold (Nth); however, the proposal does not clearly 
indicate that operators do not receive credit for these inspections in 
the Supplemental Inspection Document (SID) program, unless the aircraft 
has exceeded one-half of that threshold (Nth/2). The FAA concurs. 
The FAA has revised proposed paragraph (b)(1) to indicate that the 
inspections are to be performed prior to reaching the threshold 
(Nth), but no earlier than Nth/2.
    McDonnell Douglas also requests the deletion of the requirement to 
visually inspect the Fleet Leader Operator Sampling (FLOS) Principal 
Structural Elements (PSE) that are proposed in paragraph (b)(3). The 
manufacturer states that these requirements are redundant to those 
required by AD 92-22-08 R1, amendment 39-8591 (58 FR 32281, June 9, 
1993), which requires the implementation of a corrosion prevention and 
control program to inspect all primary structure, including all PSE's.
    The FAA concurs. Paragraph (b)(3) from the original NPRM has been 
deleted, and a new NOTE 3 has been added to this supplemental NPRM to 
indicate that these visual inspections are not required. However, the 
visual inspections that are part of the Non Destructive Inspection 
(NDI) procedures specified in Section 2 of Volume II of the SID would 
still be required by this AD action. Additionally, paragraph (b)(4) 
from the originally proposed rule, which would have required certain 
general visual inspections, has been deleted from this supplemental 
NPRM since the requirement to perform visual inspections of FLOS PSE's 
are no longer required by this AD action.
    Also, since issuance of the original NPRM, the FAA has reviewed and 
approved Volume III-95 of the SID, dated September 1995, which 
eliminates the visual FLOS inspections that were contained in Volume 
III-94 of the SID, dated July 1994. Volume III-94 was referenced in the 
original NPRM as the appropriate source of service information for 
performing visual inspections of PSE's. Therefore, paragraph (b) of 
this supplemental NPRM has been revised to reference Volume III-95 as 
the appropriate source of service information.
    Since these changes significantly revise the originally proposed 
rule, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment 
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.
    Although other comments were received in response to the original 
NPRM, those comments, as well as any other received in response to this 
supplemental NPRM, will be addressed in the final rule.
    There are approximately 889 Model DC-9 and C-9 (military) series 
airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA 
estimates that 568 airplanes of U.S. registry and 38 U.S. operators 
would be affected by this proposed AD.
    Incorporation of the SID program into an operator's maintenance 
program, as required by AD 94-03-01, is estimated to necessitate 1,062 
work hours (per operator), at an average labor rate of $60 per work 
hour. Based on these figures, the cost to the 38 affected U.S. 
operators to incorporate the SID program is estimated to be $2,421,360.
    The incorporation of the revised procedures proposed in this AD 
action would require approximately 20 additional work hours per 
operator to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. 
Based on these figures, the cost to the 38 affected U.S. operators to 
incorporate these revised 

[[Page 639]]
procedures into the SID program into an operator's maintenance program 
is estimated to be $45,600.
    The recurring inspection costs, as required by AD 94-03-01, are 
estimated to be 362 work hours per airplane per year, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the recurring 
inspection costs required by AD 94-01-03 are estimated to be $21,720 
per airplane, or $12,336,960 for the affected U.S. fleet.
    The recurring inspection procedures added to the program by this 
proposed AD action would not add any new additional economic burden on 
affected operators since certain inspections would be added while 
others would be deleted.
    Based on the figures discussed above, the cost impact of this AD is 
estimated to be $12,382,560 for the first year, and $12,336,960 for 
each year thereafter. These cost impact figures discussed above is 
based on assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the 
proposed requirements of this AD action. However, it can be reasonably 
be assumed that the majority of the affected operators have already 
initiated the SID program (as required by AD 94-03-01).
    Additionally, the number of required work hours for each proposed 
inspection (and for the SID program), as indicated above, is presented 
as if the accomplishment of those actions were to be conducted as 
``stand alone'' actions. However, in actual practice, these actions for 
the most part will be accomplished coincidentally or in combination 
with normally scheduled airplane inspections and other maintenance 
program tasks. Therefore, the actual number of necessary additional 
work hours will be minimal in many instances. Further, any cost 
associated with special airplane scheduling can be expected to be 
minimal.
    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 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-8807 (59 FR 
6538, February 11, 1994), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 94-NM-195-AD. Supersedes AD 94-03-01, 
Amendment 39-8807.

    Applicability: Model DC-9-10, -20, -30, -40, -50, and C-9 
(military) series airplanes; certificated in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To ensure the continuing structural integrity of these 
airplanes, accomplish the following:
    (a) Within 6 months after March 14, 1994 (the effective date of 
AD 94-03-01, amendment 39-8807), incorporate a revision into the 
FAA-approved maintenance inspection program which provides for 
inspection(s) of the Principal Structural Elements (PSE) defined in 
McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26-008, ``DC-9 Supplemental Inspection 
Document (SID),'' Section 2 of Volume I of Revision 3, dated April 
1991, in accordance with Section 2 of Volume III-92, dated July 
1992, of the SID.
    (1) Visual inspections of all PSE's on airplanes listed in 
Volume III-92, dated July 1992, of the SID planning data, are 
required by the fleet leader-operator sampling (FLOS) program at 
least once during the interval between the start date (SDATE) and 
the end date (EDATE) established for each PSE. These visual 
inspections are defined in Section 3 of Volume II, dated April 1991, 
of the SID, and are required only for those airplanes that have not 
been inspected previously in accordance with Section 2 of Volume II, 
dated April 1991, of the SID.
    (2) The Non Destructive Inspection (NDI) techniques set forth in 
Section 2 of Volume II, dated April 1991, of the SID provide 
acceptable methods for accomplishing the inspections required by 
this paragraph.
    (3) All inspection results (negative or positive) must be 
reported to McDonnell Douglas, in accordance with the instructions 
contained in Section 2 of Volume III-92, dated July 1992, of the 
SID. 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.

    Note 1: Volume II, dated April 1991, of the SID is comprised of 
the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Revision 
                    Volume designation-                      level shown
                                                              on volume 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume II-10/20-...........................................            3
Volume II-20/30-...........................................            4
Volume II-40-..............................................            3
Volume II-50-..............................................            3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 2: NDI inspections accomplished in accordance with the 
following Volume II of the SID provide acceptable methods for 
accomplishing the inspections required by this paragraph:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Volume designation-           Revision level-    Date of revision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume II-10/20-.................  3-................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-10/20-.................  2-................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-10/20-.................  1-................  June 1989.       
Volume II/20-....................  Original-.........  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-20/30-.................  4-................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-20/30-.................  3-................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-20/30-.................  2-................  June 1989.       
Volume II-20/30-.................  1-................  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-40-....................  3-................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-40-....................  2-................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-40-....................  1-................  June 1989.       
Volume II-40-....................  Original-.........  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-50-....................  3-................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-50-....................  2-................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-50-....................  1-................  June 1989.       
Volume II-50-....................  Original-.........  Nov. 1987.       
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, replace 
the revision of the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, with a revision that provides 
for inspection(s) of the PSE's defined in McDonnell Douglas Report 
No. L26-008, ``DC-9 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' 
Section 2 of Volume I of McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26-008, ``DC-
9 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Revision 4, dated July 
1993, in accordance with Section 2 of Volume III-95, dated September 
1995, of the SID.
    Note 3: Operators should note that certain visual inspections of 
FLOS PSE's that were previously specified in earlier revisions of 
Volume III of the SID are no longer specified in Volume III-95 of 
the SID.
    (1) Prior to reaching the threshold (Nth), but no earlier 
than one-half of the threshold (Nth/2), specified for all PSE's 
listed in Volume 

[[Page 640]]
III-95, dated September 1995, of the SID, inspect each PSE sample in 
accordance with the NDI procedures set forth in Section 2 of Volume 
II, dated July 1993. Thereafter, repeat the inspection for that PSE 
at intervals not to exceed DNDI/2 of the NDI procedure that is 
specified in Volume III-95, dated September 1995, of the SID.
    (2) The NDI techniques set forth in Section 2 of Volume II, 
dated July 1993, of the SID provide acceptable methods for 
accomplishing the inspections required by this paragraph.
    (3) All inspection results (negative or positive) must be 
reported to McDonnell Douglas, in accordance with the instructions 
contained in Section 2 of Volume III-95, dated September 1995, of 
the SID. 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.

    Note 4: Volume II, dated July 1993, of the SID is comprised of 
the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Revision 
                    Volume designation-                      level shown
                                                              on volume 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume II-10/20-...........................................            4
Volume II-20/30-...........................................            5
Volume II-40-..............................................            4
Volume II-50-..............................................            4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 5: NDI inspections accomplished in accordance with the 
following Volume II of the SID provide acceptable methods for 
accomplishing the inspections required by this paragraph:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Volume designation           Revision level     Date of revision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume II-10/20..................  4.................  July 1993.       
Volume II-10/20..................  3.................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-10/20..................  2.................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-10/20..................  1.................  June 1989.       
Volume II/20.....................  Original..........  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-20/30..................  5.................  July 1993.       
Volume II-20/30..................  4.................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-20/30..................  3.................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-20/30..................  2.................  June 1989.       
Volume II-20/30..................  1.................  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-40.....................  4.................  July 1993.       
Volume II-40.....................  3.................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-40.....................  2.................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-40.....................  1.................  June 1989.       
Volume II-40.....................  Original..........  Nov. 1987.       
Volume II-50.....................  4.................  July 1993.       
Volume II-50.....................  3.................  Apr. 1991.       
Volume II-50.....................  2.................  Apr. 1990.       
Volume II-50.....................  1.................  June 1989.       
Volume II-50.....................  Original..........  Nov. 1987.       
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Any cracked structure detected during the inspections 
required by either paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD must be repaired 
before further flight, in accordance with a method approved by the 
Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate.

    Note 6: Requests for approval of any PSE repair that would 
affect the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that is 
required by this AD should include a damage tolerance assessment for 
that PSE.

    (d) 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. Alternative methods of compliance 
previously granted for AD 94-03-01, amendment 39-8807, continue to 
be considered as acceptable alternative methods of compliance with 
this amendment.

    Note 7: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

    (e) 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 January 3, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-262 Filed 1-08-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U