[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 194 (Friday, October 4, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51845-51847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-25460]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-199-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 Series
Airplanes and KC-10A (Military) 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), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10
series airplanes, and KC-10A (military) airplanes, that would have
required high frequency eddy current inspection(s) to detect cracks in
the secondary pivot support of the horizontal stabilizer, and various
follow-on actions, if necessary. That proposal was prompted by reports
of crack development in the secondary pivot support of the horizontal
stabilizer due to fatigue. This action revises the proposed rule by
adding repetitive visual inspections. The actions specified by this
proposed AD are intended to prevent such fatigue cracking, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer
and, subsequently, lead to reduced controllability of the airplane.
DATES: Comments must be received by October 30, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
[[Page 51846]]
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-199-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 McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical Publications
Business Administration, Department 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, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, California.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Atmur, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712; telephone
(310) 627-5224; 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 95-NM-199-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. 95-NM-199-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
certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 series airplanes, and KC-10A
(military) airplanes, was published as a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) in the Federal Register on March 22, 1996 (61 FR 11789). That
NPRM would have required high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections
to detect cracks in the secondary pivot support of the horizontal
stabilizer. The proposed AD also would have required repair of the
cracked area and follow-on actions, or replacement of the cracked
secondary pivot support of the horizontal stabilizer with a new
secondary pivot support. Such replacement would have constituted
terminating action for the repetitive inspections. That NPRM was
prompted by crack development in the secondary pivot support of the
horizontal stabilizer due to fatigue. That condition, if not corrected,
could result in reduced structural integrity of the horizontal
stabilizer; this situation subsequently could lead to reduced
controllability of the airplane.
Actions Since Issuance of Previous Proposal
Since the issuance of that NPRM, the FAA has recognized that the
repetitive intervals for accomplishing the visual inspections that
would be required by paragraph (c)(1) of the NPRM were inadvertently
omitted. These visual inspections are an optional procedure that is to
be accomplished if any crack is detected during an HFEC inspection, and
the cracking is repaired in accordance with the ``temporary repair''
procedures described in Paragraph (1) of Condition II (cracks), Option
1 (temporary repair), of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-
167, Revision 1. The FAA has determined that the proposed rule must be
revised to require visual inspections of the subject area at intervals
of 300 landings in order to ensure that fatigue cracking is addressed
in an adequate and timely manner.
Conclusion
Since this change expands the scope of the originally proposed
rule, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 376 McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 series
airplanes and KC-10A (military) airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 230 airplanes of U.S. registry
would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately
5 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed actions, and that
the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures,
the cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$69,000, or $300 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
The cost impact figure discussed above is 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
[[Page 51847]]
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 95-NM-199-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, and -40 series
airplanes, and KC-10A (military) airplanes; as listed in McDonnell
Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-167, Revision 1, dated February
15, 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
otherwise 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 (d) 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 prevent fatigue cracking in the secondary pivot support of
the horizontal stabilizer, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the horizontal stabilizer and, subsequently, lead to
reduced controllability of the airplane, accomplish the following:
(a) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total landings, or
within 3,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later, perform a high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection to detect cracks in the secondary pivot support of the
horizontal stabilizer, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-10
Service Bulletin 53-167, Revision 1, dated February 15, 1995.
(b) If no cracks are detected during the HFEC inspection
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, perform the actions specified
in paragraph (b)(1) of this AD until the actions specified in
paragraph (b)(2) of this AD are accomplished. These actions shall be
accomplished in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service
Bulletin 53-167, Revision 1, dated February 15, 1995.
(1) Repeat the HFEC inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 10,000 landings.
(2) Accomplishment of the preventative modification in
accordance with Condition I (no cracks), Option 2, of the service
bulletin constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspection requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this AD.
(c) If any crack is detected during the HFEC inspection required
by paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD, prior to further flight,
accomplish either paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 53-167,
Revision 1, dated February 15, 1995.
(1) Repair the crack in accordance with Paragraph (1) of
Condition II (cracks), Option 1 (temporary repair), of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Within 300
landings after accomplishing that repair, perform a visual
inspection to detect cracks at the area of the repair, in accordance
with the service bulletin. Repeat the visual inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 300 landings.
(i) If any crack is detected during the visual inspection
required by paragraph (c)(1) of this AD, prior to further flight,
repair it in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate.
(ii) Prior to 2,800 landings after accomplishing the HFEC
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, replace the
secondary pivot support of the horizontal stabilizer with a new
secondary pivot support, in accordance with Condition II (cracks),
Option 2, of the service bulletin. Accomplishment of this
replacement constitutes terminating action for the repetitive HFEC
and visual inspection requirements of this AD.
(2) Replace the secondary pivot support of the horizontal
stabilizer with a new secondary pivot support, in accordance with
Condition II (cracks), Option 2 (permanent repair), of the service
bulletin. Accomplishment of this replacement constitutes terminating
action for the repetitive HFEC and visual inspection requirements of
this AD.
(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 Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. 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 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the 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 September 27, 1996.
James V. Devany,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-25460 Filed 10-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U