[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20548-20550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11089]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 98-NM-110-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 and C-9
(Military) 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-9 and C-9 (military) series airplanes. This proposal would require
repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the fuselage
frames and longerons 16R
[[Page 20549]]
and 17R above the forward lower cargo door; repair, if necessary; and
modification of the fuselage frames and longerons, if necessary, and
follow-on repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the skin
adjacent to the modification. This proposal is prompted by numerous
instances of fatigue cracking of the fuselage frames and longerons. The
actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue
cracking of the fuselage frames and longerons 16R and 17R, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
DATES: Comments must be received by June 11, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-NM-110-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 Company, Douglas Products Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical
Publications Business Administration, ept. 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: Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5324; 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 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 98-NM-110-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-110-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion
Operators have reported to the FAA numerous instances of fatigue
cracks on in-service McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 series airplanes in
the fuselage frames and longerons 16R and 17R above the forward lower
cargo door. These cracks were discovered during inspections conducted
as part of the Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID)
program, required by AD 96-13-03, amendment 39-9671 (61 FR 31009, June
19, 1996). Investigation has revealed that such cracking was caused by
fatigue-related stress. Such fatigue cracking, if not corrected, could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
The subject area on certain Model C-9 (military) series airplanes
is identical to that on the affected Model DC-9 series airplanes;
therefore, both models may be subject to the same unsafe condition.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC9-53-267, dated October 20, 1997, which describes procedures
for repetitive visual inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the
fuselage frames and longerons 16R and 17R above the forward lower cargo
door, and repair of any cracking of the fuselage frames and longerons
16R and 17R. The service bulletin also describes procedures for
modification of the fuselage frames and longerons 16R and 17R, if
necessary, and follow-on repetitive visual inspections to detect
fatigue cracking of the skin adjacent to the modification.
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 specified in
the service bulletin described previously.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 887 airplanes of the affected designs in
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 582 airplanes of U.S.
registry would be affected by this proposed AD. It would take
approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed
inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on
this figure, the cost impact of the proposed inspection on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $34,920, or $60 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.
Should an operator be required to accomplish the proposed
modification, it would take approximately 4 work hours per airplane to
accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required
parts would cost approximately $860 or $713 per airplane, depending on
the service kit purchased. Based on these figures, the cost impact of
the proposed modification is estimated to be as high as $1,100 and as
low as $953 per airplane.
Should an operator be required to accomplish the proposed follow-on
inspection of the fuselage skin, it would take approximately 1 work
hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, at an average
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on this figure, the cost impact
of the proposed inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to be $60 per
airplane, per inspection cycle.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
[[Page 20550]]
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-110-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-9 and C-9 (military) series airplanes,
as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-267, dated
October 20, 1997; 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 (e) 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 of the fuselage frames and longerons
16R and 17R, which could result in reduced structural integrity of
the airplane, accomplish the following:
Note 2: This AD will affect Principal Structural Element (PSE)
53.09.055A of the DC-9 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID).
(a) Prior to the accumulation of 30,000 total landings, or
within 3,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later, perform a visual inspection to detect fatigue cracking
of the fuselage frames and longerons 16R and 17R above the forward
lower cargo door, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC9-53-267, dated October 20, 1997.
(b) Condition 1. If no cracking is detected during the
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, accomplish the
requirements of either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-267, dated
October 20, 1997.
(1) Option 1. Repeat the visual inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 19,000 landings. Or
(2) Option 2. Prior to further flight, modify the fuselage
frames and longerons 16R and 17R. Prior to the accumulation of
19,000 landings after accomplishment of the modification, perform a
visual inspection to detect fatigue cracking of the skin adjacent to
the modification.
(i) If no cracking is detected, repeat the visual inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 19,000 landings.
(ii) If any cracking is detected, prior to further flight,
repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate.
(c) Condition 2. If any cracking is detected during the
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further
flight, repair the cracked area and modify the fuselage frames and
longerons 16R and 17R; in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC9-53-267, dated October 20, 1997. Prior to the
accumulation of 19,000 landings after accomplishment of the
modification, perform a visual inspection to detect fatigue cracking
of the skin adjacent to the modification; in accordance with the
service bulletin.
(1) If no cracking is detected, repeat the visual inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 19,000 landings.
(2) If any cracking is detected, prior to further flight, repair
in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles
ACO.
(d) Accomplishment of the actions required by this AD
constitutes terminating action for the requirements of AD 96-13-03,
amendment 39-9671, for PSE 53.09.055A only of the DC-9 SID.
(e) 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 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.
(f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
Secs. 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 April 21, 1998.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 98-11089 Filed 4-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U