[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4727-4729]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-2095]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-152-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-11, DC-8-
12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, and DC-8-43 
Airplanes; DC-8-50 Series Airplanes; DC-8-61 Airplanes; DC-8-61F 
Airplanes; DC-8-71 Airplanes, and DC-8-71F Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to revise an existing airworthiness 
directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes. That 
AD currently requires visual or eddy current inspections of the left 
and right wing front spar lower caps to detect cracks migrating from 
attachment holes; and repair, if necessary. That AD also requires a 
terminating modification of the front spar lower cap. That AD was 
prompted by a report that additional cracking was found in the front 
spar lower cap of a wing. The actions specified by that AD are intended 
to prevent reduced structural integrity of the left or right wing due 
to metal fatigue failure of the front spar lower cap. This action would 
extend the compliance time for the follow-on inspection after 
accomplishment of the terminating modification.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 17, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-NM-152-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 2001-NM-152-AD'' in the subject line and need not 
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach Division, 
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data 
and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). 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, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Mowery, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712; 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 action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
    [sbull] Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
    [sbull] For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
    [sbull] Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    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 action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2001-NM-152-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. 2001-NM-152-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On March 12, 2001, the FAA issued AD 2001-06-02, amendment 39-12149 
(66 FR 16107, March 23, 2001), applicable to McDonnell Douglas Model 
DC-8 series airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC-8-57-090, Revision 05, dated June 16, 1997. That AD requires visual 
or eddy current inspections of the left and right wing front spar lower 
caps to detect cracks migrating from attachment holes; and repair, if 
necessary. That AD also requires a terminating modification of the 
front spar lower cap and a follow-on inspection. That action was 
prompted by a report that additional cracking was found in the front 
spar lower cap of a wing. The requirements of that AD are intended to 
prevent reduced structural integrity of the left or right wing due to 
metal fatigue failure of the front spar lower cap.

[[Page 4728]]

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    Since the issuance of that AD, the FAA has received information 
that the compliance time for the follow-on inspection after 
accomplishment of the terminating modification should be within 32,900 
landings after the modification rather than within 32,900 flight hours. 
The compliance time based on landings is longer than that based on 
flight hours, since the fleet averages 2.7 flight hours for every 
landing. The FAA has determined that extending the compliance time for 
the follow-on inspection after the terminating modification will 
provide an acceptable level of safety.

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 continue to require modification of the lower front 
spar cap and a follow-on inspection. However, the proposed AD would 
change the compliance time for the follow-on inspection from 32,900 
flight hours to 32,900 landings after the modification.

Explanation of Change to Applicability in Proposed AD

    The FAA has revised the applicability of the existing AD to 
identify model designations as published in the most recent type 
certificate data sheet for the affected models. The existing AD 
specifies the applicability as Model DC-8 series airplanes, as listed 
in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-090, Revision 05, dated 
June 16, 1997.'' The proposed AD specifies the applicability as 
``McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, 
DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, and DC-8-43 airplanes; DC-8-50 series 
airplanes; DC-8-61 airplanes; DC-8-61F airplanes; DC-8-71 airplanes, 
and DC-8-71F airplanes.''

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 264 Model DC-8 series airplanes of the 
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 244 
airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD.
    The initial and repetitive eddy current inspection currently 
required by AD 2001-06-02 takes approximately 2 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 currently required inspections on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $29,280, or $120 per airplane, per 
inspection cycle.
    The preventive modification currently required by AD 2001-06-02 
takes approximately 12 to 14 work hours per airplane to accomplish at 
an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts cost between 
$303 and $1,202 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact 
of the currently required preventive modification on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be between $256,773 and $512,542, or between $1,023 and 
$2,042, per airplane.
    The follow-on (post-modification) inspection currently required by 
AD 2001-06-02 takes approximately 2 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 currently required follow-on 
inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to be $29,280, or $120 per 
airplane. This proposal would increase the compliance time for 
performing the follow-on inspection, but would not change the estimated 
cost of that inspection.
    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. The cost impact figures 
discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to 
perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein would 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    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 removing amendment 39-12149 (66 FR 
16107, March 23, 2001), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2001-NM-152-AD. Revises AD 2001-06-02, 
Amendment 39-12149.

    Applicability: Model DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-
32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, and DC-8-43 airplanes; DC-8-51, -52, 
-53, and -55 airplanes; DC-8-61 airplanes; DC-8-61F airplanes; DC-8-
71 airplanes, and DC-8-71F airplanes; 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 (i) 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 reduced structural integrity of the left or right 
wing due to metal fatigue failure of the front spar lower cap, 
accomplish the following:

    Note 2: This AD will affect the inspections, corrective actions, 
and reports required by AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469 (58 FR 5576, 
January 22, 1993), for Principal Structural Elements (PSE) 57.08.021 
and 57.08.022 of the DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID).


    Note 3: Where there are differences between this AD and the 
referenced service bulletin, the AD prevails.


[[Page 4729]]



Eddy Current Inspection

    (a) For airplanes equipped with left or right wing front spar 
lower cap, part number (P/N) 5597838-1 or -2, not modified per any 
of the McDonnell Douglas DC-8 service bulletins listed in Table 1 of 
this AD: Do an eddy current inspection to detect cracks of the lower 
front spar caps of the wings at the attachment holes of the leading 
edge assembly between stations Xfs=515.000 and Xfs=526.760, per 
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-090, Revision 05, dated 
June 16, 1997, at the time specified in either paragraph (a)(1), 
(a)(2), or (a)(3) of this AD, as applicable. Eddy current 
inspections done before the effective date of this AD per McDonnell 
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-90, Revision 1, dated June 16, 
1988; Revision 2, dated March 1, 1991; Revision 3, dated March 25, 
1992; or Revision 4, dated March 3, 1995; are considered acceptable 
for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD. 
Table 1 is as follows:

   Table 1.--Applicable Service Bulletins for Preventive Modification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Service bulletin            Revision level           Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
57-90..........................  Original...........  October 3, 1983
57-90..........................  1..................  June 16, 1988
57-90..........................  2..................  March 1, 1991
57-90..........................  3..................  March 25, 1992
57-90..........................  4..................  March 3, 1995
DC8-57-090.....................  05.................  June 16, 1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) For airplanes on which the immediately preceding inspection 
was conducted using eddy current techniques per AD 86-20-08, 
amendment 39-5434, prior to April 27, 2001, (the effective date of 
AD 2001-06-02, amendment 39-12149). Inspect within 3,600 flight 
hours or 3 years after accomplishment of the last eddy current 
inspection, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes on which the immediately preceding inspection 
was conducted visually per AD 86-20-08 prior to April 27, 2001: 
Inspect within 3,200 flight hours or 2 years after accomplishment of 
the last visual inspection, whichever occurs first.
    (3) For airplanes on which a visual or eddy current inspection 
or the modification required by AD 86-20-08 has not been done: 
Inspect before the accumulation of 30,000 total flight hours, or 
within 200 flight hours after April 27, 2001.
    (b) For airplanes other than those identified in paragraph (a) 
of this AD, not modified per any of the McDonnell Douglas DC-8 
service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD: Within 3,200 flight 
hours or 2 years after April 27, 2001, whichever occurs first, do 
the eddy current inspection specified in paragraph (a) of this AD.

Repetitive Inspections

    (c) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by 
this AD, repeat the eddy current inspection every 3,600 flight hours 
or 3 years, whichever occurs first.

Repair

    (d) If any crack is detected during any inspection required this 
AD, before further flight, do the action specified in either 
paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For cracks within the limits specified in Conditions 2 
through 6, inclusive, Table 1 of paragraph 3.B.4 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC8-57-090, Revision 05, dated June 16, 1997: Modify the lower front 
spar cap per McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-090, Revision 
05, dated June 16, 1997. Accomplishment of the modification 
constitutes compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (c) and 
(e) of this AD.
    (2) For cracks that exceed the limits specified in Conditions 2 
through 6, inclusive, Table 1 of paragraph 3.B.4 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC8-57-090, Revision 05, dated June 16, 1997: Repair per a method 
approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), FAA.

Preventive Modification

    (e) Before the accumulation of 100,000 total flight hours, 
modify the lower front spar cap per paragraph 3.B.2.B of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC8-57-090, Revision 05, dated June 16, 1997. Accomplishment of the 
modification constitutes compliance with the requirements of 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD and terminates the repetitive 
inspection requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD. Modification of 
the lower front spar cap accomplished before the effective date of 
this AD per McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-90, dated 
October 3, 1993; Revision 1, dated June 16, 1988; Revision 2, dated 
March 1, 1991; Revision 3, dated March 25, 1992; or Revision 4, 
dated March 3, 1995; is considered acceptable for compliance with 
the requirements of paragraph (e) of this AD.
    (f) Accomplishment of the modification required by paragraph B. 
of AD 90-16-05, amendment 39-6614 (55 FR 31818, August 6, 1990) 
(which references ``DC-8 Aging Aircraft Service Action Requirements 
Document'' (SARD), McDonnell Douglas Report MDC K1579, Revision A, 
dated March 1, 1990, as the appropriate source of service 
information for accomplishing the modification) constitutes 
compliance with paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) of this AD and 
terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (c) 
of this AD.

Follow-On Inspection

    (g) Within 32,900 landings after accomplishment of the 
modification specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), or 
(g)(4) of this AD, or within 2 years after the effective date of 
this AD, whichever occurs later, perform an inspection to detect 
cracks in the area specified in paragraph (a) of this AD, and 
corrective actions, if necessary; per a method approved by the 
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
    (1) Modification required by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD;
    (2) Modification required by paragraph (e) of this AD;
    (3) Modification specified in paragraph D. of AD 86-20-08; or
    (4) Modification required by paragraph B. of AD 90-16-05.

Certain Actions Constitute Compliance With AD 90-16-05

    (h) Accomplishment of the eddy current inspection(s) required by 
this AD constitutes compliance with the inspections required by 
paragraph A. of AD 90-16-05, as it pertains to McDonnell Douglas DC-
8 Service Bulletin 57-90, Revision 2, dated March 1, 1991. 
Accomplishment of the eddy current inspection(s) does not terminate 
the remaining requirements of AD 90-16-05, as it applies to other 
service bulletins. Operators are required to continue to inspect 
and/or modify per the other service bulletins listed in that AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (i) 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 4: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (j) 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 23, 2003.
Vi L. Lipski,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-2095 Filed 1-29-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P