[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64827-64830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28607]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-133-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-70 and -
70F 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-8-70 and -70F series airplanes. This proposal would require 
repetitive inspections for cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb 
corners, and corrective action if necessary. For certain airplanes, 
this proposal would provide for optional terminating action for certain 
repetitive inspections. For certain other airplanes, this proposal 
would require modification of the lower cargo doorjamb corners. This 
action is necessary to detect and correct cracking in the lower cargo 
doorjamb corners, which could result in rapid decompression of the 
fuselage and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane. 
This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by January 2, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-NM-133-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: 
9-anm-

[[Page 64828]]

[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must contain 
``Docket No. 2001-NM-133-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 or 2000 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 90712-4137; 
telephone (562) 627-5322; 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-133-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-133-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    The FAA has received reports of fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin 
in the lower cargo doorjamb corners on McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-70 
and -70F 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). The cracks were found in areas that extend beyond 
the inspection areas of AD 93-01-15. Investigation revealed that the 
cracking was caused by fatigue-related stress. Such fatigue cracking, 
if not corrected, could result in rapid decompression of the fuselage 
and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001, which describes 
procedures for various repetitive inspections for cracking of the lower 
cargo doorjamb corners, and corrective action if necessary. The service 
bulletin divides the effectivity into four groups of airplanes, based 
on the modification status of the lower cargo doorjamb corners. The 
service bulletin also describes procedures for certain airplanes for a 
modification of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, which, if 
accomplished, would eliminate the need for certain repetitive 
inspections. The manufacturer issued Revision 01 to revise the 
compliance schedules for certain inspections. Accomplishment of the 
actions specified in the service bulletin is intended to adequately 
address the identified unsafe condition.
    We have identified Revision 01 of the service bulletin as an 
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) with the requirements of 
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of AD 93-01-15.

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, except as discussed below. 
The proposed AD would also require that operators send us a report of 
the results of each inspection.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    Although the service bulletin specifies that the manufacturer may 
be contacted for disposition of certain repair conditions, this 
proposal would require that those repairs be done per an FAA-approved 
method, or per data meeting the type certification basis of the 
airplane approved by a Boeing Company Designated Engineering 
Representative whom we have authorized to make such findings.

Cost Impact

    There are about 264 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 244 airplanes of U.S. registry would 
be affected by this proposed AD.
    The proposed pre-modification inspections, if required, would take 
about 24 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per 
work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of these proposed 
actions is estimated to be $1,560 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The modification, if accomplished, would take about 520 work hours 
per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. The parts 
would cost about $25,000. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
this action is estimated to be $58,800 per airplane.
    The proposed post-modification inspections would take about 40 work 
hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. 
Based on these figures, the cost impact of these proposed actions is 
estimated to be $634,400, or $2,600 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    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 proposed AD were not adopted. The cost impact 
figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the

[[Page 64829]]

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 adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2001-NM-133-AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-8-70 and -70F series airplanes, 
certificated in any category, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service 
Bulletin DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct cracking in the lower cargo doorjamb 
corners, which could result in rapid decompression of the fuselage 
and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane, 
accomplish the following:

    Note 1: This AD is related to AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469, 
and will affect Principal Structural Elements (PSEs) 53.08.042 and 
53.08.043 of the DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID), Report 
L26-011, Volume II, Revision 7, dated April 1993.

Group 1 Airplanes: Inspections and Optional Terminating Action

    (a) For airplanes identified as Group 1 in McDonnell Douglas 
Service Bulletin DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001:
    (1) Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after the effective date of 
this AD, whichever occurs first, perform applicable inspections for 
cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin.
    (i) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by 
this paragraph: Repeat the inspections within the intervals 
specified in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin.
    (ii) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by 
this paragraph: Repair before further flight in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin.
    (2) Modification of the lower cargo doorjamb corners in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service 
bulletin terminates the repetitive inspection requirement of 
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this AD.
    (3) For airplanes repaired or modified in accordance with 
paragraph (a)(1)(ii) or (a)(2) of this AD: Within 17,000 landings 
after the repair or modification, perform an eddy current inspection 
for cracks of the doorjamb corners, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin (Drawing 
SN08530001). Repeat the inspection at intervals not to exceed 4,400 
landings.

Group 2 Airplanes: Modification

    (b) For airplanes identified as Group 2 in McDonnell Douglas 
Service Bulletin DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001:
    (1) Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after the effective date of 
this AD, whichever occurs first, modify the lower cargo doorjamb 
corners in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the 
service bulletin.
    (2) Within 17,000 landings after the modification required by 
paragraph (b)(1) of this AD, perform applicable inspections for 
cracking of the doorjamb corners, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat the 
inspections at intervals not to exceed 4,400 landings.

Group 3 and Group 4 Airplanes: Inspections

    (c) For airplanes identified as Group 3 and Group 4 in McDonnell 
Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 
2001: Within 17,000 landings following accomplishment of the 
modification specified in the service bulletin, perform applicable 
inspections for cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service 
bulletin. Repeat the inspections at intervals not to exceed 4,400 
landings.

All Airplanes: Repair Following Post-Modification Inspections

    (d) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required 
by paragraph (a)(3), (b)(2), or (c) of this AD: Repair before 
further flight in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, 
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or per data 
meeting the type certification basis of the airplane approved by a 
Boeing Company Designated Engineering Representative (DER) who has 
been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make such 
findings. For a repair method to be approved, the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.

Credit for Prior Accomplishment

    (e) Inspections done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-078, dated 
February 6, 1996, are acceptable for compliance with the applicable 
inspections required by this AD.
    (f) Inspections and repairs specified in this AD of areas of 
PSEs 53.08.042 and 53.08.043 are acceptable for compliance with the 
applicable requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of AD 93-01-
15. The remaining areas of the affected PSEs must be inspected and 
repaired as applicable, in accordance with AD 93-01-15.

Report

    (g) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or 
(g)(2) of this AD: Submit a report of the findings (both positive 
and negative) of each inspection required by this AD to the Manager, 
Los Angeles ACO. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements 
contained in this AD and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (1) For an inspection done after the effective date of this AD: 
Submit the report within 10 days after the inspection.
    (2) For an inspection done before the effective date of this AD: 
Submit the report within 10 days after the effective date of this 
AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (h)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Los Angeles 
ACO, FAA, is authorized to approve alternative methods of compliance 
(AMOCs) for this AD.
    (2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by a 
Boeing DER who has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, 
to make such findings.


[[Page 64830]]


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 10, 2003.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-28607 Filed 11-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P