[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64523-64525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24724]



[[Page 64523]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2004-19536; Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-86-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-8F-54 and DC-8F-55 Airplanes; 
DC-8-60 Series Airplanes; DC-8-60F Series Airplanes; DC-8-70 Series 
Airplanes; and DC-8-70F Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness 
directive (AD) for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-70 and -70F 
series airplanes. That AD currently requires repetitive inspections for 
cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, and corrective action if 
necessary. That AD provides for optional terminating action for certain 
repetitive inspections for certain airplanes. For certain other 
airplanes, that AD requires modification of the lower cargo doorjamb 
corners. This proposed AD would add airplanes to the applicability. The 
existing AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracks in the fuselage 
skin in the lower cargo doorjamb corners; this proposed AD is prompted 
by the inadvertent omission of certain airplanes from the existing 
applicability. We are proposing this AD to ensure that the unsafe 
condition will be addressed on all affected airplanes so that cracking 
in the lower cargo doorjamb corners is detected and corrected before it 
can result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent 
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 20, 
2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You can get the service information identified in this proposed AD 
from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood 
Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service 
Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024).
    You may examine the contents of the AD docket on the Internet at 
http://dms.dot.gov.

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:

Docket Management System (DMS)

    The FAA has implemented new procedures for maintaining AD dockets 
electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new AD actions are posted on DMS 
and assigned a docket number. We track each action and assign a 
corresponding directorate identifier. The DMS AD docket number is in 
the form ``Docket No. FAA-2004-99999.'' The Transport Airplane 
Directorate identifier is in the form ``Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-
999-AD.'' Each DMS AD docket also lists the directorate identifier 
(``Old Docket Number'') as a cross-reference for searching purposes.

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2004-19536; 
Directorate Identifier 2004-NM-86-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of our 
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.
    We are reviewing the writing style we currently use in regulatory 
documents. We are interested in your comments on whether the style of 
this document is clear, and your suggestions to improve the clarity of 
our communications that affect you. You can get more information about 
plain language at http://www.faa.gov/language and http://www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket in person at the Docket Management 
Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office 
(telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif 
Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. 
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the DMS 
receives them.

Discussion

    On March 12, 2004, we issued AD 2004-06-06, amendment 39-13532 (69 
FR 15234, March 25, 2004), for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-70 
and -70F series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections for 
cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, and corrective action if 
necessary. For certain airplanes, that AD provides for optional 
terminating action for certain repetitive inspections. For certain 
other airplanes, that AD requires modification of the lower cargo 
doorjamb corners. That AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracks in 
the fuselage skin in the lower cargo doorjamb corners. We issued that 
AD 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.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2004-06-06, we learned that certain airplanes 
had been inadvertently omitted from the

[[Page 64524]]

applicability. That AD's applicability includes only ``Model DC-8-70 
and -70F series airplanes.'' That applicability does not precisely 
identify the affected airplanes: Model DC-8 series 70 ``and prior'' 
airplanes.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an 
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products 
of this same type design. Therefore, we are proposing to supersede AD 
2004-06-06.
    This proposed AD would continue to require repetitive inspections 
for cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, and corrective action 
if necessary. This proposed AD would continue to provide for optional 
terminating action for certain repetitive inspections for certain 
airplanes. For certain other airplanes, this proposed AD would continue 
to require modification of the lower cargo doorjamb corners.
    This proposed AD would clarify the applicability and ensure 
compliance of all affected airplanes by adding the affected airplanes 
that were inadvertently omitted from the existing AD.
    This proposed AD would require using the service information 
described previously to perform these actions, except as discussed 
below under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service 
Bulletin.''
    The proposed AD would continue to require that operators send us a 
report of the results of each inspection.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-078 (described in the 
preamble to AD 2004-06-06) specifies that the manufacturer may be 
contacted for disposition of certain repair conditions. This proposed 
AD would continue to require that those repairs be done in accordance 
with an FAA-approved method, or in accordance with 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.

Additional Changes to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2004-06-06. 
Since we issued that AD, we have revised the AD format. As a result, we 
have rearranged certain paragraphs and changed the corresponding 
paragraph identifiers in this proposed AD, as listed in the following 
table:

                         Reidentified Paragraphs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            New paragraph  identifier in
  Paragraph identifier in AD 2004-06-06:         this  proposed AD:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a).......................................  (f)
(b).......................................  (g)
(c).......................................  (h)
(d).......................................  (i)
(e).......................................  (j)
(f).......................................  (k)
(g).......................................  (l)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 264 airplanes worldwide. The 
following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 
comply with this proposed AD, which adds no economic burden above that 
imposed by AD 2004-06-06. The current costs for this AD are repeated 
for the convenience of affected operators, as follows:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Average
                                      Work     labor                                                            No. of affected
               Action                 hours   rate per              Parts                Cost per airplane      U.S.-registered          Fleet cost
                                                hour                                                               airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-modification inspections.......      24        $65  None required...............  $1,560, per inspection  Unknown............  Unknown.
                                                                                       cycle.
Modification.......................     520         65  $25,000.....................  58,800................  Unknown............  Unknown.
Post-modification inspections......      40         65  None required...............  2,600, per inspection   244................  $634,400, per
                                                                                       cycle.                                       inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the 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. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location 
to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing amendment 39-13532 (69 FR 
15234, March 25, 2004) and adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2004-19536; Directorate Identifier 
2004-NM-86-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration must receive comments on 
this airworthiness directive (AD) action by December 20, 2004.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2004-06-06, amendment 39-13532.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the following McDonnell Douglas 
airplanes, certificated in any category; as listed in McDonnell 
Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-53-078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 
2001:

[[Page 64525]]

    (1) 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.
    (2) Model DC-8-50 series airplanes.
    (3) Model DC-8F-54 and DC-8F-55 airplanes.
    (4) Model DC-8-60 series airplanes.
    (5) Model DC-8-60F series airplanes.
    (6) Model DC-8-70 series airplanes.
    (7) Model DC-8-70F series airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracks in the 
fuselage skin in the lower cargo doorjamb corners. We are issuing 
this AD 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.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the 
actions have already been done.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004-06-06

    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

    (f) Except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD: 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 April 29, 2004 (the 
effective date of AD 2004-06-06, amendment 39-13532), 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 (f)(1)(i) of this AD.
    (3) For airplanes repaired or modified in accordance with 
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) or (f)(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

    (g) Except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD, 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 April 29, 2004, 
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 (g)(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

    (h) 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

    (i) If any cracking is detected during any inspection required 
by paragraph (f)(3), (g)(2), or (h) 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

    (j) Inspections done before the effective date of April 29, 
2004, 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.
    (k) 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) and (b) 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

    (l) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (l)(1) or 
(l)(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 April 29, 2004: Submit the 
report within 10 days after the inspection.
    (2) For an inspection done before April 29, 2004: Submit the 
report within 10 days after April 29, 2004.

Requirements for Newly Added Airplanes

    (m) For airplanes not subject to the requirements of AD 2004-06-
06, the reference time for compliance is the effective date of this 
new AD, rather than April 29, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-
06-06).

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (n)(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.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (o) None.

Related Information

    (p) None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 26, 2004.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-24724 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P