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-nprmcomment@faa.gov. 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:

• 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.
• For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed AD is being requested.
• 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 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.