Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and -11F Airplanes, 54941-54943 [06-7945]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules spoiler jacks. A review of airplane maintenance records is an acceptable method of determining the P/N if the P/N can be conclusively determined from that review. (1) If no lift spoiler jack having P/N P308– 45–0002 or P308–45–0102 is installed: No further action is required by this paragraph. (2) For any lift spoiler jack having P/N P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102: Before further flight, inspect the lift spoiler jack to determine its serial number (S/N) and date of manufacture. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the S/N and date of manufacture can be conclusively determined from that review. Inspection of Lift Spoiler Jack (h) For any lift spoiler jack having P/N P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102: At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, perform a detailed inspection for discrepancies of the eye-end assembly of the lift spoiler jack, associated hardware, and the thread of the piston where the eye-end assembly attaches, in accordance with the service bulletin. Discrepancies include but are not limited to evidence of corrosion or damaged or fretted threads. (1) For lift spoiler jacks identified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD. (i) Any lift spoiler jack having a S/N prefixed with ‘‘DAWX’’ or ‘‘CSW’’ (regardless of the date of manufacture). (ii) Any lift spoiler jack having P/N P308– 45–0002 or P308–45–0102, with a date of manufacture on or before December 31, 1999. (2) For lift spoiler jacks with a date of manufacture on or after January 1, 2000, except those with S/Ns prefixed with ‘‘DAWX’’ or ‘‘CSW’’: Within 5 months after the effective date of this AD. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.’’ Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Action (i) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD and do corrective actions based on the inspection findings, in accordance with paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD, as applicable. (1) If no discrepancy of the eye-end assembly of the lift spoiler jack is found: Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD within 48 months, and, based on the findings during that repeat inspection, repeat the inspection and do corrective actions, as applicable, in accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. (2) If light corrosion, as defined in the service bulletin, but no other discrepancy, is found: Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD within 24 months, and, based on the findings during that repeat VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 Sep 19, 2006 Jkt 208001 inspection, repeat the inspection and do corrective actions, as applicable, in accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. (3) If severe corrosion, as defined in the service bulletin, or any damaged or fretted thread, is found: Before further flight, replace the eye-end assembly of the lift spoiler jack, associated hardware, and piston, as applicable, with new or serviceable parts, as applicable, in accordance with the service bulletin. Then, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD within 48 months, and, based on the findings during that repeat inspection, repeat the inspection and do corrective actions, as applicable, in accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD. Where the service bulletin specifies to return certain damaged parts to the parts manufacturer, this AD does not require that action. Parts Installation (j) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a lift spoiler jack having P/N P308–45–0002 or P308–45–0102 unless it has been inspected as required by this AD and found to be free of severe corrosion or other discrepancy. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information (l) The European Aviation Safety Agency’s airworthiness directive 2006–0139, dated May 23, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2006. Kevin M. Mullin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–15592 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–25850; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–128–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and –11F Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 54941 Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). ACTION: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and –11F airplanes. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance inspection program that provides for inspection of principal structural elements (PSEs) and replacement of safe-life parts, to incorporate a new revision to the MD–11 Airworthiness Limitations Instructions. The revision would reduce inspection intervals for fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, and expand the inspection area for a certain other PSE. This proposed AD results from a revised damage tolerance analysis. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://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. Contact Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–0024), for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Moreland, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5238; fax (562) 627–5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 54942 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules Relevant Service Information Regulatory Findings We have reviewed Boeing MD–11 Airworthiness Limitations Instructions (ALI), Report Number MDC–K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006. Among other things, Revision 11 of the ALI reduces certain initial and repeat intervals for inspections for fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, and expands the inspection area for a certain other PSE. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. 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 and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or 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 Docket Management System receives them. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘FAA–2006–25850; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–128–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 https:// 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 that 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 DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit https:// dms.dot.gov. There are about 102 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 93 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed maintenance and inspection program revision would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $7,440, or $80 per airplane, per inspection cycle. Discussion Boeing has completed a revised damage tolerance analysis of certain principal structural elements (PSEs) on Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. Boeing repeated the analysis to address additional crack growth scenarios as a result of in-service cracking and to correct the crack growth analysis spectrum which it found to underpredict operational loading. These new data indicate that the initial and repeat inspection intervals to detect fatigue cracking for certain PSEs must be revised. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to detect fatigue cracking of several wing PSEs and a tail pylon PSE. This fatigue cracking, if not detected and corrected, could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 Sep 19, 2006 Jkt 208001 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 airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require operators to incorporate the Boeing MD– 11 ALI, Report Number MDC–K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006, into the applicable maintenance and inspection program. Costs of Compliance List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2006– 25850; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM– 128–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 6, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to all McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11 and –11F airplanes, certificated in any category. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to incorporate new inspections for fatigue E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs). Compliance with these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able to incorporate the inspections described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph (h) of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular (AC) 25–1529. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a revised damage tolerance analysis. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain principal structural elements (PSEs), which could adversely affect the 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. Revision of Airworthiness Limitations Section (f) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD: Revise the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, Airworthiness Limitations Instructions (ALI), according to a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Boeing MD–11 ALI, Report Number MDC–K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006, is one approved method. (g) Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD: After the actions specified in paragraph (f) of this AD have been done, no alternative inspection intervals or replacement times may be approved for the PSEs and safe-life limited parts specified in Boeing Report Number MDC–K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by accomplishing the actions in this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. (3) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Sep 19, 2006 Jkt 208001 Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2006. Kevin M. Mullin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 06–7945 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 54943 may also access copies of this extension notice, Notice No. 62, and the related comments online at https://www.ttb.gov/ regulations_laws/all_rulemaking.shtml. Lisa M. Gesser, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 128, Morganza, MD 20660; telephone (301) 290–1460. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On July 26, 2006, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) published Notice No. 62, Major Food Allergen Labeling for Wines, Distilled Spirits and Malt Beverages, in the Federal Register (71 FR 42329). In that notice of proposed rulemaking, TTB requested public comment on the proposed adoption of mandatory labeling standards for major food allergens used in the production of alcohol beverages subject to the labeling requirements of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act. The comment period for Notice No. 62, when published, was scheduled to close on September 25, 2006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 27 CFR Parts 4, 5, and 7 [Notice No. 64; Re: Notice No. 62] RIN 1513–AB08 Major Food Allergen Labeling for Wines, Distilled Spirits and Malt Beverages Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In response to industry member requests, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau extends the comment period for Notice No. 62, Major Food Allergen Labeling for Wines, Distilled Spirits and Malt Beverages, a notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register on July 26, 2006, for an additional 90 days. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. You may send comments to any of the following addresses— • Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 62, P.O. Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044– 4412. • 202–927–8525 (facsimile). • nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail). • https://www.ttb.gov/ regulations_laws/all_rulemaking.shtml. An online comment form is posted with this notice on our Web site. • https://www.regulations.gov. Federal e-rulemaking portal; follow instructions for submitting comments. You may view copies of this extension notice, Notice No. 62, the petitions, and any comments we receive by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. To make an appointment, call 202–927–2400. You ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 After publication of Notice No. 62, TTB received requests from the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, the National Association of Beverage Importers, Inc., and Wine Institute to extend the comment period for Notice No. 62 for a period ranging from 60 to 120 days beyond the September 25, 2006, closing date. In support of their extension requests, these organizations note that the comment period of this notice would coincide with habitual August vacations in Europe, where many industry member suppliers reside, and that it would also coincide with the approaching grape harvest in California. Consequently, the three organizations state, many industry members would be unable to focus on the complexities and ramifications of the proposed rule and would not have adequate time to formulate a response to the proposal. In response to these requests, TTB extends the comment period for Notice No. 62 for an additional 90 days. Therefore, comments on Notice No. 62 are now due on or before December 26, 2006. Drafting Information: Gabriel J. Hiza of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted this notice. Signed: September 14, 2006. John J. Manfreda, Administrator. [FR Doc. 06–7963 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–31–P E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 20, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54941-54943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7945]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-25850; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-128-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and -11F 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for all McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and -11F airplanes. This proposed 
AD would require revising the maintenance inspection program that 
provides for inspection of principal structural elements (PSEs) and 
replacement of safe-life parts, to incorporate a new revision to the 
MD-11 Airworthiness Limitations Instructions. The revision would reduce 
inspection intervals for fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, and expand 
the inspection area for a certain other PSE. This proposed AD results 
from a revised damage tolerance analysis. We are proposing this AD to 
detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain PSEs, which could 
adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 6, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
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.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach Division, 3855 
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and 
Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service 
information identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Moreland, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; 
telephone (562) 627-5238; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your

[[Page 54942]]

comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the 
docket number ``FAA-2006-25850; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-128-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 https://
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 that 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 DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or 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 Docket Management System 
receives them.

Discussion

    Boeing has completed a revised damage tolerance analysis of certain 
principal structural elements (PSEs) on Model MD-11 and MD-11F 
airplanes. Boeing repeated the analysis to address additional crack 
growth scenarios as a result of in-service cracking and to correct the 
crack growth analysis spectrum which it found to underpredict 
operational loading. These new data indicate that the initial and 
repeat inspection intervals to detect fatigue cracking for certain PSEs 
must be revised.
    The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to detect 
fatigue cracking of several wing PSEs and a tail pylon PSE. This 
fatigue cracking, if not detected and corrected, could adversely affect 
the structural integrity of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing MD-11 Airworthiness Limitations 
Instructions (ALI), Report Number MDC-K5225, Revision 11, dated March 
2006. Among other things, Revision 11 of the ALI reduces certain 
initial and repeat intervals for inspections for fatigue cracking of 
certain PSEs, and expands the inspection area for a certain other PSE. 
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is 
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

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 airplanes 
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, 
which would require operators to incorporate the Boeing MD-11 ALI, 
Report Number MDC-K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006, into the 
applicable maintenance and inspection program.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 102 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 93 airplanes of 
U.S. registry. The proposed maintenance and inspection program revision 
would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of 
$80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the 
proposed AD for U.S. operators is $7,440, or $80 per airplane, per 
inspection cycle.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

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 and placed it in the AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2006-25850; Directorate Identifier 
2006-NM-128-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 
6, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and -
11F airplanes, certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator 
maintenance documents to incorporate new inspections for fatigue

[[Page 54943]]

cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs). Compliance with 
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes 
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the 
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able 
to incorporate the inspections described in the revisions. In this 
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must 
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according 
to paragraph (h) of this AD. The request should include a 
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure 
the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA 
has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular 
(AC) 25-1529.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a revised damage tolerance analysis. We 
are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of 
certain principal structural elements (PSEs), which could adversely 
affect the 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.

Revision of Airworthiness Limitations Section

    (f) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD: Revise 
the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for 
Continued Airworthiness, Airworthiness Limitations Instructions 
(ALI), according to a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles 
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Boeing MD-11 ALI, Report 
Number MDC-K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006, is one approved 
method.
    (g) Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD: After the 
actions specified in paragraph (f) of this AD have been done, no 
alternative inspection intervals or replacement times may be 
approved for the PSEs and safe-life limited parts specified in 
Boeing Report Number MDC-K5225, Revision 11, dated March 2006.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, has the authority to 
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the 
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by accomplishing the actions in this 
AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing 
Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization 
who has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make 
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must 
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must 
specifically refer to this AD.
    (3) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.  
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. 06-7945 Filed 9-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P