Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-53, DC-8-55, DC-8F-54, and DC-8F-55 Airplanes; and Model DC-8-60, DC-8-60F, DC-8-70, and DC-8-70F Series Airplanes, 16744-16747 [E7-6338]

Download as PDF 16744 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1932/05. (i) The effective date of this AD. (ii) The date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French export certificate of airworthiness. (2) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A330 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated April 11, 2006, as defined in Airbus A330 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1932/05, Issue 2, dated October 26, 2006 (approved by the EASA on November 17, 2006), Section 2, ‘‘Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations.’’ Revise ALS for Model A340 Airplanes (g) For Model A340–211, A340–212, A340– 213, A340–311, A340–312, A340–313, A340– 541, A340–642, and A340–643 airplanes: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD. (1) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A340 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated April 11, 2006, as defined in Airbus A340 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1933/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005 (approved by the EASA on April 28, 2006), Section 1, ‘‘Maintenance/Inspection Tasks.’’ For the task identified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1933/05, the initial compliance time starts from the effective date of this AD, and the repetitive inspection must be accomplished thereafter at the interval specified in Section 1 of Document 95A.1933/05. (2) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate Airbus A340 ALS Part 5—Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, dated April 11, 2006, as defined in Airbus A340 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Document 95A.1933/05, Issue 1, dated December 19, 2005 (approved by the EASA on April 28, 2006), Section 2, ‘‘Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations.’’ ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS No Alternative Inspections, Inspection Intervals, or CDCCLs (h) Except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD: After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (f) or (g) of this AD, as applicable, no alternative inspections, inspection intervals, or CDCCLs may be used. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (i)(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) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Related Information (j) EASA airworthiness directive 2006– 0205, dated July 11, 2006; and EASA airworthiness directive 2007–0023, dated January 25, 2007; also address the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 27, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–6231 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2007–27777; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–265–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–53, DC–8–55, DC–8F–54, and DC–8F–55 Airplanes; and Model DC–8–60, DC–8–60F, DC–8– 70, and DC–8–70F Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane (tee or angle doubler installed on the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13). This proposed AD would also require repetitive inspections for cracking of the tee or angle doubler, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report indicating that numerous operators have found cracks on the tee. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct stress corrosion cracking of the tee or angle doubler installed on the flat aft pressure bulkhead. Cracking in this area could continue to progress and damage the adjacent structure, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 • 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 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 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: 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 We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘FAA–2007–27777; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–265–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 E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1 16745 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 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 We have received a report indicating that numerous operators have found cracks on the flat aft pressure bulkhead tee. The tee is installed on the left and right side of McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8 airplanes that have a flat aft pressure bulkhead. The cracks, which originate in the corner radius of the tee from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13, are a result of stress corrosion. This condition, if not corrected, could result in cracks continuing to progress, and consequent damage the adjacent structure and loss of structural integrity of the airplane. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing an initial inspection using one of the following methods as applicable: • For airplanes not previously repaired (Configuration 1), the service bulletin specifies doing the initial inspection for cracking of the tee installed on the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13, according to one of three inspection methods specified in the DC–8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID) L26–011, Volume II, 53–10–18: Methods 01A (High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC)) and 01B (Ultrasonic) together; or Method 02 (HFEC); or Method 03 (Visual Aided). • For airplanes previously repaired with an angle doubler that was installed in accordance with DC–8 Structural Repair Manual 53–2–5, Figure 9 (Configuration 2), the service bulletin specifies an initial HFEC inspection for cracking of the angle doubler. • For airplanes previously repaired with any repair other than one installed in accordance with DC–8 Structural Repair Manual 53–2–5, Figure 9 (Configuration 3), the service bulletin specifies contacting Boeing for instructions. The service bulletin specifies the following actions, depending on crack findings: • If no crack is found, the service bulletin specifies repeating the applicable inspection. For Configuration 1 airplanes, the repetitive intervals depend on the inspection type chosen, and range from within 2 years after the previous SID inspection or 600 flight cycles, whichever occurs earlier; to within 8 years after the previous SID inspection or 17,400 flight cycles, whichever occurs earlier. For Configuration 2 airplanes, the repetitive interval is 4,500 flight cycles. • If any crack is found, the service bulletin specifies the corrective action of repairing the crack before further flight. The repair involves installing an angle doubler (if not previously installed) or removing the cracked angle doubler and installing a new one (if previously installed). The service bulletin states that the repetitive interval after repair is 4,500 flight cycles, and only the HFEC inspection type is specified for the repetitive inspections. The service bulletin also specifies that, for Configuration 1 airplanes, if maintenance records show that the flat aft pressure bulkhead tee was previously inspected using one of the three inspection methods specified in the DC–8 SID L26–011, Volume II, 53– 10–18, and no crack was found, the inspections may be continued at the applicable repetitive interval specified for Configuration 1 airplanes on which no crack is found during the initial inspection. 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 accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Difference between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.’’ This proposed AD also would require determining the configuration of the airplane. Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways: • Using a method that we approve; or • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings. Costs of Compliance There are about 321 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 139 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. ESTIMATED COSTS ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Action Inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane, and to determine previous inspection method. Configuration 1, per inspection cycle ............................................................................................. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Cost per airplane Work hours Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 1 $80 11 $880, per inspection cycle 05APP1 Fleet cost $11,120. Up to $122,320, per inspection cycle. 16746 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules ESTIMATED COSTS—Continued Action Configuration 2, per inspection cycle ............................................................................................. ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 Cost per airplane Work hours 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–2007– 27777; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM– 265–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 21, 2007. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–53, DC–8–55, DC–8–61, DC–8– 61F, DC–8–62, DC–8–62F, DC–8–63, DC–8– 63F, DC–8–71, DC–8–71F, DC–8–72, DC–8– 72F, DC–8–73, DC–8–73F, DC–8F–54, and DC–8F–55 airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report indicating that numerous operators have found cracks on the tee installed on the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct stress corrosion cracking of the tee or angle doubler installed on the flat aft pressure bulkhead. Cracking in this area could continue to progress and damage the adjacent structure, which could result in loss of 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. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5 $400, per inspection cycle Fleet cost Up to $55,600, per inspection cycle. Inspections and Related Investigative/ Corrective Actions (f) For all airplanes: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, inspect the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13 to determine whether a tee is installed (also called Configuration 1 airplanes) or an angle is installed; and if any angle was installed in accordance with the DC–8 Structural Repair Manual 52–2–5, Figure 9 (also called Configuration 2 airplanes), or in accordance with any other repair method (also called Configuration 3 airplanes). A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the applicable installation can be conclusively determined from that review. (1) For airplanes determined to be either Configuration 1 or Configuration 2: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do the applicable inspection for cracking of the tee or angle doubler, and do all applicable corrective actions before further flight, by accomplishing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. Repeat the applicable inspection thereafter at the applicable interval specified in Paragraph 1.E, ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. (2) For airplanes determined to be Configuration 1 airplanes: A review of the airplane maintenance records to determine if the tee was previously inspected using one of the three inspection methods specified in the DC–8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID) L26–011, Volume II, 53–10– 18; and to determine that no crack was found; is acceptable to determine the type of inspection and corresponding repetitive interval if the inspection type and crack finding can be conclusively determined from that review. (3) For airplanes determined to be Configuration 3 airplanes: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, repair the previous installation. Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006, specifies to contact Boeing for instructions, repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules (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. (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by 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 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 29, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–6338 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • DOT Docket Web Site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– 0001. • 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. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Examining the AD Docket DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2007–27753; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–022–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS It has been found that the fuel quantity probes harnesses installed in the left and right wing stub tanks on some Embraer ERJ– 170( ) aircraft models may not be protected in accordance with RBHA/FAR (Regulamento ´ Brasileiro de Homologacao Aeronautica/ ¸˜ Federal Aviation Regulation) 25.981(a) and (b) requirements. The unsafe condition is potential ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– 5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Streamlined Issuance of AD The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance of ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined process will allow us to adopt MCAI safety requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce safety risks to the public. This process continues to follow all FAA AD issuance processes to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure Act, and Federal Register requirements. We also continue to meet our technical decision-making responsibilities to identify and correct unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated products. This proposed AD references the MCAI and related service information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to correct the unsafe PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 16747 condition. The proposed AD contains text copied from the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language principles. Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2007–27753; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–022–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on 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 we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion ˆ The Agencia Nacional de Aviacao ¸˜ Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2007–01–02, effective January 15, 2007 (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: It has been found that the fuel quantity probes harnesses installed in the left and right wing stub tanks on some Embraer ERJ– 170( ) aircraft models may not be protected in accordance with RBHA/FAR (Regulamento ´ Brasileiro de Homologacao Aeronautica/ ¸˜ Federal Aviation Regulation) 25.981(a) and (b) requirements. The unsafe condition is potential ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. The MCAI requires inspection of the fuel quantity probes harnesses and correct reassembly if necessary. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin 170–28–0011, dated April 26, 2006. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 65 (Thursday, April 5, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16744-16747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6338]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27777; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-265-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-53, DC-8-
55, DC-8F-54, and DC-8F-55 Airplanes; and Model DC-8-60, DC-8-60F, DC-
8-70, and DC-8-70F Series 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 certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This 
proposed AD would require a one-time inspection to determine the 
configuration of the airplane (tee or angle doubler installed on the 
left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 
to Longeron 13). This proposed AD would also require repetitive 
inspections for cracking of the tee or angle doubler, and corrective 
actions if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report indicating 
that numerous operators have found cracks on the tee. We are proposing 
this AD to detect and correct stress corrosion cracking of the tee or 
angle doubler installed on the flat aft pressure bulkhead. Cracking in 
this area could continue to progress and damage the adjacent structure, 
which could result in loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 21, 2007.

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 9:00 
a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 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: 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

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
27777; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-265-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

[[Page 16745]]

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 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 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

    We have received a report indicating that numerous operators have 
found cracks on the flat aft pressure bulkhead tee. The tee is 
installed on the left and right side of McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 
airplanes that have a flat aft pressure bulkhead. The cracks, which 
originate in the corner radius of the tee from Longeron 9 to Longeron 
13, are a result of stress corrosion. This condition, if not corrected, 
could result in cracks continuing to progress, and consequent damage 
the adjacent structure and loss of structural integrity of the 
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated 
November 14, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing 
an initial inspection using one of the following methods as applicable:
     For airplanes not previously repaired (Configuration 1), 
the service bulletin specifies doing the initial inspection for 
cracking of the tee installed on the left and right side of the flat 
aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13, according to one 
of three inspection methods specified in the DC-8 Supplemental 
Inspection Document (SID) L26-011, Volume II, 53-10-18: Methods 01A 
(High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC)) and 01B (Ultrasonic) together; or 
Method 02 (HFEC); or Method 03 (Visual Aided).
     For airplanes previously repaired with an angle doubler 
that was installed in accordance with DC-8 Structural Repair Manual 53-
2-5, Figure 9 (Configuration 2), the service bulletin specifies an 
initial HFEC inspection for cracking of the angle doubler.
     For airplanes previously repaired with any repair other 
than one installed in accordance with DC-8 Structural Repair Manual 53-
2-5, Figure 9 (Configuration 3), the service bulletin specifies 
contacting Boeing for instructions.
    The service bulletin specifies the following actions, depending on 
crack findings:
     If no crack is found, the service bulletin specifies 
repeating the applicable inspection. For Configuration 1 airplanes, the 
repetitive intervals depend on the inspection type chosen, and range 
from within 2 years after the previous SID inspection or 600 flight 
cycles, whichever occurs earlier; to within 8 years after the previous 
SID inspection or 17,400 flight cycles, whichever occurs earlier. For 
Configuration 2 airplanes, the repetitive interval is 4,500 flight 
cycles.
     If any crack is found, the service bulletin specifies the 
corrective action of repairing the crack before further flight. The 
repair involves installing an angle doubler (if not previously 
installed) or removing the cracked angle doubler and installing a new 
one (if previously installed). The service bulletin states that the 
repetitive interval after repair is 4,500 flight cycles, and only the 
HFEC inspection type is specified for the repetitive inspections.
    The service bulletin also specifies that, for Configuration 1 
airplanes, if maintenance records show that the flat aft pressure 
bulkhead tee was previously inspected using one of the three inspection 
methods specified in the DC-8 SID L26-011, Volume II, 53-10-18, and no 
crack was found, the inspections may be continued at the applicable 
repetitive interval specified for Configuration 1 airplanes on which no 
crack is found during the initial inspection.
    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 accomplishing the actions specified in the service 
information described previously, except as discussed under 
``Difference between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.'' This 
proposed AD also would require determining the configuration of the 
airplane.

Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD 
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the 
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative 
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization 
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 321 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 139 airplanes of 
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for 
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate 
is $80 per work hour.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Cost per
              Action                  Work hours       airplane           Fleet cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection to determine the                      1             $80  $11,120.
 configuration of the airplane,
 and to determine previous
 inspection method.
Configuration 1, per inspection                 11       $880, per  Up to $122,320, per
 cycle.                                                 inspection   inspection cycle.
                                                             cycle

[[Page 16746]]

 
Configuration 2, per inspection                  5       $400, per  Up to $55,600, per
 cycle.                                                 inspection   inspection cycle.
                                                             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-2007-27777; Directorate Identifier 
2006-NM-265-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 21, 
2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-53, DC-8-55, 
DC-8-61, DC-8-61F, DC-8-62, DC-8-62F, DC-8-63, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71, 
DC-8-71F, DC-8-72, DC-8-72F, DC-8-73, DC-8-73F, DC-8F-54, and DC-8F-
55 airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated November 14, 2006.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report indicating that numerous 
operators have found cracks on the tee installed on the left and 
right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead from Longeron 9 to 
Longeron 13. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct stress 
corrosion cracking of the tee or angle doubler installed on the flat 
aft pressure bulkhead. Cracking in this area could continue to 
progress and damage the adjacent structure, which could result in 
loss of 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.

Inspections and Related Investigative/Corrective Actions

    (f) For all airplanes: Within 24 months after the effective date 
of this AD, inspect the left and right side of the flat aft pressure 
bulkhead from Longeron 9 to Longeron 13 to determine whether a tee 
is installed (also called Configuration 1 airplanes) or an angle is 
installed; and if any angle was installed in accordance with the DC-
8 Structural Repair Manual 52-2-5, Figure 9 (also called 
Configuration 2 airplanes), or in accordance with any other repair 
method (also called Configuration 3 airplanes). A review of airplane 
maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the 
applicable installation can be conclusively determined from that 
review.
    (1) For airplanes determined to be either Configuration 1 or 
Configuration 2: Within 24 months after the effective date of this 
AD, do the applicable inspection for cracking of the tee or angle 
doubler, and do all applicable corrective actions before further 
flight, by accomplishing all the actions specified in the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-
53A081, dated November 14, 2006. Repeat the applicable inspection 
thereafter at the applicable interval specified in Paragraph 1.E, 
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated 
November 14, 2006.
    (2) For airplanes determined to be Configuration 1 airplanes: A 
review of the airplane maintenance records to determine if the tee 
was previously inspected using one of the three inspection methods 
specified in the DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID) L26-
011, Volume II, 53-10-18; and to determine that no crack was found; 
is acceptable to determine the type of inspection and corresponding 
repetitive interval if the inspection type and crack finding can be 
conclusively determined from that review.
    (3) For airplanes determined to be Configuration 3 airplanes: 
Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, repair the 
previous installation. Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-
53A081, dated November 14, 2006, specifies to contact Boeing for 
instructions, repair using a method approved in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 
requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

[[Page 16747]]

    (2) 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by 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 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the 
approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 29, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-6338 Filed 4-4-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.