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, 60233-60236 [E7-20464]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Rules and Regulations (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 60233 Related Information (h) Refer to MCAI Dutch Airworthiness Directive NL–2005–008, dated June 30, 2005, and the service information identified in Table 1 of this AD, for related information. TABLE 1.—RELATED SERVICE INFORMATION Service information Revision level Fokker 70/100 Service Letter 102 ................................................................................................................... Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100–32–096 ....................................................................................................... Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100–32–72 ................................................................................................. Material Incorporated by Reference (i) You must use Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100–32–72, Revision 1, dated March 5, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, the Netherlands. (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go to: http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane. This AD also requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the tee or angle doubler, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from a report indicating that numerous operators have found cracks on the tee. 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. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of November 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800– 0024). Federal Aviation Administration Examining the AD Docket 14 CFR Part 39 You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Mowery, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 12, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–20814 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P [Docket No. FAA–2007–27777; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–265–AD; Amendment 39–15236; AD 2007–21–18] 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: Final rule. yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This AD requires a one-time VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:22 Oct 23, 2007 Jkt 214001 DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 1 2 1 Date February 12, 1998. April 29, 2005. March 5, 2007. California 90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5322; fax (562) 627–5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to certain 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. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2007 (72 FR 16744). That NPRM proposed to require a one-time inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane. That NPRM also proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracking of the tee or angle doubler, and corrective actions if necessary. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Request To Clarify Paragraph (f) of the NPRM Air Transport Association (ATA), on behalf of its member UPS, requests that we reword the first section of paragraph (f) of the NPRM for clarity. The commenters state that paragraph (f) of the NPRM mandates an inspection to determine if a tee or angle is installed. The commenters point out that all airplanes have a tee installed, as this is the baseline configuration, and that the angle is a repair on top of the tee. UPS suggests that we revise the paragraph to state instead, ‘‘ * * * inspect the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead to determine if a repair has been installed. As noted in Boeing Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, Configuration 1 applies to airplanes with no repairs installed; Configuration 2 applies to airplanes with repairs installed in accordance with DC–8 SRM 53–2–5, Figure 9; and Configuration 3 applies to repairs which are not E:\FR\FM\24OCR1.SGM 24OCR1 60234 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Rules and Regulations installed in accordance with DC–8 SRM 53–2–5, Figure 9 * * *’’ In addition, ABX Air, Inc. and UPS request that we fix a typographical error in paragraph (f). The Structural Repair Manual (SRM) reference should be 53– 2–5 rather than 52–2–5. We agree with the ATA and UPS because the suggested wording is more accurate and clear than the wording in the NPRM. We have revised paragraph (f) of this AD accordingly. We have also revised the Summary and Discussion sections of the preamble of this AD to state that the one-time inspection is simply to determine the configuration of the airplane. We have also changed the SRM reference in the AD, as requested. Operators should note that the reference to this SRM should also be 53–2–5 rather than 52–2–5 in Table 3 of Paragraph 1.E., Compliance, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. Request To Clarify Pressure Test Requirement ATA, on behalf of its member UPS, notes that paragraph (f)(1) of the NPRM requires accomplishment of all applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006. UPS states that the applicable actions in paragraph B.4 of those instructions include a pressure test of the fuselage as given in the DC–8 aircraft maintenance manual 21–31–0. The commenters do not believe that the pressure test is necessary to accomplish either the inspections or repairs successfully. They note that Boeing concurs with deleting this requirement, and refer to Boeing Message 1–283162455–4, dated February 12, 2007, as the relevant correspondence between Boeing and UPS. We agree that the pressure test is not necessary for accomplishing either the inspections or repairs. We have added a sentence to paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to state that where the service bulletin specifies to do the pressure test, that action is not required by this AD. Requests To Supersede AD 93–01–15 The same commenters have three requests related to AD 93–01–15, amendment 39–8469 (58 FR 5576, January 22, 1993). The commenters believe that the AD resulting from the NPRM should supersede AD 93–01–15 for the area of concern, which is Principal Structural Element (PSE) 53.08.009 and PSE 53.08.010. The commenters also believe that the AD resulting from the NPRM should specifically mention that it removes the reporting requirements of AD 93–01–15 for the area of concern. UPS notes that a similar request to remove the reporting requirements was granted as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval for all airplanes affected by AD 2006–03–04, amendment 39–14468 (71 FR 5969, February 6, 2006). UPS also requests that we revise paragraph (g) of the NPRM (the AMOC paragraph) to mention that prior AMOC approvals for AD 93–01–15 for repairs in the area of concern be automatically accepted as AMOCs for this new AD. We partially agree with the commenters. We agree that inspections and repairs required by this AD of specified areas of PSEs 53.08.009 and 53.08.010 are acceptable for compliance with the applicable requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 93–01–15, including the reporting requirements for those specified areas. The remaining areas of the affected PSEs must be inspected and repaired, as applicable, in accordance with AD 93–01–15. We also agree that AMOCs for repairs granted previously in accordance with AD 93– 01–15 are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions required by this AD. We have added new paragraphs (g)(4) and (g)(5) to this AD to address these requests. We do not agree that it is necessary to supersede AD 93–01–15. We find that the revisions to this AD are sufficient to address the area of concern noted by the commenters. Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Costs of Compliance There are about 321 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This AD affects about 139 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. ESTIMATED COSTS Action Work hours Inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane, and to determine previous inspection method. Configuration 1, per inspection cycle ....... Configuration 2, per inspection cycle ....... yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES Jkt 214001 $80 ............................................................ $11,120. 11 5 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 15:22 Oct 23, 2007 Fleet cost 1 Authority for This Rulemaking VerDate Aug<31>2005 Cost per airplane $880, per inspection cycle ........................ $400, per inspection cycle ........................ Up to $122,320, per inspection cycle. Up to $55,600, per inspection cycle. 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 AD will not have federalism implications under PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and E:\FR\FM\24OCR1.SGM 24OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Rules and Regulations (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 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, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: I PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: I 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): I 2007–21–18 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39–15236. Docket No. FAA–2007–27777; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–265–AD. Effective Date (a) This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007. Affected ADs (b) None. yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:22 Oct 23, 2007 Jkt 214001 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 sides of the flat aft pressure bulkhead to determine if a repair has been installed. As noted in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006, Configuration 1 applies to airplanes with no repairs installed; Configuration 2 applies to airplanes with repairs installed in accordance with DC–8 Structural Repair Manual (SRM) 53–2–5, Figure 9; and Configuration 3 applies to airplanes with repairs that are not installed in accordance with DC–8 SRM 53–2–5, Figure 9. 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. Where the service bulletin specifies to do the pressure test, that action is not required by this AD. (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. (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 60235 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 Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. (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. (4) Inspections and repairs required by this AD of specified areas of Principal Structural Elements (PSEs) 53.08.009 and 53.08.010 are acceptable for compliance with the applicable requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 93–01–15, amendment 39–8469, including the reporting requirements for those specified areas. The remaining areas of the affected PSEs must continue to be inspected and repaired, as applicable, in accordance with AD 93– 01–15. (5) AMOCs for repairs granted previously in accordance with AD 93– 01–15 are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions required by this AD. Material Incorporated by Reference (h) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A081, dated November 14, 2006, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of this document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 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 a copy of this service information. You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ ibr-locations.html. E:\FR\FM\24OCR1.SGM 24OCR1 60236 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Rules and Regulations Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 9, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–20464 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1622; fax (425) 227–1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Aviation Administration Discussion 14 CFR Part 39 We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 3, 2007 (72 FR 43199). A correction of that NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 15, 2007 (72 FR 45866). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: [Docket No. FAA–2007–28853; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–218–AD; Amendment 39–15241; AD 2007–22–05] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300–600 Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This 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: yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES At some locations, the new calculated fatigue life [for the wing to center box assembly] falls below the aircraft Design Service Goal. The aim of this Airworthiness Directive (AD) is * * * to ensure detection of cracks on the panels and stiffeners at rib No. 1. This situation, if left uncorrected, could affect the structural integrity of the area. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 28, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of Airbus A300–600 Airworthiness Limitations Items Document AI/SE–M2/ 95A.0502/06, Issue 11, dated April 2006, as of October 31, 2007 (72 FR 54536, September 26, 2007). ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// dms.dot.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:22 Oct 23, 2007 Jkt 214001 During installation of the wing to the centre box junction on the Final Assembly Line, some ‘‘taperlocks’’ fasteners were found non compliant with the specification. Fatigue tests on samples and calculation performed on non-conform fasteners demonstrated that this defect could lead to decrease the fatigue life of the wing to centre wing box assembly. At some locations, the new calculated fatigue life falls below the aircraft Design Service Goal. The aim of this Airworthiness Directive (AD) is to mandate repetitive inspections to ensure detection of cracks on the panels and stiffeners at rib No. 1. This situation, if left uncorrected, could affect the structural integrity of the area. The corrective action includes contacting Airbus for repair instructions in the event of crack finding. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public. Clarification of Compliance Times We added ‘‘total’’ to the flight hour compliance times in paragraphs (f)(1)(i)(A), (f)(2)(i)(A), and (f)(3)(i)(A) of the AD. The flight cycle compliance times already specify total flight cycles. Change of Service Bulletin Appendix Reference We changed ‘‘including’’ to ‘‘excluding’’ when referring to Appendix 01 of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6154, dated June 20, 2006, in paragraph (h) and in the subparagraphs PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 of paragraph (f) of the AD. Appendix 01 is a reporting form, and this AD does not require reporting. Conclusion We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect 7 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 79 workhours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $44,240, or $6,320 per product. 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. E:\FR\FM\24OCR1.SGM 24OCR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 24, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60233-60236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20464]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27777; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-265-AD; 
Amendment 39-15236; AD 2007-21-18]
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: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for 
certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This AD requires 
a one-time inspection to determine the configuration of the airplane. 
This AD also requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the tee or 
angle doubler, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD results 
from a report indicating that numerous operators have found cracks on 
the tee. 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.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 28, 2007.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of November 28, 
2007.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood 
Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service 
Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024).

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, 
any comments received, and other information. The address for the 
Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is the Document Management 
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 
Washington, DC 20590.

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:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to certain 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. That 
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2007 (72 FR 
16744). That NPRM proposed to require a one-time inspection to 
determine the configuration of the airplane. That NPRM also proposed to 
require repetitive inspections for cracking of the tee or angle 
doubler, and corrective actions if necessary.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the 
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Request To Clarify Paragraph (f) of the NPRM

    Air Transport Association (ATA), on behalf of its member UPS, 
requests that we reword the first section of paragraph (f) of the NPRM 
for clarity. The commenters state that paragraph (f) of the NPRM 
mandates an inspection to determine if a tee or angle is installed. The 
commenters point out that all airplanes have a tee installed, as this 
is the baseline configuration, and that the angle is a repair on top of 
the tee. UPS suggests that we revise the paragraph to state instead, `` 
* * * inspect the left and right side of the flat aft pressure bulkhead 
to determine if a repair has been installed. As noted in Boeing Service 
Bulletin DC8-53A081, Configuration 1 applies to airplanes with no 
repairs installed; Configuration 2 applies to airplanes with repairs 
installed in accordance with DC-8 SRM 53-2-5, Figure 9; and 
Configuration 3 applies to repairs which are not

[[Page 60234]]

installed in accordance with DC-8 SRM 53-2-5, Figure 9 * * *''
    In addition, ABX Air, Inc. and UPS request that we fix a 
typographical error in paragraph (f). The Structural Repair Manual 
(SRM) reference should be 53-2-5 rather than 52-2-5.
    We agree with the ATA and UPS because the suggested wording is more 
accurate and clear than the wording in the NPRM. We have revised 
paragraph (f) of this AD accordingly. We have also revised the Summary 
and Discussion sections of the preamble of this AD to state that the 
one-time inspection is simply to determine the configuration of the 
airplane. We have also changed the SRM reference in the AD, as 
requested. Operators should note that the reference to this SRM should 
also be 53-2-5 rather than 52-2-5 in Table 3 of Paragraph 1.E., 
Compliance, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated November 
14, 2006.

Request To Clarify Pressure Test Requirement

    ATA, on behalf of its member UPS, notes that paragraph (f)(1) of 
the NPRM requires accomplishment of all applicable actions specified in 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-
53A081, dated November 14, 2006. UPS states that the applicable actions 
in paragraph B.4 of those instructions include a pressure test of the 
fuselage as given in the DC-8 aircraft maintenance manual 21-31-0. The 
commenters do not believe that the pressure test is necessary to 
accomplish either the inspections or repairs successfully. They note 
that Boeing concurs with deleting this requirement, and refer to Boeing 
Message 1-283162455-4, dated February 12, 2007, as the relevant 
correspondence between Boeing and UPS.
    We agree that the pressure test is not necessary for accomplishing 
either the inspections or repairs. We have added a sentence to 
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to state that where the service bulletin 
specifies to do the pressure test, that action is not required by this 
AD.

Requests To Supersede AD 93-01-15

    The same commenters have three requests related to AD 93-01-15, 
amendment 39-8469 (58 FR 5576, January 22, 1993). The commenters 
believe that the AD resulting from the NPRM should supersede AD 93-01-
15 for the area of concern, which is Principal Structural Element (PSE) 
53.08.009 and PSE 53.08.010. The commenters also believe that the AD 
resulting from the NPRM should specifically mention that it removes the 
reporting requirements of AD 93-01-15 for the area of concern. UPS 
notes that a similar request to remove the reporting requirements was 
granted as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval for all 
airplanes affected by AD 2006-03-04, amendment 39-14468 (71 FR 5969, 
February 6, 2006). UPS also requests that we revise paragraph (g) of 
the NPRM (the AMOC paragraph) to mention that prior AMOC approvals for 
AD 93-01-15 for repairs in the area of concern be automatically 
accepted as AMOCs for this new AD.
    We partially agree with the commenters. We agree that inspections 
and repairs required by this AD of specified areas of PSEs 53.08.009 
and 53.08.010 are acceptable for compliance with the applicable 
requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 93-01-15, including the 
reporting requirements for those specified areas. The remaining areas 
of the affected PSEs must be inspected and repaired, as applicable, in 
accordance with AD 93-01-15. We also agree that AMOCs for repairs 
granted previously in accordance with AD 93-01-15 are acceptable for 
compliance with the corresponding actions required by this AD. We have 
added new paragraphs (g)(4) and (g)(5) to this AD to address these 
requests.
    We do not agree that it is necessary to supersede AD 93-01-15. We 
find that the revisions to this AD are sufficient to address the area 
of concern noted by the commenters.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the 
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public 
interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. 
We have determined that these changes will neither increase the 
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

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

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Action                    Work hours       Cost per airplane                Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection to determine the configuration            1  $80........................  $11,120.
 of the airplane, and to determine
 previous inspection method.
Configuration 1, per inspection cycle....           11  $880, per inspection cycle.  Up to $122,320, per
                                                                                      inspection cycle.
Configuration 2, per inspection cycle....            5  $400, per inspection cycle.  Up to $55,600, 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 AD will not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

[[Page 60235]]

    (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 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, 
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2007-21-18 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-15236. Docket No. FAA-
2007-27777; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-265-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective November 28, 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 sides of the flat aft 
pressure bulkhead to determine if a repair has been installed. As 
noted in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated November 
14, 2006, Configuration 1 applies to airplanes with no repairs 
installed; Configuration 2 applies to airplanes with repairs 
installed in accordance with DC-8 Structural Repair Manual (SRM) 53-
2-5, Figure 9; and Configuration 3 applies to airplanes with repairs 
that are not installed in accordance with DC-8 SRM 53-2-5, Figure 9. 
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. Where the service bulletin specifies to do the 
pressure test, that action is not required by this AD.
    (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.
    (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 Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 
FSDO.
    (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.
    (4) Inspections and repairs required by this AD of specified areas 
of Principal Structural Elements (PSEs) 53.08.009 and 53.08.010 are 
acceptable for compliance with the applicable requirements of 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469, including the 
reporting requirements for those specified areas. The remaining areas 
of the affected PSEs must continue to be inspected and repaired, as 
applicable, in accordance with AD 93-01-15.
    (5) AMOCs for repairs granted previously in accordance with AD 93-
01-15 are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions 
required by this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (h) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A081, dated 
November 14, 2006, to perform the actions that are required by this AD, 
unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register 
approved the incorporation by reference of this document in accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 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 a copy of this service information. You may review 
copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, 
SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records 
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.


[[Page 60236]]


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 9, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-20464 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P