Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-61, DC-8-61F, DC-8-63, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71F, and DC-8-73F Airplanes, 24887-24889 [E8-9883]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules Done in Washington, DC, this 30th day of April 2008. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E8–9968 Filed 5–5–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2008–0497; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–096–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–63, DC–8–63F, DC–8–71F, and DC–8–73F Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC– 8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–63, DC–8–63F, DC–8–71F, and DC–8–73F airplanes. For certain airplanes, this proposed AD would require non-destructive testing (NDT) to detect cracks of the door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, and doing applicable related investigative and corrective actions. For certain other airplanes, this proposed AD would require inspecting and repairing if necessary or replacing previously repaired door jamb corners with an applicable repair. This proposed AD results from reports of numerous cases of cracks in the skin at the door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 20, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Fax: 202–493–2251. • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:38 May 05, 2008 Jkt 214001 M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 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 https:// 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. 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 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–2008–0497; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–096–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 because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// www.regulations.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 We have received reports of numerous cases of cracks found in the skin at the door jamb corners of forward and aft service doors, on certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–63, DC–8–63F, DC–8–71F, and DC–8–73F airplanes. Investigation PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 24887 revealed that cracks were caused by metal fatigue. Fatigue cracking of door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, if not detected and corrected, could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A082, dated February 6, 2007. For certain airplanes, the service bulletin describes doing initial non-destructive testing (NDT) to detect cracks of the door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, and doing applicable related investigative and corrective actions. The applicable related investigative actions include repeating the NDT or doing repetitive inspections of the repaired door jamb corners, as applicable. The corrective actions include repairing the door jamb corners, and contacting Boeing for certain instructions, as applicable. For certain other airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures for contacting Boeing for repair or inspection instructions or replacing previously repaired door jamb corners with an applicable repair. The service bulletin specifies the following compliance times: • For the initial NDT: Within 2,000 landings or 3 years, whichever occurs first. • For repetitive NDTs or inspections: Between 532 and 11,325 landings depending on the NDT/inspection method. • For corrective actions: Before further flight or before the repeat interval for the inspection method depending on the repair condition. 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 ‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.’’ Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin Although the service bulletin recommends that operators of airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 3, contact the manufacturer for repeat inspection instructions, this proposed E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM 06MYP1 24888 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules AD would require operators to inspect and repair using a method approved by the FAA. The service bulletin recommends that operators of airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 4, 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 299 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 55 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed testing 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 $4,400, or $80 per airplane, per testing 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. 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. § 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–2008– 0497; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM– 096–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 20, 2008. Affected ADs (b) As specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, this AD affects certain requirements of AD 93–01–15, amendment 39–8469. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Regulatory Findings Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–63, DC– 8–63F, DC–8–71F, and DC–8–73F airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A082, dated February 6, 2007. 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 Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports of numerous cases of cracks in the skin at the door jamb corners of forward and aft service doors. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:38 May 05, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. Testing, Inspecting, Repairing, and Related Investigative and Corrective Actions (f) At the applicable compliance time and repeat intervals listed in Tables 1 through 5 inclusive of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A082, dated February 6, 2007; except where the service bulletin specifies a compliance time after the date on the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of this AD, as applicable. (1) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configurations 1 and 2, in the service bulletin: Do the testing and related investigative and corrective actions by accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. (2) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 3, in the service bulletin: Inspect and repair discrepancies in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. (3) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 4, in the service bulletin: Do the actions specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(ii) of this AD. (i) Repair door jamb corners of the service door using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. (ii) Replace the previously repaired door jamb corners with an applicable repair in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. Compliance With Certain Requirements of AD 93–01–15 (g) Accomplishment of the applicable actions required by paragraph (f) of this AD constitutes compliance with certain requirements of AD 93–01–15, as it pertains to the affected areas of principal structural elements 53.08.039 and 53.08.040 of McDonnell Douglas DC–8 Supplemental Inspection Document, dated December 1985. 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) 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 E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM 06MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 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 April 23, 2008. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8–9883 Filed 5–5–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2007–0074] RIN 1625–AA87 Safety and Security Zones: New York Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify several aspects of the permanent safety and security zones within the New York Captain of the Port Zone. This action is necessary to consolidate, clarify, and otherwise modify safety and security zone regulations to eliminate unnecessary regulations and better meet the safety and security needs of the New York and New Jersey port community. This action would modify existing safety and security zones, consolidate and modify safety and security zones currently found in separate regulations, and remove certain safety and security zones. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management Facility on or before July 7, 2008. Comments sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB on or before July 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number USCG–2007–0074 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods: (1) Online: https:// www.regulations.gov. (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:38 May 05, 2008 Jkt 214001 Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001. (3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on the Ground Floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202–366–9329. (4) Fax: 202–493–2251. You must also send comments on collection of information to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. To ensure that the comments are received on time, the preferred method is by email at nlesser@omb.eop.gov or fax at 202–395–6566. An alternate, though slower, method is by U.S. mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call Lieutenant Commander Mike McBrady, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector New York (718) 354–2353. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change, to https:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information that you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility. Please see DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’ paragraph below. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2007–0074), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket Management PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 24889 Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, please submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2007–0074) in the Search box, and click ‘‘Go >>.’’ You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector New York, 212 Coast Guard Drive, Staten Island, NY 10305 between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of Transportation’s Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https:// DocketsInfo.dot.gov. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose On September 11, 2001, three commercial aircraft were hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center in New York City, and the Pentagon, inflicting catastrophic human casualties and property damage. National security E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM 06MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 6, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24887-24889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9883]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0497; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-096-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-61, DC-8-
61F, DC-8-63, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71F, and DC-8-73F 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 Model DC-8-61, DC-8-61F, DC-8-63, DC-8-
63F, DC-8-71F, and DC-8-73F airplanes. For certain airplanes, this 
proposed AD would require non-destructive testing (NDT) to detect 
cracks of the door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, 
and doing applicable related investigative and corrective actions. For 
certain other airplanes, this proposed AD would require inspecting and 
repairing if necessary or replacing previously repaired door jamb 
corners with an applicable repair. This proposed AD results from 
reports of numerous cases of cracks in the skin at the door jamb 
corners of the forward and aft service doors. We are proposing this AD 
to detect and correct fatigue cracking of door jamb corners of the 
forward and aft service doors, which could adversely affect the 
structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 20, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    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 https://
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 proposed AD, the regulatory 
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street 
address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the 
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly 
after receipt.

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 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-2008-0497; 
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-096-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 because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.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

    We have received reports of numerous cases of cracks found in the 
skin at the door jamb corners of forward and aft service doors, on 
certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-61, DC-8-61F, DC-8-63, DC-8-63F, 
DC-8-71F, and DC-8-73F airplanes. Investigation revealed that cracks 
were caused by metal fatigue. Fatigue cracking of door jamb corners of 
the forward and aft service doors, if not detected and corrected, could 
adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A082, dated 
February 6, 2007. For certain airplanes, the service bulletin describes 
doing initial non-destructive testing (NDT) to detect cracks of the 
door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, and doing 
applicable related investigative and corrective actions. The applicable 
related investigative actions include repeating the NDT or doing 
repetitive inspections of the repaired door jamb corners, as 
applicable. The corrective actions include repairing the door jamb 
corners, and contacting Boeing for certain instructions, as applicable. 
For certain other airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures 
for contacting Boeing for repair or inspection instructions or 
replacing previously repaired door jamb corners with an applicable 
repair.
    The service bulletin specifies the following compliance times:
     For the initial NDT: Within 2,000 landings or 3 years, 
whichever occurs first.
     For repetitive NDTs or inspections: Between 532 and 11,325 
landings depending on the NDT/inspection method.
     For corrective actions: Before further flight or before 
the repeat interval for the inspection method depending on the repair 
condition.
    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 
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    Although the service bulletin recommends that operators of 
airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 3, contact the 
manufacturer for repeat inspection instructions, this proposed

[[Page 24888]]

AD would require operators to inspect and repair using a method 
approved by the FAA.
    The service bulletin recommends that operators of airplanes 
identified as Group 1, Configuration 4, 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 299 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 55 airplanes of 
U.S. registry. The proposed testing 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 
$4,400, or $80 per airplane, per testing 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-2008-0497; Directorate Identifier 
2007-NM-096-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 20, 
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) As specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, this AD affects 
certain requirements of AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-61, DC-8-
61F, DC-8-63, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71F, and DC-8-73F airplanes, 
certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin DC8-53A082, dated February 6, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of numerous cases of cracks in 
the skin at the door jamb corners of forward and aft service doors. 
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of 
door jamb corners of the forward and aft service doors, 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.

Testing, Inspecting, Repairing, and Related Investigative and 
Corrective Actions

    (f) At the applicable compliance time and repeat intervals 
listed in Tables 1 through 5 inclusive of paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A082, dated 
February 6, 2007; except where the service bulletin specifies a 
compliance time after the date on the service bulletin, this AD 
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the 
effective date of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraph 
(f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configurations 1 and 2, 
in the service bulletin: Do the testing and related investigative 
and corrective actions by accomplishing all the applicable actions 
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service 
bulletin.
    (2) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 3, in the 
service bulletin: Inspect and repair discrepancies in accordance 
with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
    (3) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 4, in the 
service bulletin: Do the actions specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or 
(f)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Repair door jamb corners of the service door using a method 
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph 
(h) of this AD.
    (ii) Replace the previously repaired door jamb corners with an 
applicable repair in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions 
of the service bulletin.

Compliance With Certain Requirements of AD 93-01-15

    (g) Accomplishment of the applicable actions required by 
paragraph (f) of this AD constitutes compliance with certain 
requirements of AD 93-01-15, as it pertains to the affected areas of 
principal structural elements 53.08.039 and 53.08.040 of McDonnell 
Douglas DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document, dated December 1985.

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) 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

[[Page 24889]]

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 April 23, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-9883 Filed 5-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.