[Federal Register: July 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 144)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43628-43631]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28jy05-2]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NM-343-AD; Amendment 39-14203; AD 2005-15-14]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-11, DC-8-
12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, DC-8-43, DC-
8F-54, and DC-8F-55 Airplanes; and DC-8-50, DC-8-60, DC-8-60F, DC-8-70,
and DC-8-70F Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas airplane models. This AD
requires a one-time test to determine the material of the upper inboard
spar cap of the wing, and corrective actions if necessary. This action
is necessary to prevent stress corrosion cracking in the forward tang
of the upper inboard spar cap of the wing, which could result in
structural damage to adjacent components of the wing and consequent
reduced structural integrity of the airplane. This action is intended
to address the identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Effective September 1, 2005.
The incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 1, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). This information may be
examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Mowery, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone (562) 627-5322; fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model
DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42,
DC-8-43, DC-8F-54, and DC-8F-55 airplanes; and DC-8-50, DC-8-60, DC-8-
60F, DC-8-70, and DC-8-70F series airplanes; was published in the
Federal Register on August 14, 2003 (68 FR 48576). For certain
airplanes, that action proposed to require a one-time test to determine
the material of the upper inboard spar cap of the wing, or a one-time
inspection to determine if the slant panel cap has been repaired
previously. For most airplanes, this action also proposed to require a
one-time inspection for corrosion of the slant panel cap of the wing
leading edge assembly, and follow-on actions.
Comments
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received from a single commenter, who is the airplane
manufacturer.
Request To Add Conductivity Test for Group 2 Airplanes
The commenter requests that we revise paragraph (a) of the proposed
AD to add Group 2 airplanes, as identified in McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995. (Paragraph
(a) of the proposed AD specifies that the actions in that paragraph
apply to airplanes in Group 1 of that service bulletin.) The commenter
points out that Group 1 airplanes are those that do not have a
[[Page 43629]]
previous repair on the upper inboard spar cap. Group 2 airplanes are
those airplanes modified previously under Condition 2 of the referenced
service bulletin, or certain Service Rework Drawings. The commenter
states that Group 2 airplanes should be added to paragraph (a) to
ensure that all subject airplanes are inspected.
We agree. The proposed AD separated requirements for Group 1 and
Group 2 airplanes into paragraphs (a) (for airplanes in Group 1) and
(b) (for airplanes in Group 2). The difference between the two
paragraphs is that no conductivity test was specified for airplanes in
Group 2. However, not providing the option to perform the conductivity
test on Group 2 airplanes could result in airplanes being subject to
unnecessary requirements if the upper inboard spar cap is made from
7075-T73 material. Thus, we have revised paragraph (a) of this final
rule to specify the conductivity test for all affected airplanes. We
have also included a new paragraph (b) to state that, for airplanes in
Group 2, accomplishing the modification in paragraph (a)(2) of this AD
without accomplishing the one-time eddy current conductivity test to
determine the material of the upper inboard spar cap of the wing is
acceptable for compliance with this AD.
Request To Defer Requirements for Group 3 Airplanes
The commenter states that no action is necessary for Group 3
airplanes, as identified in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-
072 R03, Revision 03, until McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-
30 has been accomplished. The commenter points out that replacing the
slant panel cap of the wing leading edge is not necessary to address
the unsafe condition (an issue which is discussed fully later on in
this final rule), and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-072
R03, Revision 03, provides for deferral of the other action specified
for Group 3 airplanes in the following statement:
``Modification of the front spar stiffeners is to provide
compatibility with rework of the lower spar cap rework per DC-8
Service Bulletin 57-30, Revision 4[,] and may be deferred until
accomplishing DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30.''
However, in the section ``Differences Between Proposed AD and Service
Information'' of the proposed AD, the FAA states that the proposed AD
would not allow this deferral. The commenter states that if McDonnell
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30 is done, McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC8-57-072 will be necessary for compatibility.
We infer that the commenter is requesting that we reinstate the
deferral of action for airplanes in Group 3 until DC-8 Service Bulletin
57-30 is accomplished. We agree for the reasons stated by the
commenter. Therefore, we have revised paragraph (c) of this final rule
to state that, for Group 3 airplanes as identified in McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, the actions specified by
paragraph (a) of this AD are not required until the actions specified
in McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30 are accomplished, or
within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is
later. If the actions specified in McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service
Bulletin 57-30 have been accomplished before the effective date of the
AD, the actions required by paragraph (a) of this AD must be
accomplished within 48 months after the effective date of this AD.
Request To Remove Requirements for Slant Panel Cap
The commenter requests changes throughout the proposed AD to remove
requirements that would apply to the slant panel cap of the wing
leading edge. The commenter notes that the unsafe condition is stress
corrosion cracking of upper inboard spar caps made of 7079-T6 material.
The commenter states that the only time that an inspection of the slant
panel cap is needed is during the modification of the upper inboard
spar cap. The commenter points out that, in paragraph (a)(1) of the
proposed AD, if the test reveals that the upper inboard spar cap is
made from 7075-T73 material, then the proposed AD should specify that
no further action is needed. The commenter also notes that paragraphs
(a)(2) and (b) of the proposed AD should be revised to note that the
inspection of the slant panel cap for corrosion and previous repairs is
needed to determine what modification configuration applies. The steps
of repairing corrosion and repairing or replacing the slant panel cap,
as applicable, are not relevant and should not be included. The
commenter points out that the slant panel cap can be repaired
separately from the service bulletin without affecting the actions
required by this proposed AD for the upper inboard spar cap.
We agree with the commenter's request to remove actions that would
have applied to the slant panel cap. Including these actions in this AD
would place an unnecessary burden on affected operators, and would not
benefit safety as it relates to the unsafe condition addressed by this
AD. Accordingly, we have revised paragraph (a)(1) of this final rule to
state that, if the upper inboard spar cap is made from 7075-T73
material, no further action is needed. We have also revised paragraph
(a)(2) to remove the instructions to inspect for corrosion or previous
repairs, and repair or replace the slant panel cap. (Inspecting for
corrosion or previous repairs to determine the condition that applies
is incidental to accomplishing the required actions.) Paragraph (a)(2)
now explains that the procedures in the service bulletin include
trimming the forward tang of the upper inboard spar cap, installing a
spar cap angle doubler and stiffener clips, installing a wing upper
surface doubler, and trimming the front spar stiffeners, as applicable.
(As explained previously, the information in paragraphs (b) and (c) of
the proposed AD does not appear in this final rule, so we have not
changed paragraphs (b) and (c) of this final rule in this regard.) We
have also revised the Summary section to state that this AD requires a
one-time test to determine the material of the upper inboard spar cap
of the wing; and corrective actions if necessary. We have also revised
the Cost Impact estimate in this AD accordingly.
Request To Allow Conductivity Test Without Removing Leading Edge
The commenter requests that we revise the proposed AD to allow the
conductivity test to determine the material of the upper inboard spar
cap to be performed without removing the wing leading edge. The
commenter notes that the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin specify that the leading edge must be removed. However, the
manufacturer has received requests from operators to allow the test to
be done without removing the leading edge. The commenter states that it
is possible to access the upper inboard spar cap through the leading
edge access doors (on certain airplane models), through the center wing
fuel tank, or through the fuselage, without removing the wing leading
edge.
We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised paragraph
(a) of this final rule to allow the conductivity test to be performed
without removing the wing leading edge.
Request To Revise Applicability
The commenter notes that the Discussion paragraph of the proposed
AD states that, ``The FAA has received reports indicating that cracking
has been found in the forward tang of the upper inboard spar cap of the
wing on certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-70
[[Page 43630]]
series airplanes.'' The commenter states that this statement must be
revised because all Model DC-8 airplanes need to be inspected because
the engineering order that changed the material of the upper inboard
spar cap (from 7079-T6 material to 7075-T73 material) allowed
installing upper inboard spar caps made from 7079-T6 material until
spares were exhausted. Thus, upper inboard spar caps were installed
randomly through the fleet. The commenter states that the effectivity
listing of the referenced service bulletin correctly identifies
affected airplanes.
We acknowledge the commenter's concerns. The section of the
proposed AD referenced by the commenter states that cracking was found
on the upper inboard spar cap of the wing on certain McDonnell Douglas
Model DC-8-70 series airplanes. This is not intended to imply that only
Model DC-8-70 series airplanes are subject to the proposed AD. Indeed,
the applicability section of this AD, as proposed, identifies ``Model
DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42,
DC-8-43, DC-8-51, DC-8-52, DC-8-53, DC-8-55, DC-8F-54, DC-8F-55, DC-8-
61, DC-8-62, DC-8-63, DC-8-61F, DC-8-62F, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71, DC-8-72,
DC-8-73, DC-8-71F, DC-8-72F, and DC-8-73F airplanes; certificated in
any category; as identified in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-
57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995.'' We find that this
applicability statement includes all airplanes that should be subject
to this AD. In addition, we note that the Discussion section is not
restated in the final rule. We have not changed this AD in this regard.
Explanation of Additional Changes Made to This AD
We have revised paragraph (a) of this AD to refer specifically to
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated
October 2, 1995, instead of referring to ``the service bulletin.''
Also, Boeing has received a Delegation Option Authorization (DOA).
We have revised paragraph (e)(2) of this AD to delegate the authority
to approve an alternative method of compliance for any repair required
by this AD to the Authorized Representative for the Boeing DOA
Organization rather than the Designated Engineering Representative
(DER).
We have revised compliance times in this AD to be stated in months
(48 months after the effective date of this AD) instead of in years (4
years after the effective date of this AD).
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of
the AD.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 303 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 229 airplanes of U.S. registry
will be affected by this AD.
The electrical conductivity test will take approximately 1 work
hour per airplane, at the average labor rate of $65 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of this inspection on U.S.
operators is estimated to be $14,885, or $65 per airplane.
For airplanes subject to corrective action, the modification will
take between 110 and 416 work hours per airplane, at the average labor
rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts will cost between $4,554 and
$19,687. Based on these figures, the cost impact of these actions is
estimated to be between $11,704 and $46,727 per airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other
administrative actions.
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 Impact
The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (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 (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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:
2005-15-14 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-14203. Docket 2001-NM-
343-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-
32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, DC-8-43, DC-8-51, DC-8-52, DC-8-53,
DC-8-55, DC-8F-54, DC-8F-55, DC-8-61, DC-8-62, DC-8-63, DC-8-61F,
DC-8-62F, DC-8-63F, DC-8-71, DC-8-72,
[[Page 43631]]
DC-8-73, DC-8-71F, DC-8-72F, and DC-8-73F airplanes; certificated in
any category; as identified in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin
DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent stress corrosion cracking in the forward tang of the
upper inboard spar cap of the wing, which could result in structural
damage to adjacent components of the wing and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following:
Inspection and Investigative and Other Specified Actions
(a) Within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, except
as provided by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this AD, perform a one-time
eddy current conductivity test of the upper inboard spar cap of the
wing to determine the type of material, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin
DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995. Although the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin specify that it
is necessary to remove the wing leading edge to perform this test,
this AD does not require removing the wing leading edge to access
the upper inboard spar cap. The conductivity test can be
accomplished through the access panels on the lower surface of the
wing leading edge, through the main fuel tank, or through the
fuselage at station 680, as applicable.
(1) If the test reveals that the upper inboard spar cap is made
from 7075-T73 material (as defined in the service bulletin): No
further action is required by this paragraph.
(2) If the test reveals that the upper inboard spar cap is made
from 7079-T6 material: Within 48 months after the effective date of
this AD, except as provided by paragraph (c) of this AD, accomplish
the modification specified in the service bulletin, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. The
procedures specified in the service bulletin include determining the
condition that applies, trimming the forward tang of the upper
inboard spar cap, installing a spar cap angle doubler and stiffener
clips, installing wing upper surface doublers, and trimming the
front spar stiffeners, as applicable.
Group 2 Airplanes: Waiver of Conductivity Test
(b) For airplanes in Group 2 as defined by McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995:
In lieu of accomplishing the one-time eddy current conductivity test
to determine the material of the upper inboard spar cap of the wing
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, accomplishing the modification
in paragraph (a)(2) of this AD within the compliance time specified
in that paragraph is acceptable for compliance with this AD.
Group 3 Airplanes: Inspection and Modification
(c) For airplanes in Group 3 as defined by McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin DC8-57-072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995:
The actions specified by paragraph (a) of this AD are not required
until the actions specified in McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service
Bulletin 57-30 are accomplished. If the actions specified in
McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30 have not been
accomplished before the effective date of the AD, the actions
required by paragraph (a) of this AD must be accomplished concurrent
with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30 (if McDonnell
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-30 is accomplished), or within 48
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever is later. If
the actions specified in McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-
30 have been accomplished before the effective date of the AD, the
actions required by paragraph (a) of this AD must be accomplished
within 48 months after the effective date of this AD.
Accomplishing Certain Actions Constitutes Compliance With AD 90-16-05
(d) Accomplishment of the action(s) required by this AD
constitutes compliance with the inspections required by paragraph A.
of AD 90-16-05, amendment 39-6614, as it pertains to McDonnell
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-72, Revision 2, dated July 16,
1971; and McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 57-34, Revision 3,
dated December 29, 1970. Accomplishment of the actions required by
this AD does not terminate the remaining requirements of AD 90-16-05
as it applies to other service bulletins; operators are required to
continue to inspect and/or modify in accordance with the other
service bulletins listed in that AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(e)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, is authorized to approve
alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) for this AD.
(2) 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 Delegation Option
Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager,
Los Angeles ACO, to make such findings. For a repair method to be
approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
Incorporation by Reference
(f) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions must be
done in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-57-
072 R03, Revision 03, dated October 2, 1995. This incorporation by
reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To get copies of
this service information, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long
Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California
90846, Attention: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-
0024). To inspect copies of this service information, go to the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or to the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or to the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741-
6030, or go to http://www. archives. gov/ federal -- register /code
-- of -- federal -- regulations/ ibr -- locations. html.
Effective Date
(g) This amendment becomes effective on September 1, 2005.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 20, 2005.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-14684 Filed 7-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P