Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64523

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19536; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–86–AD] 

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, and DC–8–43 

Airplanes; DC–8–50 Series Airplanes; 

DC–8F–54 and DC–8F–55 Airplanes; 

DC–8–60 Series Airplanes; DC–8–60F 

Series Airplanes; DC–8–70 Series 

Airplanes; and DC–8–70F Series 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for certain McDonnell 

Douglas Model DC–8–70 and –70F 

series airplanes. That AD currently 

requires repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb 

corners, and corrective action if 

necessary. That AD provides for 

optional terminating action for certain 

repetitive inspections for certain 

airplanes. For certain other airplanes, 

that AD requires modification of the 

lower cargo doorjamb corners. This 

proposed AD would add airplanes to the 

applicability. The existing AD was 

prompted by reports of fatigue cracks in 

the fuselage skin in the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners; this proposed AD is 

prompted by the inadvertent omission 

of certain airplanes from the existing 

applicability. We are proposing this AD 

to ensure that the unsafe condition will 

be addressed on all affected airplanes so 

that cracking in the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners is detected and 

corrected before it can result in rapid 

decompression of the fuselage and 

consequent reduced structural integrity 

of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 20, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: room PL–401 on the 

plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

You can get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long 

Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood 

Boulevard, Long Beach, California 

90846, Attention: Data and Service 

Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–

0024). 

You may examine the contents of the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov.

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: 

Docket Management System (DMS) 

The FAA has implemented new 

procedures for maintaining AD dockets 

electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new 

AD actions are posted on DMS and 

assigned a docket number. We track 

each action and assign a corresponding 

directorate identifier. The DMS AD 

docket number is in the form ‘‘Docket 

No. FAA–2004–99999.’’ The Transport 

Airplane Directorate identifier is in the 

form ‘‘Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

999–AD.’’ Each DMS AD docket also 

lists the directorate identifier (‘‘Old 

Docket Number’’) as a cross-reference 

for searching purposes. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2004–19536; Directorate Identifier 

2004–NM–86–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of our docket 

Web site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

We are reviewing the writing style we 

currently use in regulatory documents. 

We are interested in your comments on 

whether the style of this document is 

clear, and your suggestions to improve 

the clarity of our communications that 

affect you. You can get more 

information about plain language at 

http://www.faa.gov/language and http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the AD docket in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

On March 12, 2004, we issued AD 

2004–06–06, amendment 39–13532 (69 

FR 15234, March 25, 2004), for certain 

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–8–70 

and –70F series airplanes. That AD 

requires repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb 

corners, and corrective action if 

necessary. For certain airplanes, that AD 

provides for optional terminating action 

for certain repetitive inspections. For 

certain other airplanes, that AD requires 

modification of the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners. That AD was 

prompted by reports of fatigue cracks in 

the fuselage skin in the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners. We issued that AD to 

detect and correct cracking in the lower 

cargo doorjamb corners, which could 

result in rapid decompression of the 

fuselage and consequent reduced 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2004–06–06, we 

learned that certain airplanes had been 

inadvertently omitted from the 

64524 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

applicability. That AD’s applicability 

includes only ‘‘Model DC–8–70 and 

–70F series airplanes.’’ That 

applicability does not precisely identify 

the affected airplanes: Model DC–8 

series 70 ‘‘and prior’’ airplanes. 

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 products of this same 

type design. Therefore, we are 

proposing to supersede AD 2004–06–06. 

This proposed AD would continue to 

require repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the lower cargo doorjamb 

corners, and corrective action if 

necessary. This proposed AD would 

continue to provide for optional 

terminating action for certain repetitive 

inspections for certain airplanes. For 

certain other airplanes, this proposed 

AD would continue to require 

modification of the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners. 

This proposed AD would clarify the 

applicability and ensure compliance of 

all affected airplanes by adding the 

affected airplanes that were 

inadvertently omitted from the existing 

AD. 

This proposed AD would require 

using the service information described 

previously to perform these actions, 

except as discussed below under 

‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Bulletin.’’

The proposed AD would continue to 

require that operators send us a report 

of the results of each inspection. 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Bulletin 

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 

DC8–53–078 (described in the preamble 

to AD 2004–06–06) specifies that the 

manufacturer may be contacted for 

disposition of certain repair conditions. 

This proposed AD would continue to 

require that those repairs be done in 

accordance with an FAA-approved 

method, or in accordance with data 

meeting the type certification basis of 

the airplane approved by a Boeing 

Company Designated Engineering 

Representative whom we have 

authorized to make such findings.

Additional Changes to Existing AD 

This proposed AD would retain the 

requirements of AD 2004–06–06. Since 

we issued that AD, we have revised the 

AD format. As a result, we have 

rearranged certain paragraphs and 

changed the corresponding paragraph 

identifiers in this proposed AD, as listed 

in the following table:

REIDENTIFIED PARAGRAPHS

Paragraph identifier in 

AD 2004–06–06: 

New paragraph

identifier in this

proposed AD: 

(a) .............................. (f) 

(b) .............................. (g) 

(c) .............................. (h) 

(d) .............................. (i) 

(e) .............................. (j) 

(f) ............................... (k) 

(g) .............................. (l) 

Costs of Compliance 

This proposed AD would affect about 

264 airplanes worldwide. The following 

table provides the estimated costs for 

U.S. operators to comply with this 

proposed AD, which adds no economic 

burden above that imposed by AD 

2004–06–06. The current costs for this 

AD are repeated for the convenience of 

affected operators, as follows:

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work 

hours 

Average 

labor rate 

per hour 

Parts Cost per airplane 

No. of affected 

U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost 

Pre-modification inspections 24 $65 None required ..... $1,560, per inspection cycle Unknown Unknown. 

Modification ......................... 520 65 $25,000 ............... 58,800 ................................. Unknown Unknown. 

Post-modification inspections.40 65 None required ..... 2,600, per inspection cycle 244 .......... $634,400, per inspection 

cycle. 

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. 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 FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing amendment 39–13532 (69 FR 

15234, March 25, 2004) and adding the 

following new airworthiness directive 

(AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2004–

19536; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

86–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

must receive comments on this airworthiness 

directive (AD) action by December 20, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–06–06, 

amendment 39–13532. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to the following 

McDonnell Douglas airplanes, certificated in 

any category; as listed in McDonnell Douglas 

Service Bulletin DC8–53–078, Revision 01, 

dated January 25, 2001: 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Proposed Rules 64525

(1) 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, and DC–8–43 airplanes. 

(2) Model DC–8–50 series airplanes. 

(3) Model DC–8F–54 and DC–8F–55 

airplanes. 

(4) Model DC–8–60 series airplanes. 

(5) Model DC–8–60F series airplanes. 

(6) Model DC–8–70 series airplanes. 

(7) Model DC–8–70F series airplanes.

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by reports of 

fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin in the 

lower cargo doorjamb corners. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct cracking in the 

lower cargo doorjamb corners, which could 

result in rapid decompression of the fuselage 

and consequent reduced 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. 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004–

06–06

Note 1: This AD is related to AD 93–01–

15, amendment 39–8469, and will affect 

Principal Structural Elements (PSEs) 

53.08.042 and 53.08.043 of the DC–8 

Supplemental Inspection Document (SID), 

Report L26–011, Volume II, Revision 7, dated 

April 1993.

Group 1 Airplanes: Inspections and Optional 

Terminating Action 

(f) Except as provided by paragraph (m) of 

this AD: For airplanes identified as Group 1 

in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8–

53–078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001: 

(1) Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after 

April 29, 2004 (the effective date of AD 

2004–06–06, amendment 39–13532), 

whichever occurs first, perform applicable 

inspections for cracking of the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

(i) If no crack is detected during any 

inspection required by this paragraph: Repeat 

the inspections within the intervals specified 

in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin. 

(ii) If any crack is detected during any 

inspection required by this paragraph: Repair 

before further flight in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

(2) Modification of the lower cargo 

doorjamb corners in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin terminates the repetitive inspection 

requirement of paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD. 

(3) For airplanes repaired or modified in 

accordance with paragraph (f)(1)(ii) or (f)(2) 

of this AD: Within 17,000 landings after the 

repair or modification, perform an eddy 

current inspection for cracks of the doorjamb 

corners, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin (Drawing SN08530001). Repeat the 

inspection at intervals not to exceed 4,400 

landings. 

Group 2 Airplanes: Modification 

(g) Except as provided by paragraph (m) of 

this AD, for airplanes identified as Group 2 

in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8–

53–078, Revision 01, dated January 25, 2001: 

(1) Within 2,000 landings or 3 years after 

April 29, 2004, whichever occurs first, 

modify the lower cargo doorjamb corners in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin. 

(2) Within 17,000 landings after the 

modification required by paragraph (g)(1) of 

this AD, perform applicable inspections for 

cracking of the doorjamb corners, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat 

the inspections at intervals not to exceed 

4,400 landings. 

Group 3 and Group 4 Airplanes: Inspections 

(h) For airplanes identified as Group 3 and 

Group 4 in McDonnell Douglas Service 

Bulletin DC8–53–078, Revision 01, dated 

January 25, 2001: Within 17,000 landings 

following accomplishment of the 

modification specified in the service bulletin, 

perform applicable inspections for cracking 

of the lower cargo doorjamb corners, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin. Repeat 

the inspections at intervals not to exceed 

4,400 landings. 

All Airplanes: Repair Following PostModification Inspections 

(i) If any cracking is detected during any 

inspection required by paragraph (f)(3), (g)(2), 

or (h) of this AD: Repair before further flight 

in accordance with a method approved by 

the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or per data 

meeting the type certification basis of the 

airplane approved by a Boeing Company 

Designated Engineering Representative (DER) 

who has been authorized by the Manager, Los 

Angeles ACO, to make such findings. For a 

repair method to be approved, the approval 

must specifically refer to this AD. 

Credit for Prior Accomplishment 

(j) Inspections done before the effective 

date of April 29, 2004, in accordance with 

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8–

53–078, dated February 6, 1996, are 

acceptable for compliance with the 

applicable inspections required by this AD. 

(k) Inspections and repairs specified in this 

AD of areas of PSEs 53.08.042 and 53.08.043 

are acceptable for compliance with the 

applicable requirements of paragraphs (a) 

and (b) of AD 93–01–15. The remaining areas 

of the affected PSEs must be inspected and 

repaired as applicable, in accordance with 

AD 93–01–15. 

Report 

(l) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this AD: Submit 

a report of the findings (both positive and 

negative) of each inspection required by this 

AD to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. Under 

the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in this AD and has 

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 

(1) For an inspection done after April 29, 

2004: Submit the report within 10 days after 

the inspection. 

(2) For an inspection done before April 29, 

2004: Submit the report within 10 days after 

April 29, 2004. 

Requirements for Newly Added Airplanes 

(m) For airplanes not subject to the 

requirements of AD 2004–06–06, the 

reference time for compliance is the effective 

date of this new AD, rather than April 29, 

2004 (the effective date of AD 2004–06–06). 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(n)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the 

Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, is 

authorized to approve alternative methods of 

compliance (AMOCs) 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 a 

Boeing DER who has been authorized by the 

Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make such 

findings. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(o) None. 

Related Information 

(p) None.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

26, 2004. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24724 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19535; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–78–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B 

SUD, 747–200B, 747–300, 747SP, and 

747SR Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 

747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 

747–200B, 747–300, 747SP, and 747SR 

series airplanes. That AD currently 

requires one-time inspections for 

cracking in certain upper deck floor 

beams and follow-on actions. This 

proposed AD would expand the existing 

inspection area, and would require 

inspecting fastener holes in certain areas 

of airplanes modified previously, and