Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 42949

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–21120 Filed 8–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–49–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–10, –20, –30, –40,

and –50 Series Airplanes, and C–9

(Military) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC–

9–10, –20, –30, –40, and –50 series

airplanes, and C–9 (military) airplanes.

This proposal would require a one-time

visual inspection to determine if all

corners of the aft lower cargo doorjamb

have been previously modified. This

proposal also would require low

frequency eddy current inspections to

detect cracks of the fuselage skin and

doubler at all corners of the aft lower

cargo doorjamb, various follow-on

repetitive inspections, and modification,

if necessary. This proposal is prompted

by fatigue cracks found in the fuselage

skin and doubler at the corners of the aft

lower cargo doorjamb. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to detect and correct such

fatigue cracking, which could result in

rapid decompression of the fuselage and

consequent reduced structural integrity

of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

September 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

49–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,

California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Department C1–L51 (2–60). This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712; telephone (562) 627–

5324; fax (562) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the rules docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the rules docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the rules

docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 97–NM–49–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

97–NM–49–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received reports of

fatigue cracks in the fuselage skin and

doubler at the corners of the aft lower

cargo doorjamb on Model DC–9 series

airplanes. These cracks were discovered

during inspections conducted as part of

the Supplemental Structural Inspection

Document (SSID) program, required by

AD 96–13–03, amendment 39–9671 (61

FR 31009, June 19, 1996). Investigation

revealed that such cracking was caused

by fatigue-related stress. Fatigue

cracking in the fuselage skin or doubler

at the corners of the aft lower cargo

doorjamb, if not detected and corrected

in a timely manner, could result in

rapid decompression of the fuselage and

consequent reduced structural integrity

of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin

DC9–53–278, dated November 4, 1996.

The service bulletin describes the

following procedures:

1. For certain airplanes: Performing

low frequency eddy current (LFEC)

inspections to detect cracks of the

fuselage skin and doubler at all corners

of the aft lower cargo doorjamb;

2. For certain other airplanes:

Contacting the manufacturer for

disposition of certain conditions;

3. Conducting repetitive inspections,

or modifying the corner skin of the aft

lower cargo doorjamb and performing

follow-on LFEC inspections, if no

cracking is detected;

4. Performing repetitive LFEC

inspections to detect cracks on the skin

adjacent to any corner that has been

modified; and

5. Modifying any crack that is found

to be 2 inches or less in length at all

corners that have not been modified and

performing follow-on repetitive LFEC

inspections.

Accomplishment of the modification

will minimize the possibility of cracks

in the fuselage skin and doubler.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require, for certain airplanes, LFEC

inspections to detect cracks of the

fuselage skin and doubler at all corners

of the aft lower cargo doorjamb, various

follow-on repetitive inspections, and

modification, if necessary. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

The proposed AD also would require

a one-time visual inspection to

determine if all corners of the aft lower

cargo doorjamb have been previously

modified. The FAA finds that the LFEC

inspections described in the referenced

service bulletin are dependent on
42950 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules

whether the corners have been modified

or not, and dependent on what service

documents the operators used to

accomplish the modification. The FAA

finds that an initial one-time visual

inspection is necessary to make such a

determination.

Operators also should note that,

although the service bulletin specifies

that the manufacturer must be contacted

for disposition of certain conditions,

this proposal would require the repair of

those conditions to be accomplished in

accordance with a method approved by

the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 899

McDonnell Model DC–9–10, –20, –30,

–40, and –50 series airplanes, and C–9

(military) airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 622 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

It would take approximately 1 work

hour per airplane to accomplish the

proposed visual inspection, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the visual inspection proposed by

this AD on U.S. operators is estimated

to be $37,320, or $60 per airplane.

Should an operator be required to

accomplish the proposed LFEC

inspection, it would take approximately

1 work hour per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the LFEC inspection proposed

by this AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $37,320, or $60 per

airplane.

Should an operator be required to

accomplish the proposed modification,

it would take approximately 14 work

hours per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would cost between $692

to $990 per airplane, depending on the

service kit purchased. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

modification proposed by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,532

or $1,830 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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, in accordance with

Executive Order 12612, it is determined

that this proposal would not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this 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) if

promulgated, 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 copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the rules docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the rules docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(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. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 97–NM–49–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9–10, –20, –30,

–40, and –50 series airplanes, and C–9

(military) airplanes, as listed in McDonnell

Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin DC9–53–278,

dated November 4, 1996; certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To detect and correct fatigue cracking in

the fuselage skin or doubler at the corners of

the aft lower cargo doorjamb, which could

result in rapid decompression of the fuselage

and consequent reduced structural integrity

of the airplane, accomplish the following:

Note 2: Where there are differences

between the service bulletin and the AD, the

AD prevails.

Note 3: This AD is related to AD 96–13–

03, amendment 39–9671, (61 FR 31009, June

19, 1996), and will affect Principal Structural

Element (PSE) 53.09.035 of the DC–9

Supplemental Inspection Document (SID).

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 48,000 total

landings, or within 3,575 landings after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform a one-time visual inspection to

determine if the corners of the aft lower cargo

doorjamb have been modified prior to the

effective date of this AD.

(b) If the visual inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD reveals that the

corners of the aft lower cargo doorjamb have

not been modified, prior to further flight,

perform a low frequency eddy current (LFEC)

or x-ray inspection to detect cracks of the

fuselage skin and doubler at all corners of the

aft lower cargo doorjamb, in accordance with

McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9–

53–278, dated November 4, 1996.

(1) If no crack is detected during the LFEC

or x-ray inspection required by this

paragraph, accomplish the requirements of

either paragraph (b)(1)(i) or (b)(1)(ii) of this

AD.

(i) Option 1. Repeat the inspections as

follows until paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this AD

is accomplished:

(A) If the immediately preceding

inspection was conducted using LFEC

techniques, conduct the next inspection

within 3,575 landings.

(B) If the immediately preceding inspection

was conducted using x-ray techniques,

conduct the next inspection within 3,075

landings.

(ii) Option 2. Prior to further flight, modify

the corners of the aft lower cargo doorjamb,

in accordance with the service bulletin. Prior

to the accumulation of 28,000 landings after

accomplishment of that modification,

perform a LFEC inspection to detect cracks

on the skin adjacent to the modification, in

accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat

the LFEC inspection thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 20,000 landings.

(A) If no crack is detected on the skin

adjacent to the modification during any LFEC

or x-ray inspection required by this

paragraph, repeat the LFEC inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 20,000

landings.

(B) If any crack is detected on the skin

adjacent to the modification during any LFEC

or x-ray inspection required by this

paragraph, prior to further flight, repair it in

accordance with a method approved by the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 42951

Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(2) If any crack is found during any LFEC

or x-ray inspection required by this

paragraph and the crack is 2 inches or less

in length: Prior to further flight, modify it in

accordance with the service bulletin. Prior to

the accumulation of 28,000 landings after

accomplishment of the modification, perform

a LFEC inspection to detect cracks on the

skin adjacent to the modification, in

accordance with the service bulletin.

(i) If no crack is detected during the LFEC

inspection required by this paragraph, repeat

the LFEC inspection thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 20,000 landings.

(ii) If any crack is detected during the LFEC

inspection required by this paragraph, prior

to further flight, repair it in accordance with

a method approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles ACO.

(3) If any crack is found during any LFEC

or x-ray inspection required by this

paragraph and the crack is greater than 2

inches in length: Prior to further flight, repair

it in accordance with a method approved by

the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

(c) If the visual inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD reveals that the

corners of the aft lower cargo doorjamb have

been modified, but not in accordance with

the DC–9 Structural Repair Manual (SRM) or

Service Rework Drawing, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with a method

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

(d) If the visual inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD reveals that the

corners of the aft lower cargo doorjamb have

been modified in accordance with DC–9 SRM

or Service Rework Drawing, prior to the

accumulation of 28,000 landings since

accomplishment of that modification, or

within 3,500 landings after the effective date

of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform

a LFEC inspection to detect cracks on the

skin adjacent to the modification, in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin DC9–53–278, dated November 4,

1996. Repeat the LFEC inspection thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 20,000 landings.

(1) If no crack is detected during any LFEC

inspection required by this paragraph, repeat

the LFEC inspection thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 20,000 landings.

(2) If any crack is detected during any

LFEC inspection required by this paragraph,

prior to further flight, repair it in accordance

with a method approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles ACO.

(e) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August

5, 1997.

John J. Hickey,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–21096 Filed 8–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–165–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0100 and 0070 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100

and 0070 series airplanes. This proposal

would require replacement of the

fusible pin in the upper torque link of

the main landing gear with an improved

pin. This proposal is prompted by

issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent reduced

structural integrity and potential

collapse of the main landing gear.

DATES: Comments must be received by

September 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–NM–

165–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North

Fairfax Street, Alexandria, Virginia

22314. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2141; fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the rules docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the rules docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the rules

docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 97–NM–165–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

97–NM–165–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the Netherlands, notified the FAA that

an unsafe condition may exist on certain

Fokker Model F28 Mark 0100 and 0070

series airplanes. The RLD advises that

failures of the fusible pin to shear as

required under excessive loading

conditions may result in structural

damage to the main landing gear (MLG).

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in reduced structural integrity

and potential collapse of the main

landing gear.