19180 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

(b) 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.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance times that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. The request

shall be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(d) Questions or technical information

related to the service information referenced

in this AD should be directed to SOCATA—

Groupe AEROSPATIALE, Socata Product

Support, Aeroport Tarbes-Ossun-Lourdes, B

P 930, 65009 Tarbes Cedex, France;

telephone: 62.41.74.26; facsimile:

62.41.74.32; or the Product Support Manager,

SOCATA—Groupe AEROSPATIALE, North

Perry Airport, 7501 Pembroke Road,

Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023; telephone:

(954) 964–6877; facsimile: (954) 964–1668.

This service information may be examined at

the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri.

(e) The inspection required by this AD

shall be done in accordance with Socata

Service Bulletin No. SB 10–082–57, Amdt. 1,

dated April 1996. The replacements and

modifications required by this AD shall be

done in accordance with the Technical

Instruction of Modification, OPT10 9203–57,

Wing Rear Attachment Bracket, dated April

1996; and the Technical Instruction of

Modification, OPT10 9205–57, Wing Rear

Attachment Rod, dated April 1996. 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. Copies may be obtained from

SOCATA—Groupe AEROSPATIALE, Socata

Product Support, Aeroport Tarbes-OssunLourdes, B P 930, 65009 Tarbes Cedex,

France; Product Support Manager, SOCATA

Aircraft—Groupe AEROSPATIALE, North

Perry Airport, 7501 Pembroke Road,

Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700,

Washington, DC.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French AD 94–249(A)R1, dated June 19,

1996.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

June 3, 1998.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April

8, 1998.

Marvin R. Nuss,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10057 Filed 4–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–40–AD; Amendment

39–10473; AD 98–08–24]

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: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–10, –20, –30, –40,

and –50 series airplanes, and C–9

(military) airplanes, that requires a onetime visual inspection to determine if

all corners of the forward lower cargo

doorjamb have been previously

modified. This amendment also requires

low frequency eddy current inspections

to detect cracks of the fuselage skin and

doubler at all corners of the forward

lower cargo doorjamb, various follow-on

repetitive inspections, and modification,

if necessary. This amendment is

prompted by fatigue cracks found in the

fuselage skin and doubler at the corners

of the forward lower cargo doorjamb.

The actions specified by this 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: Effective May 22, 1998. The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of May 22,

1998.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from The Boeing Company, Douglas

Products Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Dept. C1–L51 (2–60). 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 90712; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

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: 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–9–10, –20, –30, –40,

and –50 series airplanes, and C–9

(military) airplanes was published in

the Federal Register on July 25, 1997

(62 FR 39975). That action proposed to

require a one-time visual inspection to

determine if all corners of the forward

lower cargo doorjamb have been

modified previously. That action also

proposed to require low frequency eddy

current (LFEC) inspections to detect

cracks of the fuselage skin and doubler

at all corners of the forward lower cargo

doorjamb, various follow-on repetitive

inspections, and modification, if

necessary.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received. One commenter

supports the proposed AD.

Permit Repairs in Accordance With

Designated Engineering Representative

(DER) Approval

One commenter requests that

proposed paragraphs (b)(3) and (c) be

revised to permit the repair of cracked

structure to be accomplished in

accordance with the DER of The Boeing

Company, Douglas Products Division for

a temporary basis, rather than the

Manager of the Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO). The

commenter states that such an approval

would expedite the process for repair

approval for a crack condition beyond

the allowable repair limits (i.e., greater

than 2 inches in length) and for existing

repairs that are not in accordance with

the DC–9 Structural Repair Manual

(SRM) or Service Rework Drawing.

The FAA does not concur that

revision of the AD is necessary. The

FAA is currently in the process of

implementing procedures by which ADmandated structural repairs may be

approved by certain DER’s employed by
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 19181

type certificate holders. Once the

procedures are implemented, these

DER’s will be authorized to issue such

approvals, and no change to the AD is

necessary to allow for this.

Request To Revise Requirements of

Proposed AD

One commenter requests that

paragraph (c) of the proposed AD be

revised to read as follows:

‘‘(c) If the visual inspection required

by paragraph (a) of this AD reveals that

the corners of the forward lower cargo

doorjamb have been modified by FAA

approved repairs other than the DC–9

SRM or Service Rework Drawing, prior

to further flight, accomplish an initial

Low Frequency Eddy Current inspection

of the fuselage skin adjacent to the

repair.

(c)(i) If no cracks are detected, within

(6) months after the initial LFEC

inspection, accomplish a repair

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles

ACO.

(c)(ii) If cracks are detected, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with

a method approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles ACO.’’

This commenter states that, as

paragraph (c) of the AD is currently

worded, it will cause an unnecessary

operation impact since FAA-approved

non-standard SRM or Service Rework

Drawing repairs are known to exist in

this area of the doorjamb. The

commenter contends that obtaining

approval for such repairs from the Los

Angeles ACO, prior to further flight,

will be time consuming and will result

in an unwarranted extended ground

time for the airplane.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to revise paragraph

(c) of the AD. The FAA in conjunction

with McDonnell Douglas has conducted

further analysis of this issue. The FAA

has determined that, for cargo

doorjambs which are found to be

modified previously but not in

accordance with the DC–9 SRM or

Service Rework Drawing, an initial

LFEC inspection of the fuselage skin

adjacent to those existing repairs will

not detect any cracking under the

repairs. In light of these findings, no

change to the final rule is necessary.

Request To Revise DC–9 Supplemental

Inspection Document (SID)

One commenter requests that, prior to

issuance of the final rule, the DC–9 SID

be revised to incorporate the actions

required by this AD. The commenter

states that such a revision will eliminate

confusion between the DC–9 SID and

the AD. The FAA does not concur. The

actions required by this AD are

necessary to ensure inspection

continuity for the affected Principal

Structural Element (PSE). After issuance

of the final rule, the manufacturer may

revise the DC–9 SID.

Request to Develop Standard Repairs

One commenter request that, for

previously repaired corners and for

cracks greater than 2 inches long,

McDonnell Douglas develop additional

‘‘standard repairs’’ that are preapproved by the Manager, Los Angeles

ACO, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate. The commenter contends

that the cargo door area is one of the

most easily damaged areas on the

airplane and that there are many nonSRM or Service Rework Drawing repairs

that exist in this area. The commenter

states that such an approval would

minimize the amount of time required

to obtain the approved repair and the

impact to flight and maintenance

schedules.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to pre-approve

‘‘standard repairs.’’ The manufacturer

has indicated that it has not received

many requests for approval of repairs

required by paragraph (b)(3) or (c) of

this AD. Therefore, a repair approved by

the Manager of the Los Angeles ACO

will be developed on a case-by-case

basis. In addition, the Manager and staff

of the Los Angeles ACO are working

very closely with the manufacturer to

expedite repair approval requests. Such

requests may be made under the

provisions of paragraph (e) of the final

rule.

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 as proposed.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 899

McDonnell Douglas 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 will be affected by this AD.

It will take approximately 1 work

hour per airplane to accomplish the

required visual inspection, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

visual inspection required 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 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 required by this

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$60 per airplane.

Should an operator be required to

accomplish the modification, it would

take approximately 14 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$936, or $2,807 per airplane, depending

on the service kit purchased. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

modification required by this AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,776

or $3,647 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.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

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 final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

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

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:
19182 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

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:

98–08–24 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–10473. Docket 97–NM–40–AD.

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

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

(military) airplanes, as listed in McDonnell

Douglas Service Bulletin DC9–53–277, dated

September 30, 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 forward 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) 53.09.001 of the DC–9

Supplemental Inspection Document (SID).

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

landings, or within 3,500 landings after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform a one-time visual inspection to

determine if the corners of the forward 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 forward 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 forward lower cargo doorjamb, in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin DC9–53–277, dated September 30,

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 3,500 landings.

(B) If the immediately preceding inspection

was conducted using x-ray techniques,

conduct the next inspection within 2,850

landings.

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

the corners of the forward 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

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 forward 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 forward 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 DC9–53–277, dated September 30,

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.

(g) Except as provided by paragraphs (a),

(b)(1)(ii)(B), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(3), (c), and (d)(2) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service

Bulletin DC9–53–277, dated September 30,

1996. 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. Copies may be obtained

from The Boeing Company, Douglas Products

Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long

Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration, Dept.

C1–L51 (2–60). Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

May 22, 1998.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 9,

1998.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10056 Filed 4–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U