[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55598-55601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18907]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 183 / Thursday, September 22, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 55598]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-22503; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-062-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-
10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, 
DC-10-40F, MD-10-10F, MD-10-30F, MD-11, and MD-11F 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 transport category airplanes. This 
proposed AD would require an initial ultrasonic inspection for cracks 
of the studbolts of the inboard and outboard hinge fittings of the left 
and right outboard flaps of the wings. Based on the inspection results, 
this proposed AD would also require doing repetitive ultrasonic 
inspections, replacing upper and/or lower studbolts with new or 
serviceable studbolts, doing a detailed inspection for corrosion of the 
upper studbolts, doing a magnetic particle inspection for cracks of 
studbolts, and changing the protection treatment; as applicable. This 
proposed AD is prompted by reports of corrosion and failures of the 
upper and lower studbolts of the outboard flaps inboard and outboard 
hinge fittings. We are proposing this AD to prevent corrosion and 
subsequent cracking of studbolts, which could result in failure of the 
flap hinge fittings and their possible separation from the wing rear 
spar, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 7, 
2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
    <bullet> DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    <bullet> Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
    <bullet> Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
    <bullet> By fax: (202) 493-2251.
    <bullet> 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.
    For service information identified in this proposed 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).
    You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at 
http://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility, 
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., room PL-401, 
on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. This docket 
number is FAA-2005-22503; the directorate identifier for this docket is 
2005-NM-062-AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Moreland, Aerospace Engineer, 
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles 
Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, 
California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5238; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2005-22503; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-062-AD'' in the subject line 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 submitted 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 
that 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 can review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
can visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or 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

    We have received several reports of corrosion and failures of the 
upper and lower studbolts of the outboard flaps inboard and outboard 
hinge fittings on certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, 
DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, DC-10-40F, 
MD-10-10F, and MD-10-30F airplanes. We have also received several 
reports of corrosion of the upper studbolts of the outboard flaps 
inboard and outboard hinge fittings on certain McDonnell Douglas Model 
MD-11 and -11F airplanes. (The lower studbolts installed on Model MD-11 
and -11F airplanes during production are made of corrosion-resistant 
material and are not subject to the identified unsafe condition.)
    Investigation has shown that the failures are caused by stress 
corrosion starting at corrosion pits. Corrosion and subsequent cracking 
of the studbolts, if

[[Page 55599]]

not detected and corrected, could result in failure and possible 
separation of the flap hinge fittings from the wing rear spar, and 
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed the service bulletins in the following table:

                      Referenced Service Bulletins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Model--                     Boeing service bulletin--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30,    DC10-57-154, dated February
 DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40,    2, 2005.
 DC-10-40F, MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F
 airplanes.
MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes................  MD11-57-076, dated February
                                             2, 2005.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The service bulletins describe procedures for an initial ultrasonic 
inspection for cracks of the upper and lower studbolts (upper only for 
MD-11 and -11F airplanes) of the inboard and outboard hinge fittings of 
the left and right outboard flaps of the wings. Based on the inspection 
results, the service bulletins describe the procedures in the following 
two tables:

                  Condition 1.--(No Cracked Studbolts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Option                             Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.........................  Repetitive ultrasonic inspections (described
                             previously).
2.........................  Replacement of the upper and lower studbolts
                             (as applicable) with new or serviceable
                             studbolts. Replacing studbolts with
                             studbolts that have increased corrosion
                             protection ends the repetitive inspections.
3.........................  Removal of upper and lower studbolts (as
                             applicable), a visual inspection for
                             corrosion of the studbolts, a magnetic
                             particle inspection for cracks of studbolts
                             if necessary, contact Boeing for protection
                             treatment procedures if necessary, and
                             installation of new or serviceable
                             studbolts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    Condition 2.--(Cracked Studbolts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Option                             Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.........................  Removal of upper and lower studbolts (as
                             applicable), a visual inspection for
                             corrosion of studbolts, a magnetic particle
                             inspection for cracks of studbolts if
                             necessary, installation of new or
                             serviceable studbolts, and repetitive
                             ultrasonic inspections (described
                             previously) if necessary. Replacing
                             studbolts with studbolts that have
                             increased corrosion protection ends the
                             repetitive inspections.
2.........................  Replacement of the upper and lower studbolts
                             (as applicable) with new or serviceable
                             studbolts.
3.........................  Removal of upper and lower studbolts (as
                             applicable), a detailed inspection for
                             corrosion of the studbolts, a magnetic
                             particle inspection for cracks of studbolts
                             if necessary, and installation of new or
                             serviceable studbolts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. Therefore, 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 Bulletins.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletins

    Although the service bulletins specify that operators may contact 
the manufacturer for disposition of certain repair conditions, this 
proposed AD would require operators to repair those conditions 
according to a method approved by the FAA.
    The service bulletins refer only to a ``visual inspection'' for 
corrosion of studbolts. We have determined that the procedures in the 
service bulletins should be described as a ``detailed inspection.'' 
Note 1 has been included in this proposed AD to define this type of 
inspection.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 594 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 297 U.S.-
registered Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F 
(KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, DC-10-40F, MD-10-10F, and MD-10-30F 
airplanes; and 69 Model MD-11 and -11F airplanes.

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Average                            Number of U.S.-
            Action                Work     labor rate     Parts     Cost per       registered       Fleet cost
                                 hours      per hour                airplane       airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial ultrasonic inspection        16           $65   None....       $1,040              366         $380,640
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 55600]]

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. 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 FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2005-22503; Directorate Identifier 
2005-NM-062-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive 
comments on this AD action by November 7, 2005.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.
    Applicability: (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas 
airplanes identified in Table 1 of this AD, certificated in any 
category.

                         Table 1.--Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Model--                         As identified in--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-    Boeing Service Bulletin
 30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-    DC10-57-154, dated
 40, DC-10-40F, MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F       February 2, 2005
 airplanes.
(2) MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes.............  Boeing Service Bulletin
                                              MD11-57-076, dated
                                              February 2, 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by reports of corrosion and failures of 
the upper and lower studbolts of the outboard flaps inboard and 
outboard hinge fittings. We are issuing this AD to prevent corrosion 
and subsequent cracking of studbolts, which could result in failure 
of the flap hinge fittings and their possible separation from the 
wing rear spar, and consequent reduced controllability 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.

Service Bulletins

    (f) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin 
listed in Table 1 of this AD.

Ultrasonic Inspection

    (g) Do an ultrasonic inspection for cracks of the upper and 
lower studbolts (upper studbolts only for Model MD-11 and -11F 
airplanes) of the inboard and outboard hinge fittings of the left 
and right outboard flaps of the wings, in accordance with the 
service bulletin. Inspect within 72 months from the time the 
studbolts were last replaced, or within 24 months after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

Condition 1: No Cracked Studbolts

    (h) If no cracked upper or lower studbolt is detected during any 
ultrasonic inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do the 
actions specified in paragraph (i), (j), or (k) of this AD.

Condition 1, Option 1: Repetitive Inspections

    (i) Repeat the ultrasonic inspection required by paragraph (g) 
of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months, until 
the action in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (k)(1), or (k)(2)(i) of this 
AD is done.

Condition 1, Option 2: Replacement

    (j) Within 72 months from the time the studbolts were last 
replaced, or within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later, do any one of the replacements in Table 2 of 
this AD. Thereafter, at the times specified in Table 2, repeat the 
ultrasonic inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD (if 
applicable).

                       Table 2.--Replacement Parts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    And repeat the
                                      ultrasonic
   Replace the upper and lower        inspection      Accomplishing this
studbolts (as applicable) of the      required by         replacement
   inboard and outboard hinge      paragraph (g) of      terminates--
         fitting with--                 this AD
                                     thereafter--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) New studbolts that have       None..............  The repetitive
 increased corrosion protection                        inspection
 in accordance with the service                        requirements of
 bulletin.                                             paragraph (i),
                                                       (j)(3), and
                                                       (j)(4) of this
                                                       AD.

[[Page 55601]]

 
(2) Studbolts changed with        None..............  The repetitive
 protective treatment in                               inspection
 accordance with a method                              requirements of
 approved by the Manager, Los                          paragraph (i),
 Angeles Aircraft Certification                        (j)(3), and
 (ACO), FAA.                                           (j)(4) of this
                                                       AD.
(3) Equivalent studbolts in       At intervals not    None.
 accordance with the service       to exceed 24
 bulletin.                         months.
(4) Kept serviceable studbolts    At intervals not    None.
 wet with sealant.                 to exceed 24
                                   months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Condition 1, Option 3: Removal, Inspection(s), and Corrective Actions

    (k) Within 72 months from the time the studbolts were last 
replaced, or within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later, remove the upper and lower studbolts (as 
applicable) of the inboard and outboard hinge fittings, and do a 
detailed inspection for corrosion of the upper and lower studbolts 
(as applicable), in accordance with the service bulletin.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: 
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or 
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available 
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good 
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as 
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning 
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

    (1) If no corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, 
change the protective treatment of all upper and lower studbolts (as 
applicable) to give increased corrosion protection in accordance 
with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA. 
Accomplishing this change ends the repetitive inspection 
requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD.
    (2) If any corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, thereafter do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in 
accordance with Table 2 of this AD, and do a magnetic particle 
inspection for cracks in any remaining studbolt in accordance with 
the service bulletin.
    (i) If no cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
change the protective treatment of all remaining studbolts to give 
increased corrosion protection in accordance with a method approved 
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA. Accomplishing this change ends 
the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD.
    (ii) If any cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, and thereafter do the repetitive inspections (if 
applicable) in accordance with Table 2 of this AD.

Condition 2: Cracked Studbolts

    (l) If any cracked studbolt is detected during any ultrasonic 
inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further 
fight, do the actions specified in paragraph (m), (n), or (o) of 
this AD.

Condition 2, Option 1: Removal, Inspection(s), and Corrective Actions

    (m) Remove any cracked upper and lower studbolt (as applicable) 
of the inboard and outboard hinge fittings, install any studbolt 
identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of this AD, do the 
repetitive inspections (if applicable) in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, and do a detailed inspection for corrosion of any remaining 
studbolts in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (1) If no corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, do 
a magnetic particle inspection for cracks in any remaining studbolt 
in accordance with the service bulletin. If any crack is found, 
before further flight, install any studbolt identified in and in 
accordance with Table 2 of this AD and do the repetitive inspections 
(if applicable) in accordance with Table 2 of this AD.
    (2) If any corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in accordance 
with Table 2 of this AD, and do a magnetic particle inspection for 
cracks in any remaining studbolt in accordance with the service 
bulletin.
    (i) If no cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, and do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in 
accordance with Table 2 of this AD.
    (ii) If any cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, and do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in 
accordance with Table 2 of this AD.

Condition 2, Option 2: Replacement

    (n) Replace all studbolts in accordance with paragraph (j) of 
this AD.

Condition 2, Option 3: Removal, Inspections, and Installation

    (o) Remove any cracked studbolt, install any studbolt identified 
in and in accordance with Table 2 of this AD, do the repetitive 
inspections (if applicable) in accordance with Table 2 of this AD, 
and do a detailed inspection for corrosion of any remaining studbolt 
in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (1) If no corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, do 
a magnetic particle inspection for cracks in any remaining studbolt 
in accordance with the service bulletin, and change the protective 
treatment of all remaining upper and lower studbolts (as applicable) 
to give increased corrosion protection in accordance with a method 
approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA. Accomplishing this 
change ends the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (i) 
of this AD.
    (2) If any corroded studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in accordance 
with Table 2 of this AD, and do a magnetic particle inspection for 
cracks in any remaining studbolt in accordance with the service 
bulletin.
    (i) If no cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
change the protective treatment of all remaining studbolts to give 
increased corrosion protection in accordance with a method approved 
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA. Accomplishing this change ends 
the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD.
    (ii) If any cracked studbolt is found, before further flight, 
install any studbolt identified in and in accordance with Table 2 of 
this AD, and do the repetitive inspections (if applicable) in 
accordance with Table 2 of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (p) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to 
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the 
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 15, 2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-18907 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P