Document ID: FAA-2014-0235-0001
Agency: faa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Company Airplanes
Posted Date: 2014-04-17T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 74 (Thursday, April 17, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21648-21651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08726]

 ========================================================================
 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. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 21648]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0235; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-249-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for 
certain The Boeing Company Model DC-8-55, DC-8F-54, and DC-8F-55 
airplanes, Model DC-8-60 series airplanes, Model DC-8-60F series 
airplanes, Model DC-8-70 series airplanes, and Model DC-8-70F series 
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple reports of 
cracking of the upper aft skin panel of the fuselage. An evaluation by 
the design approval holder (DAH) indicates that the upper aft skin 
panel of the fuselage is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). 
This proposed AD would require removing any previously installed local 
repairs; installing a full-length improvement modification with finger 
doublers or a full-length repair with finger doublers; and repetitive 
inspections for cracking of the doublers, and repair if necessary. We 
are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 
upper aft skin panel of the fuselage, which could result in loss of 
structural integrity and consequent rapid decompression of the 
airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 2, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above 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, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001; 
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 2; fax 206-766-5683; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service 
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this 
material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0235; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket 
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments 
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket 
Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chandraduth Ramdoss, Aerospace 
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Blvd., Suite 100, Lakewood, 
CA 90712-4137, phone: 562-627-5239; fax: 562-627-5210; email: 
chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed 
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-0235; 
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-249-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute 
cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses. 
This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design 
attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as 
material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings, 
or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or 
structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is 
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural 
details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that 
occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a 
lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur 
in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-
site-damage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small 
initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. 
Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise 
the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as WFD. 
As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if 
the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became 
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to 
prevent catastrophic failure due to WFD throughout the operational life 
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these 
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and 
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that

[[Page 21649]]

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that 
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the 
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV 
is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require 
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show 
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane 
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of 
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance 
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness 
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this approach is necessary to enable DAHs to 
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for 
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This 
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides 
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information 
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with 
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    During routine maintenance inspections, three operators reported 
finding cracks in the upper aft skin panel. The cracks were located 
along the upper row of rivets common to the longeron 28 skin splice, 
near the flat aft pressure bulkhead. Cracks were detected on airplanes 
that had accumulated between 27,072 and 46,176 total flight cycles. 
This cracking, if not corrected, could result in fatigue cracking of 
the upper aft skin panel of the fuselage, which could result in loss of 
structural integrity and consequent rapid decompression of the 
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, Revision 2, 
dated September 18, 2013. For information on the procedures and 
compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2014-0235.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant 
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is 
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require removing previously installed local 
repairs; installing a full-length improvement modification with finger 
doublers, or a full-length repair with finger doublers; and doing 
repetitive detailed inspections or repetitive low frequency eddy 
current inspections for cracking along all four edges of the doublers, 
and corrective action if necessary.

Related Rulemaking

    On March 9, 2008, we issued AD 2008-06-23, Amendment 39-15435 (73 
FR 14378, March 18, 2008). AD 2008-06-23 provides an option to install 
full-length preventive modifications or full-length repairs, and 
requires repetitive inspections. Accomplishing these actions is a 
method of compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of 
this proposed AD.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, Revision 2, dated 
September 18, 2013, specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD 
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the 
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial 
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have 
authorized to make those findings.

Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the modification specified in this proposed 
AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant 
structure is modified before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard 
inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it 
becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the 
compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to 
WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly 
warrant such an extension.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 18 airplanes of U.S. 
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full-length modification or       Up to 184           Up to $14,720.....  Up to $30,360.....  Up to $546,480.
 repair.                           work[dash]hours x
                                   $85 per hour =
                                   $15,640.
Inspection......................  9 work-hours x $85  $0................  $765 per            $13,770 per
                                   per hour = $765                         inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                   per inspection
                                   cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed 
AD.

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 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

[[Page 21650]]

distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify 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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, 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

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2014-0235; Directorate Identifier 
2013-NM-249-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 2, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2008-06-23, Amendment 39-15435 (73 FR 14378, 
March 18, 2008).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company airplanes identified in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any 
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, 
Revision 2, dated September 18, 2013.
    (1) The Boeing Company Model DC-8-55 airplanes.
    (2) The Boeing Company Model DC-8F-54 and DC-8F-55 airplanes.
    (3) The Boeing Company Model DC-8-61, DC-8-62, and DC-8-63 
airplanes.
    (4) The Boeing Company Model DC-8-61F, DC-8-62F, and DC-8-63F 
airplanes.
    (5) The Boeing Company Model DC-8-71, DC-8-72, and DC-8-73 
airplanes.
    (6) The Boeing Company Model DC-8-71F, DC-8-72F, and DC-8-73F 
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by multiple reports of cracking of the 
upper aft skin panel of the fuselage. An evaluation by the design 
approval holder indicates that the upper aft skin panel of the 
fuselage is subject to widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing 
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the upper aft skin 
panel of the fuselage, which could result in loss of structural 
integrity and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Modification or Repair

    Before the accumulation of 45,400 total flight cycles, or within 
72 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 
later: Remove any previously installed local repairs and install a 
full-length improvement modification with finger doublers or a full-
length repair with finger doublers, as applicable, in accordance 
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin DC8-53A080, Revision 2, dated September 18, 2013. 
Installation of the full-length improvement modification or full-
length repair with finger doublers, in accordance with paragraph (i) 
of AD 2008-06-23, Amendment 39-15435 (73 FR 14378, March 18, 2008), 
is a method of compliance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of 
this AD. Installation of a local repair as specified in paragraph 
(i) of AD 2008-06-23, does not comply with the requirements of 
paragraph (g) of this AD.

(h) Post-Modification or Post-Repair Repetitive Inspections

    After accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of 
this AD, at the applicable time and intervals specified in paragraph 
(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD: Do an external visual inspection or low 
frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspection for cracking along all four 
edges of the finger doublers, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, Revision 
2, dated September 18, 2013. Repeat the inspections thereafter at 
the applicable time and interval specified in paragraphs (h)(1) or 
(h)(2) of this AD. Accomplishment of the applicable repetitive 
inspection specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2)(ii) of AD 2008-
06-23, Amendment 39-15435 (73 FR 14378, March 18, 2008), is a method 
of compliance with the applicable inspection requirements of 
paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) For an external visual inspection, within 30,000 flight 
cycles after doing the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this 
AD. Repeat the external visual inspection thereafter at intervals 
not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles.
    (2) For an LFEC inspection, within 15,000 flight cycles after 
doing the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. Repeat the 
LFEC inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10,000 flight 
cycles.

(i) Cracking Repair

    If any cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (h) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a 
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in 
paragraph (k) of this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by 
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed 
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin DC8-53A080, dated June 22, 2004; or Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin DC8-53A080, Revision 1, dated May 3, 2013. Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, dated June 22, 2004, was previously 
incorporated by reference in AD 2008-06-23, Amendment 39-15435 (73 
FR 14378, March 18, 2008). Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8-53A080, 
Revision 1, dated May 3, 2013, is not incorporated by reference in 
this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance 
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or 
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending 
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 
attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. 
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding 
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization 
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to 
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair 
must meet the certification basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571, 
Amendment 45, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Chandraduth 
Ramdoss, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Blvd., 
Suite 100, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137, phone: 562-627-5239; fax: 562-
627-5210; email: chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001; 
telephone 206-544-5000, extension 2; fax 206-766-5683; Internet 
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information 
at the FAA, Transport

[[Page 21651]]

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 8, 2014.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-08726 Filed 4-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P