AD 96-17-07

This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series airplanes, that requires an inspection to detect cracking of the swivel bogie beam lugs, and repair, if necessary. For airplanes on which no cracking is found, this amendment also requires an inspection to detect corrosion of the swivel pin lug surfaces and bores, and modification of the forward bogie beams. This amendment is prompted by reports indicating that swivel pin lugs of the main landing gear (MLG) have failed due to cracks resulting from stress corrosion. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent such stress corrosion, which could result in failure of the swivel-type bogie beam of the MLG; this condition could result in collapse of the MLG during landing.

Final rule.

96-17-07 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS: Amendment 39-9716. Docket 95-NM-115-AD. \n\n\tApplicability: Model DC-8 airplanes equipped with main landing gears having swivel type bogie beams on which the swivel pin lugs have not been nickel plated, certificated in any category. \n\n\tNOTE 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. \n\n\tCompliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously. \n\n\tTo prevent failure of the swivel-type bogie beam of the main landing gear (MLG) due to stress corrosion, which could result in collapse of the MLG during landing, accomplish the following: \n\n\t(a)\tPerform a one-time magnetic particle inspection to detect cracking of the swivel bogie beam lugs, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995; McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995, or Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995; at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD. \n\n\t\t(1)\tPrior to the accumulation of 11,600 total flight hours, or within 10 years since the installation of the forward bogie beam of the MLG, whichever occurs first. \n\n\t\t(2)\tPrior to the accumulation of 2,000 flight hours, or 2 years after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. \n\n\t(b)\tIf no cracking is detected during the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, perform a visual inspection to detect corrosion in the swivel pin lug surfaces and bores, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995; or McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995, or Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995. \n\n\tNOTE 2: Particular attention should be paid to the lubrication of the swivel pin lug and the lower swivel pin bushing during regular normal maintenance. \n\n\t\t(1)\tIf no corrosion is detected, prior to further flight, accomplish paragraph (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(ii), (b)(1)(iii), or (b)(1)(iv) of this AD, as applicable, in accordance with the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t\t(i)\tFor Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t\t(ii)\tFor Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t\t(iii)\tFor Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t\t(iv)\tFor Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t(2)\tIf any corrosion is detected, prior to further flight, accomplish paragraph (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii), or (b)(2)(iv), as applicable, inaccordance with the service bulletin. \n\n\t\t\t(i)\tFor Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. \n\n\t\t\t(ii)\tFor Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. \n\n\t\t\t(iii)\tFor Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. \n\n\t\t\t(iv)\tFor Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to further flight, repair in accordance witha method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. \n\n\t(c)\tIf any cracking is detected during the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. \n\n\t(d)\tAs of the effective date of this AD, no forward bogie beam swivel pin lug shall be installed on any airplane, unless that swivel pin lug has been modified in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995; or McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995, or Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995. \n\n\t(e)\tAn 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 ACO. 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. \n\n\tNOTE 3: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Los Angeles ACO. \n\n\t(f)\tSpecial 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. \n\n\t(g)\tThe inspections and modification shall be done in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995; McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995; or McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO2, Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995. 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 McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: TechnicalPublications Business Administration, Department C1-L51 (2-60). Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. \n\n\t(h)\tThis amendment becomes effective on September 23, 1996.

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-8 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register as a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on November 1, 1995 (60 FR 55496). That action proposed to require a magnetic particle inspection to detect cracking of the swivel bogie beam lugs, and repair, if necessary. For airplanes on which no cracking is found during the magnetic particle inspection, that action also proposed to require a visual inspection to detect corrosion of the swivel pin lug surfaces and bores, and modification of the forward bogie beams. \n\n\tInterested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to the single comment received. \n\nRequest to Revise Proposed Compliance Times \n\n\tThe commenter states that the actions described in McDonnell Douglas S.B. 32-182 (the service information referenced in the proposed rule) should be accomplished at gear overhaul. \n\n\tThe FAA infers that the commenter requests the compliance times be revised to reflect the intervals for gear overhaul. The FAA does not concur that the compliance times need to be revised in this AD. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, the FAA considered not only the manufacturer's recommendation as to an appropriate compliance time, but the degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe condition, and the intervals for gear overhaul of the majority of affected operators. In addition, paragraph (a)(2) of the AD provides a grace period for those operators that may have accomplished a gear overhaul just prior to the effective date of this AD, or that may be required to accomplish such an overhaul soon after this AD becomes effective. However, under the provisions of paragraph (e) of the final rule,the FAA may approve requests for adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted to substantiate that an adjustment would provide an acceptable level of safety. \n\nConclusion \n\n\tAfter careful review of the available data, including the comment noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed. \n\nCost Impact \n\n\tThere are approximately 148 McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 97 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 83 work hours per airplane to accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $483,060, or $4,980 per airplane. \n\n\tThe cost impact figure discussed above is 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. \n\nRegulatory Impact \n\n\tThe 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. \n\n\tFor 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." \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. \n\nAdoption of the Amendment \n\n\tAccordingly, 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: \n\nPART 39 - AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES \n\n\t1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: \n\nAuthority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701. \n\n§ 39.13 - (Amended) \n\n\t2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness directive: