[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 123 (Monday, June 28, 1999)]
[Unknown Section]
[Pages 34519-34523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15926]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98-NM-147-AD; Amendment 39-11208; AD 99-13-13]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9, DC-9-80, 
and C-9 (Military) Series Airplanes; Model MD-88 Airplanes; and Model 
MD-90 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, DC-9-80, and C-9 
(military) series airplanes; Model MD-88 airplanes; and Model MD-90 
airplanes, that requires a one-time inspection of the forward attach 
pins of the outboard flight spoiler actuators to determine whether the 
pins are of correct length, and follow-on corrective actions. This 
amendment is prompted by a report that forward attach pins of

[[Page 34520]]

incorrect length were found to be installed in the flight spoiler 
actuators on several in-service and in-production airplanes. The 
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of the 
piston of the flight spoiler actuator and consequent puncturing of the 
aft spar web, which could result in fuel leakage and reduced structural 
integrity of the wings.

DATES: Effective August 2, 1999.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of August 2, 1999.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach 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, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 
Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brent Bandley, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 
Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5237; 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, DC-9-80, and C-9 (military) series airplanes; Model MD-88 
airplanes; and Model MD-90 airplanes was published in the Federal 
Register on July 13, 1998 (63 FR 37508). That action proposed to 
require a one-time inspection of the forward attach pins of the 
outboard flight spoiler actuators to determine whether the pins are of 
correct length, and follow-on corrective actions.

Comments Received

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Support for the Proposed Rule

    One commenter supports the proposed rule.

Requests To Revise or Delete Paragraph (c) of the Proposed AD

    One commenter requests that the FAA revise paragraph (c) of the 
proposed AD to read, ``As of the effective date of this AD, no person 
shall install a forward attach pin of the flight spoiler actuator, P/N 
4935329-1 or 4935329-501 to be used on piston P/N 4913415-505 or   P/N 
4913415-507, on any airplane.'' The commenter states, as paragraph (c) 
of the proposed AD is currently worded, it may create confusion that a 
forward attach pin, P/N 4935329-1, must be installed on actuators with 
a piston,   P/N 4913415-501. Actuators with a piston, P/N 4913415-501, 
are eligible for installation as long as the aircraft has been modified 
in accordance with ``S/B 27-300 Option #1.'' The commenter also states 
that, due to the stack up of tolerances, the use of a forward attach 
pin, P/N 4935329-503, on a piston,
P/N 4913415-501, could eliminate the anti-rotation attribute of the 
pin, and consequently, could cause the pin to bind in the bushings. 
Such binding would translate to the rotation of the bushings in the 
lugs and cause scoring and wear of the piston lugs, which would create 
stress risers that could greatly reduce the strength of the piston 
lugs.
    One commenter requests that the FAA revise paragraph (c) of the 
proposed AD to take into account that the -1 pin may still be required 
on the aircraft. The commenter notes that P/N 5913900-5523 actuators 
are still acceptable for use in the inboard positions, and that all 
outboard positions may not have been reworked in accordance with AD 97-
02-08, amendment 39-9893 (62 FR 3985, January 28, 1997), by the time 
this new AD is released. The proper pin for use with the P/N 5913900-
5523 actuators is the P/N 4935329-1 pin.
    One commenter requests that paragraph (c) of the proposed AD be 
revised to include a note that reads, ``NOTE: The -1 pin is still used 
on other than 4913415-505 and 4913415-507 piston assemblies.'' The 
commenter provides no justification for its request.
    One commenter requests that the FAA delete paragraph (c) of the 
proposed AD. The commenter states that the P/N 4913415-501 piston is a 
legal assembly in accordance with AD 97-02-08 R1, amendment 39-9928 (62 
FR 6708, February 13, 1997), provided that aft spar web protective 
doublers are installed in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service 
Bulletin DC9-27-355, dated February 24, 1998 (which is referenced in 
this AD as an appropriate source of service information for 
accomplishment of the requirements of this AD).
    One commenter states that the forward attach pins identified in 
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD may be used in flight spoilers other 
than those installed in the outboard position. The commenter points out 
that, if only the outboard positions are inspected in accordance with 
the proposed AD, those pins that are on the actuators in the inboard 
positions having other part number pistons would go uninspected. This 
would appear to conflict with the requirements of paragraph (c) of the 
proposed AD.
    The FAA acknowledges that clarification of the requirements of 
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD is necessary. The FAA's intent was 
that no person shall install a forward attach pin (P/N 4935329-1 or P/N 
4935329-501) in piston assembly (P/N 4913415-505 or   P/N 4913415-507) 
of the outboard flight spoiler actuator on any airplane. However, 
because paragraph (c) of the proposed AD is confusing and because 
operators will be remarking correct length pins and reidentifying them 
with P/N 4935329-503, the FAA has determined not to retain paragraph 
(c) of the proposed AD in the final rule.
    In addition, the FAA finds that further clarification is necessary. 
The FAA's concern is about the outboard flight spoiler actuator because 
only at the outboard location can a failed piston lug puncture the aft 
spar web and result in fuel leakage. (The inboard location of the aft 
spar web is thick enough to prevent such puncturing.) The requirements 
of both AD 97-02-08 R1 and this final rule are intended to prevent 
puncturing of the aft spar web and resultant fuel leakage.

Requests To Revise the Applicability Statement

    One commenter requests that the applicability statement of the 
proposed AD be revised to exclude airplanes that have incorporated 
Option 1 of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-27-300, dated June 
16, 1997 (referenced in AD 97-02-08 R1 as the appropriate source of 
service information for accomplishment of the requirements of that AD), 
or that a note be included in the final rule that acknowledges Option 1 
as an alternative method of compliance. The commenter states that 
airplanes on which Option 1 of the subject service bulletin has been 
accomplished, or on which the old piston, P/N 4913415-501 (or prior), 
has been installed, are safe to fly with the

[[Page 34521]]

existing spoiler attach pins installed and do not require incorporation 
of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-27-355.
    From this comment, the FAA infers that this commenter is requesting 
that the applicability statement be revised due to confusion over the 
requirements of paragraph (c) of the proposed AD. The FAA does not 
concur. As discussed previously, the FAA has determined not to retain 
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD in the final rule. The FAA notes that 
airplanes on which only a piston assembly having P/N 4913415-505 or   
P/N 4913415-507 of the outboard flight spoiler actuator has been 
installed are subject to the addressed unsafe condition of this AD. 
Therefore, the FAA finds that no change to applicability statement of 
the final rule is necessary.
    One commenter states that under the heading ``Concurrent 
Requirements'' of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-27-355, the 
text reads ``Aircraft with Service Bulletin DC9-27-300 Option 1 
accomplished * * * are not affected.'' The commenter contends that an 
operator may accomplish Option 1 of Service Bulletin DC9-27-300, which 
involves installing doublers. However, the FAA notes that at anytime, 
piston   P/N 4913415-505 or P/N 4913415-507 may have been installed. 
This creates a situation where Option 1 of Service Bulletin DC9-27-300 
has been accomplished but the installed piston and pin are still 
suspect. The commenter also states that Option II of Service Bulletin 
DC9-27-300 gives no definitive actuator identification instructions. 
This creates a situation where any dash number actuator assembly may 
have a suspect piston and pin installed. The commenter suggests that a 
possible solution would be to require measurement of the piston lugs to 
determine which piston has been installed.
    From this comment, the FAA infers that the commenter is requesting 
that the applicability statement of the proposed AD be revised to 
exclude airplanes equipped with external protective doublers between 
the outboard flight spoiler actuator and the aft spar webs. The FAA 
does not concur. Airplanes on which only Option 1 of Service Bulletin 
DC9-27-300 (which is required by AD 97-02-08 R1) has been accomplished 
are not subject to the requirements of this AD. As indicated in the 
applicability statement, this AD applies to certain airplanes on which 
a piston assembly having P/N 4913415-505 or 4913415-507 is installed. 
In addition, the FAA finds that a measurement to determine which piston 
is installed is unnecessary because this AD specifically identifies the 
dash number of the affected pin assembly.

Requests To Extend Compliance Time

    Several commenters request that the compliance time for 
accomplishing the removal and one-time visual inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of the proposed AD be extended from the proposed 18 
months. One commenter states that the removal of actuators will require 
extensive maintenance requirements. One commenter states that, as 
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD is currently worded, it would have to 
inspect twice as many units as initially proposed. Another commenter 
states that an 18-month extension would minimize the impact on its 
operation and aid in scheduling of the inspection/modification.
    The FAA does not concur with the commenters' request. As discussed 
previously under the heading ``Requests to Revise or Delete Paragraph 
(c) of the Proposed AD,'' operators are required to inspect the forward 
attach pins of only the outboard flight spoiler actuators, not both the 
outboard and inboard as suggested by some of the commenters. Because 
stress corrosion is time dependent rather than landing dependent, the 
FAA finds that a 5,000-landing compliance time, as suggested by one of 
the commenters, would be inappropriate. In developing an appropriate 
compliance time for these actions, the FAA considered the safety 
implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for 
timely accomplishment of the removal and inspection. In consideration 
of these factors, the FAA has determined that the 18-month initial 
compliance time, as proposed, is appropriate. However, under the 
provisions of paragraph (c) of the final rule, the FAA may approve 
requests for adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted 
to substantiate that such an adjustment would provide an acceptable 
level of safety.

Request To Allow Replacement of Pins With Serviceable or 
Reidentified Pins

    One commenter requests that paragraph (a)(2)(i) of the proposed AD 
be revised to allow the use of serviceable and reidentified forward 
attach pins as well as new pins. The commenter notes that some 
operators may elect to send pins to the shop for length inspection and 
reidentification, which could result in the pins being reinstalled on 
another aircraft. The FAA concurs. The FAA finds that installing 
serviceable and reidentified, as well as new, forward attach pins is 
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraphs 
(a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii)(A), and (a)(2)(ii)(B) of the final rule. 
Therefore, the final rule has been revised accordingly.

Request To Use a New Tool

    One commenter states that it recently has developed a tool which 
will allow gauging the pins to differentiate between the short pins and 
the proper length pins. The commenter also states that the use of this 
tool would eliminate the requirement for removing the pin for 
measurement. An alternative method of identification also could be used 
such as the application of paint to the end of the pin, which is 
accessible. The commenter notes that the use of this tool would greatly 
minimize the economic impact of the proposed AD.
    The FAA does not concur. The commenter did not provide sufficient 
information to the FAA to justify the use of such a tool. However, 
paragraph (c) of the final rule does provide affected operators the 
opportunity to apply for an alternative method of compliance, such as 
the use of a new tool or application of paint.

Request to Delete Reporting Requirement

    One commenter requests that paragraph (b) of the proposed AD be 
deleted. The commenter states that a reporting requirement places an 
additional burden on the operator and has no useful purpose since all 
discrepant parts are being removed from service. The FAA does not 
concur. When the unsafe condition addressed by an AD action appears to 
be attributed to a manufacturer's quality control (QC) problem (such as 
this AD), such a reporting requirement is instrumental in ensuring that 
the FAA is able to gather as much information as possible as to the 
extent and nature of the QC problem or QC breakdown, especially in 
cases where such data may not be available through other established 
means. This information is necessary to ensure that proper corrective 
action is implemented.

Request to Revise Reporting Requirement

    One commenter requests that the compliance time for the reporting 
requirement in paragraph (b) of the proposed AD be revised from 10 days 
to 30 days. The commenter states that such an extension will allow time 
to receive paperwork from the inspection stations, review and analyze 
the results, and compile the data. The FAA does not concur. In 
developing an appropriate compliance time, the FAA considered

[[Page 34522]]

the time necessary for submitting a report of the inspection results to 
the FAA in a timely manner. The FAA has determined that a 10-day 
compliance time is appropriate. However, paragraph (c) of the final 
rule does provide affected operators the opportunity to apply for an 
adjustment of the compliance time if data are presented to justify such 
an adjustment.

Requests to Revise Cost Impact

    Two commenters note that the economic impact of the proposed rule 
has been underestimated. In order to gain access to the flight spoiler 
forward attach pin to conduct the required inspection, these commenters 
state that it is necessary to remove the actuator. One commenter 
estimates that it will take approximately six work hours per aircraft 
to accomplish the pin inspection (including removal and reinstallation 
of the forward attach pin), as compared to the five work hours 
estimated in the proposed rule. The other commenter estimates that it 
will take 16 work hours.
    From these comments, the FAA infers that the commenters are 
requesting that the Cost Impact section of the proposed AD be revised. 
The FAA does not concur. The cost impact information, below, describes 
only the ``direct'' costs of the specific actions required by this AD. 
The number of work hours necessary to accomplish the required actions, 
specified as 5 in the cost impact information, below, was provided to 
the FAA by the manufacturer based on the best data available to date. 
This number represents the time necessary to perform only the actions 
actually required by this AD. The FAA recognizes that, in accomplishing 
the requirements of any AD, operators may incur ``incidental'' costs in 
addition to the ``direct'' costs. The cost analysis in AD rulemaking 
actions, however, typically does not include incidental costs, such as 
the time required to gain access and close up; planning time; or time 
necessitated by other administrative actions. Because incidental costs 
may vary significantly from operator to operator, they are almost 
impossible to calculate.

Request to Revise Descriptive Language in Discussion Section of 
Proposed AD

    One commenter points out that, in addition to McDonnell Douglas 
Model DC-9-80 and Model MD-90 airplanes, the incorrect length pins were 
found on Model DC-9 and MD-88 series airplanes. From this comment, the 
FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that the FAA revise the 
wording of the reported incident that appeared in the Discussion 
Section of the AD.
    The same commenter requests that the word ``nut'' be replaced with 
``washer'' in the sentence in the Discussion Section of the proposed AD 
that reads ``If a forward attach pin is too short, the pin and nut * * 
*''
    The FAA finds that no revision to this final rule in the manner 
suggested by the commenter is necessary, since the Discussion section 
of the proposed AD does not reappear in 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 with the changes previously 
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 1,700 airplanes of the affected design in 
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 1,134 airplanes of U.S. 
registry will be affected by this AD.
    It will take approximately 5 work hours per airplane (including 
removal and reinstallation of the forward attach pin) to accomplish the 
required one-time visual inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 
per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of this 
inspection required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$340,200, or $300 per airplane.
    If the forward attach pin is determined to be of correct length, it 
will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the 
necessary modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. 
Based on these figures, the cost impact of this modification required 
by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $60 per airplane.
    If the forward attach pin is determined to be of incorrect length, 
it will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the 
follow-on visual inspection and replacement of the pin, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. New pins will be provided by the 
manufacturer at no cost to the operators. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the follow-on visual inspection and replacement is 
estimated to be $60 per airplane.
    Should an operator be required to accomplish the HFEC inspection, 
it will take approximately 11 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
(including removal and reinstallation of the flight spoiler actuator), 
at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, 
the cost impact of the HFEC inspection is estimated to be $660 per 
airplane.
    Should an operator be required to accomplish the replacement of the 
piston assembly of the flight spoiler actuator, it will take 
approximately 5 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately 
$2,590 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
replacement on U.S. operators is estimated to be $2,890 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:

[[Page 34523]]

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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

99-13-13  McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-11208. Docket 98-NM-147-
AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-9-10, -20, -30, -40, and -50 series 
airplanes, Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), 
and DC-9-87 (MD-87) series airplanes, Model MD-88 airplanes, and C-9 
(military) series airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service 
Bulletin DC9-27-355, dated February 24, 1998; and Model MD-90 
airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD90-27-
024, dated February 24, 1998; on which a piston assembly of the 
flight spoiler actuator having part number (P/N) 4913415-505 or 
4913415-507 is installed; 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 (c) 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 prevent failure of the piston of the flight spoiler actuator 
and consequent puncturing of the aft spar web, which could result in 
fuel leakage and reduced structural integrity of the wings, 
accomplish the following:
    (a) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, remove 
the forward attach pin of the outboard flight spoiler actuator of 
the left and right wings of the airplane, and perform a one-time 
visual inspection of the pin to determine whether it is of correct 
length, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-27-355 [for Model DC-9-10, -
20, -30, -40, -50 series airplanes; Model C-9 (military) series 
airplanes; Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), -82 (MD-82), -83 (MD-83), and -87 
(MD-87) series airplanes; and Model MD-88 airplanes], or MD90-27-024 
(for Model MD-90 airplanes), both dated February 24, 1998, as 
applicable.
    (1) Condition 1 (Correct Length). If the forward attach pin is 
of correct length, prior to further flight, modify the pin by 
reidentifying it with P/N 4935329-503, in accordance with the 
applicable service bulletin.
    (2) Condition 2 (Incorrect Length). If the forward attach pin is 
of incorrect length, prior to further flight, perform a follow-on 
visual inspection of the piston lugs of the flight spoiler actuator 
for corrosion at the outer transition radii, or discrepancies of the 
cadmium plating of the lugs, in accordance with the applicable 
service bulletin.
    (i) If no corrosion or discrepancy of the cadmium plating of the 
lugs is detected, prior to further flight, install a forward attach 
pin, P/N 4935329-503, that is new, serviceable, or reidentified in 
accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this AD, and install a new 
washer and nut; in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.
    (ii) If any corrosion or discrepancy of the cadmium plating of 
the lugs is detected, prior to further flight, remove the actuator 
and attaching parts, and perform a high frequency eddy current 
inspection for cracking of the lugs of the actuator, in accordance 
with the applicable service bulletin.
    (A) If no cracking of the lugs is detected, prior to further 
flight, reinstall the flight spoiler actuator and attaching parts, 
and install a forward attach pin, P/N 4935329-503, that is new, 
serviceable, or reidentified in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of 
this AD, and install a new washer and nut; in accordance with the 
applicable service bulletin.
    (B) If any cracking of the lugs is detected, prior to further 
flight, replace the existing piston assembly of the flight spoiler 
actuator with a new piston assembly having the same P/N; reinstall 
the flight spoiler actuator and attaching parts; and install a 
forward attach pin, P/N 4935329-503, that is new, serviceable, or 
reidentified in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this AD, and 
install a new washer and nut; in accordance with the applicable 
service bulletin.
    (b) Within 10 days after accomplishing the inspection required 
by paragraph (a) of this AD, submit a report of the inspection 
results (both positive and negative findings) to the Manager, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-
4137; fax (562) 627-5210. Information collection requirements 
contained in this regulation have been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been 
assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (c) 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 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.

    Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (d) 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.

Incorporation by Reference

    (e) The actions shall be done in accordance with McDonnell 
Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-27-355, dated February 24, 1998; or 
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD90-27-024, dated February 24, 
1998; as applicable. 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 Boeing 
Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach 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 the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the Office of 
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.
    (f) This amendment becomes effective on August 2, 1999.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 17, 1999.
Dorenda D. Baker,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-15926 Filed 6-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P